24 resultados para load carriage
Resumo:
This report describes the measurement of dynamic (live load) deflections in a 240' x 30' three span continuous prestressed steel bridge, skewed 30 degrees. The design assumptions and prestressing procedure are described briefly, and the instrumentation and loading are discussed. The actual deflections are presented in tabular form, and the deflections due to the design live load are calculated. The maximum deflections are presented as a ratio of the span length, and the further use of prestressed steel beams is recommended.
Resumo:
In this paper are described the results of a research project that had the objective of developing construction procedures for restoring load transfer in existing jointed concrete pavements and of evaluating the effectiveness of the restoration methods. A total of 28 test sections with various load transfer devices were placed. The devices include split pipe, figure eight, vee, double vee, and dowel bars. Patching materials used on the project included three types of fast-setting grouts, three brands of polymer concrete, and plain portland cement concrete. The number and spacing of the devices and dowel bars were also variables in the project. Dowel bars and double vee devices were used on the major portion of the project. Performance evaluations were based on deflection tests conducted with a 20,000-lb axle load. Horizontal joint movement measurements and visual observations were also made. The short-term performance data indicate good results with the dowel bar installations regardless of patching materials. The sections with split pipe, figure eight, and vee devices failed in bond during the first winter cycle. The results with the double vee sections indicate the importance of the patching material to the success or failure of the load transfer system: some sections are performing well and other sections are performing poorly with double vee devices. Horizontal joint movement measurements indicate that neither the dowel bars nor the double vee devices are restricting joint movement.
Resumo:
Recent reports indicate that of the over 25,000 bridges in Iowa, slightly over 7,000 (29%) are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. While many of these bridges may be strengthened or rehabilitated, some simply need to be replaced. Before implementing one of these options, one should consider performing a diagnostic load test on the structure to more accurately assess its load carrying capacity. Frequently, diagnostic load tests reveal strength and serviceability characteristics that exceed the predicted codified parameters. Usually, codified parameters are very conservative in predicting lateral load distribution characteristics and the influence of other structural attributes. As a result, the predicted rating factors are typically conservative. In cases where theoretical calculations show a structural deficiency, it may be very beneficial to apply a "tool" that utilizes a more accurate theoretical model which incorporates field-test data. At a minimum, this approach results in more accurate load ratings and many times results in increased rating factors. Bridge Diagnostics, Inc. (BDI) developed hardware and software that are specially designed for performing bridge ratings based on data obtained from physical testing. To evaluate the BDI system, the research team performed diagnostic load tests on seven "typical" bridge structures: three steel-girder bridges with concrete decks, two concrete slab bridges, and two steel-girder bridges with timber decks. In addition, a steel-girder bridge with a concrete deck previously tested and modeled by BDI was investigated for model verification purposes. The tests were performed by attaching strain transducers on the bridges at critical locations to measure strains resulting from truck loading positioned at various locations on the bridge. The field test results were used to develop and validate analytical rating models. Based on the experimental and analytical results, it was determined that bridge tests could be conducted relatively easy, that accurate models could be generated with the BDI software, and that the load ratings, in general, were greater than the ratings, obtained using the codified LFD Method (according to AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges).
Resumo:
In jointed portland cement concrete pavements, dowel bars are typically used to transfer loads between adjacent slabs. A common practice is for designers to place dowel bars at a certain, consistent spacing such that a sufficient number of dowels are available to effectively transfer anticipated loads. In many cases, however, the standards developed today for new highway construction simply do not reflect the design needs of low traffic volume, rural roads. The objective of this research was to evaluate the impact of the number of dowel bars and dowel location on joint performance and ultimately on pavement performance. For this research, test sections were designed, constructed, and tested in actual field service pavement. Test sections were developed to include areas with load transfer assemblies having three and four dowels in the outer wheel path only, areas with no joint reinforcement whatsoever, and full lane dowel basket assemblies as the control. Two adjacent paving projects provided both rural and urban settings and differing base materials. This report documents the approach to implementing the study and provides discussion and suggestions based on the results of the research. The research results indicate that the use of single three or four dowel basket assemblies in the outer wheel path is acceptable for use in low truck volume roads. In the case of roadways with relatively stiff bases such as asphalt treated or stabilized bases, the use of the three dowel bar pattern in the outside wheel path is expected to provide adequate performance over the design life of the pavement. In the case of untreated or granular bases, the results indicate that the use of the three or four dowel bar basket in both wheel paths provides the best long-term solution to load transfer and faulting measurements.
Resumo:
For well over 100 years, the Working Stress Design (WSD) approach has been the traditional basis for geotechnical design with regard to settlements or failure conditions. However, considerable effort has been put forth over the past couple of decades in relation to the adoption of the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach into geotechnical design. With the goal of producing engineered designs with consistent levels of reliability, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued a policy memorandum on June 28, 2000, requiring all new bridges initiated after October 1, 2007, to be designed according to the LRFD approach. Likewise, regionally calibrated LRFD resistance factors were permitted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to improve the economy of bridge foundation elements. Thus, projects TR-573, TR-583 and TR-584 were undertaken by a research team at Iowa State University’s Bridge Engineering Center with the goal of developing resistance factors for pile design using available pile static load test data. To accomplish this goal, the available data were first analyzed for reliability and then placed in a newly designed relational database management system termed PIle LOad Tests (PILOT), to which this first volume of the final report for project TR-573 is dedicated. PILOT is an amalgamated, electronic source of information consisting of both static and dynamic data for pile load tests conducted in the State of Iowa. The database, which includes historical data on pile load tests dating back to 1966, is intended for use in the establishment of LRFD resistance factors for design and construction control of driven pile foundations in Iowa. Although a considerable amount of geotechnical and pile load test data is available in literature as well as in various State Department of Transportation files, PILOT is one of the first regional databases to be exclusively used in the development of LRFD resistance factors for the design and construction control of driven pile foundations. Currently providing an electronically organized assimilation of geotechnical and pile load test data for 274 piles of various types (e.g., steel H-shaped, timber, pipe, Monotube, and concrete), PILOT (http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/lrfd/) is on par with such familiar national databases used in the calibration of LRFD resistance factors for pile foundations as the FHWA’s Deep Foundation Load Test Database. By narrowing geographical boundaries while maintaining a high number of pile load tests, PILOT exemplifies a model for effective regional LRFD calibration procedures.
Resumo:
As a result of the construction of the Saylorville Dam and Reservoir on the Des Moines River, six highway bridges crossing the river were scheduled for removal. One of these, an old pinconnected high-truss single-lane bridge, was selected for a testing program which included ultimate load tests. The purpose of the ultimate load tests, which are summarized in this report, was to relate design and rating procedures presently used in bridge design to the field behavior of this type of truss bridge. The ultimate load tests consisted of ultimate load testing of one span of the bridge, of two I-shaped floorbeams, and of two panels of the timber deck. The theoretical capacity of each of these components is compared with the results from the field tests.
Resumo:
As a result of the construction of the Saylorville Dam and Reservoir on the Des Moines River, six highway bridges crossing the river were scheduled for removal. Two of these were incorporated into a comprehensive test program to study the behavior of old pin-connected high-truss single-lane bridges. The test program consisted of ultimate load tests, service load tests and a supplementary test program. The results reported in this report cover the service load tests on the two bridges as well as the supplementary tests, both static and fatigue, of eyebar members removed from the two bridges. The field test results of the service loading are compared with theoretical results of the truss analysis.
Resumo:
This main report provides a general discussion of the load testing, structural evaluation, and load rating procedures. Specific details for each bridge are provided in individual report sections. Additional supporting information on load testing, analyses, and load rating are also provided in the attached appendices.
Resumo:
The spacing of adjacent wheel lines of dual-lane loads induces different lateral live load distributions on bridges, which cannot be determined using the current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) or Load Factor Design (LFD) equations for vehicles with standard axle configurations. Current Iowa law requires dual-lane loads to meet a five-foot requirement, the adequacy of which needs to be verified. To improve the state policy and AASHTO code specifications, it is necessary to understand the actual effects of wheel-line spacing on lateral load distribution. The main objective of this research was to investigate the impact of the wheel-line spacing of dual-lane loads on the lateral load distribution on bridges. To achieve this objective, a numerical evaluation using two-dimensional linear elastic finite element (FE) models was performed. For simulation purposes, 20 prestressed-concrete bridges, 20 steel bridges, and 20 slab bridges were randomly sampled from the Iowa bridge database. Based on the FE results, the load distribution factors (LDFs) of the concrete and steel bridges and the equivalent lengths of the slab bridges were derived. To investigate the variations of LDFs, a total of 22 types of single-axle four-wheel-line dual-lane loads were taken into account with configurations consisting of combinations of various interior and exterior wheel-line spacing. The corresponding moment and shear LDFs and equivalent widths were also derived using the AASHTO equations and the adequacy of the Iowa DOT five-foot requirement was evaluated. Finally, the axle weight limits per lane for different dual-lane load types were further calculated and recommended to complement the current Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) policy and AASHTO code specifications.