Error when designing girders

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Error when designing girders

When designing girders, I added a 14th girder (girder N) to span 5. After making this change I am receiving the following error message:

An error occurred during the girder structural analysis (-2147220960)
F:\ARP\PGSuper\AnalysisAgent\GirderModelManager.cpp, line 1821

This error message is produced when running design girder on Span 5 Girder N. My .pgs file is below. I haven't had any success troubleshooting this error and will appreciate any help. Thank you.

Binary Data I5 NB.pgs915.53 KB
Error when designing girders

It is going to take some time to get to the root cause issue. The bridge model probably doesn't conform very well with the simplified line girder analysis method. There are abrupt and significant changes to the number of girders in adjacent spans and the edge of deck geometry has near 90 degree angle points. An essentially smooth edge of deck is expected.

Review to understand how PGSuper creates girder line models for bridges with different number of girders per span.

Since your focus is on design, changing the analysis method to "Simple Span" gets you around the problem. All spans are treated as simple spans regardless of the boundary conditions. This is consistent with WSDOT's approach for flexural design. Though, it doesn't help you with evaluation of negative moments in the Strength limit state.

It looks like your model has three distinct frames. Modeling each frame separately would simply the model which could also get around the problem (though I haven't tried that).

Simplifying boundary conditions might help as well. The "Integral after deck casting" if a fully clamped boundary condition (no rotation) when the pier is modeled as an idealized element. "Continuous after deck casting" permits rotation at the support and maintains rotational continuity between spans.

Again, it is going to take some time to get to the root cause and provide a fix. Possibility 5 or 6 weeks because key developers are not available at this time.

Ok, I will take your

Ok, I will take your suggestion on splitting the model at expansion joints. That seems to let me work around this error. Thank you!

Log in or register to post comments