Assessment of the Strengthening of an RC Railway Bridge

with CFRP Utilizing a Full-Scale Failure Test and

Finite-Element Analysis
Arto M. Puurula 1; Ola Enochsson 2; Gabriel Sas 3; Thomas Blanksvärd 4; Ulf Ohlsson 5; Lars Bernspång 6;
Björn Täljsten 7; Anders Carolin 8; Björn Paulsson 9; and Lennart Elfgren 10
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: A finite element (FE) model was calibrated using the data obtained from a full-scale test to failure of a 50 year old reinforced
concrete (RC) railway bridge. The model was then used to assess the effectiveness of various strengthening schemes to increase the load-
carrying capacity of the bridge. The bridge was a two-span continuous single-track trough bridge with a total length of 30 m, situated in
Örnsköldsvik in northern Sweden. It was tested in situ as the bridge had been closed following the construction of a new section of the railway
line. The test was planned to evaluate and calibrate models to predict the load-carrying capacity of the bridge and assess the strengthening
schemes originally developed by the European research project called Sustainable bridges. The objective of the test was to investigate shear
failure, rather than bending failure for which good calibrated models are already available. To that end, the bridge was strengthened in flexure
before the test using near-surface mounted square section carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) bars. The ultimate failure mechanism
turned into an interesting combination of bending, shear, torsion, and bond failures at an applied load of 11.7 MN (2,630 kips). A computer
model was developed using specialized software to represent the response of the bridge during the test. It was calibrated using data from the
test and was then used to calculate the actual capacity of the bridge in terms of train loading using the current Swedish load model which
specifies a 330 kN (74 kips) axle weight. These calculations show that the unstrengthened bridge could sustain a load 4.7 times greater than
the current load requirements (which is over six times the original design loading), whilst the strengthened bridge could sustain a load
6.5 times greater than currently required. Comparisons are also made with calculations using codes from Canada, Europe, and the United
States. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001116. This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International license, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Author keywords: Bridge; Train load; Failure analysis; Ultimate load-carrying capacity; Shear; Near-surface mounted reinforcement (NSMR);
Carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP); Strengthening; Nonlinear finite element analysis (NLFEA); Structural safety and reliability.

Introduction achieved by increasing their load-carrying capacity to allow heavier

and/or faster trains (where higher dynamic factors increase the static
To meet future traffic demands, there is a constant need to make trans- load effect on a bridge) and/or to increase their service life.
port infrastructure more effective. For railway bridges, this can be This paper describes the assessment of the load capacity (in terms
of trains) using a calculation method that has been calibrated using
1 a full-scale test to failure of a redundant concrete railway bridge
Postdoctoral Researcher, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå
Univ. of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden. in Örnsköldsvik (Övik) in northern Sweden. The method uses a
2
Researcher, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of nonlinear finite element analysis (NLFEA) with a detailed three-
Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden. dimensional (3D) solid model using discrete reinforcement elements
3
Researcher, NORUT, NO 8517 Narvik, Norway. with both geometrical and material nonlinearities included. The
4
Assistant Professor, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of model developed gave a detailed picture of deflections, stresses,
Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden. and strains in the bridge with increasing train loads, which gave a
5
Assistant Professor, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of better correlation between calculated results and the actual behavior
Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden.
6 of the bridge than the code methods currently in use. Whilst this is
Associate Professor, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of
Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden. thought to be the first use of this method of assessment of the train
7
Professor, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of Technol- load capacity of a bridge, the basics of the method are given in FIB
ogy, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden. (2008), and examples of advanced finite element modeling of large
8
Bridge Engineer, Trafikverket, SE 97 125 Luleå, Sweden. concrete structures are given in, e.g., Malm (2009), Schlune et al.
9
Senior Infrastructure Engineer, Trafikverket, SE 78 189 Borlänge, (2009), Richard et al. (2010), and Bicanic et al. (2014).
Sweden. Reports on full-scale tests to failure studying the behavior of
10
Emeritus Professor, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of bridges are rare. In this paper, some of them are discussed with
Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden (corresponding author). E-mail: failures of relevance to this study. A large-scale test (1∶3) investi-
[email protected]
gating the combined shear—torsion—bending of a curved concrete
Note. This manuscript was submitted on May 5, 2013; approved on
May 14, 2014; published online on July 15, 2014. Discussion period open box-girder bridge in California was described by Scordelis et al.
until December 15, 2014; separate discussions must be submitted for in- (1977, 1979). Failure was caused by concrete spall from a corner
dividual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineer- because of high shear and torsion stresses. Two full-scale tests of
ing, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/D4014008(11)/$25.00. concrete bridges in Sweden were reported by Plos (1990, 1995) and

© ASCE D4014008-1 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

 Täljsten (1994). A slab frame bridge with a span of 21 m and a Material Properties
prestressed frame beam bridge with a span of 31 m were both tested
to failure, which was because of shear and bending. For the slab The original concrete quality used in 1955 was Swedish K400, with
beam, a brittle failure occurred when a new shear crack with a low a nominal compressive strength of 40 MPa (400 kp=cm2 ¼
slope emerged at a point load of 4.5 MN. For the prestressed bridge, 5,800 psi) measured on 200-mm cubes. This corresponds to a
the failure occurred when one of the beams punched through the characteristic strength of 31 MPa (lower 5% percentile) and ap-
end support wall at a point load of 8.45 MN. Neither of the failures proximately to EC class C28/35. The steel reinforcement is mostly
were predicted by the available codes. In Switzerland, 89 bridges made from 16 and 25-mm diameter bars of quality Ks40 with a
were studied during their demolition by Zwicky and Vogel (2000), nominal yield strength of 400 MPa (58 ksi). Carbon fiber reinforce-
and by Vogel and Bargähr (2006). Both sets of authors recom- ment Sto FRP Bar M10C has an Ef ¼ 260 GPa and a mean tensile
mended improved methods for the assessment of real loads and for strength f f ¼ 2,500 MPa (363 ksi).
corrosion damage in prestressed concrete bridges. The tests were Separate mean concrete properties were determined by testing
also simulated using solid elements by Pimentel et al. (2007) and drilled core samples from each edge beam and the slab which
using fiber elements capable of taking into account shear effects by showed that, by the date of the test in 2006, the concrete strength
Ferreira et al. (2012). In Switzerland, Fernandez Ruiz et al. (2007) had increased to 68.5 MPa (9,935 psi) corresponding to EC class
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

carried out large-scale tests of the load-carrying capacity of box C55/67. This substantial increase is due the fact that the original
girder beams with thin webs including posttensioning tendons. cement was coarsely grinded and kept on hydrating and growing
The tendons decreased the load-carrying capacity of the compres- in strength after the 28 days when the initial strength was tested.
sion struts necessary to transform the shear forces. A concrete damage plasticity model was used in the finite
element calculations for the bridge slab and mid columns. The
model was chosen mostly because other users had obtained good
Details of the Bridge results with it (FIB 2008). The following properties were assumed,
based on the tested material properties: Young’s modulus of elas-
The bridge studied was a continuous curved reinforced concrete ticity for the concrete Ec ¼ 25.4 GPa; Poisson’s ratio ν ¼ 0.167;
(RC) trough bridge with two spans of 12 m each, designed to carry the dilatation angle β ¼ 35°; the flow potential eccentricity
a single railway line, see Fig. 1. The bridge was designed and ε ¼ 0.1; and the biaxial/uniaxial compression plastic strain ratio
built in 1955 and was taken out of service in 2005 because of the fbo =f c ¼ 1.16 and the invariant stress ratio κ ¼ 0.6666 (Puurula
building of a new high-speed railway, the Bothnia line. Before 2012).
demolition, the bridge was loaded to failure to test its ultimate The steel reinforcement bars and the surrounding concrete were
load-carrying capacity as part of the European research project sus- modeled together, increasing the nominal virtual stiffness of the
tainable bridges [Sustainable Bridges (SB) 2008]. The testing was steel up to the stress when the concrete cracks, see Fig. 6. This
carried out by applying loads on a beam perpendicular to the bridge was done in accordance with the results of RILEM Committee
(Fig. 2). The embankment south of the bridge was removed before 147-FMB “Fracture mechanics to Anchorage and Bond” (Elfgren
the test. The loads were applied with jacks anchored in the ground and Noghabai 2001, 2002). This procedure increased the stiffness
beneath the bridge (Sustainable Bridges (SB)-7.3 2008). The bridge of the calculated load-deflection diagram so that it better followed
is skewed at an angle of 75° between its longitudinal and transverse the curve from the test.
directions. It is also curved in the horizontal plane with a radius A summary of the material properties is presented in Table 1.
of 300 m. Fig. 3 is of a longitudinal section showing the steel Initial characteristic properties are given first based on the original
reinforcement. drawings, followed by updated properties based on mean values of
To avoid a pure bending failure, for which good, calibrated the tested samples taken from the bridge following the load test to
models already exist, the bridge was strengthened before testing failure.
with bars of carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) (Täljsten
et al. 2011). The two edge beams of the bridge were each fitted
with nine Sto FRP Bar M10C with a length of 10 m and a Finite Element Model and Calibration with a
rectangular cross-section of 10 × 10 mm. They were installed on Full-Scale Field Test
100-mm centers using the near-surface mounted reinforcement
technique (NSMR) in presawn grooves, 15 × 15 mm, in the soffit The Örnsköldsvik Bridge was modeled with successively improved
of the bridge (Figs. 4 and 5) (Sustainable Bridges (SB)-6.3 2007). models, starting with linear two-dimensional frame models and

Fig. 1. View of bridge in Örnsköldsvik in northern Sweden prior to testing (adapted from Sustainable Bridges (SB) 7.3 2008; image by
Lennart Elfgren)

© ASCE D4014008-2 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. Elevation, plan, and section of the bridge showing the test loading arrangement using a steel beam placed in the middle of one of the two spans
and pulled downwards (adapted from Sustainable Bridges (SB) 7.3 2008)

ending with a nonlinear three-dimensional finite element model bonded to the surrounding concrete. The steel beam used to intro-
(Fig. 7) using Brigade (2011), which is based on Abaqus software. duce the load on the bridge was modeled using shell elements of
The calculation models were calibrated with results from the full- type S4R: linear quadrilateral, four-node doubly curved shell, re-
scale field test of the bridge (Puurula 2012). The boundary condi- duced integration, and hourglass control. The piles were modeled
tions and the nonlinear material properties during yielding of the as springs, each inclined pile as a separate spring with a stiffness in
steel reinforcement close to failure were deemed important param- the vertical direction of kv ¼ 285 MN=m and in the horizontal
eters to calibrate. direction of kh ¼ 71 MN=m. The earth pressure σh on the East
The model had 1,650 separate structural parts (most of them abutment was modeled as σh ¼ k0 · γ · h, where k0 ¼ 0.34 is a co-
discrete reinforcement bars), 152,460 elements, 164,003 nodes, and efficient for the soil pressure, γ ¼ 20 kN=m3 is the weight of the
511,317 variables. Solid elements in the concrete bridge were of earth, and h is the height from the Earth’s surface (m) (Puurula
type continuum, 3-dimensional, 8-node, reduced integration 2012). As discussed, the material modeling and the boundary con-
(C3D8R): 8-node linear brick, reduced integration, and hourglass ditions were important parameters in the calibration of the model.
control. Parameter studies were carried out with different element The contact between the steel beam and the concrete was modeled
sizes; elements smaller than 150 mm did not improve the results. with a tie constraint, which does not allow the contact surfaces to
Discrete reinforcement bars were modeled as wires, type two-node move in relation to one another. Another issue was to calculate
linear 3D truss elements embedded in the concrete. The CFRP the overall load-deflection curve of the bridge. Here, it was essen-
reinforcement bars in their grooves were modeled as perfectly tial to consider the effect of the surrounding concrete in Fig. 6

© ASCE D4014008-3 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. Longitudinal section of the bridge showing the layout of the main steel reinforcement and the outline strengthening scheme

Fig. 4. Cross section showing the principal dimensions of the bridge and reinforcement details together with the location of the near-surface mounted
reinforcement (NSMR) with FRP Bar M10C on 100 mm centers

Fig. 5. Installation of the NSMR showing (a) sawing of grooves; (b) filling grooves with epoxy adhesive; (c) grooves following insertion of the CFRP
reinforcement

and the choice of damage parameters. Dilatation angles between (Figs. 1 and 2). The monitoring system consisted primarily of strain
β ¼ 10° and 50° gave similar results. Convergence problems were gauges that were spot-welded to the reinforcement and glued to the
addressed using Riks method (FIB 2008). CFRP bars and the concrete, an optical laser displacement sensor
The bridge was tested in July 2006. The load was applied using and linear varying differential transducers (LVDTs) Sustainable
two jacks on top of a steel beam, which was pulled downwards Bridges (SB)-7.3 2008. The load-deflection curve from the final

© ASCE D4014008-4 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

 (Puurula 2012). This is higher than the bond strength of 9.0 MPa
for this type of bar (Nordin and Täljsten 2003). The bond failure
lowered the available tensile force at the bottom and increased the
inclination of the concrete compression struts which produced
higher stresses in the stirrups, as fewer stirrups had to carry the
load. These stresses, mostly caused by the vertical shear forces
but also, to some extent, by the torsion moment from the loads
transferred from the steel beam to the slab, ruptured the stirrups.
The torsion moment originates primarily from the load of the steel
beam. The edge beams twist outwards because they are nonsym-
metrically supported on the bridge slab. The outsides of the edge
beams deflect the most because of torsion, which explains why
the final failure started in the outermost groove of the CFRP bars
(Puurula et al. 2013). The ultimate load capacity was reached at an
Fig. 6. Steel stress-strain curve for 25-mm diameter bars with and with- applied midspan load of 11.7 MN, see Fig. 9. The inclined failure
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

out considering the effect of surrounding concrete (data from Elfgren crack had an inclination of approximately 35° with respect to the
and Noghabai 2001, 2002) horizontal axis.
A preliminary description of the load test and the finite element
calculations is given in Puurula et al. (2008) and in more detail in
test is given in Fig. 8, which also shows the calculated load- the Ph.D. theses of Sas (2011) and Puurula (2012) and in Sas
deflection curve and the effect of strengthening. It is shown that (2012) and Puurula et al. (2013).
the two curves follow one another closely and that the bridge ex-
hibits ductile behavior with a large deflection of the order of 0.1 m
before failure. The calculated strains in the steel and CFRP rein- Comparison with Codes
forcement and in the concrete also correspond well to the measured
values. The load capacity of the bridge was calculated using three
At the time of failure, high bond stresses between the concrete major codes from the United States, Canada, and Europe, namely,
and the resin in the outermost groove initiated a bond failure after ACI-318 [American Concrete Institute (ACI) 2011], CSA-A23.3
yielding of the bottom longitudinal steel reinforcement. The bond [Canadian Standards Association (CSA) 2004], and EC2 [European
stresses were calculated to be 11.3 MPa with an alternative, refined Committee for Standardization (CEN) 2004], respectively. The
model in which the CFRP reinforcement was embedded in epoxy background to them is given in ASCE-ACI 445 (1998).

Table 1. Summary of Material Properties

Concrete Steel CFRP
fc ft Ec GF f sy ¼ Reh fsu ¼ Rm Es ff Ef εuf
Material and its properties MPa MPa GPa N=m MPa MPa GPa MPa GPa %
Initial characteristic properties 31 1.8 32 — Ø16∶410 Ø16∶500 200 2,500 260 ≈0.8
based on drawings Ø25∶390 Ø25∶500
Mean properties based on tests 68.5 (8) 2.2 (0.5) 25.4 (1.7) 154 (82) Ø16∶441 (12) Ø16∶738 (2.4) Ø16∶192.1 (23.3) — — —
(standard deviations are given uniaxial tension Ø25∶411 (8.2) Ø25∶706 (22.6) Ø25∶198.3 (31.5)
in parenthesis)
Note: For the concrete: f c = compressive strength; f t = tensile strength; Ec = modulus of elasticity; and GF = fracture energy. For the steel: fsy ¼ Reh is the
yield stress; fsu ¼ Rm is the ultimate stress; and Es = modulus of elasticity. For the CFRP: ff = tensile strength; Ef = modulus of elasticity; and εuf = failure
strain.

Fig. 7. (a) Model of bridge with nonlinear concrete in the bridge slab and midcolumns and linear concrete in the other parts; failure started in the east
edge beam; (b) nonlinear discrete reinforcement is embedded in the concrete model of the bridge with a perfect bond to the concrete

© ASCE D4014008-5 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

 way the shear truss mechanism is applied. Codes ACI and CSA
permit the use of the concrete’s contribution to the shear capacity,
whereas in EC2, this is not permitted. Another factor that is respon-
sible for some of the differences is that the codes differ in their treat-
ment of the concrete compression strut inclination. In the ACI
code, it is assumed to be fixed at 45°, which is quite a conservative
assumption. The Canadian code is a simplified version of the modi-
fied compression field theory (MFCT), e.g., Collins and Mitchell
(1991) and Bentz et al. (2006). Here, the inclination is determined
iteratively from the cross-sectional equilibrium and is dependent on
factors such as the crack spacing, concrete material properties and
the average tensile and compressive strains over the cracked sec-
tions. In the simplified code definitions, the inclination depends pri-
marily on the longitudinal strain εx calculated at the middle of the
cross-section. However, this definition has been calibrated using
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Comparison of load-deflection curves for the cases with and data obtained from beams with only steel reinforcement, whereas
without FRP strengthening; 1 = effect on stiffness, 2 = strengthening the bridge was also strengthened with CFRP reinforcement, a
effect material that displays linear elasticity until failure. This might be
one reason why the crack angle estimated by the CSA code does
not correspond to the angle observed in the test.
The interaction between the shear force and the bending The European code compensates for the omission of the concrete
moment, as a function of a unit load P, is presented in Fig. 10. contribution to the shear capacity by adopting a crack angle that
Because the dead load was already acting on the bridge, its effect most closely matches the angle observed in the test. In addition,
[the hatched parts of the diagrams in Figs. 10(b and c)] has not the truss model used in EC2 is a transparent geometrical method
been considered in the analysis. Calculations based on the initial and the change in the tensile longitudinal strains because of the ad-
characteristic concrete strength, fc ¼ 31 MPa, and the tested mean dition of the strengthening can be easily incorporated into the analy-
value, fc ¼ 68 MPa, are given in Sas (2011), Sas et al. (2011) and sis to obtain cross-sectional equilibrium. As the longitudinal force
some of the results are summarized in Table 2. in the tensile chord of the truss increases, the crack angle is reduced;
The three codes predict the shear force capacity and the ultimate therefore, the assumed crack has to bridge more stirrups to obtain
load capacity of the bridge in a conservative manner. The ratio be- equilibrium. In this way, EC2 predicts an increase of the shear force
tween the predicted value PV and the test result PTest varies between capacity after strengthening. However, disregarding the concrete
0.31 (EC2, with a concrete strut inclination of θ ¼ 45°), 0.65 (CSA, contribution leads to conservative estimates of the shear capacity.
θ ¼ 38°), 0.66 (ACI, θ ¼ 45°), and 0.78 (EC2 with minimum When the initial characteristic compressive strength of the con-
value θ ¼ 22°). Because EC2 makes use of the variable angle truss crete is used, the discrepancies between code predictions and test
model, both minimum and maximum capacities were estimated. results are even larger (Table 2). This underlines the importance of
They are shown in Table 2. The reason for the differences is the using actual tested values in assessment of structures.

Fig. 9. Failure cracks with ruptured stirrups in the beams after the maximum load of 11.7 MN in the span close to the South abutment: (a) west beams;
(b) east beams (images by Lennart Elfgren)

© ASCE D4014008-6 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

 The Swedish railways bridge design code, BV Bridge (2003),
contains the BV 2000 loading model, which represents trains with
axle loads of 330 kN and is more representative of the type of traffic
actually using the bridge. For design and assessment purposes, the
actual train loading can be represented by a uniformly distributed
characteristic line load of 4 × 330=6.4 ¼ 206 kN=m where 6.4 m is
the distance over which the four-axle loads act in two bogies con-
nected to one another. This gives a mean value of the train load of
187 kN=m with a standard deviation of 10 kN=m if the character-
istic value has a probability of being exceeded by 3.0% of the
trains. As the width of the bridge is 2.9 m, the design loading can
be expressed as q0 ¼ 187=2.9 ¼ 64.5 kN=m2 . The uniformly dis-
tributed soil pressure is calculated as qh ¼ 0.34q, where q = train
load applied on the bridge divided by the deck area and 0.34 is the
coefficient for soil pressure. Additionally, permanent soil pressure,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

self-weight of the bridge ballast, sleepers, and rail are included in

the calculation (Puurula 2012).
Based on results from the model, the following comparisons can
be made:
• bridge without strengthening,
• two edge beams strengthened with 9 FRP bars as tested during
the load test to failure, and
• bridge slab strengthened with transverse NSM Sto FRP Bar
M10C on 150 mm centers. The bars are parallel to the supports,
contrary to the original steel reinforcement bars which are at an
Fig. 10. Shear force and bending moment acting on the bridge under a angle to the supports and perpendicular to the bridge center
unit load P ¼ 1 MN and g ¼ 58.7 kN=m (dead load): (a) geometry; line (Fig. 11).
(b) shear force V; (c) bending moment M; (d) forces in the longitudinal In Fig. 12, vertical displacements are presented for the un-
steel reinforcement because of bending and shear and shear: z denotes strengthened bridge at the train load level q ¼ 304 kN=m2 . This
the internal lever arm load level corresponds to 304=64.5 ¼ 4.71 times the modern de-
sign loading, representing trains with an axle load of 330 kN or
Assessment of Load-Carrying Capacity for a Train approximately 4.71 × 330=250 ¼ 6.2 times the original design re-
Load quirement to cater for an axle load of 250 kN. The deflection in the
middle of the bridge slab reached a value of 0.1028 m, when the
A very simple first estimate of the load capacity of the bridge can be maximum stresses in the reinforcement in the slab were far beyond
obtained by dividing the actual failure load, P ¼ 11.7 MN, by the their yield limit (Fig. 13). Hence, according to the model, the failure
originally designed-for axle load of 250 kN. This gives the load of the original, unstrengthened bridge would start in the deck slab.
capacity of the bridge as 11.7=0.25 ¼ 46 axles. On a 12-m span, The influence of the two potential strengthening alternatives is
there is room for one locomotive with six axles, spaced at 1.6 m illustrated in Figs. 14–18. Comparable load-deflection curves for
centers. This results in the approximation that the strengthened the midpoint of the slab are given in Fig. 14. It is shown that
bridge may carry the equivalent of 46=6 ¼ 7.9 locomotives. strengthening the edge beams only contributes to a small stiffening
However, by using the finite element model presented previ- of the slab. Strengthening of the slab, however, has a substantial
ously, now including the soil pressure at both ends of the bridge, effect on the slab stiffness. The strengthening of the slab also con-
it is possible to assess the capacity of the bridge more accurately. In siderably increases the overall load-carrying capacity of the bridge.
the calculations using Brigade, the train load is increased succes- Failure deflections in the order of 0.1 m are large but are indicative
sively and, at the same time, the uniformly distributed soil pressure of ductile behavior despite the introduction of nonductile CFRP
caused by the increasing train load is also increased. reinforcement.

Table 2. Capacities Predicted by Codes Using Tested and Nominal Characteristic Material Properties
ACI CSA EC2
Parameter studied fc ¼ 68 MPa f c ¼ 31 MPa fc ¼ 68 MPa f c ¼ 31 MPa f c ¼ 68 MPa fc ¼ 31 MPa
θ 45° 45° 38°a 37°4′a 45° 22° 45° 22°
V s (MN) 1.06 1.06 1.31 1.22 1.02 2.54 0.93 2.32
V c (MN) 1.24 0.83 0.97 0.66 — — — —
V Rd (MN) 2.29 1.89 2.28 1.87 1.02 2.54 0.93 2.32
M Rd (MNm) 6.12 5.62 6.12 5.62 6.12 6.12 5.62 5.62
PV (MN) 7.74 6.25 7.67 6.3 3.64 9.12 3.33 8.33
PV =PTest 0.66 0.53 0.65 0.54 0.31 0.78 0.28 0.71
Note: M Rd = bending moment capacity; PV = vertical load corresponding to the shear capacity; and PV =PTest = ratio of the predicted capacity to the actual load
obtained at the PTest ¼ 11.7 MN; V s and V c = vertical shear forces taken by steel and concrete, respectively; V Rd ¼ V s þ V c is the total shear capacity; and
θ = inclination of the compression struts.
a
This value iteratively calculated.

© ASCE D4014008-7 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 11. Proposed strengthening of the slab with Sto FRP Bar M10C at 150 mm centers, parallel to the supports but not parallel to the steel
reinforcement

Fig. 12. Modeled vertical displacements of the bridge slab for an unstrengthened bridge at the load level q ¼ 304 kN=m2 ¼ 4.71q0 , where
q0 ¼ 64.5 kN=m2 is the mean live load for a train with an axle load of 330 kN. The maximum displacement in the midpoint of the slab is 0,1028 m

Fig. 13. Maximum tensile stress of 629 MPa, well above the yield stress of 440 MPa, is obtained for a load level of q ¼ 304 kN=m2 ¼ 4.71q0 for an
unstrengthened bridge

© ASCE D4014008-8 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 16. Load-strain curves for the transverse bottom reinforcement in

the middle of the slab with increasing train load for a slab strengthened
with skewed transverse CFRP reinforcement as shown in Fig. 11
Fig. 14. Load-deflection curves for the midpoint of the slab with in-
creasing train load for different strengthening alternatives

to minimize the distance to the edge beams, whilst the CFRP

reinforcement was placed slightly skewed, to be parallel with the
supports, see Fig. 11. This is the reason why the steel reinforcement
carries larger strains than the carbon reinforcement. After the fail-
ure of the carbon bars, the steel reinforcement takes over the load
from the carbon bars and the strains in steel reinforcement increase
rapidly for the same load level.
Plastic strains in the concrete at the failure load as seen from
underneath are shown in Fig. 17 for the strengthened slab. It gives
an indication of the crack pattern. In Fig. 18, load-strain curves are
given for the longitudinal reinforcement in the centre of the East
edge beam when the slab is strengthened transversely with CFRP
bars. The steel tensile reinforcement in the edge beams begins to
yield at the load level q ¼ 420 kN=m2 .
In summary, the transverse carbon strengthening chosen was
quite appropriate because the strengthened slab can sustain q ¼
487 kN=m2 ¼ 7.54q0 , and the steel reinforcement in the edge
beams can sustain q ¼ 420 kN=m2 ¼ 6.5q0 before yielding starts.
The rupture of the carbon at εuf ≈ 0.008 is very brittle and is to be
avoided. In this case, the yielding of the steel reinforcement in the
Fig. 15. Load-stress curves for the transverse bottom reinforcement in edge beams leads to a ductile failure. This can, therefore, be pre-
the middle of the slab with increasing train load for different strength- dicted to be the ultimate limit of the bridge’s load-carrying capacity.
ening alternatives

Summary and Conclusions

The effect of the strengthening of the slab is further demon- This paper has described how the load-carrying capacity of a re-
strated in Fig. 15, in which load-stress curves are given for the inforced concrete railway bridge can be calculated for different
transverse bottom slab steel reinforcement, showing that the CFRP strengthening alternatives using a nonlinear three-dimensional fi-
strengthening of the slab decreases the steel tensile stress. In the nite element model with discrete reinforcement bars which was
case in which the slab is strengthened with transverse CFRP bars, calibrated using a full-scale test to failure of a redundant 50 year
much of the tensile force is taken by the carbon reinforcement es- old bridge. The strengthening of the bridge was successful as the
pecially after the steel reinforcement started to yield at a load level carbon fiber bars increased both the stiffness of the bridge and its
of 230 kN=m2 . The CFRP reinforcement reaches its ultimate fail- bending moment capacity.
ure stress at a load level of q ¼ 487 kN=m2 (or 7.54q0 ). After ini- The three-dimensional nonlinear calculation method with dis-
tial failure, the stress in the carbon bar decreases and the stresses in crete reinforcement was used to model the bridge in an integrated
the steel reinforcement start to increase, now in the hardening part way, including twist and deflections in all directions. The calcula-
of the stress-strain curve (Fig. 16). Just strengthening the edge tion model was first calibrated with test results from a full-scale
beams does not have any effect on the stresses in the tensile steel loading to failure of a railway bridge in Örnsköldsvik in northern
reinforcement in the slab. Sweden. The bridge behavior with increasing load and its ultimate
Load-strain curves for the transverse bottom reinforcement load-carrying capacity were closely predicted using the calculation
in the middle of the slab for increasing train load are shown in method described. The focus was on the assessment of the load-
Fig. 16. The steel reinforcement was located squarely in the slab carrying capacity during nonlinear behavior of the materials rather

© ASCE D4014008-9 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 17. Plastic strains in concrete, i.e., the crack pattern of a strengthened slab at the failure load as seen from underneath the slab

600 The calculations show that ordinary reinforced concrete bridges of

the type studied are ductile and often have a reserve capacity, which
500 may be utilized after a proper assessment procedure. This extra
capacity is seldom obvious when a standard evaluation is run using
400 nominal material properties and code models.
Therefore, to increase our knowledge and to use our existing
q [kN/m2]

Steel strains with FRP transverse

300 Steel strains with FRP longitudinal bridges to their best potential, more bridges of different types
Steel strains without FRP
FRP strains with FRP longitudinal
should be tested to failure in a planned way, when they are going
200 to be demolished. In this way we can (1) analyze the real behavior
of typical bridges, (2) develop appropriate strengthening strategies,
100 and (3) determine the real safety of our bridges—with and without
q0 strengthening.
0
0.0000 0.0050 0.0100 0.0150
Strain m/m Acknowledgments
Fig. 18. Load-strain curves for the longitudinal outermost tensile bot- The authors gratefully acknowledge support and contributions from
tom reinforcement in the middle of the east edge beam with increasing our partners and collaborators in the Sustainable Bridges Project
train load for different strengthening alternatives
(www.sustainablebridges.net): the European Union 6th Framework
Program; Banverket, Sweden; The Federal Institute for Materials
Research and Testing (BAM), Germany; Chalmers University of
than investigating other failure modes such as intermediate crack Technology, Sweden; City University, U.K.; Cervenka Consulting,
(IC) induced debonding, anchorage failure, peeling, or delamina- Czech Republic; COWI A/S, Denmark; Design Projektsamverkan,
tion of the carbon fiber reinforcement. Sweden; Deutsche Bahn (DB), Germany; Ecole Polytechnique
After adjustment and verification of the model, train loading Federal de Lausanne (EPFL); and Eidgenössissche Materialprü-
was applied to the bridge using statistical mean values of actual fungsanstalt (EMPA), Switzerland; Luleå University of Technology
material properties obtained from testing samples taken from the and Lund University of Technology, Sweden; Finnish Rail Admin-
bridge after the conclusion of the load test. The load-carrying istration and Finnish Road Administration, Finland; Laboratoire
capacity of the bridge was then calculated for the bridge before Central des Pontes et Chaussées (LCPC), France; Network Rail,
and after strengthening with near-surface mounted reinforcement U.K.; Norut Technology, Norway; PKP Polish Railway Lines,
(NSMR) consisting of carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP).
Poland; Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Sweden; RWTH,
The method can be used to ensure a ductile behavior after strength-
Germany; Skanska Sverige AB, Sweden; SNCF, France; STO
ening and to avoid brittle failure modes which may be caused by
Skandinavia AB, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, and Swedish
rupturing carbon fibers. Bridge sections for strengthening should
be designed so that ductility is maintained by ensuring that the Road Administration, Sweden; Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya,
FRP bars do not rupture before extended yielding of the steel Spain; University of Minho, Portugal; University of Oulu, Finland;
reinforcement. University of Salford, U.K; Universität Stuttgart, Germany; Wroclaw
The assessment of the different strengthening alternatives shows University of Technology, Poland and WSP, Finland. The follow-
that the bridge, after strengthening the deck slab with CFRP bars, ing companies outside the Sustainable Bridges Project have also
would have failed under a load 6.5 times the current maximum contributed: Botniabanan, Sweden; Denmark Technical University
axle load of 330 kN, whilst the unstrengthened bridge would have (DTU), Denmark; Nordisk Spännarmering, Sweden; Savonia Uni-
failed under a load 4.7 times the axle load of 330 kN and approx- versity of Applied Sciences, Finland and Örnsköldsviks kommun,
imately 6.2 times the originally designed-for axle load of 250 kN. Sweden.

© ASCE D4014008-10 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008

 References Plos, M. (1995). “Application of fracture mechanics to concrete bridges.
finite element analysis and experiments.” Ph.D. thesis, Chalmers Univ.
American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2011). “Building code requirements of Technology, Division of Concrete Structures, Gothenburg, Sweden,
for structural concrete and commentary.” ACI-318, Farmington Hills, 57–70.
MI, 503. Puurula, A. (2012). “Load-carrying capacity of a strengthened reinforced
ASCE and American Concrete Institute (ACI) 445 on Shear and concrete bridge. Non-linear finite element modeling of a test to failure.
Torsion. (1998). “Recent approaches to shear design of structural Assessment of train load capacity of a two span railway trough bridge
concrete.” J. Struct. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124: in Örnsköldsvik strengthened with bars of carbon fibre reinforced pol-
12(1375), 1375–1417. ymers (CFRP).” Doctoral thesis, Division of Structural Engineering,
Bentz, E. C., Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. R. (2006). “Simplified Luleå Univ. of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 328.
modified compression field theory for calculating shear strength of Puurula, A., et al. (2008). “Full-scale test to failure of a strengthened
reinforced concrete elements.” ACI Struct. J., 103(4), 614–624. reinforced concrete bridge. Calibration of assessment models for load-
Bicanic, N., Mang, H., Meschke, G., and De Borst, R., eds. (2014). Com- bearing capacities of existing bridges.” Nordic Concrete Research,
putational modelling of concrete structures, CRC Press/Balkema, Vol. 2008:2, Publ. 38, The Nordic Concrete Federation, Oslo, Norway,
Leiden, Netherlands, 1120. 121–132.
Brigade. (2011). Brigade software, 〈http://www.scanscot.com/products/
Puurula, A., et al. (2013). “Loading to failure and 3D nonlinear FE
overview/〉 (Jun. 7, 2014).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 36.78.193.79 on 01/29/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

modelling of a strengthened RC bridge.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng.,

BV Bridge. (2003). BVS 583.10 Broregler för nybyggnad – BV Bro,
10.1080/15732479.2013.836546.
utgåva 9 [Rules for new bridges—version 9], Banverket, Borlänge,
Richard, B., Epaillard, S., Cremona, C., Adelaide, L., and Elfgren, L.
Sweden (in Swedish).
(2010). “Nonlinear finite element analysis of a 50 years old reinforced
Canadian Standards Association (CSA). (2004). “Design of concrete
concrete trough bridge.” Eng. Struct., 32(12), 3899–3910.
structures.” CSA-A23.3, Mississauga, ON, Canada, 352.
Collins, M. P., and Mitchell, D. (1991). Prestressed concrete structures, Sas, G. (2011). “FRP shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams.”
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 766. Doctoral thesis, Luleå Univ. of Technology, Luleå, Sweden.
Elfgren, L., and Noghabai, K. (2001). “Tension of reinforced concrete Sas, G., Blanksvärd, T., Enochsson, O., Täljsten, B., Puurula, A., and
prisms. round robin analysis and tests on bond. A report from an inves- Elfgren, L. (2011). “Flexural-shear failure of a full scale tested RC
tigation arranged by RILEM technical committee 147-FMB fracture bridge strengthened with NSM CFRP: Shear capacity analysis.” Nordic
mechanics to anchorage and bond.” Research Rep. 2001:13, Luleå Concr. Res., 2/2011(44), 189–206.
Univ. of Technology (LTU), Luleå, Sweden, 244. Sas, G., Blanksvärd, T., Enochsson, O., Täljsten, B., and Elfgren, L.,
Elfgren, L., and Noghabai, K. (2002). “Tension of concrete prisms. bond (2012). “Photographic strain monitoring during full-scale failure testing
properties of reinforcement bars embedded in concrete tie elements. of Örnsköldsvik bridge.” Struct. Health Monit., 11(4), 489–498.
summary of a RILEM round-robin investigation arranged by TC Sustainable Bridges (SB). (2008). “Sustainable bridges—Assessment for
147-FMB ‘Fracture Mechanics to Anchorage and Bond’.” Mater. future traffic demands and longer lives.” 〈www.sustainablebridges
Struct., 35(6), 318–325. .net〉 (Jun. 7, 2014).
European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (2004). “Eurocode 2: Sustainable Bridges (SB)-6.3. (2007). “Field Tests. Örnsköldsvik bridge—
Design of concrete structures—Part 1-1: General rules and rules for Full scale testing; Vitmossen—Strengthening of the subsoil; Frövi
buildings.” EN 1992:1-1, Brussels, Belgium, 225. bridge—Strengthening and monitoring.” Deliverable D6.3. sustainable
fédération internationale du béton (FIB; International Federation for bridges—a project within EU FP6, B. Täljsten and A. Carolin, eds.,
Structural Concrete). (2008). “Practitioners’ guide to finite element Luleå Univ. of Technology, Luleå, Sweden.
modelling of reinforced concrete structures. state-of -art report.” Bulle- Sustainable Bridges (SB)-7.3. (2008). “Field Test of a concrete bridge
tin 45, Int. Federation for Concrete Structures, Lausanne, Switzerland, in Örnsköldsvik, Sweden.” Deliverable D 7.3, sustainable bridges,
344. L. Elfgren, O. Enochsson, and H. Thun, eds., Luleå Univ. of Technol-
Fernandez Ruiz, M., Muttoni, A., and Hars, E. (2007). “Experimental ogy, Luleå, Sweden.
investigation on the load carrying capacity of thin webs including Schlune, H., Plos, M., and Gylltoft, K. (2009). “Improved bridge evaluation
post-tensioning tendons.” Proc. Fib Symp., Int. Federation of Structural through finite element model updating using static and dynamic mea-
Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland, 483–490. surements.” Eng. Struct., 31(7), 1477–1485.
Ferreira, D., Bairan, J., and Mari, A. (2012). “Modelação numérica de es- Scordelis, A. C., Elfgren, L. G., and Larsen, P. K. (1979). “Time-dependent
truturas porticadas de betão armado e pré-esforçado críticas ao esforço behaviour of concrete box girder bridges.” ACI J., 76(1), 159–178.
transverso e propostas de reforço [Numerical simulation of reinforced
Scordelis, A. C., Larsen, P. K., and Elfgren, L. G. (1977). “Ultimate
and prestressed frame structures critical to shear and strengthening
strength of curved RC box girder bridge.” J. Struct. Div., 130,
proposals].” Proc. Encontro Nacional Betao Estrutural- BE2012,
1525–1542.
Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto (FEUP), Porto,
Täljsten, B. (1994). “Plate bonding. Strengthening of existing concrete
Portugal, 10 (in Portuguese).
structures with epoxy bonded plates of steel or fibre reinforced plastics.”
Malm, R. (2009). “Predicting shear type crack initiation and growth in
concrete with non-linear finite element method.” Ph.D. thesis, Royal Ph.D. thesis, 152 D, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå Univ. of
Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 283.
Nordin, H, and Täljsten, B. (2003). “Concrete beams strengthened with Täljsten, B., Blanksvärd, T., and Sas, G. (2011). Handbok för dimensioner-
CFRP. a study of anchor lengths.” Proc. 10th Conf. on Structural Faults ing i samband med förstärkning av betongkonstruktioner med pålim-
and Repair, Engineering Technical Press, Edinburgh, Scotland, 135. made fiberkompositer [Design Guideline for FRP Strengthening of
Pimentel, P., Figueiras, J., and Bruhwiler, E. (2007). “Numerical modelling Existing Concrete Structures], Division of Structural Engineering,
of prestressed beams for structural examination of existing bridges.” Luleå Univ. of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 184 (in Swedish).
Congress on Numerical Methods in Engineering, J. César de Sá, Vogel, T., and Bargähr, R. (2006). “Zustandserfassung von Brücken bei
R. Delgado, A. Rodríguez Ferran, J. Oliver, P. R. M. Lyra, and J. L. D. deren Abbruch (ZEBRA) [Condition survey of bridges during their
Alves, eds., APMTAC—Portugese Association for Theoretical, Ap- demolition].” Project AGB 1998/101 (86/98), Dept. of Transport
plied and Computational Mechanics, Lisbon, Portugal. (UVEK), Zürich, Switzerland, 187 (in German).
Plos, M. (1990). “Skjuvförsök i full skala på plattrambro i armerad betong Zwicky, D., and Vogel, T (2000). “Bruchversuche an ausgebauten
[Full scale shear test of a reinforced concrete slab frame bridge].” Brückenträgern [Ultimate load tests on dismantled bridge girders].”
Rep. 90, Chalmers Univ. of Technology, Div. of Concrete Structures, IBK-Rep. No. 258, ETH Zurich, Institute of Structural Engineering,
Gothenburg, Sweden, 45–72 (in Swedish). Birkhäuser, Basel, Switzerland, 167.

© ASCE D4014008-11 J. Struct. Eng.

J. Struct. Eng., 2015, 141(1): D4014008