Transverse Joint Design of Small–Medium-Span Fully Precast Steel–UHPC Lightweight Composite Bridge

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 04021046
Author(s):  
Shuwen Deng ◽  
Xudong Shao ◽  
Banfu Yan ◽  
Xudong Zhao ◽  
Yang Wang
2012 ◽  
Vol E95-B (1) ◽  
pp. 333-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seungwon CHOI ◽  
Jung-Hyun PARK ◽  
Seokkwon KIM ◽  
Dong-Jo PARK

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. R. Edkie ◽  
R. S. Solanki
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 691 ◽  
pp. 96-107
Author(s):  
Tomas J. Zivner ◽  
Rudolf B. Aroch ◽  
Michal M. Fabry

This paper deals with the slab concreting sequence and its influence on a composite steel and concrete continuous highway girder bridge. The bridge has a symmetrical composite two-girder structure with three spans of 60 m, 80 m, 60 m (i.e. a total length between abutments of 200.0 m). The horizontal alignment is straight. The top face of the deck is flat. The bridge is straight. The transverse cross-section of the slab is symmetrical with respect to the axis of the bridge. The total slab width is 12 m. The slab thickness varies from 0.4 m on main girders to 0.25 m at its free edges and 0.3075 m at its axis of symmetry. The center-to-center spacing between main girders is 7 m and the slab cantilever on either side is 2.5 m long. Every main girder has a constant depth of 2800 mm and the thicknesses of the upper and lower flanges are variable. The lower flange is 1200 mm wide whereas the upper flange is 1000 mm wide. The two main girders have transverse bracing at abutments and at internal supports and at regular intervals in every span. The material of concrete slab is C35/45 and of steel members S355. The on-site pouring of the concrete slab segments is performed by casting them in a selected order and is done after the launching of the steel two girder bridge. The paper presents several concreting sequences and their influence on the normal stresses and deflections of the composite bridge girder.


Author(s):  
Lucio Salles de Salles ◽  
Lev Khazanovich

The Pavement ME transverse joint faulting model incorporates mechanistic theories that predict development of joint faulting in jointed plain concrete pavements (JPCP). The model is calibrated using the Long-Term Pavement Performance database. However, the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) encourages transportation agencies, such as state departments of transportation, to perform local calibrations of the faulting model included in Pavement ME. Model calibration is a complicated and effort-intensive process that requires high-quality pavement design and performance data. Pavement management data—which is collected regularly and in large amounts—may present higher variability than is desired for faulting performance model calibration. The MEPDG performance prediction models predict pavement distresses with 50% reliability. JPCP are usually designed for high levels of faulting reliability to reduce likelihood of excessive faulting. For design, improving the faulting reliability model is as important as improving the faulting prediction model. This paper proposes a calibration of the Pavement ME reliability model using pavement management system (PMS) data. It illustrates the proposed approach using PMS data from Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. Results show an increase in accuracy for faulting predictions using the new reliability model with various design characteristics. Moreover, the new reliability model allows design of JPCP considering higher levels of traffic because of the less conservative predictions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document