Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 620 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Development of Design Specifications and Commentary for Horizontally Curved Concrete Box-Girder Bridges

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka VICE CHAIR: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Allen D. Biehler, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg John D. Bowe, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA Larry L. Brown, Sr., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles David S. Ekern, Commissioner, Virginia DOT, Richmond Nicholas J. Garber, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville Jeffrey W. Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN Edward A. (Ned) Helme, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC Will Kempton, Director, California DOT, Sacramento Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Pete K. Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR Rosa Clausell Rountree, Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Linda S. Watson, CEO, LYNXCentral Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando Steve Williams, Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Thad Allen (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC Joseph H. Boardman, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA Paul R. Brubaker, Research and Innovative Technology Administrator, U.S.DOT George Bugliarello, Chancellor, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC Sean T. Connaughton, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC John H. Hill, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC Carl T. Johnson, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT J. Edward Johnson, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis Space Center, MS Thomas J. Madison, Jr., Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC Nicole R. Nason, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT James S. Simpson, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT Robert A. Sturgell, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC *Membership as of September 2008.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 620 Development of Design Specifications and Commentary for Horizontally Curved Concrete Box-Girder Bridges NUTT, REDFIELD AND VALENTINE Orangevale, CA IN ASSOCIATION WITH DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES, INC. San Diego, CA AND ZOCON CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Folsom, CA Subject Areas Bridges, Other Structures, and Hydraulics and Hydrology Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 620 RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 12-71 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614 administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN: 978-0-309-11750-0 interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2008936983 or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the 2008 Transportation Research Board accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT PERMISSION cooperative research. Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein. initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission Transportation. from CRP. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of NOTICE modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, Governing Board's judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed research directly to those who are in a position to use them. or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 620 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs David B. Beal, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 12-71 PANEL Field of Design--Area of Bridges Michael R. Pope, California DOT, Sacramento, CA (Chair) Bruce V. Johnson, Oregon DOT, Salem, OR Abdeldjelil Belarbi, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO David C. O'Hagan, Florida DOT, Tallahassee, FL Jerry L. Potter, Livingston, TX Geoffrey Swett, Washington State DOT, Olympia, WA Dean W. Van Landuyt, Texas DOT, Austin, TX Nur Yazdani, University of TexasArlington, Arlington, TX Gary Jakovich, FHWA Liaison Stephen F. Maher, TRB Liaison

OCR for page R1
FOREWORD By David B. Beal Staff Officer Transportation Research Board This report provides specifications, commentary, and examples for the design of hori- zontally curved concrete box-girder highway bridges. The report details the development of the design procedures. Recommended LRFD specifications and design examples illustrat- ing the application of the design methods and specifications are included in appendixes (available on the TRB website at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9596). The mate- rial in this report will be of immediate interest to bridge designers. Many concrete box-girder bridges are constructed on horizontally curved alignments. In some instances, problems such as bearing uplift, cracked diaphragms and piers, and lateral tendon breakout have occurred. The AASHTO Bridge Specifications do not adequately address these and other issues, either in the provisions, or commentary. AASHTO has recently incorporated provisions for the design of horizontally curved steel bridges into the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. These specifications include specific guidance on when horizontal curvature effects must be considered. Bridge owners and designers need specifications and commentary, as well as examples that provide design guidance for horizontally curved concrete box-girder bridges. The objective of NCHRP Project 12-71 was to develop specifications, commentary, and examples for the design of horizontally curved concrete box-girder bridges. The research was performed by Nutt, Redfield & Valentine, Orangevale, California; in association with David Evans & Associates, Inc., San Diego, California; and Zocon Consulting Engineers, Inc., Folsom, California. The report and appendices fully document the effort to develop the design procedures. (The appendixes are available on the TRB website at http://trb.org/ news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9596)

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 3 Chapter 2 State-of-Practice Review 3 Domestic Practice 5 Foreign Practice 6 Field Problems 8 Chapter 3 Published Literature Review 8 Codes and Design Standards 9 Design Methods 9 Design Steps (General Sectional Model) 9 Step 1--Determine the Controlling Load Cases 9 Step 2--Determine the Cross-Section Parameters 9 Step 3--Check the Web Width 10 Step 4--Calculate Shear Stress 10 and x and Find and Step 5--Calculate vu / f c 10 Step 6--Determine Required Spacing of Stirrups 11 Step 7--Check the Longitudinal Reinforcement 11 Design Steps (Segmental Box-Girder) 11 Step 1--Determine the Controlling Load Cases 11 Step 2--Determine the Cross-Section Parameters 12 Step 3--Check if Torsion Must be Considered 12 Step 4--Check the Web Width 12 Step 5--Determine Required Spacing of Stirrups: 12 Step 6--Check the Longitudinal Reinforcement 13 Design Philosophy 14 Response of Curved Concrete Box-Girder Bridges 14 Global Analysis 20 Laboratory Experiments 21 Design Issues 21 Bearings 21 Diaphragms 21 Flexure and Flexural Shear 23 Torsion 25 Wheel Load Distribution 25 Tendon Breakout and Deviation Saddles 28 Time Dependency 29 Vehicular Impact 29 Seismic Response 29 Design Optimization 29 Detailing 30 Summary

OCR for page R1
31 Chapter 4 Global Response Analysis Studies 31 Objective 31 Model Verification 31 Parameter Studies 31 Analysis Cases 32 Structural Analysis 34 Loads 35 Results Review 36 Summary of Results 37 Conclusions of the Parametric Study 38 Special Studies 38 Diaphragm 39 Bearings at the Bents 39 Skewed Abutments 41 Long-Term Creep 44 Chapter 5 Regional and Local Response Analysis Studies 45 Local Analysis Validation/Demonstration Case (UT Test Case) 45 Test Model and Test Conduct 51 Local Analysis of Multicell Box Girders 52 Model Prototype: Three-Cell Cast-In-Place Box Girder 53 Multicell Models--Analysis Results 57 Discussion of Results 63 Local Analysis of Single-Cell Box Girders 63 Model Prototype: Single-Cell CIP Box Girder 66 Single-Cell Models--Analysis Results 67 Discussion of Results 72 Conclusions From Local Analyses 72 General Observations on Capacity 72 Summary of Influences from Detailing Parameters 75 Recommendations for Web Capacity Design 79 Chapter 6 Conclusions 84 References/Bibliography 87 Appendixes