1977•Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardRequires access

LOAD DISTRIBUTION ON A TIMBER-DECK AND STEEL-GIRDER BRIDGE (ABRIDGMENT)

Marvin H. Hilton, Larry L. Ichter

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Strain gauges were applied to 8 of the 14 girders at midspan on this in-service bridge. The structure was then loaded with a truck that simulated the type 3 loading designated by AASHTO. The study determined the stresses in the steel girders that resulted from various loading sequences. Load distribution characteristics of the structure were determined under varying conditions with loosened floor fasteners. It was found that the live load stresses were both laterally distributed in a reasonably consistent manner and also reasonably low (at most only 31 percent of the maximum allowable for A36 steel, and generally only 25-30 percent) with loosening of the deck plank having no very significant effect on either magnitude or lateral distribution of the stresses. It is concluded that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation's current practice of distributing the live load moments to the interior girders of all timberdeck bridges by using a factor of S/4, where S is the spacing in feet between adjacent girders specified by AASHTO, is conservative; and that a distribution factor for the interior girders of S/5 would be adequate for legal limits. This factor of S/5 is also felt to be more realistic than current procedure for exterior girders as well.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Strain gauges were applied to 8 of the 14 girders at midspan on this in-service bridge. The structure was then loaded with a truck that simulated the type 3 loading designated by AASHTO. The study determined the stresses in the steel girders that resulted from various loading sequences. Load distribution characteristics of the structure were determined under varying conditions with loosened floor fasteners. It was found that the live load stresses were both laterally distributed in a reasonably consistent manner and also reasonably low (at most only 31 percent of the maximum allowable for A36 steel, and generally only 25-30 percent) with loosening of the deck plank having no very significant effect on either magnitude or lateral distribution of the stresses. It is concluded that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation's current practice of distributing the live load moments to the interior girders of all timberdeck bridges by using a factor of S/4, where S is the spacing in feet between adjacent girders specified by AASHTO, is conservative; and that a distribution factor for the interior girders of S/5 would be adequate for legal limits. This factor of S/5 is also felt to be more realistic than current procedure for exterior girders as well.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Strain gauges were applied to 8 of the 14 girders at midspan on this in-service bridge. The structure was then loaded with a truck that simulated the type 3 loading designated by AASHTO. The study determined the stresses in the steel girders that resulted from various loading sequences. Load distribution characteristics of the structure were determined under varying conditions with loosened floor fasteners. It was found that the live load stresses were both laterally distributed in a reasonably consistent manner and also reasonably low (at most only 31 percent of the maximum allowable for A36 steel, and generally only 25-30 percent) with loosening of the deck plank having no very significant effect on either magnitude or lateral distribution of the stresses. It is concluded that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation's current practice of distributing the live load moments to the interior girders of all timberdeck bridges by using a factor of S/4, where S is the spacing in feet between adjacent girders specified by AASHTO, is conservative; and that a distribution factor for the interior girders of S/5 would be adequate for legal limits. This factor of S/5 is also felt to be more realistic than current procedure for exterior girders as well.

Key concepts: Girder, Structural engineering, Deck, Structural load, Engineering, Load factor, Load distribution, Bridge (graph theory)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
LOAD DISTRIBUTION ON A TIMBER-DECK AND STEEL-GIRDER BRIDGE (ABRIDGMENT) — Research Paper | ScholarLens