TR-424 - Steel Diaphragms In Prestressed Concrete Girder .

2y ago
12 Views
2 Downloads
1.85 MB
165 Pages
Last View : 19d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Luis Waller
Transcription

STEEL DIAPHRAGMS INPRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDER BRIDGESIowa DOT Project TR-424CTRE Project 99-36Sponsored bythe Iowa Department of Transportationand the Iowa Highway Research BoardDepartment of Civil, Construction and Environmental EngineeringFinal ReportSeptember 2004

The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors andnot necessarily those of the Iowa Department of Transportation or the Iowa Highway Research Board.CTRE’s mission is to develop and implement innovative methods, materials, and technologies forimproving transportation efficiency, safety, and reliability while improving the learning environment ofstudents, faculty, and staff in transportation-related fields.

Technical Report Documentation Page1. Report No.TR-4242. Government Accession No.4. Title and SubtitleSteel Diaphragms in Prestressed Concrete Girder Bridges3. Recipient’s Catalog No.5. Report DateSeptember 20046. Performing Organization Code7. Author(s)Robert E. Abendroth, Fouad S. Fanous, and Bassem O. Andrawes8. Performing Organization Report No.9. Performing Organization Name and AddressCenter for Transportation Research and EducationIowa State University2901 South Loop Drive, Suite 3100Ames, IA 50010-863410. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)12. Sponsoring Organization Name and AddressIowa Department of Transportation800 Lincoln WayAmes, IA 5001011. Contract or Grant No.13. Type of Report and Period CoveredFinal Report, January 1999 to September 200414. Sponsoring Agency Code15. Supplementary NotesThis report is available in color at www.ctre.iastate.edu.16. AbstractOver the years, bridge engineers have been concerned about the response of prestressed concrete (PC) girder bridges that hadbeen hit by over-height vehicles or vehicle loads. When a bridge is struck by an over-height vehicle or vehicle load, usually the outsideand in some instances one of the interior girders are damaged in a bridge. The effect of intermediate diaphragms in providing damageprotection to the PC girders of a bridge is not clearly defined. This analytical study focused on the role of intermediate diaphragms inreducing the occurrence of damage in the girders of a PC-girder bridge that has been struck by an over-height vehicle or vehicle load.The study also investigated whether a steel, intermediate diaphragm would essentially provide the same degree of impact protection forPC girders as that provided by a reinforced-concrete diaphragm.This investigation includes the following: a literature search and a survey questionnaire to determine the state-of-the-art in theuse and design of intermediate diaphragms in PC-girder bridges. Comparisons were made between the strain and displacement resultsthat were experimentally measured for a large-scale, laboratory, model bridge during previously documented work and those results thatwere obtained from analyses of the finite-element models that were developed during this research for that bridge. These comparisonswere conducted to calibrate the finite element models used in the analyses for this research on intermediate diaphragms. Finite-elementmodels were developed for non-skewed and skewed PC-girder bridges. Each model was analyzed with either a reinforced concrete ortwo types of steel, intermediate diaphragms that were located at mid-span of an interior span for a PC-girder bridge. The bridge modelswere analyzed for lateral-impact loads that were applied to the bottom flange of the exterior girders at the diaphragms location and awayfrom the diaphragms location. A comparison was conducted between the strains and displacements induced in the girders for eachintermediate-diaphragm type.These results showed that intermediate diaphragms have an effect in reducing impact damage to the PC girders. When thelateral impact-load was applied at the diaphragm location, the reinforced-concrete diaphragms provided more protection for the girdersthan that provided by the two types of steel diaphragms. The three types of diaphragms provided essentially the same degree ofprotection to the impacted, PC girder when the lateral-impact load was applied away from the diaphragm location.17. Key Wordsbridges, collisions, damage, diaphragms, finite-element, girders, impacts,prestressed18. Distribution StatementNo restrictions.19. Security Classification (of thisreport)Unclassified.21. No. of Pages22. Price151NA20. Security Classification (of thispage)Unclassified.

STEEL DIAPHRAGMS IN PRESTRESSEDCONCRETE GIRDER BRIDGESIowa DOT Project TR-424Principal InvestigatorsRobert E. AbendrothAssociate Professor of Civil EngineeringFouad S. FanousProfessor of Civil EngineeringIowa State UniversityResearch AssistantBassem O. AndrawesPreparation of this report was financed in partthrough funds by the Iowa Department of Transportationthrough its research management agreement with theCenter for Transportation Research and Education, Project 99-36.Center for Transportation Research and EducationIowa State UniversityISU Research Park2901 South Loop Drive, Suite 3100Ames, IA 50010-8634Phone: 515-294-8103Fax: 515-294-0467www.ctre.iastate.eduFinal Report September 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTSLIST OF FIGURES .vACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. xi1.INTRODUCTION .11.1.1.2.1.3.1.4.1.5.2.EXPERIMENTAL BRIDGE MODEL.132.1.2.2.2.3.2.4.3.Background .1Problem statement .2Objective and scope.3Literature review.4Review of current department of transportation practice .9Introduction.13Model description .13Intermediate diaphragms.16Loading mechanisms .18FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF AN EXPERIMENTAL BRIDGE.193.1.3.2.3.3.3.4.Introduction .19Model description .19Support conditions.21Intermediate diaphragms .233.4.1. Preliminary models .243.4.1.1. Reinforced concrete intermediate diaphragm .243.4.1.2. Steel channel intermediate diaphragm.253.4.1.3. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm .263.4.2. Refined models .273.4.2.1. Reinforced concrete intermediate diaphragm .273.4.2.2. Steel channel intermediate diaphragm.283.4.2.3. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm .323.5. Load cases.333.5.1. Preliminary models.333.5.2. Refined models.353.6. Sub-models .353.6.1. Introduction .353.6.2. Steel channel intermediate diaphragm sub-model .363.6.3. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm sub-model.403.7. Comparison of analytical and experimental results.433.7.1. Comparison of displacements .433.7.2. Comparison of strains .45iii

4.FINITE ELEMENT MODELS OF PROTOTYPE PC GIRDER BRIDGES.474.1. Introduction .474.2. Bridges selected for the analyses.474.2.1. Non-skewed bridge .474.2.2. Skewed bridge .514.3. Finite-element models of a non-skewed bridge .544.3.1. Description of the finite-element model.544.3.1.1. Four-span finite-element model .544.3.1.2. Single-span finite-element model .584.3.2. Intermediate diaphragms.594.3.2.1. Reinforced concrete intermediate diaphragm .594.3.2.2. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm.644.3.2.3. Steel K-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm.694.3.3. Load cases .694.4. Finite element model of the skewed bridge .744.4.1. Model description.744.4.2. Intermediate diaphragms .754.4.3. Load cases.765. ANALYSIS RESULTS .795.1. Introduction .795.2. Four-span and one-span finite element models.795.3. Non-skewed bridge model .815.3.1. Strains.815.3.1.1. Reinforced concrete intermediate diaphragms .835.3.1.2. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragms .915.3.1.3. Steel K-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragms.975.3.2. Displacements .1015.3.3. Strain and displacement comparisons.1125.3.3.1. Strain comparisons .1125.3.3.2. Displacement comparisons.1245.3.4. Four foot load case.1275.4. Skewed bridge model.1295.5. Maximum principal-tensile strain locations.1346.CLOSING REMARKS.1376.1. Summary .1376.2. Conclusions .1406.3. Recommendations for future work .144REFERENCES .145APPENDIX A: DESIGN AGENCY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS.147iv

LIST OF FIGURESFigure 2.1. Experimental bridge .14Figure 2.2. PC-girder cross section.15Figure 2.3. Abutment and end diaphragm .16Figure 2.4. Reinforced concrete intermediate diaphragm.17Figure 2.5. Steel channel intermediate diaphragm.17Figure 2.6. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut intermediate diaphragm.18Figure 3.1. Finite element model of an experimental bridge.20Figure 3.2. Supports condition of the finite element model of the experimental bridge .22Figure 3.3. Reinforced concrete diaphragm for the preliminary finite element model .24Figure 3.4. Steel channel diaphragm for the preliminary finite element model .26Figure 3.5. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut diaphragm for the preliminaryfinite element model .27Figure 3.6. Reinforced concrete diaphragm for the refined finite element model.29Figure 3.7. Steel channel diaphragm for the refined finite element model.30Figure 3.8. Steel X-braced with horizontal strut diaphragm for the refined finiteelement model.32Figure 3.9. The load locations considered in the analysis .34Figure 3.10. Vertical and horizontal load locations considered in the preliminaryand refined finite element models.34Figure 3.11. Steel channel diaphragm sub-model.37Figure 3.12. Steel X-braced diaphragm sub-model .41Figure 3.13. Horizontal load versus horizontal displacement at Point 1 for the nodiaphragm condition .44Figure 3.14. Horizontal load versus horizontal displacement at Point 1 for the RCdiaphragms.44v

Figure 4.1. Longitudinal section at centerline of the roadway for the Marshall CountyBridge (Adapted from the Iowa DOT-Highway Division design details).48Figure 4.2. Cross section of Marshall County Bridge (Adapted from the Iowa DOTHighway Division design details, File no. 27498, Sheet no. 8).50Figure 4.3. Cross section of an Iowa “Type-D” PC girder .51Figure 4.4. Diaphragms at the abutments and piers (Adapted from the Iowa DOTHighway Division design details, File no. 27498, Sheet no. 9).52Figure 4.5. Longitudinal section at centerline of the roadway for the Johnson CountyBridge (Adapted from Iowa DOT-Highway Division design details, fileno. 26197, sheet no. 2) .53Figure 4.6. Cross section of the four-span, non-skewed, finite-element bridge model.55Figure 4.7. Cross section of the roadway passing beneath the bridge.56Figure 4.8. Boundary conditions considered in the analysis of the four-span finiteelement model.57Figure 4.9. Iowa DOT reinforced concrete diaphragms (adapted from the Iowa DOTstandard details) .60Figure 4.10. Connection between the RC diaphragms and the PC girders .63Figure 4.11. Iowa DOT X-braced with horizontal strut diaphragm (adapted from theIowa DOT standards).65Figure 4.12. Finite element model of a cross bracing member (view looking along themember length) .67Figure 4.13. Iowa DOT K-braced with horizontal strut diaphragm (adapted from the IowaDOT standards).70Figure 4.14. Load locations.72Figure 4.15. Force versus time relations used in simulating lateral-impact loads .73Figure 4.16. Arrangement of the intermediate diaphragms in the skewed bridge .74Figure 4.17. Load locations of the skewed bridge model .76Figure 5.1. Maximum principal-tensile strain versus time for the four-span and one-spanmodels without diaphragms (load and strains at the mid-span of Beam BM1).80vi

Figure 5.2. Horizontal displacement versus time for the four-span and one-span models(load and displacement at the mid-span of Beam BM1).81Figure 5.3. Maximum principal-tensile strain versus time for the RC diaphragms(no load offset on Beam BM1) .83Figure 5.4. Maximum principal-tensile strain distribution along a portion ofBeam BM1 for the RC diaphragms (no load offset on Beam BM1) .84Figure 5.5. Maximum principal-tensile strain versus time for the RC diaphragms(no load offset on Beam BM5) .

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date September 2004 6. Performing Organization Code Steel Diaphragms in Prestressed Concrete Girder Bridges 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Robert E. Abendroth, Fouad S. Fanous, and Bassem O. Andrawes 9. Performing Organization Name and Ad

Related Documents:

DF CHIP BREAKER The DF chip breaker is the preferred choice chip breaker on P category material finish. M Class tolerance double sided chip breaker, excellent chip flow in finishing cut range while producing excellent surface finish on work material. Steel 424-1989 424-1990 424-1991 424-1992

Untopped steel decking and untopped wood structural panels are considered FLEXIBLE if the vertical seismic force resisting systems are steel or composite braced frames or are shear walls. Diaphragms in one- and two-family residential buildings may be considered FLEXIBLE. Concrete slab or concrete filled metal deck diaphragms

CHARACTERIZING THE LOAD-DEFORMATION BEHAVIOR OF STEEL DECK DIAPHRAGMS USING PAST TEST DATA Patrick E. O'Brien GENERAL AUDIENCE ABSTRACT A building's floor and roof systems active in the resistance of in-plane loads, known as

contributions from the Steel Deck Institute, the Metal Building Manufacturers Association, and the Steel Joist Institute in partnership with the Cold-Formed Steel Research Consortium; including, . Steel Deck Building Diaphragms." to be submitted to Journal of Constructional Steel Research Foroughi, H., Torabian, S., Schafer, B.W., Wei, G .

steel, weathering steel, fire-resistant steel, high-toughness steel, low-yield-point steel, memory alloy steel, additive manufacturing steel and other types/grades of steel used in construction different from low grade carbon steel. Currently, the council focuses on the structures made of HPS and their joints using bolted and welded connections.

SECTIONAL STEEL DOOR SYSTEMS STEEL AND INSULATED STEEL DOORS * R-value is a measure of thermal efficiency. The higher the R-value the greater the . Steel door panel detail Insulated steel door panel detail Aluminum Sash Section with DSB glazing Insulated DSB (24"x 7") White Industrial Brown All models: Available only on 424, 426, 430, 432

NEWMAN NewFlo Replacement Diaphragms for ITT Weir Style Diaphragm Valves Technical Data Sheet Single Piece Diaphragms for ITT Pure-Flo and Dia-Flo Valves Genuine Newman 2107 EPDM (Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer) Genuine Newman 2107 EPDM is the material of choice for many food and biopharm processing applications, surpassing other .

ASME A17.1-2013 / CSA B44-13 2.25.4.1.1 Emergency Terminal Speed-Limiting Device New requirement to apply the emergency brake if the main brake fails to slow the car down when ETSL actuated. Both brakes may be applied but max deceleration is 9.81 m/s2. Reduced stroke buffer ETSL Broken Shaft - Main brake does not work Emergency brake applied when car fails to slow down as intended Car below .