AASHTO-LRFD LIVE LOAD DISTRIBUTION SPECIFICATIONS
|
|
- Melvin Watts
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 AASHTO-LRFD LIVE LOAD DISTRIBUTION SPECIFICATIONS By Toorak Zokaie, 1 Member, ASCE ABSTRACT: The live load distribution factors contained in the AASHTO-LRFD Bridge Design Specification present a major change to the AASHTO-LFD specifications that have been in effect for more than 50 years. This change has generated some interest in the bridge engineering community and has raised some questions. The AASHTO-LFD formulas are based on the girder spacing only and are usually presented as S/D, where S is the spacing and D is a constant based on the bridge type. This method is applicable to straight and right (i.e., nonskewed) bridges only. The new formulas are more complex and consider more parameters, such as bridge length and slab thickness. It may not be obvious to the engineers what added accuracy and flexibility (e.g., skewed bridges) is gained by the increased complexity. This paper will present the background on the development of the formulas and compare their accuracy with the S/D method. A discussion on the extension of the single girder design (using formulas) to the skewed bridges is also presented. BACKGROUND The AASHTO-LRFD (AASHTO 1994) live load distribution formulas have resulted from the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) project, entitled Distribution of Live Loads on Highway Bridges (Zokaie et al. 1991). This project was initiated in 1985, long before the LRFD specifications were developed, to improve the accuracy of the S/D formulas contained in the AASHTO specifications (Standard 1996). Upon review of the S/D formulas, it was found that these formulas were generating valid results for bridges of typical geometry (i.e., girder spacing near 6 ft and span length about 60 ft), but would lose accuracy very soon when the bridge parameters were varied (e.g., when relatively short or long bridges were considered). It was therefore concluded that, in order to gain higher accuracy, additional parameters such as span length and stiffness properties must be considered. This study led to the development of a set of formulas that not only provided higher accuracy but also include a broader range of bridges. These formulas were adopted by AASHTO as the guide specifications for distribution of live loads on highway bridges (Guide 1994). The AASHTO-LRFD specifications presented differences in the live load model and the multiple presence factors. As a result, the original formulas were revised to retain their accuracy when applied to the LRFD live loads. These formulas were developed for several bridge types: beam-and-slab (reinforced concrete T-beam, prestressed concrete I-girder, and steel I-girder), multicell box girder, side-by-side and spread box beams, and slab bridges. However, the rest of this paper will concentrate on beam-and-slab bridges for simplicity. The methods used to develop the formulas, verification methods, and applicability discussions are applicable to all bridge types that were considered. In order to evaluate the existing formulas, it is necessary to compare their results with an accurate method. Finite-element or grillage analysis methods were used for this purpose, and bridge deck models were prepared based on generic geometric parameters and material properties. A database of several hundred actual bridge decks was also prepared, and analytical models were developed for all the bridges in the database. The positioning of the live load is one of the key items in the calculation of the distribution factor and is further described below. 1 Sr. Software Engr., Leap Software, Inc., 1144 Coloma Rd., Ste. 440, Gold River, CA toorak@leapsoft.com Note. Discussion open until October 1, To extend the closing date one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on May 1, This paper is part of the Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 2, May, ASCE, ISSN /00/ /$8.00 $.50 per page. Paper No CALCULATION OF ACCURATE DISTRIBUTION FACTORS A grillage or finite-element analysis of the bridge is generally acceptable as an accurate analysis. However, two key points must be kept in mind to achieve accurate results: the computer program must be selected carefully so that the important parameters affecting the behavior of the bridge deck can be modeled; and the model must be prepared carefully to represent the true behavior of the bridge deck. After reviewing several computer programs and modeling details, the computer program GENDEK5A (Powell and Buckle 1970) was selected, and modeling details were finalized. This program was selected partly because it uses plate elements to model the deck slab, and it can model the eccentricity of the beams. The results of a number of field and prototype tests were compared with the analytical results, and it was found that GENDEK5A produces accurate results and compares well with test results. A typical bridge deck model is shown in Fig. 1. The distribution factors were calculated by loading the deck FIG. 1. Single-Span Beam-and-Slab Bridge Finite-Element Model JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000 / 11
2 TABLE 2. Beam-and-Slab Bridge Wheel Load Distribution Factors for Sensitivity Study Parameters FIG. 2. Variation of Girder Spacing in Beam-and Slab Bridges FIG.. Relationship of Slab Thickness and Girder Spacing in Beam-and-Slab Bridges model with truck loads positioned at the longitudinal location that produces the maximum moment. The trucks were then moved transversely across the width of the bridge, and for each location the maximum girder moment was calculated. The largest girder moment for all locations was then selected as the maximum moment. This procedure was repeated for any number of trucks that fit on the bridge transversely, and the maximum moment was adjusted by the multiple presence reduction factor. The controlling moment was then selected. The ratio of this moment to the moment obtained from a simple beam loaded by one truck wheel line (one half of the axle loads) represents the wheel load distribution factor. Note that the LRFD specifications use a factor that is found by using the lane load (full axle load), rather than the wheel loads. BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURE DATABASE In order to get a representative sample of the bridges in the United States, several hundred bridges were selected randomly from the National Bridge Inventory File (NBIF). Bridge plans Variation from average properties Moment Values Multiple lane One lane Shear Values Multiple lane One lane (5) Average a S = 457 mm (1.5 ft) 0.2 S = 1,72 mm (4.5 ft) S = 1,840 mm (6.04 ft) S = 2,896 mm (9.5 ft) S =,992 mm (1.1 ft) L = 8.90 m (29.2 ft) L = m (9.0 ft) L = m (66.0 ft) L = m (84.0 ft) L = m (150.0 ft) t = mm (6 in.) t = (9.0 in.) I Ae 2 = m 4 (2.74 ft 4 ) I Ae 2 = m 4 (9.98 ft 2 ) I Ae 2 = m 4 (41.04 ft 4 ) I Ae 2 = m 4 (64.91 ft 4 ) J = m 4 (0.01 ft 4 ) J = m 4 (.19 ft 4 ) J = m 4 (.04 ft 4 ) J = m 4 (4.82 ft 4 ) Number of girders = Number of girders = de b = de b = m (0.5 ft) de b = 0.05 m (1.0 ft) de b = m (1.92 ft) de b = m (.0 ft) de b = 1.72 m (4.5 ft) de b = m (6.5 ft) Gaug m (4.0 ft) Gaug m (5.0 ft) Gaug 2.48 m (8.0 ft) Gaug.048 m (10.0 ft) Gaug.658 m (12.0 ft) a Average properties are: spacing (S) = 2.68 m (7.77 ft); span length (L) = 14.6 m (48.0 ft); slab thickness (t) = mm (6.95 in.); beam stiffness (I Ae 2 ) = m 4 (17.22 ft 4 ); torsional inertia (J) = m 4 (1.25 ft 4 ); number of girders = 5; d m (2.5 ft); gaug 1.8 m (6.0 ft). b Exterior girder distribution factors. were obtained from the state departments of transportation. Several parameters were extracted from the bridge plans and were stored in a database. This information was enough to carry out a finite-element or grillage analysis of the bridge deck. The information contained in the database included bridge type (i.e., T-beam, prestressed I-girder, or steel I-girder), span length, edge to edge width, skew angle, number of girders, girder depth, slab thickness, overhang, curb to curb width, year built, girder eccentricity (distance from centroid of the girder to the midheight of the slab), girder moment of inertia, and girder area. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PARAMETERS The database was studied to identify the range and variation of each parameter. The minimum, maximum, mean, and stan- TABLE 1. Variation of Wheel Load Distribution with I, A, and e I Ae 2 I A/e m 4 (57,000 in. 4 ) m 4 (65,688 in. 4 ) m 2 (596.1 in. 2 ) m (22.11 in.) m 4 (57,000 in. 4 ) m 4 (47,445 in. 4 ) m 2 (614.5 in. 2 ) m (22.44 in.) m 4 (57,000 in. 4 ) 0.01 m 4 (75,255 in. 4 ) m 2 (586. in. 2 ) m (21.92 in.) m 4 (57,000 in. 4 ) m 4 (65,688 in. 4 ) m 2 (418.0 in. 2 ) m (26.40 in.) m 4 (57,000 in. 4 ) m 4 (65,688 in. 4 ) m 2 (825.6 in. 2 ) m (18.78 in.) 1.88 A e (5) g int (6) 12 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000
3 dard deviation for each parameter was determined. Fig. 2 shows the variation of the girder spacing values in the database as a sample. Furthermore, several parameters were plotted against each other to determine if they are correlated. For example, it was suggested that girder spacing and slab thickness may be correlated, or that larger span lengths result in larger moments of inertia and/or girder depths. This study revealed that, by and large, the parameters are not correlated. Fig. shows the relationship between the girder spacing and slab thickness as a sample. A hypothetical bridge deck model that is made of all mean values of the parameters was created and referred to as the Average Bridge. To identify which parameters are of considerable importance for live load distribution, a sensitivity study was performed. A bridge deck finite-element model was prepared for the average bridge and loaded with HS20 trucks, as described earlier, to calculate the live load distribution factors for shear and moment. A parameter was introduced for the longitudinal stiffness of the girder to cut down the number of variations. This parameter, (K g = I Ae 2 ), can replace the girder inertia (I), girder area (A), and girder eccentricity (e). A number of bridge decks with the same K g and different I, A, and e values were analyzed, and it was determined that the final distribution factors are not largely affected by this variation. The results are shown in Table 1. A similar analysis was performed for several models, keeping all parameters as mean value, except for one that was varied from its minimum to maximum. This process was repeated for all parameters. The values of the parameters used in this study and the resulting distribution factors are shown in Table 2. These results were also plotted to provide a visual examination of the importance of the parameter. FIG. 4. Sensitivity of Wheel Load Distribution Factors to Girder Spacing FIG. 6. Sensitivity of Wheel Load Distribution Factors to Composite Girder Bending Stiffness (K g ) FIG. 5. Length Sensitivity of Wheel Load Distribution Factors to Span FIG. 7. Sensitivity of Wheel Load Distribution Factor to Slab Thickness JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000 / 1
4 After examining the results of Table 2 and graphs showing the variation of the distribution factor with each parameter, it was determined that the key parameters for each bridge type are girder spacing (S), span length (L), girder stiffness (K g ), and slab thickness (t). Graphs showing the effect of each parameter on the distribution factor are presented in Figs Since the design truck has a fixed gauge width, variation of truck axle width (gauge) was not considered. Most permit FIG. 8. Comparison of Predictions of Simple Formulas with More Accurate Analysis: (a) AASHTO S/D; (b) AASHTO Guide Specifications (before Revisions for LRFD) TABLE. Formulas for Moment/Shear Distribution (g) to Interior Girders Beam and slab Bridge type Concrete box girders Bridge designed for one traffic lane S S K g 4 f L Lt s 0.1 Slab 2f LW Multibox beam decks Beam and slab (slab on girder) Concrete box girder Multibox beams Note: f = 04.8 mm (1.0 ft) Bridge designed for two or more traffic lanes (a) Moment Range of applicability S S K g.5f S 16 f f L Lt s 0.15 S f f L N 1 L S 90f 0.25 c N N 800f 9f L b I k S 5f L L L J c L.5f 0.06 LW S 2f L L b b 1 I f L N J (b) Shear 2 S S S f 6f 25f f L 4.4f L b I 1.15 L J f L.1f L b b b I.2f L J 0.75f t s f 0.48f 4 K g 7f 7f S 1f 60f L 240f N c 8f L 70f 12f W 100f 20f L 15.5f 20f L 105f 1.2f 4 J 29.5f f 4 I 29.5f 4.5f S 16f 0.75f t s f 0.48f 4 K g 7f 7f S 1f 60f L 240f N c 20f L 15.5f 20f L 105f 1.2f 4 J 29.5f f 4 I 29.5f 4 14 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000
5 trucks have a larger gauge width, which results in lower distribution factors. Therefore, using simplified formulas that are developed based on the design truck will yield conservative results for permit trucks. SIMPLIFIED FORMULAS In order to develop the formulas in a systematic manner, certain assumptions must be made. First, it is assumed that the effect of each parameter can be modeled by an exponential function of the form ax b, where x is the value of the given parameter and constants a and b are to be determined based on the variation of the distribution factor with x. Second, it is assumed that the effects of different parameters are independent of each other. This assumption allows each parameter to be considered separately. The final distribution factor will be modeled by an exponential formula of the form g = (a)(s b1 )(L b2 )(t b )( ), where g = wheel load distribution factor; S, L, and t = parameters included in the formula; a = scale factor; and b1, b2, and b are determined from the variation of g with S, L, and t, respectively. Assuming that for two cases all bridge parameters are the same except for S, then and therefore or b1 b2 b g1 =(a)(s1 )(L )(t )( ) b1 b2 b g2 =(a)(s2 )(L )(t )( ) b1 (g1/g2)=(s1/s2) b1 = ln(g1/g2)/ln(s1/s2) If n different values of S are examined and successive pairs are used to determine the value of b1, then (n 1) different values of b1 can be obtained. If these b1 values are close to each other, an exponential curve may be used to accurately model the variation of the distribution factor with S. In that case, the average of (n 1) values of b1 is used to achieve the best match. Once all exponents (i.e., b1, b2, etc.) are determined, the value of a can be obtained from the average bridge, i.e. b1 b2 b a = g0/[(s0) (L0) (t0) ( )] This procedure was followed during the entire course of the study to develop new formulas as needed. In certain cases where an exponential function was not suitable to model the effect of a parameter, a slight variation from this procedure was used to achieve the required accuracy. However, this procedure worked quite well in most cases, and the developed formulas demonstrate high accuracy. VERIFICATION AND EVALUATION Since certain assumptions were made in the derivation of the formulas and some bridge parameters were ignored altogether, it is important to verify the accuracy of these formulas when applied to real bridges. The database of actual bridges was used for this purpose. Bridge in the database were analyzed by an accurate method. The distribution factors obtained from the accurate method were compared with the results of the formulas. The ratio of the formula results to accurate distribution factors was calculated and examined to assess the accuracy of the formula. Average, standard deviation, and minimum and maximum values of the ratios were obtained for each formula. The formula that has the smallest standard deviation is considered to be the most accurate. The minimum TABLE 4. Formulas for Moment/Shear Distribution (g) in Exterior Girders Bridge type Bridge designed for one traffic lane Bridge designed for two or more traffic lanes (a) Moment Beam and slab (slab on girder) Use simple beam distribution e g interior a Concrete box girders W e 7f 7f d e f Use simple beam distribution e g interior 27.7f d e 28.5f Multibox beam Use simple beam distribution e g interior 26f d e 25f (b) Shear Beam and slab (slab on girder) Use simple beam distribution e g interior 6f d e 10f Concrete box girders Use simple beam distribution e g interior 8f d e 128.5f Use simple beam distribution e g interior 8f d e 10f Multibox beams Use simple beam distribution e g interior 51f d e 50f a g interior = distribution factor for interior beams; f = 04.8 mm (1.0 ft). W e 7f Range of applicability f d e 5.5f W e S 0 d e 4.5f f d e 2f f d e 5.5f 2f d e 5f 0 d e 4.5f f d e 2f JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000 / 15
6 and maximum values present the extreme predictions that each formula produces based on the database of actual bridges. Although these values may change if a different database is used, the values allow us to identify the shortcomings of a formula so that the formula can be fine-tuned to be more accurate. These shortcomings are not readily identified by the average and standard deviation values. FINE-TUNING FORMULA A scattergram and a histogram (bar graph) were developed for visual inspection of the results of a formula. The results obtained from a formula are compared with the results obtained from a more accurate analysis (e.g., finite-element deck analysis), and the values that were inspected were the ratios of the distribution factors obtained from the formula to the one obtained from the more accurate analysis. This value was referred to as the g-ratio. This visual inspection allows us to identify the revisions and fine-tuning that can improve the results. The following goals were set for the g-ratios in fine tuning each formula: 1. The standard deviation for the g-ratios obtained using the new formula must be less than the one obtained from the existing AASHTO formulas. This is a measure of the accuracy of the formula as applied to a large number of bridges. 2. The average value of the g-ratios must be greater than unity by one standard deviation. This builds slight conservatism in the formula, allowing the formula to be conservative in most cases, but not overly conservative.. Minimize the standard deviation. Slight variations of the formulas were examined to get the most accurate results. The goal was to limit the standard deviation to 0.05, but in some cases where this was not possible, values of up to 0.1 were accepted. 4. Simplify the formulas as much as possible. In order for the formulas to be practical for design, a slight loss of accuracy may be acceptable for greater simplicity. Visual inspection and judgment were the key to this finetuning process. The trends were examined, and the formulas were fine-tuned by trial and error. When the overall accuracy was acceptable but the mean value needed to be adjusted, a constant was added to the formulas. As a result, some formulas take the following form: g = c a(s b1 b2 )(L )( ) In some cases, an exponential form does not produce accurate results, and other forms must be pursued. For instance, it was found that, for a spacing greater than 16 feet, the formula does not produce accurate results. The formula could be revised to be more accurate for these bridges, but the overall accuracy would suffer. Therefore, it was proposed that the lever rule be used for bridges with spacing greater than 16 feet. This would preserve the overall accuracy and produce acceptable results for the higher spacings as well. Fig. 8 shows the histogram of the g-ratios for the AASHTO S/D formula and the proposed formula. These graphs demonstrate the better predictions obtained from the new formulas, allowing us to have more confidence in our analysis. FINAL RESULTS The above procedure was repeated for each case of moment and shear, and for single-lane and multilane loading. After several trials, and after reaching the desired accuracy, the formula was finalized. The final results for these four cases are shown in Table. Please note that these formulas are independent of the units of measure and are based on the values of parameters. For example, in S/L or b/l, units of S and L or b and L are the same. In some cases, a constant distance of one foot ( f ) is used to create a unitless ratio, such as the ratio S/4f in the beam-and-slab formula for single-lane loading. Since the formulas were calibrated against this database, the range of variation of each parameter in the database was presented as the range of applicability. This is not to imply that the formula would give erroneous results when a parameter is outside its range, but that it could be less accurate. In most cases, the formulas are far more accurate than the S/D methods, even outside their range. The main purpose of presenting these ranges is that if the engineer wishes to obtain results that are generally within 5% of a detailed analysis and if the bridge TABLE 5. Formulas/Correction Factors for Calculation of Interior Moment and Obtuse Corner Girder Shear for Skewed Supports Bridge type Beam and slab (slab on girder) Concrete box girders, slabs, multibox beams, and spread box beams Beam and slab (slab on girder) Concrete box girder Multiple Presence Factors in AASHTO Specifica- TABLE 6. tions Number of lanes Bridge designed for any number of traffic lanes (a) Moment 1 c 1 (tan ) 1.5 Kg S c = 0.25 Lt L If q is less than 0, c 1 = 0.0 If q is larger than 60, use as tan( ) 1.0 If q is larger than 60, use as 60 Multiple Presence Factor 16th edition Range of applicability LRFD or more s (b) Shear 1.0 c 1 tan 1 c 1 = 0. K g 5 Lt s 1.0 c 1 tan( ) L c 1 = d 1.0 c 1 tan( ) c = 1 Ld 6S Multibox beams a 1.0 c1 tan( ) c = 1 L 90d Note: f = 04.8 mm (1.0 ft) a Applies to all beam (interior and exterior)..5f S 16f.75f t s f.48f 4 K g 7f 4.5f S 18f.75f t s f.48f 4 K g 7f 4 6f S 1f 20f L 240f f d 9f 20f L 15f 1.5f d 5.5f 20f L 105f 1.5f d 5f 16 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000
7 falls outside the range of applicability, then a more detailed analysis may be warranted. Another issue of concern for design is that some formulas have an inertia term. Since the member size is not known, an iterative procedure is needed. Additionally, in most cases the beams are not prismatic, and the inertia varies along the length of the beam. Which inertia value should be used for design? All the inertia effects are included in one term (K g /Lt ) 0.1, and this term has the least effect on the final value. Therefore, the entire inertia term can be taken as unity for preliminary design. For nonprismatic beams, the inertia value at the location of highest moment (e.g., midspan) can be used. The value of K g can be taken as (I Ae 2 ) for beams designed for composite action with the slab, and as the girder inertia (I) for noncomposite beams. EXTENSIONS After establishing the base formulas (i.e., formulas for flexure and shear, for single and multiple lane loading, in the interior girder), several extensions were investigated. These include continuity, edge girder, and skew effects. For most of these cases, the results of the base formulas can be adjusted by a correction factor. Therefore, the final distribution factor would be g s = f s g 0, in which g s is the final factor, f s is the correction factor, and g 0 is the result of the base formula. A similar procedure was used to study the sensitivity of the factor to various bridge parameters and to develop its formula. Continuity Effect: It was found that the distribution factors in continuous bridges are slightly higher than in the simply supported bridges. This difference is less than 5% for positive moments and less than 10% for negative moments. However, it was assumed that redistribution of moment will cancel this effect. As a result, it was decided that the formulas are directly applicable for negative moment. Therefore, it is suggested that the span length used in the formula be the average of the adjacent spans. Edge Girders: It was found that the edge girders are more sensitive to the truck placement than any other factor, i.e., the most important issue is how close can the trucks get to the exterior girder. This was determined using a parameter called edge distance (d e ). In some cases, the lever rule produced more accurate results than applying correction factors to the base formulas. The final proposed procedures are shown in Table 4. Skew Effect: It was found that the skewed supports change the load path slightly. In these cases, the load is transferred to the supports in their shortest path, i.e., towards the obtuse corners. Therefore the moments are smaller, and the shear at the obtuse corner is larger when compared to a non-skewed bridge of the same length and size. This effect is dependent on the amount of skew, and therefore, the correction factors must be TABLE 7. AASHTO-LRFD Formulas for Moment/Shear Distribution (g) to Interior Girders Beam and slab Bridge type Concrete box girders Bridge designed for one traffic lane S S K g 14 f L Lt s S f f L N c Slab 2f LW Multibox beam decks Beam and slab (slab on girder) Concrete box girder Multibox beams Note: f = 04.8 mm (1.0 ft) S f L L b I 1.2k L J k = 2.5(N b ) S 25f f L f L for S 11.5 use lever rule S I 10.8L J Bridge designed for two or more traffic lanes (a) Moment (b) Shear Range of applicability S S K g.5f S 16 f 20f L 240f 9.5 f L Lt s S f 2 N 5.8f L c 7f S 1f 60f L 240f N c if N c > 8 use N c =8.5f 0.06 LW 8f L 70f f W 100f S 2 6.f L L b b I 2k 25.4f L J k = 2.5(N b ) S S f 5f 2 7.f L 2 7.4f L b b I 2 1f L J 20f L 140f 1.5f d 5.4f 20f L 120f 2.92f b 5f.5f S 16f 0.75f t s 12.0f 0.48f 4 K g 7f 7f S 1f 60f L 240f N c 20f L 15.5f 20f L 105f 1.2f 4 J 29.5f f 4 I 29.5f 4 JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000 / 17
8 dependent on the skew angle. The correction factors that were developed for this case are shown in Table 5. AASHTO-LRFD SPECIFICATION The formulas developed in NCHRP needed to be modified to be compatible with the LRFD specifications. Two issues are of particular importance in comparing the live load response calculation procedures of the AASHTO 16th edition and LRFD specifications: live load description and multiple presence factors. The live load truck in the 16th edition consists of an HS20 truck or a lane load. The live load in the LRFD consists of an HS20 truck in conjunction with a lane load. Both trucks have a 6 ft axle (gauge) width, which is the most important factor affecting the transverse distribution of live loads. Therefore, it was assumed that the difference in the live load configuration does not affect the live load distribution. The multiple presence factors for the two specifications are shown in Table 6. The formulas need to be revised to reflect this difference. Accurate distribution factors were calculated for the LRFD specifications using the finite-element models, and the formulas were revised (recalibrated) to these results. The new formulas were incorporated in the LRFD specifications. Table 7 presents these formulas for comparison with Table. Note that the formulas in Table 7 are presented in a slightly different format than the LRFD specifications (i.e., as wheel load distribution factors) to allow easier comparison. These formulas are based on unitless ratios of parameters, as explained for Table. LIMITATIONS AND SPECIAL CASES In order to apply the load distribution formulas to actual bridges, we should consider the limitations of the study and understand when accurate results can be expected. The models that were used to develop the formulas had uniform spacing, girder inertia, and skew. Continuous models had equal spans. Diaphragm effects were not included in the model. The results were calibrated against a database of real bridges with certain ranges of span length, inertia, spacing, and so on. Although these formulas are much more accurate than the simple S/D factors, they would be most accurate when applied to bridges with similar restraints. An engineer s judgment must be used when the parameters used in the formulas are determined. For example, when a girder has variable inertia, the average girder inertia may be used, or the maximum inertia can be used to be conservative. When girder spacings are different, the average of the spacings on the two sides of one girder may be a good estimate. When the ends of the span have different skews, resulting in different span lengths, the specific girder length and the average skew may be an acceptable approximation. The engineers should judge when the variations are too much, causing the formulas to be inapplicable. The live load analysis for permit trucks (by applying one lane of the truck to a beam model and adjusting that by the distribution factor) may be too conservative, since it assumed that all lanes are loaded by similar trucks. A simple grillage analysis can, in most cases, be performed to calculate more accurate distribution factors than the formula results if needed. One simple program, called LDFAC (Zokaie et al. 199), was developed as part of this NCHRP study to assist engineers in cases for which the formulas may not be applicable but for which a detailed analysis is not warranted. CONCLUSIONS The work that was done under NCHRP resulted in lateral load distribution factors for highway bridges. The formulas that were developed generally produce results that are within 5% of the results of a finite-element deck analysis. These formulas were calibrated against an extensive database of actual bridge decks to verify their applicability to real bridges. The formulas were developed for beam-and-slab bridges with steel, prestressed, or T-beam girders, multicell box girder bridges, side-by-side box beam bridges, solid slab decks, and spread box beam bridges. A grillage or finite-element analysis is recommended for cases in which the simple formula method is not applicable. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer would like to acknowledge the invaluable contributions of Mr. Timothy Osterkamp, who performed much of the analysis. The efforts of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program in funding and monitoring the research are also appreciated. APPENDIX. REFERENCES AASHTO-LRFD bridge design specifications. (1994). 1st Ed., American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. Guide specifications for distribution of loads for highway bridges. (1994). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. Powell, G. M., and Buckle, I. G. (1970). Computer programs for bridge deck analysis. Rep. No. UC SESM 70-6, University of California, Berkeley, Calif. Standard specifications for highway bridges. (1996). 16th Ed., American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. Zokaie, T., Mish, K. D., and Imbsen, R. A. (1995). Distribution of wheel loads on highway bridges, phase. NCHRP 12-26/2 Final Rep., National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C. Zokaie, T., Osterkamp, T. A., and Imbsen, R. A. (1991). Distribution of wheel loads on highway bridges. NCHRP 12-26/1 Final Rep., National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C. 18 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 2000
APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF EXISTING SIMPLIFIED METHODS
APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF EXISTING SIMPLIFIED METHODS D-1 An extensive literature search revealed many methods for the calculation of live load distribution factors. This appendix will discuss, in detail,
More informationLoad Capacity Evaluation of Pennsylvania s Single Span T-Beam Bridges
Presentation at 2003 TRB Meeting, Washington, D.C. UNIVERSITY Load Capacity Evaluation of Pennsylvania s Single Span T-Beam Bridges F. N. Catbas, A. E. Aktan, K. Ciloglu, O. Hasancebi, J. S. Popovics Drexel
More informationCurved Steel I-girder Bridge LFD Guide Specifications (with 2003 Edition) C. C. Fu, Ph.D., P.E. The BEST Center University of Maryland October 2003
Curved Steel I-girder Bridge LFD Guide Specifications (with 2003 Edition) C. C. Fu, Ph.D., P.E. The BEST Center University of Maryland October 2003 Guide Specifications (1993-2002) 2.3 LOADS 2.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS
More informationAppendix J. Example of Proposed Changes
Appendix J Example of Proposed Changes J.1 Introduction The proposed changes are illustrated with reference to a 200-ft, single span, Washington DOT WF bridge girder with debonded strands and no skew.
More informationI I I I I I I I I I I I I FHWA-PA-RD No
. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. FHWA-PA-RD-72-4-3 4. Title and S.,britle LVE LOAD DSTRBUTON N SKEWED PRESTRESSED CONCRETE -BEAM AND SPREAD BOX-BEAM BRDGES Technical Report Documentation Page 3.
More informationA.2 AASHTO Type IV, LRFD Specifications
A.2 AASHTO Type IV, LRFD Specifications A.2.1 INTRODUCTION A.2.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS 1'-5.0" Detailed example showing sample calculations for design of typical Interior AASHTO Type IV prestressed concrete
More informationAppendix K Design Examples
Appendix K Design Examples Example 1 * Two-Span I-Girder Bridge Continuous for Live Loads AASHTO Type IV I girder Zero Skew (a) Bridge Deck The bridge deck reinforcement using A615 rebars is shown below.
More informationPreferred practice on semi-integral abutment layout falls in the following order:
GENERAL INFORMATION: This section of the chapter establishes the practices and requirements necessary for the design and detailing of semi-integral abutments. For general requirements and guidelines on
More informationRoadway Grade = m, amsl HWM = Roadway grade dictates elevation of superstructure and not minimum free board requirement.
Example on Design of Slab Bridge Design Data and Specifications Chapter 5 SUPERSTRUCTURES Superstructure consists of 10m slab, 36m box girder and 10m T-girder all simply supported. Only the design of Slab
More informationLATERAL STABILITY OF BEAMS WITH ELASTIC END RESTRAINTS
LATERAL STABILITY OF BEAMS WITH ELASTIC END RESTRAINTS By John J. Zahn, 1 M. ASCE ABSTRACT: In the analysis of the lateral buckling of simply supported beams, the ends are assumed to be rigidly restrained
More informationExperimental Lab. Principles of Superposition
Experimental Lab Principles of Superposition Objective: The objective of this lab is to demonstrate and validate the principle of superposition using both an experimental lab and theory. For this lab you
More informationRESEARCH ON HORIZONTALLY CURVED STEEL BOX GIRDERS
RESEARCH ON HORIZONTALLY CURVED STEEL BOX GIRDERS Chai H. Yoo Kyungsik Kim Byung H. Choi Highway Research Center Auburn University Auburn University, Alabama December 2005 Acknowledgements The investigation
More informationCSiBridge. Bridge Rating
Bridge Rating CSiBridge Bridge Rating ISO BRG102816M15 Rev. 0 Proudly developed in the United States of America October 2016 Copyright Copyright Computers & Structures, Inc., 1978-2016 All rights reserved.
More informationMoment redistribution of continuous composite I-girders with high strength steel
Moment redistribution of continuous composite I-girders with high strength steel * Hyun Sung Joo, 1) Jiho Moon, 2) Ik-Hyun sung, 3) Hak-Eun Lee 4) 1), 2), 4) School of Civil, Environmental and Architectural
More informationRisk Assessment of Highway Bridges: A Reliability-based Approach
Risk Assessment of Highway Bridges: A Reliability-based Approach by Reynaldo M. Jr., PhD Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne pablor@ipfw.edu Abstract: Many countries are currently experiencing
More informationFLEXIBILITY METHOD FOR INDETERMINATE FRAMES
UNIT - I FLEXIBILITY METHOD FOR INDETERMINATE FRAMES 1. What is meant by indeterminate structures? Structures that do not satisfy the conditions of equilibrium are called indeterminate structure. These
More informationBridge deck modelling and design process for bridges
EU-Russia Regulatory Dialogue Construction Sector Subgroup 1 Bridge deck modelling and design process for bridges Application to a composite twin-girder bridge according to Eurocode 4 Laurence Davaine
More informationA New Method of Analysis of Continuous Skew Girder Bridges
A New Method of Analysis of Continuous Skew Girder Bridges Dr. Salem Awad Ramoda Hadhramout University of Science & Technology Mukalla P.O.Box : 50511 Republic of Yemen ABSTRACT One three girder two span
More informationε t increases from the compressioncontrolled Figure 9.15: Adjusted interaction diagram
CHAPTER NINE COLUMNS 4 b. The modified axial strength in compression is reduced to account for accidental eccentricity. The magnitude of axial force evaluated in step (a) is multiplied by 0.80 in case
More informationEquivalent Uniform Moment Factor for Lateral Torsional Buckling of Steel Beams
University of Alberta Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Master of Engineering Report in Structural Engineering Equivalent Uniform Moment Factor for Lateral Torsional Buckling of Steel Beams
More informationSimplified Analysis of Continuous Beams
Simplified Analysis of Continuous Beams Abdulamir Atalla Almayah Ph.D., Department of Civil Engineering-College of Engineering University of Basrah, Iraq. ORCID: 0000-0002-7486-7083 Abstract The analysis
More informationReliability analysis of a reinforced concrete deck slab supported on steel girders
Reliability analysis of a reinforced concrete deck slab supported on steel girders David Ferrand To cite this version: David Ferrand. Reliability analysis of a reinforced concrete deck slab supported on
More informationTORSION INCLUDING WARPING OF OPEN SECTIONS (I, C, Z, T AND L SHAPES)
Page1 TORSION INCLUDING WARPING OF OPEN SECTIONS (I, C, Z, T AND L SHAPES) Restrained warping for the torsion of thin-wall open sections is not included in most commonly used frame analysis programs. Almost
More informationPh.D. Preliminary Examination Analysis
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Spring Semester 2017 Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering Structural Engineering, Mechanics and Materials Name:......................................... Ph.D.
More informationFinite Element and Modal Analysis of 3D Jointless Skewed RC Box Girder Bridge
www.crl.issres.net Vol. 4 (1) March 2013 Finite Element and Modal Analysis of 3D Jointless Skewed RC Box Girder Bridge Mahmoud Sayed-Ahmed c, Khaled Sennah Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
More informationBEHAVIOR AND ANALYSIS OF A HORIZONTALLY CURVED AND SKEWED I-GIRDER BRIDGE. A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty. Cagri Ozgur
BEHAVIOR AND ANALYSIS OF A HORIZONTALLY CURVED AND SKEWED I-GIRDER BRIDGE A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty by Cagri Ozgur In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science
More informationLecture-08 Gravity Load Analysis of RC Structures
Lecture-08 Gravity Load Analysis of RC Structures By: Prof Dr. Qaisar Ali Civil Engineering Department UET Peshawar www.drqaisarali.com 1 Contents Analysis Approaches Point of Inflection Method Equivalent
More informationFinite Element Analyses on Dynamic Behavior of Railway Bridge Due To High Speed Train
Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(8): 1-7, 2012 ISSN 1991-8178 Finite Element Analyses on Dynamic Behavior of Railway Bridge Due To High Speed Train Mehrdad Bisadi, S.A. Osman and Shahrizan
More informationAn Evaluation and Comparison of Models for Maximum Deflection of Stiffened Plates Using Finite Element Analysis
Marine Technology, Vol. 44, No. 4, October 2007, pp. 212 225 An Evaluation and Comparison of Models for Maximum Deflection of Stiffened Plates Using Finite Element Analysis Lior Banai 1 and Omri Pedatzur
More informationComposite bridge design (EN1994-2) Bridge modelling and structural analysis
EUROCODES Bridges: Background and applications Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 1 Composite bridge design (EN1994-2) Bridge modelling and structural analysis Laurence
More informationFinal report on design checks for timber decks on steel girders on forestry roads of British Columbia
1 Final report on design checks for timber decks on steel girders on forestry roads of British Columbia Baidar Bakht Aftab Mufti Gamil Tadros Submitted to Mr. Brian Chow Ministry of Forests and Range British
More informationDesign of a Balanced-Cantilever Bridge
Design of a Balanced-Cantilever Bridge CL (Bridge is symmetric about CL) 0.8 L 0.2 L 0.6 L 0.2 L 0.8 L L = 80 ft Bridge Span = 2.6 L = 2.6 80 = 208 Bridge Width = 30 No. of girders = 6, Width of each girder
More informationKarbala University College of Engineering Department of Civil Eng. Lecturer: Dr. Jawad T. Abodi
Chapter 04 Structural Steel Design According to the AISC Manual 13 th Edition Analysis and Design of Compression Members By Dr. Jawad Talib Al-Nasrawi University of Karbala Department of Civil Engineering
More informationPLATE GIRDERS II. Load. Web plate Welds A Longitudinal elevation. Fig. 1 A typical Plate Girder
16 PLATE GIRDERS II 1.0 INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the current practice for the design of plate girders adopting meaningful simplifications of the equations derived in the chapter on Plate Girders
More informationThe plastic moment capacity of a composite cross-section is calculated in the program on the following basis (BS 4.4.2):
COMPUTERS AND STRUCTURES, INC., BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 2002 COMPOSITE BEAM DESIGN BS 5950-90 Technical Note Composite Plastic Moment Capacity for Positive Bending This Technical Note describes
More informationSystem Capacity of Vintage Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame Culverts with No Overlay
DCT 252 System Capacity of Vintage Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame Culverts with No Overlay By Timothy Porter Thomas Schumacher August, 2015 Delaware Center for Transportation University of Delaware 355
More informationMAXIMUM SUPERIMPOSED UNIFORM ASD LOADS, psf SINGLE SPAN DOUBLE SPAN TRIPLE SPAN GAGE
F-DEK ROOF (ASD) 1-1/2" high x 6" pitch x 36" wide SECTION PROPERTIES GAGE Wd 22 1.63 20 1.98 18 2.62 16 3.30 I D (DEFLECTION) 0.142 0.173 0.228 fy = 40 ksi Sp Sn 0.122 0.135 708 815 905 1211 1329 2365
More informationMODULE C: COMPRESSION MEMBERS
MODULE C: COMPRESSION MEMBERS This module of CIE 428 covers the following subjects Column theory Column design per AISC Effective length Torsional and flexural-torsional buckling Built-up members READING:
More informationAPPENDIX D COMPARISON OF CURVED STEEL I-GIRDER BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
APPENIX COMPARISON O CURVE STEEL I-GIRER BRIGE ESIGN SPECIICATIONS (This page is intentionally left blank.) TABLE O CONTENTS LIST O IGURES... -iv LIST O TABLES... -vi 1 OBJECTIVE... -1 METHOOLOGY... -1
More informationFinite Element Modeling of the Load Transfer Mechanism in Adjacent Prestressed. Concrete Box-Beams. a thesis presented to.
Finite Element Modeling of the Load Transfer Mechanism in Adjacent Prestressed Concrete Box-Beams a thesis presented to the faculty of the Russ College of Engineering and Technology of Ohio University
More informationREINFORCEMENT-FREE DECKS USING A MODIFIED STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL. Han Ug Bae, Michael G. Oliva, Lawrence C. Bank
REINFORCEMENT-FREE DECS USING A MODIFIED STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL Han Ug Bae, Michael G. Oliva, Lawrence C. Bank Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 0 Engineering
More informationDESIGN AND DETAILING OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL
DESIGN AND DETAILING OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL When the height of the retaining wall exceeds about 6 m, the thickness of the stem and heel slab works out to be sufficiently large and the design becomes
More informationParametric study on the transverse and longitudinal moments of trough type folded plate roofs using ANSYS
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) e-issn : 2320-0847 p-issn : 2320-0936 Volume-4 pp-22-28 www.ajer.org Research Paper Open Access Parametric study on the transverse and longitudinal moments
More informationSeismic Pushover Analysis Using AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design
Seismic Pushover Analysis Using AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Elmer E. Marx, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Michael Keever, California Department
More informationDesign of a Multi-Storied RC Building
Design of a Multi-Storied RC Building 16 14 14 3 C 1 B 1 C 2 B 2 C 3 B 3 C 4 13 B 15 (S 1 ) B 16 (S 2 ) B 17 (S 3 ) B 18 7 B 4 B 5 B 6 B 7 C 5 C 6 C 7 C 8 C 9 7 B 20 B 22 14 B 19 (S 4 ) C 10 C 11 B 23
More informationDirect Design and Indirect Design of Concrete Pipe Part 2 Josh Beakley March 2011
Direct Design and Indirect Design of Concrete Pipe Part 2 Josh Beakley March 2011 Latest in Design Methods? AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 2010 Direct Design Method for Concrete Pipe 1993? LRFD5732FlexuralResistance
More informationPLAT DAN CANGKANG (TKS 4219)
PLAT DAN CANGKANG (TKS 4219) SESI I: PLATES Dr.Eng. Achfas Zacoeb Dept. of Civil Engineering Brawijaya University INTRODUCTION Plates are straight, plane, two-dimensional structural components of which
More informationINELASTIC RESPONSES OF LONG BRIDGES TO ASYNCHRONOUS SEISMIC INPUTS
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 24 Paper No. 638 INELASTIC RESPONSES OF LONG BRIDGES TO ASYNCHRONOUS SEISMIC INPUTS Jiachen WANG 1, Athol CARR 1, Nigel
More informationPRACTICE 2 PROYECTO Y CONSTRUCCIÓN DE PUENTES. 1º Máster Ingeniería de Caminos. E.T.S.I. Caminos, canales y puertos (Ciudad Real) 01/06/2016
PRACTICE 2 PROYECTO Y CONSTRUCCIÓN DE PUENTES 1º Máster Ingeniería de Caminos E.T.S.I. Caminos, canales y puertos (Ciudad Real) 01/06/2016 AUTHOR: CONTENT 1. INTRODUCTION... 3 2. BRIDGE GEOMETRY AND MATERIAL...
More informationDES140: Designing for Lateral-Torsional Stability in Wood Members
DES140: Designing for Lateral-Torsional Stability in Wood embers Welcome to the Lateral Torsional Stability ecourse. 1 Outline Lateral-Torsional Buckling Basic Concept Design ethod Examples In this ecourse,
More informationSabah Shawkat Cabinet of Structural Engineering Walls carrying vertical loads should be designed as columns. Basically walls are designed in
Sabah Shawkat Cabinet of Structural Engineering 17 3.6 Shear walls Walls carrying vertical loads should be designed as columns. Basically walls are designed in the same manner as columns, but there are
More informationFlexure: Behavior and Nominal Strength of Beam Sections
4 5000 4000 (increased d ) (increased f (increased A s or f y ) c or b) Flexure: Behavior and Nominal Strength of Beam Sections Moment (kip-in.) 3000 2000 1000 0 0 (basic) (A s 0.5A s ) 0.0005 0.001 0.0015
More informationRULES PUBLICATION NO. 17/P ZONE STRENGTH ANALYSIS OF HULL STRUCTURE OF ROLL ON/ROLL OFF SHIP
RULES PUBLICATION NO. 17/P ZONE STRENGTH ANALYSIS OF HULL STRUCTURE OF ROLL ON/ROLL OFF SHIP 1995 Publications P (Additional Rule Requirements), issued by Polski Rejestr Statków, complete or extend the
More informationComputationally Efficient Method for Inclusion of Nonprismatic Member Properties in a Practical Bridge Analysis Procedure
TRANSPORTATON RESEARCH RECORD 1476 171 Computationally Efficient Method for nclusion of Nonprismatic Member Properties in a Practical Bridge Analysis Procedure THOMAS E. FENSKE, Muzz YENER, DONGFA LU,
More informationDEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTING OF PRESS-BRAKE- BRAKE-FORMED STEEL TUB GIRDERS FOR SHORT SPAN BRIDGE APPLICATIONS
DEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTING OF PRESS-BRAKE- FORMED STEEL TUB GIRDERS FOR SHORT SPAN BRIDGE APPLICATIONS Karl E. Barth, Ph.D. Gregory K. Michaelson, Ph.D. VOLUME I: DEVELOPMENT AND FEASIBILITY
More informationDISTORTION ANALYSIS OF TILL -WALLED BOX GIRDERS
Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 25, No. 2, September 2006 Osadebe and Mbajiogu 36 DISTORTION ANALYSIS OF TILL -WALLED BOX GIRDERS N. N. OSADEBE, M. Sc., Ph. D., MNSE Department of Civil Engineering
More informationA Report from the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center. Statistical Analysis of Weigh-in- Motion Data for Bridge Design in Vermont
A Report from the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center Statistical Analysis of Weigh-in- Motion Data for Bridge Design in Vermont TRC Report 4-4 Hernandez June 4 DISCLAIMER The contents
More informationImpact of Existing Pavement on Jointed Plain Concrete Overlay Design and Performance
Impact of Existing Pavement on Jointed Plain Concrete Overlay Design and Performance Michael I. Darter, Jag Mallela, and Leslie Titus-Glover 1 ABSTRACT Concrete overlays are increasingly being constructed
More informationSingly Symmetric Combination Section Crane Girder Design Aids. Patrick C. Johnson
Singly Symmetric Combination Section Crane Girder Design Aids by Patrick C. Johnson PCJohnson@psu.edu The Pennsylvania State University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University Park,
More informationINELASTIC SEISMIC DISPLACEMENT RESPONSE PREDICTION OF MDOF SYSTEMS BY EQUIVALENT LINEARIZATION
INEASTIC SEISMIC DISPACEMENT RESPONSE PREDICTION OF MDOF SYSTEMS BY EQUIVAENT INEARIZATION M. S. Günay 1 and H. Sucuoğlu 1 Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University,
More informationCLASSICAL TORSION AND AIST TORSION THEORY
CLASSICAL TORSION AND AIST TORSION THEORY Background The design of a crane runway girder has not been an easy task for most structural engineers. Many difficult issues must be addressed if these members
More informationEVALUATION OF THERMAL SRESSES IN CONTINOUOS CONCRETE BRIDGES
Volume 12 June 2006 Dr.Ramzi B.Abdul-Ahad Mrs. Shahala a A.Al--Wakeel Department of Building Assistant Lecturer Assistant Professor Construction Engineering University Of Technology Iraq- Baghdad ABSRACT
More informationAccordingly, the nominal section strength [resistance] for initiation of yielding is calculated by using Equation C-C3.1.
C3 Flexural Members C3.1 Bending The nominal flexural strength [moment resistance], Mn, shall be the smallest of the values calculated for the limit states of yielding, lateral-torsional buckling and distortional
More informationA. F. Alani and J. E. Breen
VERFCATON OF CCMPUTER SMULATON HETHODS FOR SLAB AND GRDER BRDGE SYSTEMS by A. F. Alani and J. E. Breen Research Report Number ls-f Research Project Number 3-5-68-115 Experimental Verification of Computer
More informationResearch work in this thesis deals with the effects of lateral loads in the longitudinal
ABSTRACT POSSIEL, BENJAMIN ALLEN. Point of Fixity Analysis of Laterally Loaded Bridge Bents. (Under the direction of Dr. Mohammed Gabr and Dr. Mervyn Kowalsky.) Research work in this thesis deals with
More informationRigid pavement design
Rigid pavement design Lecture Notes in Transportation Systems Engineering Prof. Tom V. Mathew Contents 1 Overview 1 1.1 Modulus of sub-grade reaction.......................... 2 1.2 Relative stiffness
More informationInfluence of residual stresses in the structural behavior of. tubular columns and arches. Nuno Rocha Cima Gomes
October 2014 Influence of residual stresses in the structural behavior of Abstract tubular columns and arches Nuno Rocha Cima Gomes Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal Contact:
More informationPUNCHING SHEAR CALCULATIONS 1 ACI 318; ADAPT-PT
Structural Concrete Software System TN191_PT7_punching_shear_aci_4 011505 PUNCHING SHEAR CALCULATIONS 1 ACI 318; ADAPT-PT 1. OVERVIEW Punching shear calculation applies to column-supported slabs, classified
More informationGuide for Mechanistic-Empirical Design
Copy No. Guide for Mechanistic-Empirical Design OF NEW AND REHABILITATED PAVEMENT STRUCTURES FINAL DOCUMENT APPENDIX BB: DESIGN RELIABILITY NCHRP Prepared for National Cooperative Highway Research Program
More informationCHAPTER -6- BENDING Part -1-
Ishik University / Sulaimani Civil Engineering Department Mechanics of Materials CE 211 CHAPTER -6- BENDING Part -1-1 CHAPTER -6- Bending Outlines of this chapter: 6.1. Chapter Objectives 6.2. Shear and
More informationLoad distribution in simply supported concrete box girder highway bridges
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations 1969 Load distribution in simply supported concrete box girder highway bridges James Grant Arendts Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd
More informationA RELIABILITY BASED SIMULATION, MONITORING AND CODE CALIBRATION OF VEHICLE EFFECTS ON EXISTING BRIDGE PERFORMANCE
A RELIABILITY BASED SIMULATION, MONITORING AND CODE CALIBRATION OF VEHICLE EFFECTS ON EXISTING BRIDGE PERFORMANCE C.S. Cai 1, Wei Zhang 1, Miao Xia 1 and Lu Deng 1 Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
More informationDEFLECTION CALCULATIONS (from Nilson and Nawy)
DEFLECTION CALCULATIONS (from Nilson and Nawy) The deflection of a uniformly loaded flat plate, flat slab, or two-way slab supported by beams on column lines can be calculated by an equivalent method that
More informationDYNAMIC INVESTIGATIONS ON REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES
2 nd Int. PhD Symposium in Civil Engineering 1998 Budapest DYNMIC INVESTIGTIONS ON REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES Tamás Kovács 1 Technical University of Budapest, Department of Reinforced Concrete Structures
More informationChapter 4 Seismic Design Requirements for Building Structures
Chapter 4 Seismic Design Requirements for Building Structures where: F a = 1.0 for rock sites which may be assumed if there is 10 feet of soil between the rock surface and the bottom of spread footings
More informationBridge System Performance Assessment from Structural Health Monitoring: A Case Study
Bridge System Performance Assessment from Structural Health Monitoring: A Case Study Ming Liu, M.ASCE 1 ; Dan M. Frangopol, F.ASCE 2 ; and Sunyong Kim 3 Abstract: Based on the long-term monitored strain
More informationDynamic Response of RCC Curve-Skew Bridge Deck Supported by Steel Multi-Girders
Paper ID: SE-034 584 International Conference on Recent Innovation in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development () Department of Civil Engineering DUET - Gazipur, Bangladesh Dynamic Response of RCC
More informationColorado Department of Transportation Structure Inspection and Inventory Report (English Units)
10/23/2017 Header Information Colorado Department of Transportation Structure Inspection and Inventory Report (English Units) Bridge Name: D-02-PR-030A Inspection Date: 12/2/2015 Sufficiency Rating: Inspection
More informationSuggestion of Impact Factor for Fatigue Safety Assessment of Railway Steel Plate Girder Bridges
Suggestion of Impact Factor for Fatigue Safety Assessment of Railway Steel Plate Girder Bridges 1 S.U. Lee, 2 J.C. Jeon, 3 K.S. Kyung Korea Railroad, Daejeon, Korea 1 ; CTC Co., Ltd., Gunpo, Kyunggi, Korea
More informationVertical acceleration and torsional effects on the dynamic stability and design of C-bent columns
Vertical acceleration and torsional effects on the dynamic stability and design of C-bent columns A. Chen, J.O.C. Lo, C-L. Lee, G.A. MacRae & T.Z. Yeow Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
More information3. Stability of built-up members in compression
3. Stability of built-up members in compression 3.1 Definitions Build-up members, made out by coupling two or more simple profiles for obtaining stronger and stiffer section are very common in steel structures,
More informationThermal Gradients in Southwestern United States and the Effect on Bridge Bearing Loads
Final Report May 2017 Thermal Gradients in Southwestern United States and the Effect on Bridge Bearing Loads SOLARIS Consortium, Tier 1 University Transportation Center Center for Advanced Transportation
More information1. ARRANGEMENT. a. Frame A1-P3. L 1 = 20 m H = 5.23 m L 2 = 20 m H 1 = 8.29 m L 3 = 20 m H 2 = 8.29 m H 3 = 8.39 m. b. Frame P3-P6
Page 3 Page 4 Substructure Design. ARRANGEMENT a. Frame A-P3 L = 20 m H = 5.23 m L 2 = 20 m H = 8.29 m L 3 = 20 m H 2 = 8.29 m H 3 = 8.39 m b. Frame P3-P6 L = 25 m H 3 = 8.39 m L 2 = 3 m H 4 = 8.5 m L
More informationSimply supported non-prismatic folded plates
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations 1966 Simply supported non-prismatic folded plates Claude Derrell Johnson Iowa State University Follow this
More informationAn Increase in Elastic Buckling Strength of Plate Girder by the Influence of Transverse Stiffeners
GRD Journals- Global Research and Development Journal for Engineering Volume 2 Issue 6 May 2017 ISSN: 2455-5703 An Increase in Elastic Buckling Strength of Plate Girder by the Influence of Transverse Stiffeners
More informationCrack Control for Ledges in Inverted T Bent Caps
Crack Control for Ledges in Inverted T Bent Caps Research Report 0-1854-5 Prepared for Texas Department of Transportation Project 0-1854 By Ronnie Rong-Hua Zhu Research Associate Hemant Dhonde Research
More informationEXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS ON TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS IN CONCRETE BOX-GIRDER BRIDGE UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL LOADINGS
EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS ON TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS IN CONCRETE BOX-GIRDER BRIDGE UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL LOADINGS S. R. Abid 1, N. Tayşi 2, M. Özakça 3 ABSTRACT The effect of the fluctuation of air temperature
More informationFIXED BEAMS IN BENDING
FIXED BEAMS IN BENDING INTRODUCTION Fixed or built-in beams are commonly used in building construction because they possess high rigidity in comparison to simply supported beams. When a simply supported
More informationMaterials: engineering, science, processing and design, 2nd edition Copyright (c)2010 Michael Ashby, Hugh Shercliff, David Cebon.
Modes of Loading (1) tension (a) (2) compression (b) (3) bending (c) (4) torsion (d) and combinations of them (e) Figure 4.2 1 Standard Solution to Elastic Problems Three common modes of loading: (a) tie
More informationAnalysis of Shear Lag Effect of Box Beam under Dead Load
Analysis of Shear Lag Effect of Box Beam under Dead Load Qi Wang 1, a, Hongsheng Qiu 2, b 1 School of transportation, Wuhan University of Technology, 430063, Wuhan Hubei China 2 School of transportation,
More informationEffect of eccentric moments on seismic ratcheting of single-degree-of-freedom structures
Effect of eccentric moments on seismic ratcheting of single-degree-of-freedom structures K.Z. Saif, C.-L. Lee, G.A. MacRae & T.Z. Yeow Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
More informationDynamic Stability and Design of Cantilever Bridge Columns
Proceedings of the Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Society 14-16 April, 211, Auckland, New Zealand Dynamic Stability and Design of Cantilever Bridge
More informationFINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF TAPERED COMPOSITE PLATE GIRDER WITH A NON-LINEAR VARYING WEB DEPTH
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Vol. 12, No. 11 (2017) 2839-2854 School of Engineering, Taylor s University FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF TAPERED COMPOSITE PLATE GIRDER WITH A NON-LINEAR VARYING
More informationPOST-PEAK BEHAVIOR OF FRP-JACKETED REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMNS
POST-PEAK BEHAVIOR OF FRP-JACKETED REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMNS - Technical Paper - Tidarut JIRAWATTANASOMKUL *1, Dawei ZHANG *2 and Tamon UEDA *3 ABSTRACT The objective of this study is to propose a new
More information5 ADVANCED FRACTURE MODELS
Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful George E.P. Box, (Box and Draper, 1987) 5 ADVANCED FRACTURE MODELS In the previous chapter it was shown that the MOR parameter cannot be relied upon
More informationSamantha Ramirez, MSE
Samantha Ramirez, MSE Centroids The centroid of an area refers to the point that defines the geometric center for the area. In cases where the area has an axis of symmetry, the centroid will lie along
More informationFatigue Resistance of Angle Shape Shear Connector used in Steel-Concrete Composite Slab
Fatigue Resistance of Angle Shape Shear Connector used in Steel-Concrete Composite Slab A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of Engineering of Nagoya University in partial fulfillment of the
More informationMechanics of Solids notes
Mechanics of Solids notes 1 UNIT II Pure Bending Loading restrictions: As we are aware of the fact internal reactions developed on any cross-section of a beam may consists of a resultant normal force,
More informationThe Islamic University of Gaza Department of Civil Engineering ENGC Design of Spherical Shells (Domes)
The Islamic University of Gaza Department of Civil Engineering ENGC 6353 Design of Spherical Shells (Domes) Shell Structure A thin shell is defined as a shell with a relatively small thickness, compared
More informationCE5510 Advanced Structural Concrete Design - Design & Detailing of Openings in RC Flexural Members-
CE5510 Advanced Structural Concrete Design - Design & Detailing Openings in RC Flexural Members- Assoc Pr Tan Kiang Hwee Department Civil Engineering National In this lecture DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
More information