Finite Element Thermal Analysis of Deep Box-Girders
Finite Element Thermal Analysis of Deep Box-Girders
Finite Element Thermal Analysis of Deep Box-Girders
128
editor@iaeme.com
1. INTRODUCTION
Many types of structures are constructed in open environments, thus suffer a
continuous exposure to the fluctuation of climate. Bridges are among the structures
where the diurnal and seasonal variations in solar radiation and air temperature affect
the serviceability and may cause serious cracks and deflections [1-5], which influence
the live span of the bridge [6]. Many of the leading researches that were carried out
during the period extended from 1970 to 1990 [7-9] were the basis of the thermal
actions provisions of respected bridge design codes.
Most of the existing bridge design codes around the world, take into consideration
the temperature gradients that occur along the depth of the superstructure. The
temperature gradient models suggested by the design codes are generally linear,
multi- linear or nonlinear, which consider both the heating (positive) temperature
gradients and the cooling (negative) temperature gradients. The positive gradient
occurs after the continuous heating of the top surface during the hot hours of the day,
causing a significant rise in the temperature there compared to the tempe rature of the
interior sections, while the negative gradient occurs within the early morning hours
after long cooling phase at the top surface, which leads to a reverse temperature
differential.
AASHTO [10] specifies a bilinear gradient model for both the positive and the
negative temperature gradients. Four climate regions are categorized by AASHTO
according to the maximum solar intensity in USA and are defined from zone 1 to zone
4. The bilinear model consists of three temperatures gradients. The maximum at the
top surface (T1), followed by a linear decrease to the temperature gradient T2, which
is located 0.1 m below the top surface. The gradient decreases from T2 to zero at a
depth of 0.4 m for most cases. At the lower surface of the bottom slab, a temperature
gradient T3 is suggested, which varies linearly along the lower 0.2 m of the
superstructure.
In this paper, the influences of the daily change in the ambient air temperature and
the variation of the intensity of solar thermal radiation on the thermal budget in deep
box-girder bridges were studied using a three-dimensional finite element modeling of
an existing bridge. The temperature distributions along and across the slabs and the
webs of the girder and the vertical temperature gradients were inves tigated for the
climate of Gaziantep, Turkey. In addition, a comparison was made between the
predicted maximum temperature gradient and the design gradient of the AASHTO
bridge design specifications.
where , and are the concrete density, specific heat and thermal conductivity,
respectively, while Q is the heat generated by cement hydration. The temperature T is
the main variable, which varies with x, y, and z.
The boundary conditions on the girder's surfaces are described by [11],
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
129
editor@iaeme.com
where
is the heat exchange between the exposed surfaces and the surrounding
environment per unit area, while
,
,
are the direction cosines of the unit
vectors normal to the surfaces in the directions x, y and z.
(3)
The first term is the surface convection with the surrounding air, where
is the
convection coefficient of the surface,
is the surface temperature and
is the
temperature of the ambient air. The second term is the solar radiation absorbed by the
exposed surfaces, while the third term describes the reflected radiation from the
ground and other surroundings. Where, is the absorptivity of the surfaces, is the
global solar radiation on a horizontal surface,
is the reflection coefficient of the
ground, and is the tilt angle of surface. Finally, the last term represents the thermal
radiosity of the exposed surfaces to the atmosphere, where is the emissivity of the
surface and is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. To solve Eq. (1) and to apply the
boundary loads that described in Eq. (3), the finite element package COMSOL
Multiphysics [12] was used.
Table 1 Material and thermal loads values
(
J/Kg K
1.7
Maximum
( )
1000
0.9
0.5
Minimum
Wind Speed Albedo
( )
28.6
21.6
29.5
0.1
130
editor@iaeme.com
12 m
TS2
TS3
W2
14 m
0.4 m
W3
0.96 m
BS1
W4
5m
(a) Cross-section
Figure 1 The deep box-girder, (a) the cross-section of the tested box-girder [13] and (b) the
three-dimensional finite element temperature distribution at 3:00 PM
Figure 2 Comparison of the finite element predicted and the field temperatures along BS1
section
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
131
editor@iaeme.com
Figure 3 Comparison of the finite element predicted and the field temperatures along TS1
section
Figure 4 Comparison of the finite element predicted and the field temperatures along W1 and
W2 sections
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
132
editor@iaeme.com
6:00 AM was 26.6 , while the temperature in an interior point located 0.3 below
the top surface was about 30
as shown in Figure 5(a) and clearly illustrated in
Figure 5(b). After the continuous heating of the top surface during the midday hours,
which are associated with high solar radiation fluxes, the surface reached its
maximum temperature between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM making a high differential
from the temperature of the lower layers along the top slab and the web as shown in
Figure 5(a). It is shown in Figures 5(a) and 5(b) that the temperature of the top surface
at 2:00 PM was more than 52 , while the temperature at 1.0
below was less than
25 . After the sunset, the temperature of the top surface decreased gradually while
the temperature of the interior points of the top slab stilled relatively higher as
illustrated in the temperature distribution at 8:00 PM. This decrease continued during
the night hours and early morning hours because of the effect of the surface
convection cooling and the surface long-wave radiation to atmosphere, reaching the
minimum surface temperature before the sunrise as shown in the temperature
distribution at 6:00 AM as illustrated in Figures 5(a) and 5(b).
A general notice, which can be recognized for each of the three time steps, is that
the temperature was almost constant along the clear depth of the web, which is
extended from the bottom surface of the top slab to the top surface of the bottom slab
as shown in Figure 5(a).
As shown in Figure 5(a), the temperature distribution across the bottom slab
differs from a time step to another. This variation is more clearly illustrated in Figure
6(a). As shown in Figure 6(a), the bottom surface of the bottom slab suffered higher
temperatures than the inside concrete points at 2:00 PM. This can be attributed to the
effect of the diffused solar radiation, the hot air temperature and the reflected
radiation from the ground and other surroundings. The temperature at the bottom
surface along the south web was 26.6
at 2:00 PM, while at 0.2
deeper in the
concrete of the bottom slab, the temperature decreased to 23.8 . Beyond the hot
hours of the day, the solar radiation reduced gradually and the air temperature
decreased leading to the starting of the cooling process on the bottom surface as
shown in the temperature distribution at 8:00 PM in Figure 6(a). The convection and
the re-radiation surface cooling continued until a reverse temperature distribution took
place, which reached its maximum before sunrise as shown in the temperature
distribution at 6:00 AM in Figure 6(a), in which the surface temperature was
approximately 19 , while it was approximately 23
at depths deeper than 0.2
from the bottom surface.
Figure 6(b) shows the temperature distribution across the section WS, which was
taken across the thickness of the south web at the mid-depth of the web. The figure
shows that the exterior surface temperature was higher than that of the interior surface
at 2:00 PM by 6.5 , while it was lower than that of the interior surface by
approximately 5 at 6:00 AM. As shown in Figure 6(b), at 8:00 PM, the temperature
difference between the exterior surface and the interior surface is minimal, where the
starting of the cooling phase set the surface temperature down.
Figures 7(a) and 7(b) show the temperature distributions at the three time steps
along the centerline of the 12 width of the top slab and the 5 width of the bottom
slab, respectively. It is shown in Figure 7(a) that for each of the three time steps, the
temperature was approximately the same along the central width of the slab, while
sharp temperature deviation occurred along the southern cantile ver slab and lower
temperature deviation occurred along the northern cantilever slab. At 6:00 AM, the
temperature decreased from approximately 30
at 0.5
away from the edge to
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
133
editor@iaeme.com
approximately 21.5
at the southern edge, while the difference was only 3
along
the northern edge as shown in Figure 7(a). Similar results were observed at 8:00 PM
but with lower temperature differentials. At 2:00 PM, the temperature of the southern
edge was higher by about 4.5 as shown in Figure 7(a).
Figure 5 Temperature distributions along the centerline of the south web at different time
steps (a) along the depth of girder and (b) across the thickness of the top slab
Figure 6 Temperature distributions at different time steps (a) across the thickness of the
bottom slab (b) across the thickness of the south web
During summer, the sun rises from the northeast and sets at the northwest striking
with low angles and lower solar radiations. While during the hot hours, which
extended from approximately 10:00 AM to approximately 4:00 PM, sunrays strike the
bridge from the south with higher altitudes and higher solar radiation intensity. This
explains why the maximum temperature gradients occur at the southern surfaces [19].
This explanation can be obviously observed in the temperature distribution along the
bottom slab at 6:00 AM, which is shown in Figure 7(b). At the northern surface, the
edge was heated up after short time from sunrise due to the low altitude sunrays
concentrated there, while the completely shaded southern edge continued cooling
down. Thus, the temperature gradient was positive (heating) along the northern edge,
while it was negative (cooling) along the southern edge. The temperature distribution
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
134
editor@iaeme.com
at 8:00 PM, which was close to the sunset, also confirms that the low altitude striking
of sunrays near the sunrise and sunset hours increased the temperature of the northern
surface of the bottom slab causing higher temperature gradients than at the southern
surfaces as shown in Figure 7(b).
Figure 7 Temperature distributions at different time steps (a) along the top slab (b) along the
bottom slab
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
135
editor@iaeme.com
webs. The thickness of the top slab is 0.7 , while the thermal conductivity of
concrete is weak (1.7
) so that it is not adequate to conduct the surface's low
temperatures to the lower surface or even beyond the mid-thickness of the slab within
the night cooling hours. Thus, the deeper points of the top slab kept their hot
temperatures even after the long cooling hours, causing a reversed temperature
gradient within the thickness of the slab. The maximum surface negative temperature
gradients along the south and the north webs were 10.7
and 10.8 , respectively.
The temperature along the clear depth of the web was approximately 23
for
the south web and 25
for the north web at 5:40 AM and 5:20 AM, respectively.
Along the thickness of the bottom slab, the temperature gradients at the same time
steps were approximately 4 and 5 for the south and the north webs, respectively.
Figure 9 Vertical temperature gradients along the depth of the girder at different time steps
(a) along the centerline of the south web and (b) along the centerline of the north web
Three distinguishable regions can be recognized in the positive gradients along the
depth of the girder. First, a sharp nonlinear temperature decrease within the thickness
of the top slab or at most within the top 1 , followed by a region of a semi-constant
temperature, which mostly extends along the clear depth of web in addition to the top
0.7
of the bottom slab. The third region extends along the bottom 0.2
of the
bottom slab, within which the temperature shows a limited semi- linear increase up to
a maximum at the bottom surface of the bottom slab. The three regions are obvious in
Figures 9(a) and 9(b).
The maximum positive temperature gradients occurred between 1:20 PM and 1:40
PM. The maximum surface temperature gradients along the south and the north webs
were 29.6
and 28.6 , respectively. While at the bottom surface, the temperature
gradient was about 3 for both cases.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
136
editor@iaeme.com
section, the real variation occurred with these two regions, while the temperature was
almost constant along the clear depth of the web. As shown in Figure 10(b), the
maximum gradients at the top surface are almost identical, where the predicted
maximum temperature gradient was 29.6
, while the AASHTO's maximum
temperature gradient is 30 . At the bottom region of the girder, the behaviors and
the gradient values are also very close. The predicted gradient is almost linear along
the bottom 0.2
of the girder with a maximum gradient less than 3 , which is
almost identical with the linear variation of the AASHTO along this region and with
the gradient of the AASHTO at the bottom surface, which equals 2.8 .
Figure 10 Comparison of the predicted maximum vertical temperature gradient with the
gradient of the AASHTO (Zone1): (a) along the depth of the box-girder and (b) along the top
2 plus the bottom 1
The main difference between the two gradients is the behavior along the top
region (almost the top 1 ). The AASHTO gradient is bilinear with 7.8
at 0.1
from the top surface and reaching its zero value (constant temperature region) at 0.4
below. On the other hand, the predicted gradient distribution shows a nonlinear
variation along this region with much higher temperature gradients at these two
points. The predicted temperature gradients at 0.1 and 0.4 were 17.3
and 5.7 ,
respectively. Another important notice is that the predicted maximum temperature
gradient was calculated for recorded weather data; hence, it is inadequate for extreme
weather conditions. Considering extreme air temperature variation and solar radiation
intensity with long return period as worked by all design codes, the gradient would be
higher and hence the current AASHTO gradient would not be satisfactory for the case
of deep box-girders in the region of Gaziantep, Turkey.
7. COCLUSIONS
The heat conduction and the temperature distributions in deep concrete box-girder
bridges were studied in this research using the finite element method. External
thermal loads including solar radiation, reflected radiation fluxes, surface convection
cooling and surface re-radiation were considered in the thermal analysis. The finite
element model was verified with climate data and temperature measurements from an
existing bridge and was used to study the temperature and the temperature gradient
distributions in deep box- girder sections for the summer weather conditions of
Gaziantep in Turkey. Finally, the predicted maximum gradient was compared with the
AASHTO provisions. The main conclusions of the current study are:
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
137
editor@iaeme.com
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
138
editor@iaeme.com
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
139
editor@iaeme.com