Decision Analysis of a Reinforcement Scheme for In-Service Prestressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges Based on AHP and Evaluation of the Reinforcement Effect
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Bridge Profile and Technical Condition Development
2.1. The Bridge Profile
2.2. Box Girder Cracking and Technical Condition Development
2.3. The First Reinforcement of the Bridge
3. Analysis of the Causes of Crack Development
3.1. Material Performance Degradation Testing
3.2. The Increased Traffic and Overloading
3.3. Conclusions of the Analysis
4. Study on the Secondary Reinforcement Schemes
4.1. Scheme 1: Overall Replacement of the Girder
4.2. Scheme 2: Adding Bridge Piers
4.3. Comparative Analysis of Reinforcement Schemes
5. Reinforcement Scheme Selection Based on AHP
5.1. Hierarchical Analysis Model and Discriminant Matrix
5.2. Total Hierarchical Ranking and Scheme Optimization
5.3. Conclusion of Decision Analysis
6. Evaluation of the Reinforcement Effect Based on Finite Element and Load Tests
6.1. Analysis of Finite Element Calculation Results
6.2. Load Test Program and Results
6.3. Reinforcement Effect Analysis
7. Discussion
8. Conclusions
- After 25 years of service, the concrete, reinforcement, and prestressing bars of the box girder showed significant performance degradation. Corrosion testing of the steel bars in the concrete showed rust activity in the box girders, with a probability of corrosion over 90%. Material performance degradation was determined to be the intrinsic cause of the inadequate load-carrying capacity and box girder cracking.
- From 2010 to 2020, the total weight of freight increased by 163.08%, and the proportion of heavy trucks and overloaded vehicles in road transport increased rapidly. This increase in traffic volume and the proportion of heavy trucks increased the risk of fatigue failure of the bridge, which was the extrinsic cause of structural damage, and accelerated the development of cracks and bridge performance degradation.
- Considering the two aspects of restoring the material properties of the structure and improving the structural force, the reinforcement schemes of replacing the main girders and adding piers were, respectively, developed. The advantages and disadvantages of the schemes were analyzed. The reinforcement scheme was chosen by applying the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) considering four aspects: the reinforcement effect, project cost, traffic impact, and social and environmental impacts. The results of the analysis showed that adding piers was better than the other options. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a scientific and effective method for the selection and decision of reinforcement options.
- The finite element calculation results show that the reinforcement scheme of adding piers can effectively improve the structural force state. The deflection and strain calibration coefficients were less than 1, which indicates that the actual strengthening effect reached the design goal. The reinforcement scheme of adding piers could better improve the force of the main girder under live loads and inhibit the development of cracks.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ambroziak, A.; Malinowski, M. A 95-Year-Old Concrete Arch Bridge: From Materials Characterization to Structural Analysis. Materials 2021, 14, 1744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Miluccio, G.; Losanno, D.; Parisi, F.; Cosenza, E. Traffic-load fragility models for prestressed concrete girder decks of existing Italian highway bridges. Eng. Struct. 2021, 249, 113367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cadenazzi, T.; Dotelli, G.; Rossini, M.; Nolan, S.; Nanni, A. Cost and environmental analyses of reinforcement alternatives for a concrete bridge. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2019, 16, 787–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yifan, S.; Wenliang, H.; Yangguang, Y.; Shipu, R. Strengthening Prestressed Concrete Box Girder Bridge by Upgrading Structural System. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2020, 34, 04019103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Sun, Z.; Wei, B.; Zhang, L.; Zeng, P. Deflection-based multilevel structural condition assessment of long-span prestressed concrete girder bridges using a connected pipe system. Measurement 2021, 169, 108352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgese, M.; Ansari, F.; Domaneschi, M.; Cimellaro, G.P. Post-collapse analysis of Morandi’s Polcevera viaduct in Genoa Italy. J. Civ. Struct. Health Monit. 2019, 10, 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haveresch, K. Nachrechnen und Verstärken älterer Spannbetonbrücken. Beton-und Stahlbetonbau 2011, 106, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.-H.; Park, J.-S.; Jung, W.-T.; Kim, T.-K.; Park, H.-B. Experimental Study on Strengthening Effect Analysis of a Deteriorated Bridge Using External Prestressing Method. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichenbach, S.; Preinstorfer, P.; Hammerl, M.; Kromoser, B. A review on embedded fibre-reinforced polymer reinforcement in structural concrete in Europe. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 307, 124946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shimada, Y.; Yamada, S.; Kishiki, S.; Hasegawa, T.; Takeuchi, T. Method of reinforcement for joints between steel roofs and RC columns in existing buildings. Eng. Struct. 2020, 209, 110255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vecchi, F.; Franceschini, L.; Tondolo, F.; Belletti, B.; Sánchez Montero, J.; Minetola, P. Corrosion morphology of prestressing steel strands in naturally corroded PC beams. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 296, 123720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kramer, K.W. Load-Deflection Response of Prestressed Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP: A Comprehensive Perspective; ProQuest LLC: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, B.; Huang, J.; Xing, G. Crack behavior of concrete beam in flexure strengthened with NSM prestressing screw-thread steel bars. Mater. Struct. 2020, 53, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, J.H.; Huang, Y.H.; Feng, W.X.; Chen, Y.H.; Huang, Y. Experimental study on flexural behavior of concrete T-beams strengthened with externally prestressed tendons. Math. Biosci. Eng. 2019, 16, 6962–6974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Leicht, L.; Roberts-Wollmann, C.L.; Koutromanos, I.; Hebdon, M.H.; Mosig, O. Experimental and Analytical Investigation of a 64-Year-Old Prestressed Beam Retrofitted with External Posttensioning. J. Bridge Eng. 2022, 27, 04022015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jia, L.; Tao, L.; Hong, H.; Jian, J.; Zhi, H. Experimental Test on Bridge Reinforcement by Enlarging Section-Prestress Method. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Civil Architecture and Energy Science, CAES 2020, Changchun, China, 20–22 March 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X.; Li, S.; Zhang, W.; Ikechukwu, O.; Dai, L.; Wang, L. Second Remediation of Long-Term Deflection and Cracking of PT Box-Girder Bridge Using External Post-Tensioning. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2020, 34, 04020090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, H.; Zhou, S. Gray Relation Analysis for Optimal Selection of Bridge Reinforcement Scheme Based on Fuzzy-AHP Weights. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 8813940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China. Standards for Technical Condition Evaluation of Highway Bridges; China Communications Press: Beijing, China, 2011; pp. 4–110.
- Wu, L.; Kaewunruen, S. Performance and durability of concrete structures in railway environment under extreme climate. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Rail Transportation 2017: Railway Development, Operations, and Maintenance, ICRT 2017, Chengdu, China,, 10–12 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zhuang, C.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, R. Fatigue Flexural Performance of Short-Span Reinforced Concrete T-Beams Considering Overloading Effect. Balt. J. Road Bridge Eng. 2020, 15, 89–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, G.; Hag-Elsafi, O. Vehicular Overloads: Load Model, Bridge Safety, and Permit Checking. J. Bridge Eng. 2000, 5, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C.; Zhang, J.; Yi, Z. Research on Vehicle Overloading Influenced to Roadbed. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference of Chinese Logistics and Transportation Professionals (ICCLTP), Chengdu, China, 8–10 October 2008; pp. 2528–2533. [Google Scholar]
- Deng, L.; Wang, W.; Yu, Y. State-of-The-Art Review on the Causes and Mechanisms of Bridge Collapse. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2016, 30, 04015005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Wu, P.; Wang, J.; Jiang, R.; Chen, M.; Wang, X. Critical review of data-driven decision-making in bridge operation and maintenance. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2020, 18, 47–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peraza, D.B.; Erdem, I. Bridge collapse during demolition. In Proceedings of the 8th Congress on Forensic Engineering 2018: Forging Forensic Frontiers, Austin, TX, USA, 29 November–2 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Woodson, R.D. Appendix I—Background Facts and Issues Concerning Cement and Cement Data. In Concrete Portable Handbook; Woodson, R.D., Ed.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Boston, MA, USA, 2012; pp. 195–283. [Google Scholar]
- Webster, M.D.; Meryman, H.; Kestner, D.M. Carbon emissions and building structure: What the structural engineer needs to know about carbon in the 21st century. In Proceedings of the Structures Congress 2011, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 14–16 April 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Akaa, O.U.; Abu, A.; Spearpoint, M.; Giovinazzi, S. A group-AHP decision analysis for the selection of applied fire protection to steel structures. Fire Saf. J. 2016, 86, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andreolli, F.; Bragolusi, P.; D’Alpaos, C.; Faleschini, F.; Zanini, M.A. An AHP model for multiple-criteria prioritization of seismic retrofit solutions in gravity-designed industrial buildings. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 45, 103493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contreras-Nieto, C.; Shan, Y.; Lewis, P.; Hartell, J.A. Bridge maintenance prioritization using analytic hierarchy process and fusion tables. Autom. Constr. 2019, 101, 99–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ikpong, A.; Chandra, A.; Bagchi, A. Alternative to AHP approach to criteria weight estimation in highway bridge management. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2021, 48, 1181–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coyle, G. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Practical Strategy. Open Access Material, AHP; Pearson Education Limited: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China. Specification for Inspection and Evaluation of Load-Bearing Capacity of Highway Bridges; China Communications Press: Beijing, China, 2011; pp. 1–40.
- Abedin, M.; De Caso y Basalo, F.J.; Kiani, N.; Mehrabi, A.B.; Nanni, A. Bridge load testing and damage evaluation using model updating method. Eng. Struct. 2022, 252, 113648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeon, S.H.; Yim, H.J.; Huh, J.; Cho, K.-I.; Ahn, J.-H. Full-scale field testing of a precast concrete buried arch bridge with steel outriggers: Field loading test. Eng. Struct. 2021, 242, 112563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kovács, N.; Kövesdi, B.; Dunai, L.; Takács, B. Loading Test of the Rákóczi Danube Bridge in Budapest. Procedia Eng. 2016, 156, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lantsoght, E.O.L.; van der Veen, C.; de Boer, A.; Hordijk, D.A. State-of-the-art on load testing of concrete bridges. Eng. Struct. 2017, 150, 231–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Park, Y.H.; Park, C.; Park, Y.G. The behavior of an in-service plate girder bridge strengthened with external prestressing tendons. Eng. Struct. 2005, 27, 379–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China. Load Test Methods for Highway Bridge; China Communications Press: Beijing, China, 2015; p. 64.
Inspection Year | Cracks in the 5 × 45 m Continuous Box Girder (Strip) | Technical Status Rating | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Longitudinal Cracks in the Top Plate | Web Vertical Cracks | Diagonal Cracks in the Web | Transverse Cracks in the Bottom Plate | Longitudinal Cracks in the Bottom Plate | ||
2000 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 1 | 1 | Class II—good state |
2002 | 0 | 1 | 55 | 1 | 1 | Class III—bad state |
2005 | 0 | 1 | 84 | 1 | 1 | Class IV—dangerous state (Reinforcement) |
2008–2016 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Class II—good state |
2017 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 6 | Class II—good state |
2018 | 29 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 6 | Class III—bad state |
2019 | 149 | 13 | 24 | 4 | 6 | Class IV—dangerous state |
2020 | 165 | 15 | 33 | 8 | 6 | Class IV—dangerous state |
Year | Total Number of Vehicles (10,000 vehicles) | Passenger Vehicle | Cargo Vehicle | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Number (10,000 vehicles) | Total Seats (10,000 seats) | Large Buses (10,000 vehicles) | Total Number (10,000 vehicles) | Total Cargo Weight (10,000 tons) | ||
2010 | 1133.32 | 83.13 | 2017.09 | 24.78 | 1050.19 | 5999.82 |
2011 | 1263.75 | 84.34 | 2086.66 | 26.83 | 1179.41 | 7261.20 |
2012 | 1339.90 | 86.71 | 2166.55 | 28.70 | 1253.19 | 8062.14 |
2013 | 1504.74 | 85.26 | 2170.26 | 29.90 | 1419.48 | 9613.91 |
2014 | 1537.94 | 84.58 | 2189.55 | 30.67 | 1453.36 | 10,292.47 |
2015 | 1473.12 | 83.93 | 2148.58 | 30.49 | 1389.19 | 10,366.50 |
2016 | 1435.77 | 84.00 | 2140.26 | 30.57 | 1351.77 | 10,826.78 |
2017 | 1450.23 | 81.61 | 2099.18 | 30.57 | 1368.62 | 11,774.81 |
2018 | 1435.48 | 79.66 | 2048.11 | 30.27 | 1355.82 | 12,872.97 |
2019 | 1165.49 | 77.67 | 2002.53 | 30.31 | 1087.82 | 13,587.00 |
2020 | 1171.54 | 61.26 | 1840.89 | / | 1110.28 | 15,784.17 |
Reinforcement Schemes | Comparative Factors of the Two Schemes | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Reinforcement Effects | Construction Costs | Traffic Impact | Social and Environmental Impacts | |
Scheme 1 | The reinforcement effect is very good, and the bridge bearing capacity can be fully restored. | The estimated cost is about 40 million yuan. | Large impact: The total construction period is about 8 months, during which the traffic is interrupted. | Large impact: The reconstruction cost is high, and the life span of the bridge is much shorter than the design life, which has a large social impact; the demolition of the bridge will cause some noise, dust, and concrete waste; at least 2360.5 t of carbon dioxide emissions will be generated. |
Scheme 2 | The reinforcement effect is good, diseases can be eliminated, and structural stress can be improved. | The estimated cost is about 21 million yuan. | General impact: The total construction period lasts about 6 months, and the traffic interruption lasts about 1 month. | General impact: The reinforcement cost is relatively low, which can prolong the service life of the bridge and has a small social impact; the construction difficulty is small, and the environmental impact is relatively small; about 2677.3 t of carbon dioxide emissions will be generated. |
Importance Intensity | Definition |
---|---|
1 | Equal importance |
3 | Moderate importance of one over another |
5 | Strong importance of one over another |
7 | Very strong importance of one over another |
9 | Extreme importance of one over another |
2,4,6,8 | Intermediate values |
Reciprocals | Reciprocals for inverse comparison |
Matrixes | Eigenvector | CI | RI | CR | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 4.0488 | 0.0163 | 0.89 | 0.0183 | |
B1 | 2.0000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
B2 | 2.0000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
B3 | 2.0000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
B4 | 2.0000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Indicators | , n is the matrix order and RI is the random consistency indicator. |
Deflection Measuring Points | Deflection Test Results | Strain Measurement Points | Strain Test Results | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Measured Value (mm) | Theoretical Calculated Value (mm) | Check Validation Coefficient | Measured Value (με) | Theoretical Calculated Value (με) | Check Validation Coefficient | ||
D1 | −2.82 | −3.592 | 0.79 | 1 | −32.1 | −42.0 | 0.76 |
D2 | −3.02 | −3.592 | 0.84 | 2 | −35.6 | −42.0 | 0.85 |
D3 | −3.19 | −3.592 | 0.89 | 3 | −33.9 | −42.0 | 0.81 |
D4 | −3.13 | −3.592 | 0.87 | 4 | 79.5 | 86.4 | 0.92 |
D5 | −3.04 | −3.592 | 0.85 | 5 | 80.2 | 86.4 | 0.93 |
/ | / | / | / | 6 | 78.6 | 86.4 | 0.91 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, H.; Li, J.; Zhang, J.; Pang, D. Decision Analysis of a Reinforcement Scheme for In-Service Prestressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges Based on AHP and Evaluation of the Reinforcement Effect. Buildings 2022, 12, 1771. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101771
Liu H, Li J, Zhang J, Pang D. Decision Analysis of a Reinforcement Scheme for In-Service Prestressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges Based on AHP and Evaluation of the Reinforcement Effect. Buildings. 2022; 12(10):1771. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101771
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Haikuan, Jie Li, Junfeng Zhang, and Dongyuan Pang. 2022. "Decision Analysis of a Reinforcement Scheme for In-Service Prestressed Concrete Box Girder Bridges Based on AHP and Evaluation of the Reinforcement Effect" Buildings 12, no. 10: 1771. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12101771