Implementation of a Precast Inverted T-Beam System in Virginia: Part II: Analytic and Field Investigations
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields



Publication Date Range:


Document Data


Document Type:






Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page


Implementation of a Precast Inverted T-Beam System in Virginia: Part II: Analytic and Field Investigations

Filetype[PDF-4.65 MB]

  • English

  • Details:

    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • Abstract:
      The inverted T-beam superstructure is a bridge system that provides an accelerated construction alternative for short-to-medium-span bridges. The system consists of adjacent precast inverted T-beams with a cast-in-place concrete topping. This bridge system is expected to not experience the reflective cracking problems manifested in short-to-medium-span bridges constructed with traditional adjacent voided slab or adjacent box beams. This report presents the results of three phases of a comprehensive research project to develop and implement an inverted T-beam system for Virginia. The three phases are: investigation of time-dependent and temperature effects, investigation of end zone stresses, and live load testing. The first investigation is of time-dependent effects in composite bridges with precast inverted T-beams. The analysis was performed for a two-span continuous bridge. An analytical study was performed to quantify the stresses generated as a result of differential shrinkage, creep and temperature gradient at various sections in both directions. At the cross-sectional level, an elastic sectional analysis approach using the age-adjusted effective modulus method was used to perform the investigation. At the structure level, the effects of uniform temperature changes, thermal gradients and differential shrinkage and creep were investigated and quantified in terms of axial restraint forces and restraint moments. It is shown that, by paying attention to detailing and by selecting a mix design for the cast-in-place topping that has relatively low shrinkage and high creep, the potential for excessive cracking can be reduced. The second investigation is of the stresses in the end zones of such a uniquely shaped precast element. The transfer of prestressing force creates vertical and horizontal tensile stresses in the end zones of the beam. A series of three-dimensional (3D) finite element analyses were performed to investigate the magnitude of these tensile stresses. Various methods of modeling the prestressing force, including the modeling of the transfer length, were examined and the effect of notches at the ends of the precast beams was explored. Existing design methods were evaluated; strut-and-tie models, calibrated to match the results of 3D finite element analyses, are proposed as alternatives to existing methods to aid designers in sizing reinforcing in the end zones. The final section reports the results of live load testing performed on the first inverted T-beam bridge in Virginia on U.S. 360 over the Chickahominy River. A finite element model of Phase I of the U.S. 360 Bridge was created and the live load distribution factors were analytically determined. Live load tests using a stationary truck were performed on Phase I of the U.S. 360 Bridge with the purpose of quantifying live load distribution factors and validating the results from the finite element analyses. It is concluded that it is appropriate to estimate live load distribution factors using AASHTO provisions for cast-in-place slab span bridges.
    • Format:
    • Funding:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at

    Version 3.26