journal article·2026-02-20Open access

Optimization of Mobile Overpass Support Placement Considering the Nonlinear Properties of the Soil Foundation

Alexandr Ganyukov, Adil Kadyrov, Aliya Kukesheva, Aidar Zhumabekov, Kirill Sinelnikov, Sabit Amanbayev, Akbope Karsakova

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 4

Abstract

This study addresses the problem of traffic congestion in large cities caused by long-term repairs of underground utility networks. An innovative mobile overpass is considered, which combines the functions of a vehicle and a temporary bridge, allowing passenger cars up to 3.5 t to pass directly over repair trenches without detours. The research focuses on optimizing the placement of overpass supports relative to the trench edge to reduce soil deformation and prevent trench wall instability. A numerical methodology is developed in ANSYS Workbench that integrates finite element analysis of the soil-support system with parametric optimization using the nonlinear Drucker–Prager elastoplastic model. The soil parameters are obtained from oedometer compression tests (KPr-1M) and direct shear tests (PSG-2M) on clayey soils and then used to calibrate the numerical model. The optimization results show that the optimal distance from the trench wall to the overpass support is Lmin = 2.78 m, which is 13.5% greater than the initial design value. This modification reduces the maximum horizontal displacement of the trench wall by more than a factor of two and ensures compliance with the displacement criteria. Comparison between experimental and numerical compression curves yields an average deviation of 37.55%, with errors below 5% at higher stress levels, confirming that the Drucker–Prager model is suitable for engineering optimization of mobile overpass support placement on similar soils. The proposed methodology can be applied to the design and verification of temporary bridge systems operating above utility trenches in urban environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Railway Engineering and Dynamics · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Transport Engineering and Logistics Systems, Abylkas Saginov Karaganda Technical University, 56 Nursultan Nazarbayev Avenue, Karaganda 100027, Kazakhstan

Funding

Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan

References (91)

Show source-provided references
1. A simple contagion process describes the spreading of traffic jams in urban networks10.1038/s41467-020-15353-2 ↗
2. Harris, N., Shealy, T., and Klotz, L. (2017). Choice architecture as a way to encourage a whole systems design perspective for more sustainable infrastructure. Sustainability, 9.10.3390/su9010054 ↗
3. The costs and other consequences of traffic congestion10.1007/978-3-319-15165-6_13 ↗
4. Identification, cost evaluation, and prioritization of urban traffic congestions and their origin10.1038/s41598-022-17404-8 ↗
5. European Commission (2025, April 07). Reports on Urban Mobility and Congestion 2019–2023. Available online: https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes_en.
6. Texas A&M Transportation Institute (2019). Urban Mobility Report, Texas A&M Transportation Institute. Available online: https://mobility.tamu.edu/umr/.
7. Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training (2025, April 09). Reports on Urban Congestion and Economic Impacts 2010–2015. Available online: https://www.mlit.go.jp.
8. A review on the analysis of evaluating traffic congestion10.1007/978-981-97-0751-5_86 ↗
9. Bellam, K., Nagappan, K., Sankaran, N., Chowdhury, S., and Perakovic, D. (2025). Urban Mobility and Challenges of Intelligent Transportation Systems, IGI Global.10.4018/979-8-3693-7984-4 ↗
10. Sustainability assessment for urban underground utility infrastructure projects
11. The development of the district heat supply system of the city of Karaganda10.1051/e3sconf/201913501031 ↗
12. Impact mitigation of tunnels maintenance works on highway performance10.1016/j.prostr.2024.09.133 ↗
13. Verma, A., Anbazhagan, P., Mayakuntla, S.K., and Bhat, F.A. (2022). Assessing the impact of underground utility works on road traffic and users: A study from an Indian city. International Conference on Transportation Infrastructure Projects: Conception to Execution, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-981-99-2556-8_19 ↗
14. Development of mobile communal overpasses applied during repairing of urban communal networks
15. Research and calculation of the deformed state of the roadway mobile overpass10.52209/2706-977X_2024_3_88 ↗
16. ERE Systems Inc (2021). Corporate Profile and Technical Capabilities, ERE Systems Inc.. Available online: https://erelogistics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ERE-Systems-Brochure-Final-2.pdf.
17. Prokop, J., Odrobiňák, J., Farbák, M., and Novotný, V. (2022). Load-carrying capacity of Bailey bridge in civil applications. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12083788 ↗
18. Portable and rapidly deployable bridges: Historical perspective and recent technology developments10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000454 ↗
19. ERE Logistics (2025). Flat Rack Portable Bridges, ERE Logistics. Available online: https://erelogistics.com/.
20. A novel deployable tied arch bridge10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.03.015 ↗
21. Federal Highway Administration (2025). ASTRA Bridge, Federal Highway Administration. Available online: https://www.astra.admin.ch/astra/de/home/themen/nationalstrassen/baustellen/wissenswertes/astra-bridge.html.
22. Design resistance evaluation for steel and steel–concrete composite members10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.05.009 ↗
23. Time-dependent reliability analysis of stainless steel members and bridges
24. Tatarchenko, G.O., Chernih, O.A., Sokolenko, V.M., and Tatarchenko, Z.S. (2019). Modern information technologies in system architecture—Urban planning—Building constructions. International Conference Building Innovations, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-42939-3_48 ↗
25. Baláž, I.J., and Koleková, Y.P. (2016). New generation of Eurocodes. Production Management and Engineering Sciences: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Science and Production Management (ESPM 2015), CRC Press.10.1201/b19259-63 ↗
26. Farouk, H., and Farouk, M. (2014). Effect of soil model on contact stress under strip footing. New Frontiers in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE.10.1061/9780784413456.008 ↗
27. Wellbore stability analysis using ground reaction curve and Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion
28. Parameter analysis on hardening soil model of soft soil for foundation pits based on shear rates in Shenzhen Bay, China10.1155/2020/7810918 ↗
29. Finite element modeling of rigid inclusion-supported embankment
30. Drucker–Prager plasticity model in the framework of OSB–PD theory with shear deformation10.1007/s00366-021-01527-z ↗
31. Finite element implementation of strain-hardening Drucker–Prager plasticity model with application to tunnel excavation10.1016/j.undsp.2017.08.003 ↗
32. An algorithm for multi-objective efficient parametric optimization10.1115/1.4056764 ↗
33. Performance assessment of a multi-objective parametric optimization algorithm with application to a multi-physical engineering system10.1007/s00158-018-1902-x ↗
34. Chouw, N. (2022). Dynamics of bridge structures. Innovative Bridge Design Handbook, Butterworth-Heinemann.10.1016/B978-0-12-823550-8.00004-4 ↗
35. Nowak, A., Pipinato, A., and Stawska, S. (2022). Loads on bridges. Innovative Bridge Design Handbook, Butterworth-Heinemann.10.1016/B978-0-12-823550-8.00008-1 ↗
36. Interrelations of various soil types mechanical properties10.1088/1742-6596/1177/1/012032 ↗
37. Simplified method for predicting surrounding soil’s horizontal displacement caused by arbitrary deflection of retaining wall
38. Wall and ground movements due to deep excavations in Shanghai soft soils10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000299 ↗
39. A study on the suitability of the Mohr–Coulomb model for numerical analysis of ground excavation
40. Drucker–Prager models and its application in ANSYS and FLAC3D
41. Nonlinear elastic–perfectly plastic model of soil and its numerical implementation and application10.1007/s11204-022-09804-9 ↗
42. Duncan–Chang nonlinear constitutive model based on joint strength theory of structural loess
43. Efficient parametric optimization for expensive single-objective problems
44. Surrogate-Assisted Constraint-Handling Technique for Parametric Multi-Objective Optimization10.1007/s00158-024-03859-y ↗
45. Quliyev, S. (2024). Automated and automatic systems of management of a programs package for making optimal decisions. International Conference on Information Technologies and Their Applications, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-3-031-73417-5_22 ↗
46. Belorit, M., Hrček, S., and Bisták, M. (2019). Description of the methodology of the automated optimization process. Current Methods of Construction Design: Proceedings of the ICMD 2018, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-33146-7_2 ↗
47. Use of design optimization techniques in solving typical structural engineering related design optimization problems10.12989/sem.2015.55.6.1121 ↗
48. Corriou, J.P. (2021). Numerical methods of optimization. Numerical Methods and Optimization: Theory and Practice for Engineers, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-89366-8 ↗
49. Evolving a Nelder–Mead algorithm for optimization with genetic programming10.1162/evco_a_00174 ↗
50. Ravichandran, K., Masoudi, N., Fadel, G.M., and Wiecek, M.M. (2019). Parametric optimization for structural design problems. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, ASME. Paper No. V02BT03A022.10.1115/DETC2019-97860 ↗
51. Probabilistic design of composite leaf spring by using finite element method10.1088/1757-899X/814/1/012019 ↗
52. A four-node plane parametric element based on quadrilateral area coordinate and its application to coupled solid–deformation/fluid–flow simulation for porous geomaterials10.1002/nag.2301 ↗
53. LLC Pribor (2017). Compression Device KPr-1M, LLC Pribor. Available online: https://clk.li/qhCa.
54. LLC Pribor (2017). Soil Shear Tester PSG-3M, LLC Pribor. Available online: https://clk.li/Escl.
55. (2011). Soils. Laboratory Methods for Determining the Strength and Strain Characteristics (Standard No. GOST 12248-2010). Available online: https://clk.li/CTNc.
56. (2013). Soils. Methods of Statistical Treatment of Test Results (Standard No. GOST 20522-2012). Available online: https://clk.li/DiDD.
57. Unsymmetric extensions of Wilson’s incompatible four-node quadrilateral and eight-node hexahedral elements10.1002/nme.6849 ↗
58. Akhmatnurov, D., Zamaliyev, N., Mussin, R., Demin, V., Tolovkhan, B., Ganyukov, N., Skrzypkowski, K., Korzeniowski, W., Stasica, J., and Rak, Z. (2025). Geomechanical Modeling of the Northern Katpar Deposit (Kazakhstan): Assessing the Impact of Rock Mass Disturbance on Stability Safety Factor. Mining, 5.10.3390/mining5040073 ↗
59. A comparison of model fitting using different runs in Box–Behnken design for alginate film formulation10.56808/3027-7922.2449 ↗
60. Non-uniform space filling (NUSF) designs10.1080/00224065.2020.1727801 ↗
61. Response surface split-plot designs: A literature review
62. Regression and Kriging metamodels with their experimental designs in simulation: A review10.1016/j.ejor.2016.06.041 ↗
63. Modeling of the complex behavior through an improved response surface methodology10.1080/08827508.2020.1728265 ↗
64. Ghattas, B., and Manzon, D. (2023). Machine learning alternatives to response surface models. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11153406 ↗
65. Coefficient of determination for multiple measurement error models10.1016/j.jmva.2014.01.006 ↗
66. On asymmetry of prediction errors in small area estimation
67. Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE): When to use them or not10.5194/gmd-15-5481-2022 ↗
68. Research of operation of mobile overpass constructions
69. Verification of non-coaxial constitutive model based on generalized potential theory
70. Comparisons of two approaches for geotechnical model calibration with scarce data10.1155/2021/4245051 ↗
71. Tseshkovskaya, Y., Tsoy, N., Tseshkovskiy, V., Ibrayev, M., Zamaliyev, N., Akhmatnurov, D., Mussin, R., Ganyukov, N., Zakharov, A., and Skrzypkowski, K. (2025). Research Progress of Environmental Studies of a Mining Facility for Land Restoration (Using the Example of a Mining Enterprise in the Karaganda Region). Resources, 14.10.3390/resources14090144 ↗
72. Discussion of safety factor definitions and computation methods for geotechnical structures
73. Low, B.K. (2021). Reliability-Based Design in Soil and Rock Engineering: Enhancing Partial Factor Design Approaches, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003112297 ↗
74. Identification of soil model parameters
75. Determination of parameters for soil models10.1007/s11204-006-0031-5 ↗
76. Boldyrev, G.G., and Muyzemnels, A.J. (2008). The modeling of deformation process in soils with use of ANSYS and LS-DYNA programs. Proceedings of the International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology. Available online: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3326&context=icchge.
77. Statistical analysis of existing test results of HSS model parameters for soft soils
78. Analysis of stress–deformation behavior of soil–geosynthetic composites in plane strain condition10.1007/s40515-018-0057-y ↗
79. Zhao, X., Schorr, J., Peña Olarte, A.A., and Cudmani, R. (2022). A step towards quantifying the uncertainty of the soil mechanical response through the use of genetic algorithms. Proceedings of the International Conference of the International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-12851-6_32 ↗
80. Applying optimized machine learning models for predicting unconfined compressive strength in fine-grained soil10.1007/s40515-024-00372-z ↗
81. Secondary development of modified Duncan–Chang model considering disturbance
82. A Finite Element Modeling of Drained Triaxial Test on Loose Sand Using Different Constitutive Models
83. Experimental Construction and Validation of Revised Drucker–Prager Model Using Finite Element Method for Moisture Condensation Zone in Bentonite-Bonded Silica Sand10.1007/s11665-024-09265-1 ↗
84. Davarpanah, S., Allili, M., and Mousavi Ajarostaghi, S.S. (2024). Numerical Optimization of Drucker–Prager–Cap Model Parameters in Powder Compaction Employing Particle Swarm Algorithms. Fluids, 9.10.3390/fluids9110262 ↗
85. Buljak, V., Baivier-Romero, S., and Kallel, A. (2021). Calibration of Drucker–Prager Cap Constitutive Model for Ceramic Powder Compaction through Inverse Analysis. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14144044 ↗
86. A Modified Back Analysis Method for Deep Excavation with Multi-Objective Optimization Procedure10.1016/j.jrmge.2023.05.007 ↗
87. Polynomial Chaos Kriging-Assisted Reliability-Based Design Optimization for a Deep Mixing Wall10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.107044 ↗
88. An Efficient Variable Selection-Based Kriging Model Method for the Reliability Analysis of Slopes with Spatially Variable Soils10.1016/j.ress.2023.109234 ↗
89. Chen, R., Zhou, X., Yu, M., Wu, J., Tao, Y., Xue, F., and Zhang, Y. (2023). Bayesian Updating for Ground Surface Settlements of Shield Tunneling. Front. Earth Sci., 11.10.3389/feart.2023.1321883 ↗
90. Bayesian Updating of Geotechnical Parameters with Polynomial Chaos Kriging Model and Gibbs Sampling10.1016/j.compgeo.2025.107087 ↗
91. Liu, D., Shen, X., and Pan, D. (2025). Soil Parameter Inversion Considering the Influence of Temperature Effects. Appl. Sci., 15.10.3390/app152312511 ↗