Hand Calculation Examples. CG Gilbertson

Similar documents
AASHTOWare BrDR 6.8 Feature Tutorial ADJ1 Analysis with Routine Traffic in Adjacent Lane

AASHTOWare BrR 6.8 Steel Tutorial Steel Plate Girder Using LRFR Engine

AASHTOWare BrDR 6.8 Steel Tutorial STL6 Two Span Plate Girder Example

2008 Bridge Load Rating Class 101

BrD Superstructure Tutorial

Title Page: Modeling & Load Rating of Two Bridges Designed with AASHTO and Florida I-Beam Girders

Slab Bridge Designer 2.1 Help: Example Analysis

Calibration for the Service Limit States in AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications

Design Aids of NU I-Girders Bridges

Part B: Design Calculations

Design of Short Span Steel Bridges

AASHTOWare BrD 6.8. BrR and BrD Tutorial. PS7-3 Stem PS Bridge Example

Bijan Khaleghi, Ph, D. P.E., S.E.

XXIV Konferencja Naukowo-Techniczna XXIV Szczecin-Międzyzdroje, maja awarie budowlane ULTIMATE OR SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES?

AASHTOWare BrR/BrD 6.8 Reinforced Concrete Structure Tutorial RC5 Schedule Based Tee Example

APPENDIX A: BRIDGE DRAWINGS AND PHOTOS

Introduction to Decks and Deck Systems

Release Notes MERLIN DASH V10.8 (WIN 6.2)

Load and Resistance Factor Calibration for Wood Bridges

HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE. by John J. Roller CTLGroup

FIELD TESTING AND LOAD RATING REPORT: THE MILO ADVENTIST ACADEMY S COVERED BRIDGE

Inventory Inspection and Load Rating of a Complex Segmental Concrete Bridge. Presented by Matthew J. Lengyel, PE, SE

BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL UPDATES. Jamie F. Farris, P.E.

Design and Rating of Steel Bridges

SERVICEABILITY LIMITS AND ECONOMICAL STEEL BRIDGE DESIGN

MASTER AGREEMENT FOR BRIDGE DESIGN SERVICES SCOPE OF WORK

Shear Capacity of Prestressed Concrete Beams

Seismic Analysis and Response Fundamentals. Lee Marsh Senior Project Manager BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc

JULY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 5-1

Substructure systems, specifically retaining walls

NOVEMBER 2017 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 14-1

Nonlinear Redundancy Analysis of Truss Bridges

Hyperstatic (Secondary) Actions In Prestressing and Their Computation

Well Road Project Accelerated Bridge Construction Using Self-Propelled Modular Transporters (SPMT s) By: Mark Bucci, P.E.

AASHTO LRFD. Reinforced Concrete. Eric Steinberg, Ph.D., P.E. Department of Civil Engineering Ohio University

Field and Laboratory Study of the Mn/DOT Precast Slab Span System

Fundamentals of Post Tensioned Concrete Design for Buildings

Buckling Reliability of Deteriorating Steel Beam Ends

Evaluation of the Empirical Deck Design for Vehicular Bridges

AUGUST 2016 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 3-1

System reliability models for bridge structures

USE OF A SANDWICH PLATE SYSTEM IN A VIRGINIA BRIDGE

AASHTOWare Bridge Rating/DesignTraining. STL9 Curved Steel 3D Example (BrR/BrD 6.5)

Bridge Preventative Maintenance.Act now before this happens to you! Keith Cooper, P.E. Local Bridge Program Manager

Live Load Distribution Factors Suitable For Concrete Bridges Under Ecp 201 And Euro Code 1991 Loading

Introduction to Structural Analysis TYPES OF STRUCTURES LOADS AND

MIDAS Training Series

Reinforced Concrete Design. A Fundamental Approach - Fifth Edition

STRENGTHENING STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE BRIDGES WITH HIGH MODULUS CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER (CFRP) LAMINATES

Sensitivity Analysis of Rail-Structure Interaction Force Effects for Direct-Fixation. Bridges

Chapter 3: Designing Steel Bridges Using DCALC By Karl Hanson, S.E., P.E. July 2006

LRFD Bridge Manual - Part I 7-1 CHA PTER 7 B RID GE LOA D RA TIN G GU ID ELIN ES

Seismic Performance of Precast Concrete Bents used for Accelerated Bridge Construction. Bijan Khaleghi 1

AIA St. Louis January 4 th, 2017 Phillip Shinn, PE Jacobs Engineering Washington University in St. Louis, Sam Fox School of Design and Visual Arts

This tip sheet may be used as a guide for single-family residential uncovered deck permits.

How to Design a Singly Reinforced Concrete Beam

Tama County s Steel Free Bridge Deck

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CENTRAL OFFICE, 1980 W. BROAD ST., COLUMBUS, OHIO

Comparison of haunched and constant depth steel box bridge girders, International Bridge Conference, Pittsburgh, PA., June 1984 (F.L. Publ.

Use of Grade 80 Reinforcement in Oregon

Assessment of Load Transfer and Load Distribution in Bridges Utilizing FRP Panels

Reinforced Concrete Column Design

Implementation of the AASHTO LRFD Code

80 Fy (ksi)= 50 2 nd Floor = 61. Length (ft) Plan View. Penthouse

CIVIL BREADTH Exam Specifications

After-Fracture Redundancy of Two-Girder Bridge: Testing 1-40 Bridges Over Rio Grande

Comprehensive Update to AASHTO LRFD Provisions for Flexural Design of Bridge I-Girders. D.W. White 1 and M.A. Grubb 2

Continuous Beam Design with Moment Redistribution (ACI )

Development of live load calibration factor for state highway bridge design of Pakistan

TXDOT ENGINEERING SOFTWARE SUPPORT INFORMATION. Prestressed Concrete Girder SUPERstructure Design and Analysis Program (PGSuper TM )

Upgrading Missouri Transportation Infrastructure: Solid RC Decks Strengthened with FRP Systems

Influence of Distributed Dead Loads on Vehicle Position for Maximum Moment in Simply Supported Bridges

Bridge Beams/Girders

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION TO POST-TENSIONED CONCRETE DEVELOPED BY THE PTI EDC-130 EDUCATION COMMITTEE

Continuous for Live Load: A Texas Historical Perspective

Bridge Quality Management

PricewaterhouseCoopers Building Oslo, Norway

Structural Option April 7 th, 2010

W. Mark McGinley March 3, 2016 ISEA MEETINGS 1

AASHTOWare BrDR 6.8 3D FEM Analysis Tutorial Steel Diaphragm and Lateral Bracing Specification Checking Example

Live Load Distribution on Longitudinal Glued- Laminated Timber Deck Bridges

JULY 2016 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 11-1

In Service Replacement of Box Girder Bottom Slab

FINAL CONTRACT REPORT EVALUATION OF THE IN-SERVICE PERFORMANCE OF THE TOM S CREEK BRIDGE FIBER-REINFORCED POLYMER SUPERSTRUCTURE

FHWA-NDE CENTER. Methods Available for Testing & Evaluation of Structures. NDE Center Federal Highway Administration

CFRP CONCRETE PROTECTION AND STRENGTHENING

OPTIMIZED ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURAL FORMS FOR STANDARD HIGHWAY BRIDGE BEAMS WITH HIGHER STRENGTH CONCRETES

Table of Contents. July

D D TYPE A1, A2 & B MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 5-40 CONNECTION. L4" x 4" x 3/8" Brace. C8 x 4.25 Strut. WT9 x 17.5.

INELASTIC OVERLOAD ANALYSIS OF STEEL MULTIGIRDER HIGHWAY BRIDGES. Heishman. Carl A~ Celal N. Kostem

TWO-WAY POST-TENSIONED SLABS WITH BONDED TENDONS

Study Guide. Given Formulae:

Railway Alignment Design and Geometry

AASHTOWare BrD 6.8 Substructure Tutorial Solid Shaft Pier Example

Section 906. STRUCTURAL STEEL

four design methods & beams Allowable Stress Design Limit State Design Allowable Stress Design

AASHTO- Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Railings. V 1.2 Rev

Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) webinar Thursday, October 24, 2013 ABC Center at Florida International University (FIU) presents

Transcription:

Hand Calculation Examples CG Gilbertson March 22 nd, 2011

Example 1: LFR Steel Superstructure Built in 1965 65 foot span No distress

General Properties Moment capacity: 2,910 ft*k Shear capacity: 380 k Combined dead load effect moment: 573 ft*k shear: 35.3 k Live load effect: to be determined as required for each component of the load rating Impact factor: 0.26 Girder distribution factor (GDF): 0.667

General Load Rating Equation RF = C A 1 D A 2 L GDF (1 + I) RF = rating factor C = capacity D = dead load effect L = live load effect GDF = girder distribution factor I = impact factor A 1 = dead load effect factor A 2 = live load effect factor

Federal Inventory Rating Moment: RF m = 2,910 1.3 (573.6) 2.17 896 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 1.32 Shear: RF v = 380 1.3 35.3 2.17 61.7 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 2.96

Federal Operating Rating Moment: RF m = 2,910 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 896 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 2.20 Shear: RF v = 380 1.3 35.3 1.3 61.7 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 4.96

Michigan Operating Rating Moment (max effect caused by 2-unit truck #17): RF m (2 unit ) = 2,910 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 1550 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 1.27 Shear (max effect caused by 2-unit truck #17): RF v (2 unit ) = 380 1.3 35.3 1.3 104 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 2.93 No posting is required!

MDOT Overload Class Moment (max effect caused by Class A Truck #10 &12): RF m (A ) = 2,910 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 2,000 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 0.99 Shear (max effect caused by Class A Truck #12): RF v = 380 1.3 35.3 1.3 144 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 2.12 Check Class B trucks

MDOT Overload Class Moment (max effect caused by Class B Truck #12): RF m (B) = 2,910 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 1,680 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 1.18 OVERLOAD CLASS B!

Example 2: LFR Steel Superstructure with Distress Built in 1965 65 foot span Distress resulting in loss of section

General Properties Moment capacity: 2,066 ft*k Shear capacity: 164 k Combined dead load effect moment: 573 ft*k shear: 35.3 k Live load effect: to be determined as required for each component of the load rating Impact factor: 0.26 Girder distribution factor (GDF): 0.667

General Load Rating Equation RF = C A 1 D A 2 L GDF (1 + I) RF = rating factor C = capacity D = dead load effect L = live load effect GDF = girder distribution factor I = impact factor A 1 = dead load effect factor A 2 = live load effect factor

Federal Inventory Rating Moment: RF m = 2,066 1.3 (573.6) 2.17 896 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 0.81 Shear: RF v = 164 1.3 35.3 2.17 61.7 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 1.05

Federal Operating Rating Moment: RF m = 2,066 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 896 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 1.35 Shear: RF v = 164 1.3 35.3 1.3 61.7 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 1.75

Michigan Operating Rating Moment (max effect caused by 2-unit truck #17): RF m (2 unit ) = 2,066 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 1550 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 0.78 Shear (max effect caused by 2-unit truck #17): RF v (2 unit ) = 164 1.3 35.3 1.3 104 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 1.04 Posting or repairs must be considered!

Michigan Operating Rating Calculate Live Load Capacity: L Allowed = C 1.3 D 1.3 RF GDF 1 + I = 2,066 1.3 573.4 1.3 104 0.667 1 + 0.26 Live load moment effect is limited to 1,209 ft*k

Posting Procedure: 1-unit trucks All these trucks produce a moment effect less than the max. The maximum weight of 42 tons is OK. 2-unit trucks List trucks that have a moment effect greater than max allowable (#12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18) The truck with highest moment/weight ratio will produce the greatest effect and must be used to restrict the loads applied to the bridge Restrict 2-unit trucks to 57 tons

Posting Procedure, Cont. 3-unit trucks List trucks that have a moment effect greater than max allowable (#21, #22, #23, #25) The truck with highest moment/weight ratio will produce the greatest effect and must be used to restrict the loads applied to the bridge Restrict 3-unit trucks to 65 tons

MDOT Overload Class Moment (max effect caused by Class A Truck #10 &12): RF m (A ) = 2,066 1.3 (573.4) 1.3 2,000 0.667 (1 + 0.26) = 0.60 Shear (max effect caused by Class A Truck #12): RF v = 164 1.3 35.3 1.3 144 0.667 1 + 0.26 = 0.74 Live Load Capacity (from previous calc) = 1,209 ft*k

MDOT Overload Class, Cont. Check Class B for load effects in excess of max Max effect is exceeded Check Class C for load effects in excess of max Max effect is exceeded Bridge is Class D Calculate allowable axle loads Use moment effects from Class A trucks and the corresponding axle loads Allowable Axle Load = Allowable Effect Load Effect Axle Load

MDOT Overload Class, Cont. Truck Axle Load Limits for Class D Overload Moment Effect for Class A Overload (ft*k) from Table 10.10 Calculated Allowable Axle Load (k) for Class D Axle Load (k) from Figure 8.1 1 60 1150 60 2 60 1270 57 3 57 1400 49 4 49 1550 38 5 44 1630 32 6 30 1710 21 7 31 1820 20 8 24 1860 15 9 22 1920 13 10 20 2000 12 11 46 1830 30 12 31 2000 18 13 34 1820 22

Example 3: LRFR Prestressed Box Beam Bridge 27 x 36 inch side by side prestressed box-beams 50 foot span No deterioration

General Properties Moment Capacity: 991 ft*k Shear Capacity: 95.6 k c b = 18.5 in (composite shape) I = 92,640 in 4 (composite shape) Combined Dead Load Effect Moment: 293 ft*k Shear: 22.1 k Live Load Effect: To be determined as required for each component of the load rating. IM: 0.26 Girder Distribution Factor (GDF): 0.26 ADTT: 5000

General Load Rating Equation RF = C γ DC DC γ DW DW ± γ P (P) γ LL (LL + IM) RF = rating factor C = capacity γ DC = LRFD load factor for structural components and attachments DC = dead load effect due to structural components and attachments γ DW = LRFD load factor for wearing surfaces and utilities DW = dead load effect due to wearing surfaces and utilities γ P = LRFD load factor for permanent loads other than dead loads = 1.0 P = permanent loads other than dead loads γ LL = evaluation live load factor LL = live load effect IM = dynamic load allowance

Limit States: Prestressed Design Load (HL-93) Other Loads Concrete: Strength I Federal Inventory and Operating MI Operating (Legal Loads) Strength II Permit Loads (Check Shear) Service III Federal Inventory MI Operating (Legal Loads) Service I Permit Loads (Check Shear)

Federal Inventory Rating Strength I: Flexure at midspan RF = 1.0 1.0 1.0 (991 ft k) 1.25 293 ft k 1.75 1,034 ft k (0.26) RF = 1.33 Note: Shear need not be checked for HL-93 if bridge does not show signs of shear distress

Federal Inventory Rating Service III: Tensile stress in concrete RF = f R γ D f D γ LL (f (LL+IM) ) RF = 1.845 ksi 1.0 0.952 ksi 0.80 0.644 ksi RF = 1.73

Federal Operating Rating Strength I: Flexure at midspan RF = 1.0 1.0 1.0 (991 ft k) 1.25 293 ft k 1.35 1,034 ft k (0.26) RF = 1.72 Note: Shear need not be checked for HL-93 if bridge does not show signs of shear distress

Michigan Operating Rating Note: Live load factor is a function of axle loads and configurations. Generate a table for factored load effects from BAG Strength I: Flexure at midspan RF = 1.0 1.0 1.0 (991 ft k) 1.25 293 ft k 1,634 ft k (0.26) RF = 1.47

Michigan Operating Rating Service III: Tensile stress in concrete RF = 1.845 ksi 1.0 0.952 ksi 1.0 0.837 ksi RF = 1.06

MDOT Overload Class Note: Live load factor is a function of axle loads and configurations. Generate a table for factored load effects from BAG Strength II: Flexure at midspan RF = 1.0 1.0 1.0 (991 ft k) 1.25 293 ft k 1,841 ft k (0.26) RF = 1.30 OK for routine permit Class A vehicles

MDOT Overload Class, Cont. Permit trucks should be checked for shear incrementally along the length of the member (not shown here)

References: Bridge Analysis Guide, 2005 Edition with 2009 Interim Update. MDOT Construction and Technology Support Area The Manual for Bridge Evaluation, Second Edition, AASHTO, Washington DC. (2011)