Show simple item record

contributor authorArvind Chaurasiya
contributor authorAparup Biswal
contributor authorG. Tamizharasi
contributor authorRajeev Goel
date accessioned2026-02-16T22:00:00Z
date available2026-02-16T22:00:00Z
date copyright2025/05/01
date issued2025
identifier otherJSDCCC.SCENG-1619.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4310047
description abstractTo construct a deck–arch steel bridge over a valley at Manali, Himachal Pradesh, India, five different arch configurations are proposed. The deck span of the arch was fixed (100 m) and the arch span (75, 80, 85, 90, and 95 m) is varied, which in turn changes the angle of inclination and rise of the arch. The five bridge configurations are modeled, analyzed, and designed per provisions of Indian standards using MIDAS Civil. Elastic and inelastic structural behavior (including damage mechanism), quantity of materials, and cost are used to identify the best configuration suited to this region. From the analysis, it was observed that the 75- and 95-m spans have higher material consumption and cost. Additionally, the serviceability criteria per the Indian standard are not satisfied by the 95-m span. Parametric studies were conducted for critical load combinations using the maximum bending moments and shear forces in critical structural elements. Based on the observed results, changing the arch span from 80 to 90 m is recommended. Also, based on the quantity of materials and cost, the 85-m arch span was found economical. Additionally, the deck–arch steel bridge configurations are checked for their adequacy using nonlinear static analysis. All the bridge configurations remain elastic under maximum considered earthquake and have almost the same lateral stiffness and strength in x-directions, declining with an increase in arch span in y-directions. The 75-m span is too stiff and brittle in the y-direction, whereas the 95-m span is too flexible. The 80- and 90-m spans caused sudden failure after arch rib failure in x-directions with 85-m sustaining higher deformations. Thus, the 85-m bridge is considered as the best configuration based on safety and economy.
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titleSelection of the Type and Geometry of Deck–Arch Steel Bridge Based on Structural Performance and Cost
typeJournal Article
journal volume30
journal issue2
journal titleJournal of Structural Design and Construction Practice
identifier doi10.1061/JSDCCC.SCENG-1619
journal fristpage04025001-1
journal lastpage04025001-10
page10
treeJournal of Structural Design and Construction Practice:;2025:;Volume ( 030 ):;issue: 002
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record