Front. Archit. Civ. Eng.
China 2008, 2(3): 274–280
DOI 10.1007/s11709-008-0039-1
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Peiheng LONG, Xianting DU, Weizhen CHEN
Spatial embedded reinforcement of 20-node block element for
analysis PC bridges
E Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2008
Abstract The formula for the contribution of prestressed
reinforcement on embedded reinforcement element is
derived according to the mechanical behavior of PC
bridges and the foundational principle of finite element
method. Mechanical concept is definite and examples val-
idate the calculation results. Reinforcement element
model allows generating a finite element mesh without
taking into consideration the layout of reinforcements.
Furthermore, the prestressing tendon may pass through
the concrete elements in an arbitrary manner. It is an
effective approach that the no-node loads are diverted
from the tendons to the adjacent concrete elements. A
useful arithmetic analysis of the spatial curved tendon
PC Bridges is provided.
Keywords prestressed concrete bridges, curved tendon,
embedded reinforcement elements, no-node load
1 Introduction
Numerical methods have extensive application in linear
and non-linear analysis of bridge structure and have
become a requisite tool for bridge engineers. However,
certain limitations of existing finite element procedures
for PC bridge are obvious, mainly on two aspects. On
the one hand, plane beam-rod procedures based on
Translated from Journal of Tongji University (Natural Science),
2007, 35(4): 455–460 [译自: 同济大学学报(自然科学版)]
Peiheng LONG (*)
Department of Civil Engineering, Beijing Institute of Civil
Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China
E-mail: phjz@163.com
Xianting DU
School of Civil Engineering & Architecture, Beijing Jiaotong
University, Beijing 100044, China
Weizhen CHEN
Department of Bridge Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai
200092, China
plane cross-section assumption are commonly used in
analysis of complex spiral mechanical system of PC
box girder, which can’t reflect the effect of shear lag,
the effect of distortion, the effect of warp and the effect
of section stress distribution nonhomogeneity induced
by spiral prestress. The inaccuracy of local stress ana-
lysis reduces the certainty of box girder design. On the
other hand, the nodal superposition of concrete solid
element and prestressed reinforcement element is
required in the analysis of local stress using the universal
finite element program, which is difficult to satisfy for
PC bridge with spiral curved prestressing tendons. The
frequent resolution that the compatibility of deforma-
tions of both elements is implemented by coupling
DOFs is very tedious and influences the computational
accuracy of results. Therefore, a spiral embedded PC
combined element is derived by the author where ele-
ments are meshed without taking into account the lay-
out of prestressing tendons passing through concrete
elements in an arbitrary manner. The model using this
element is established to analyze existing PC bridge,
which obviously shows mechanical behavior of the
structure.
2 Spiral embedded PC combined element
The concrete and reinforcement steel are respectively
represented by isoparametric 20-node brick elements
and embedded reinforcing bars in spiral embedded PC
combined element model (see Fig. 1). Based on mech-
anical characteristics, the formula of embedded reinforce-
ment elements that contains the contributions of the
reinforcing bar is derived through displacement transfer
matrix of both elements without considering slip between
concrete and bar. By means of transfer matrix of displace-
ment, the force transfer from the tendons to the adjacent
concrete elements and the influence of prestress losses
caused by creep and shrinkage of concrete are taken into
account.
Spatial embedded reinforcement of 20-node block element for analysis PC bridges 275

to the stiffness and internal force. The embedded repres-

entation of the reinforcement allows a finite element
meshing without paying much attention to the layout of
the reinforcement. Rather, the reinforcing bar may pass
through the concrete elements in an arbitrary manner, as
shown in Fig. 2. The stiffness of reinforcement is
expressed by the following matrix.
2 3
EA EA
6 L 0 0 { 0 07
6 L 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 7
h i 6 7
ðsÞ 6 0 0 0 0 0 07
ke ~6 7 ð4Þ
6 EA EA 7
6{ 0 0 0 07
6 L L 7
6 7
4 0 0 0 0 0 05
0 0 0 0 0 0

Fig. 1 20-node isoparametric element

2.1 Concrete 20-node brick isoparametric element

model [1]

Displacement model:

X
20 X
20 X
20
x~ Ni xi y~ N i yi z~ N i zi
i~1 i~1 i~1
ð1Þ
X
20 X
20 X
20
u~ N i ui v~ N i vi w~ Ni wi
i~1 i~1 i~1

Shape function:


0 when i=j,
Ni ðji ,gi ,fi Þ~ ð2Þ
1 when i~j:
Fig. 2 PC embedded combined elements
Element stiffness matrix:
h i ð1 ð1 ð1
keðcÞ ~ ½B
T ½D
:½B
:jJ jdjdgdf 2.3 Spiral embedded PC combined element model [4]
{1 {1 {1
3 
ð3Þ
X
3 X
3 X    The intersection of prestressed reinforcement and hexa-
~ ½Bi
½D
: Bj :jJ j
T
Hr Hs Ht hedron solid element generates two points that can be
j r g s ft
S r t
taken as nodes of reinforcement element. The line, com-
posed of two points, serves as spiral prestressed reinforce-
where jr, gS, ft – natural coordinate value at intergral
ment element. The same shape functions are adopted by
points;
both reinforcement element and concrete element in order
Hr, Hs, Ht – weighting coefficient of intergral points;
to statisfy the compatibility of deformations.The stiffness
[B] –strain matrix;
of combined element is formed by the stiffness superpos-
[D] –elastic matrix; tion of two types of elements.
|J| –Jacobia determinant. According to the compatibility of deformations, the
relationship between and in one displacement field can
2.2 Embedded reinforcement element be expressed as follows:
 (s)   
Embedded reinforcement element model separates rein- de ~½Rsc
: de(c) , ð5Þ
forcements from concrete elements [2,3]. A combined ele-
ment is formed by embedding the reinforcement into  (s) [Rsc] – displacement transformation matrix;
where:
concrete elements wherein the reinforcement contributes de { displacement vector of prestressed bar element;
276 Peiheng LONG, et al.
 
de(c) { nodal displacement vector of 20-node concrete  (c)   
brick element. Fe ~½Rsc
T : Fe(s) , ð11Þ
2 3  
a1,1 a1,2 a1,3 : : : a1,58 a1,59 a1,60 where: Fe(c) – nodal force vector of 20-node solid element,
6a : : : a2,58 a2,59 a2,60 7  (s) 
6 2,1 a2,2 a2,3 7 Fe – nodal force vector of spiral prestressed rod
6 7
6 a3,1 a3,2 a3,3 : : : a3,58 a3,59 a3,60 7 element
½RSC
~6 6 7. ð6Þ
7
6 a4,1 a4,2 a4,3 : : : a4,58 a4,59 a4,60 7 [Rsc] – transfer matrix.
6 7
4 a5,1 a5,2 a5,3 : : : a5,58 a5,59 a5,60 5 If there are n prestressed rod elements, total nodal
forces of solid element can be expressed as follows:
a6,1 a6,2 a6,3 : : : a6,58 a6,59 a6,60 6|60
  Xn  T h (S) i
Based on the definition of ai,j: Fec ~ RSC,j : Fe,j , ð12Þ
8 j~1
> a1,i ~N1,i (m)uk ,
>
>
>
>
> a2,i ~N2,i (m)vk , n 
P T h (S) i
>
>
< where: RSC,j : Fe,j – the contribution of n pre-
a3,i ~N3,i (m)wk , (i~1,2,3, . . . ,60 j~1
ð7Þ
>
> a4,i ~N4,i (n)uk , k~1,2,3, . . . ,20) stressed rod elements to nodal forces of solid element.
>
>
>
> a5,i ~N5,i (n)vk ,
>
>
:
a6,i ~N6,i (n)wk ,
4 Influence of concrete shrink and creep to
where, N,i(m),N,i(n) – values of shape function of node i of prestress effect
brick at positions of reinforcement nodes, uk, vk,wk – unit
displacements of node k of brick in x, y, z directions. The deformation of concrete structure varies with time
Similarly, the stiffness contribution of prestressed bar owing to the effect of shrinking and creep, which leads
element to concrete element can be expressed as follows: to t displacements of reinforced elements. Finally, the
 (sc)    prestress load greatly changes and influences the nodal
Ke ~½Rsc
T : Ke(s) :½Rsc
, ð8Þ load of concrete element.
Assuming that Nodal displacement increments of con-
thus, the stiffness of combined element is crete
 solid
 element
 and  prestressed element are expressed
    by Dde(c) and Dde(s) , respectively.
½Ke
~ Ke(c) z Ke(sc) : ð9Þ  (c) 
Dde ~
If there are n prestressed rods in concrete element, the
½ Du1 Dv1 Dw1 Du2 Dv2 Dw2 : : :
combined stiffness is in the following form:
" # Du20 Dv20 Dw20
T , ð13Þ
 (c)  Xn
(Sc)
½Ke
~ Ke z Ke,j , ð10Þ
j~1  (s) 
Dde ~½ Dum Dvm Dwm Dun Dvn Dwn
T : ð14Þ
 (c) [Ke] – the stiffness of PC combined element,
where:
Nodal displacement increment vectors of rod elements
Ke – the stiffness of concrete element,
are obtained by transfer matrix:
Pn
Ke,j SC
– the contribution of prestressed rod elements.  (s)   
j~1 Dde ~½Rsc
: Dde(c) : ð15Þ

Thus, the axial deformation of prestressed rod element

3 Transformation of non-node pre-stressed
load
The effect of pre-stressed load is commonly exerted on
nodes of concrete solid element as nodal load. However,
actual position of spiral prestressed load doesn’t always
coincide with nodes of solid element, which needs a trans-
formation method. Based on the equality of deformation
works of nodal forces of both elements, the transforma-
tion from non-node prestressed load to nodal force of
concrete solid element is carried out by the transfer
matrix.
DLmn is expressed as follows:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
DLmn ~ ðDum {Dun Þ2 zðDvm {Dvn Þ2 zðDwm {Dwn Þ2 : ð16Þ
The variable value of prestress induced by shrinking
and creep is shown by the following expression
Dfcr ~Eg :DLmn =Lmn , ð17Þ
where: Dfcr – the variable value of prestress induced by
shrinking and creep;
Eg – the elasticity modulus of reinforced tendons(MPa);
Spatial embedded reinforcement of 20-node block element for analysis PC bridges 277

DLmn – the expansible value of reinforced tendon
induced by shrinking and creep;
Lmn – the effective length of reinforced tendons when
tensioned and anchored
5 Verifying example
A 10 m-span simply supported PC beam with rectangular
section is assumed. Prestressed tendons are in the form of
12W15.24 with anchor control stress being 1395 MPa. The
sectional dimensions and the layout of prestressed ten-
dons are shown in Fig. 3. There are 10000 solid elements
in the whole beam model after meshing. Computational
load includes self weight of the structure and permanent
prestress. Analysis results of three theoretical models are
listed in Table 1, where pulling stress is positive and crush-
ing stress is negative, including spiral embedded solid ele-
ment model, separated reinforcement model and
elementary beam model.
Transverse distributions of top and bottom longit-
udinal stresses of section along the width are respectively
shown in Figs. 4 and 5 using the algorithm presented.
Local stresses of anchor end section and L/4 span section
change greatly owing to stress concentration and sudden
load change. Stress distributions of other sections change
evenly because the shear lag effect of a rectangular section
is not obvious. From Table 1, it can be seen that a few
differences between the PC combined element model and
elementary beam model exist which result from the plane
cross-section assumption of elementary beam. The stress
averages of top and bottom section can reflect spiral effect
of the beam and interaction of different spiral stress com-
ponents. Therefore, limitations of plane beam-rod pro-
gram exist. The stress is the average of the top and
bottom of the elementary beam model and PC combined
element model approach, which means that the algorithm
of the author is valid and that the result can reflect spiral
stress status of beam.
6 Case study
The case study involves a 3-span PC continuous box-gir-
der bridge with single-box-single-cell section oblique
webs. Spiral prestressed tendons along oblique webs are

Fig. 3 Prestressed tendon layout

Table 1 Longitudinal stress of section

position of sections top slab longitudinal stress/MPa bottom slab longitudinal stress/MPa

pivot L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2 pivot L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2
authorial method (average) 24.29 21.21 0.89 0.55 0.42 20.75 22.83 25.65 24.30 24.15
separated reinforcement model 24.31 21.23 0.91 0.53 0.43 20.79 22.86 25.73 24.34 24.19
(average)
elementary beam model 23.28 21.20 1.08 0.52 0.41 20.81 22.75 25.17 24.27 24.10

Fig. 4 Top slab longitudinal stress Fig. 5 Bottom slab longitudinal stress
278 Peiheng LONG, et al.

adopted in design. The sectional dimensions and the lay-
out of prestressed tendons are shown in Fig. 6. Prestressed
tendons are in the form of 12W15.24 with anchor control
stress being 1395 MPa. L represents the calculated span,
and B denotes the width of the top slab or bottom slab in
the following analysis, where pulling stress is positive and
crushing stress is negative.
Based on actual dimensions of the bridge, finite element
model is established with a total of 24384 elements by using
spiral embedded solid combined element. Computational
load includes self weight of the structure and permanent
prestress. 5-year effect of shrinking and creep of concrete
are taken into account. Diaphragms are taken as distribu-
ted load, and the same sectional characteristic are distrib-
uted along the bridge in the analysis of plane beam-rod
model. Transverse distributions of top and bottom longit-
udinal stresses of section along the width are respectively
shown in Figs. 7 and 8. Analysis results of the three theor-
etical models are listed in Tables 2 and 3, including spiral
embedded solid element model without consideration of
creep effect, spiral embedded solid element model with con-
sideration of creep effect and elementary beam model.
As seen from Figs. 7–10, tranverse stress distributions
of top and bottom slabs along the width of section are

Fig. 6 Prestressed tendon layout

Fig. 7 Top slab longitudinal stress of side span Fig. 8 Top slab longitudinal stress of mid-span

Table 2 Top slab longitudinal stress

position of sections side span mid-span

0 L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2 5L/8 3L/4 7L/8 L(0) L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2
authorial method (without 20.59 22.65 20.62 0.33 0.55 20.25 24.63 27.36 25.04 28.08 26.05 25.6 25.2
creep)
authorial method (with creep) 20.62 22.69 20.72 0.18 0.42 20.29 24.44 26.81 24.54 27.63 26.01 25.48 25.11
plane beam-rod method 20.46 22.13 20.37 0.36 0.76 20.96 27.55 28.5 26.61 28.56 25.83 25.1 24.9

Table 3 Bottom slab longitudinal stress

position of sections side span mid-span

0 L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2 5L/8 3L/4 7L/8 L L/8 L/4 3L/8 L/2
authorial method (without creep) 23.56 212.44 215.66 216.66 216.58 214.52 26.88 22.22 22.03 20.21 22.48 22.94 23.41
authorial method (with creep) 23.30 211.7 214.7 216.6 215.5 213.7 26.61 22.50 22.35 20.48 22.15 22.66 23.13
plane beam-rod method 210.8 214.44 217.73 217.28 217.62 213.30 23.50 21.32 21.89 20.92 23.24 24.02 23.97
Spatial embedded reinforcement of 20-node block element for analysis PC bridges 279

non-uniform and spiral effect of box girder stress status is

obvious, which fully shows shear lag effect of box girder
and influence of spiral prestress load to stress status of
girder. As seen from Tables 2 and 3, results only express
stress averages of the top and bottom section using ele-
mentary beam model, which can reflect spiral effect of the
beam, shear lag effect, warp and distortion effect and non-
uniformity of stress distribution induced by concrete
shrinking and creep. Inaccuracy of local stress of box
girder may lead to unsafe bridge design. As shown in
Figs. 11 and 12, stress distributions of the top and bottom
sections are influenced by the change of prestressed load
because of concrete shrinking and creep effect, in particu-
lar, maximum influence of longitudinal stress takes place Fig. 11 Influence of concrete creep to top slab longitudinal
stress
at mid-span of the side span. Therefore, shrinking and
creep effect of concrete can’t be neglected in the analysis
of PC structures.
From what have been analyzed above, owing to the
difference between plane beam-rod model and authorial
method, a few numerical discrepancies of the results exist.
But the spiral effect of spiral prestressed tendons, the
influence of concrete shrinking and creep effect to spiral
mechanical behavior of box girder, in particular, and the
influence of local stress are more authentically revealed by
a new algorithm whose result consists with actual stress
status of the box girder.

Fig. 12 Influence of Concrete creep to bottom slab longit-

udinal stress

7 Conclusions

The stiffness matrix of embedded reinforcement ele-

ment containing the contribution of prestressed rein-
Fig. 9 Bottom slab longitudinal stress of side-span forcement is derived, and a method to solve the non-
node load problem is presented in this paper. The for-
mula of embedded reinforcement element containing
the contribution of prestressed reinforcement is
derived, of which mechanical concept is defined.
Examples validate the calculation results. The new
algorithm fully reveals the effects of spiral prestressed
load and concrete shrinking & creep to spiral stress
status of bridge, and actually reflects spiral mechanical
characteristics. A practical method is provided by the
author for force transformation from prestressed ten-
dons to nodes of solid element and consideration of the
influence of concrete shrinking and creep to prestressed
load. The new algorithm is suitable for correct stress
Fig. 10 Bottom slab longitudinal stress of mid-span analysis of PC bridge with spiral curved prestressed
280
tendons, owing to its high accuracy and proper prac-
ticability.
References
1. Nie Wu, Sun Liping. Ship Structural Mechanics. Harbin:
Harbin Institute of Technology Press, 2000 (in Chinese)
Peiheng LONG, et al.
2. Song Tianxia, Huang Rongsheng, Lin Taisheng. Reinforced
Concrete Nonlinear Finite Element and Optimal Design.
Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Press, 2003 (in Chinese)
3. Jiang Jianjing, Lu Xinzheng, Ye Lieping. Nonlinear Finite
Element Analysis of Reinforced concrete Structure. Beijing:
Tsinghua University Press, 2005 (in Chinese)
4. Long Peiheng. Numerical Method to Analyze cracks in PC
Box Girder bridges. Dissertation of Doctor of Philosophy.
Shanghai: Tongji University, 2005 (in Chinese)