Bridge Superstructure Tolerance to Total and Differential Foundation Movements (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 30-42
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 30... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 30 Figure 3-7 - Typical boundary conditions employed in each model. 4 Estimation of Maximum Tolerable Support Movement (Task 2.2)
|
From page 31... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 31 This expression is based on superposition and thus assumes linear response. The tolerable support movement computed from Equation 4-1 will be in units of length (e.g.
|
From page 32... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 32 Table 4-1 - Support movements investigated in this project. Support Movement Representation Longitudinal-Differential Support Movement Transverse-Differential Support Movement 4.2 Simulation of Longitudinal- and Transverse-Differential Support Movements For two and three-span continuous bridges, responses from LD and TD movements at the abutment and at the interior pier(s)
|
From page 33... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 33 Figure 4-1 - Schematic representation of a rotational translation for an example structure with five girders. 4.3 Simulation of Dead Load Two dead load cases were simulated in order to be able to consider the limit states shown in Table 1-3: initial dead load and superimposed dead load.
|
From page 34... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 34 Table 4-2 - Bridge component states for analysis of initial dead load. Component(s)
|
From page 35... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 35 1.33. Lane loads are defined as a 0.64 kip/ft (longitudinally)
|
From page 36... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 36 maximum shear over second abutment. Loads were applied in this fashion for each axle spacing of the design truck as well as the specified tandem truck.
|
From page 37... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 37 4.5.1 Response Regions of Interest Results were extracted from the entire length of each girder; however, only specific regions experience adverse force effects from support movements. These regions depend on the continuity of the bridge as well as the type/location of the support movement.
|
From page 38... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 38 does not undergo any translation. Figure 4-5 depicts the regions that experience adverse force effects due to LD and TD support movements occurring at the pier.
|
From page 39... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 39 4.5.3 Moment on Non-Composite Sections Moments needs to be extracted from two types of non-composite sections. The first is the dead load moments within the girders.
|
From page 40... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 40 4.6 Results Convergence Results convergence was assessed by comparing the empirical cumulative density function (ECDF) for the results of superstructure tolerance for each support movement scenario (type/location)
|
From page 41... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 41 Table 4-5 - Convergence data for each data set of steel multi-girder bridges. Sample Set Movement Limit State Converged at N Samples KS-Value Simple Span Steel TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 0.9990 Service II 200 0.9990 Strength I Shear 200 0.9853 Two-Span Steel LD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 0.9999 Service II 200 0.9990 Strength I Shear 200 0.9653 TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service II 200 0.9953 Strength I Shear 200 0.9853 LD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service II 200 0.9953 Strength I Shear 200 0.9653 TD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 0.9999 Service II 200 0.9853 Strength I Shear 200 0.9853 Three-Span Steel LD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 0.9999 Service II 200 0.9999 Strength I Shear 200 0.9999 TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 0.9999 Service II 200 0.9999 Strength I Shear 200 0.9953 LD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 0.9953 Service II 200 0.9953 Strength I Shear 200 0.9990 TD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 0.9990 Service II 200 0.9990 Strength I Shear 200 0.9331
|
From page 42... ...
NCHRP Project 12-103 42 Table 4-6 - Convergence data for each data set of PS concrete multi-girder bridges. Sample Set Movement Limit State Converged at N Samples KS-Value Simple Span PS TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 0.8885 Service I/III 200 0.9653 Strength I Shear 200 1.0000 Two-Span PS LD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 1.0000 Strength I Shear 200 0.9853 TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 0.9999 Strength I Shear 200 0.9903 LD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 0.9999 Strength I Shear 200 0.9953 TD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 0.9953 Service I/III 200 0.9903 Strength I Shear 200 0.9999 Three-Span PS LD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 1.0000 Strength I Shear 200 1.0000 TD at Abutment Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 1.0000 Strength I Shear 200 0.9888 LD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 0.9999 Strength I Shear 200 0.9999 TD at Pier Strength I Flexure 200 1.0000 Service I/III 200 0.9990 Strength I Shear 200 0.9871
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.