FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES
OF A FULL-DEPTH PRECAST/PRESTRESSED DECK PANEL BRIDGES
APPROVED BY:
________________________________________ _______________
Dr. Michael Oliva
Major Advisor
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Wisconsin – Madison
Date
ii
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES
OF A FULL-DEPTH PRECAST/PRESTRESSED DECK PANEL BRIDGES
by Sung Je Chi
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
(Civil Engineering)
at the
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON
2007
iii
Acknowledgements
Many people have contributed in various ways to this project. I would like to express my
sincere thanks and immeasurable respect to many individuals.
First, I offer a heartfelt thanks to my advisor, Professor Michael G. Oliva for all your
comments and suggestions as I worked on this thesis. Without your support, guidance and
advice this project would not be possible. In particular, I would like to thank my very
supportive graduate committee members, Professor Lawrence C. Bank and Professor Jeffrey
S. Russell, who provided alternate viewpoints, technical expertise and a delicate balance of
guidance. I also want to thank Scott Becker and Finn Hubbard from the Wisconsin DOT,
Tom Strock from FHWA, and the Innovative Bridge Research and Construction Program for
funding this research.
I would like to thank previous researchers, Scott M. Markowski and Forrest Gregory
Ehmke. Without your successful and previous work this thesis could not have been
completed. I would like to thank you to my colleagues who have given me their time to help
me and friendship and encouragement. In particular I want to thank Han Ug Bae and Joseph
Hanus. I also would like to thank the members of a bridge meeting group, Paul Georgieff,
Andrew Spottiswoode, Ajaya Malla and Pinar Okumus.
I must thank my family. To my future wife, Jimin, you have always been there for me.
Without your unquestioning love and support this journey would not have been possible. To
express how much I love you would be impossible, just know that it grows with each day. To
my brother and sister thank you for your encouragement. Finally To my mother and father
who have always encouraged me and were never reticent to show their pride in me, I thank
you and love you.
iv
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to evaluate the pre-stressing needed across joints in fulldepth prefabricated bridge decks. The structural analysis software was used to perform the
finite element analyses. Three different bridges were examined to evaluate the minimum prestressing level needed to prevent joint opening between the precast deck panels under the
AASHTO standard truck loading.
This thesis describes the finite element analyses for the three different bridges (Culpeper
Bridge, Welland River Bridge and Door Creek Bridge) in terms of the dimension of each
bridge model, modeling assumptions, and AASHTO standard loading cases. Two full-depth
precast deck panel bridges (Culpeper Bridge and Welland River Bridge) were previously
analyzed by other researchers. The accuracy of the current SAP modeling method was
verified by comparing the previously analyzed results with the result from the SAP analyses.
The results from the analyses provide the re-evaluated longitudinal minimum prestressing levels of the two previously analyzed bridges (Culpeper Bridge and Welland River
Bridge) and the required post-tensioning levels at joints across longitudinal and transverse
joints in the Door Creek Bridge. Also the analyses define the overloading level needed to
cause joint opening with a given amount of pre-stressing or post-tensioning and behavior
after joint opening effect due to the overload increasing toward the factored strength design
loads in the Door Creek Bridge.
v
Table of Contents
Chapter 1
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Scope of the Research Project............................................................................... 2
1.3
Scope of Finite Element Modeling (FEM) Analysis ............................................ 2
1.4
Research Objectives .............................................................................................. 3
1.4.1
Culpeper Bridge ............................................................................................ 3
1.4.2
Welland River Bridge ................................................................................... 4
1.4.3
Door Creek Bridge ........................................................................................ 4
Chapter 2
Literature Review.................................................................................................. 5
2.1
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 5
2.2
AASHTO Precast Deck Design Provisions .......................................................... 5
2.3
Description of Bridge Model ................................................................................ 6
2.3.1
Culpeper Bridge ............................................................................................ 6
2.3.2
Welland River Bridge ................................................................................... 9
2.3.3
Door Creek Bridge ...................................................................................... 11
2.4
Summary ............................................................................................................. 15
Chapter 3
Finite Element Modeling .................................................................................... 16
3.1
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 16
3.2
Types and Sizes of Elements and Material Properties ........................................ 16
3.3
Testing the Nlink Element for Nonlinear Static Analysis .................................. 19
3.4
Description of Bridge Models ............................................................................. 20
3.4.1
Culpeper Bridge Model............................................................................... 20
3.4.2
vi
Welland River Bridge Model ...................................................................... 25
3.4.3
Door Creek Bridge Model .......................................................................... 29
3.5
Summary ............................................................................................................. 34
Chapter 4
Results ................................................................................................................. 36
4.1
Objectives ........................................................................................................... 36
4.2
Verification of Finite Element Modeling ............................................................ 36
4.2.1
Moment Equilibrium Check ....................................................................... 37
4.2.2
Verification of Culpeper Bridge ................................................................. 38
4.2.3
Verification of Welland River Bridge ......................................................... 40
4.2.4
Stress Analysis of Shear Studs .................................................................... 44
4.3
Results – Required Prestress ............................................................................... 46
4.3.1
Culpeper Bridge Model............................................................................... 46
4.3.2
Welland River Bridge Model ...................................................................... 48
4.3.3
Door Creek Bridge Model .......................................................................... 51
4.4
Overloading and Joint Opening Effect in Door Creek Bridge Model ................ 54
Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................... 60
5.1
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 60
5.2
Summary ............................................................................................................. 60
5.2.1
Verification of Finite Element Modeling .................................................... 60
5.2.2
Pre-stressing Level for Bridge Joints .......................................................... 61
5.2.3
Overloading and Joint Opening Effect in the Door Creek Bridge Model .. 63
5.2.4
Summary ..................................................................................................... 64
5.3
Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 65
5.4
vii
Recommendations ............................................................................................... 66
References ............................................................................................................................... 68
Appendix 1: Truck Loading Location (Culpeper Bridge) ...................................................... 70
Appendix 2: Single Truck Loading Location (Welland River Bridge) .................................. 74
Appendix 3: Double Truck Loading Location 1 (Welland River Bridge) .............................. 81
Appendix 4: Double Truck Loading Location 2 (Welland River Bridge) .............................. 88
Appendix 5: Truck Loading Longitudinal Location (Door Creek Bridge) ............................. 95
Appendix 6: Truck Loading Transverse Location (Door Creek Bridge) .............................. 100
viii
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Stress variation of the Culpeper Bridge along the Bridge Length (Issa, 1998) ....... 7
Figure 2.2 Layout of the AASHTO Truck Loading in Welland River Bridge model (Issa,
1998) ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 2.3 Rotational Stiffness of Longitudinal Joint (Markowski, 2005) ............................. 13
Figure 2.4 Rotational Stiffness of Transverse Joint (Markowski, 2005) ................................ 14
Figure 3.1 Rotational Stiffness for Two different Joints in Door Creek Bridge Model ......... 18
Figure 3.2 Example Modeling for Nonlinear Static Analysis ................................................. 19
Figure 3.3 Rotational Stiffness of Nlink Element ................................................................... 19
Figure 3.4 Result from Nonlinear Static Analysis in SAP 2000............................................. 20
Figure 3.5 Typical Panel Layout for Culpeper Bridge Deck Panel (Ehmke, 2006) ............... 21
Figure 3.6 Three-Dimensional View of Culpeper Bridge Model ........................................... 23
Figure 3.7 Truck Loading similar to Issa’s Truck Loading .................................................... 24
Figure 3.8 AASHTO Truck Loading for Maximum Bending ................................................ 25
Figure 3.9 Three-Dimensional View of Welland River Bridge Model .................................. 27
Figure 3.10 Double Truck Loading similar to Issa’s Truck Loading .................................... 28
Figure 3.11 Single Truck Loading by AASHTO along Half of Bridge Length .................... 28
Figure 3.12 Typical Panel Layout for Door Creek Bridge (Plans by WisDOT) ................... 30
Figure 3.13 Three-Dimensional View of Door Creek Bridge Model .................................... 31
Figure 3.14 Finding Critical Location of Truck Loading for Transverse Joint ..................... 32
Figure 3.15 Critical Location of Truck Loading for Transverse Joint ................................... 33
Figure 3.16 Critical Location of Truck Loading for Longitudinal Joint................................ 34
Figure 4.1 Location of Moment Checking ............................................................................. 37
ix
Figure 4.2 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface ............................................................. 39
Figure 4.3 Longitudinal Stresses along Bridge Length ......................................................... 40
Figure 4.4 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface ............................................................. 41
Figure 4.5 Longitudinal Stresses along Bridge Length ......................................................... 42
Figure 4.6 Longitudinal Stresses in Transverse Joint along Bridge Width ........................... 42
Figure 4.7 Longitudinal Stress in Transverse Joint along Half of Bridge Length ................. 43
Figure 4.8 Internal Forces of Exterior Bridge Girder in Culpeper Bridge Model ................. 44
Figure 4.9 Shear Studs Layout for Each Block-out (Plans by WISDOT) ............................. 45
Figure 4.10 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface along Bridge Length ......................... 46
Figure 4.11 Longitudinal Stress Variation along Bridge Length ........................................... 47
Figure 4.12 Longitudinal Stress Variation along Bridge Length ........................................... 48
Figure 4.13 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface along Half Bridge Length ................. 49
Figure 4.14 Longitudinal Stress in Transverse Joints along Half Bridge Length .................. 50
Figure 4.15 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface ........................................................... 51
Figure 4.16 Longitudinal Stress Variation in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width ........... 52
Figure 4.17 Transverse Stress (ksi) on Top Surface .............................................................. 53
Figure 4.18 Transverse Stress Variation in Longitudinal Joint across the Bridge Length .... 54
Figure 4.19 Longitudinal Bending Moment in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width ......... 55
Figure 4.20 Rotation about Transverse Axis in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width ........ 56
Figure 4.21 Vertical Deflection at the critical section across Bridge Width ......................... 56
Figure 4.22 Rotation about longitudinal Axis in Longitudinal Joint along Bridge Length ... 57
Figure 4.23 Transverse Bending Moment in Longitudinal Joint along Bridge Length ......... 58
Figure 4.24 Vertical Deflection at the Longitudinal Joint along Span Length ...................... 58
x
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Types of Elements for Structural Components used by Issa (1998) ........................ 6
Table 3.1 Element Types for Each Structural Component (Ehmke’s thesis, 2006) .............. 17
Table 3.2 Number of Elements for Each Structural Component ........................................... 18
Table 3.3 Summary of the Finite Element Modeling ............................................................ 35
Table 4.1 Moment Check in the Culpeper Bridge ................................................................. 38
Table 4.2 Overloading Factor for Each Joint ......................................................................... 54
Table 4.3 Load Factor of Overloading ................................................................................... 55
Table 4.4 Percent of Softened Transverse Joint to Deck Span .............................................. 57
Table 4.5 Percent of Softened Longitudinal Joint to Bridge Span ........................................ 59
Table 5.1 Minimum Prestress in Joint .................................................................................... 63
Table 5.2 Comparison of the results from SAP and Issa ....................................................... 65
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
A considerable number of highway bridges in the United States currently need
rehabilitation and replacement. As the nation's bridges are aging and traffic demands are
increasing, they are functionally obsolete and/or structurally deficient. There are options to
select the most optimal rehabilitation and replacement. Pre-fabricated bridge systems,
especially precast concrete deck panels, are one of the innovative technologies for
rehabilitation and replacement because there are several advantages that promise a high
payoff.
First, impact on traffic in the form of delays during bridge construction is minimized
because the use of precast concrete deck panels speeds the construction process. A second
advantage is that construction work zone safety is improved. Because prefabrication moves
much of the bridge construction work off-site, the amount of time that workers are required
to operate near traffic is greatly decreased. A third advantage is that construction is less
disruptive for the environment. The use of precast concrete deck panels that are produced offsite reduces the amount of time required for bridge construction. A final advantage is that
increased quality and lower maintenance costs are realized. Using prefabricated systems
takes them out of the critical path of the project schedule: work can be done ahead of time,
using as much time as necessary, in a controlled environment. This reduces dependence on
weather and increases control of quality and improved quality produces lower life-cycle costs.
Taking the various advantages of the prefabricated systems, a full-depth precast concrete
2
bridge deck system was applied to a deck replacement of the Door Creek Bridge on highway
I90 near Madison, Wisconsin.
This research project is part of the Innovative Bridge Research and Construction (IBRC)
program funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The University of
Wisconsin at Madison has joined with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
(WisDOT) and subcontracted a private design company named Alfred Benesch & Co. to
design the precast full-depth concrete deck system for the replacement of the Door Creek
Bridge.
1.2 Scope of the Research Project
There are three phases for the IBRC research project. The first phase is back ground
research and preliminary engineering, which is related to specific components of the
prefabricated deck system and the design procedure for the full-depth precast concrete deck
panel. The second phase is the application and direct implementation of the full-depth precast
concrete deck panel system to the Door Creek Bridge, which is related to a constructability
study of the full-depth precast bridge panel system compared with a conventional cast-inplace concrete deck system. The third phase is related to a finite element modeling (FEM)
analysis of the full-depth precast deck bridge to evaluate the minimum required pre-stressing
level across joints and the expected structural behavior of the Door Creek Bridge. The first
two phases were performed by Scott Markowski (2005) and Greg Ehmke (2006). The scope
of this research study includes the FEM analyses of the full-depth precast deck bridges.
1.3 Scope of Finite Element Modeling (FEM) Analysis
3
Three different bridges named as the Culpeper Bridge, Welland River Bridge and Door
Creek Bridge were modeled and analyzed by SAP 2000. Linear elastic analyses were
performed for the Culpeper and Welland River Bridge and both linear and non-linear elastic
analyses were performed for the Door Creek Bridge. The Culpeper and Welland River
Bridge models had been previously modeled and analyzed by Issa (1998). These two bridges
were re-analyzed in order to verify the accuracy of the current SAP modeling method and to
identify the minimum required pre-stressing level across the joints under AASHTO LRFD
(2007) service loads including impact. Then, the Door Creek Bridge was analyzed to
evaluate the minimum required pre-stressing level across the longitudinal joints and
transverse joints and to predict the structural behavior of the bridge under several
overloading cases.
1.4 Research Objectives
Research Objectives are categorized according to each bridge model in the following
sections 1.4.1, 1.4.2 and 1.4.3: for the Culpeper Bridge, Welland River Bridge and Door
Creek Bridge.
1.4.1 Culpeper Bridge
-
Verify the accuracy of current SAP analyses by comparing with stresses suggested
by Issa’s previous paper (1998)
-
Apply service loads considering the dynamic allowance factor based on AASHTO
LRFD (2007) and re-evaluate stress levels in the transverse joint.
-
Define a minimum prestress level required to prevent joint opening between precast
panels
4
1.4.2 Welland River Bridge
-
Verify the accuracy of current SAP analyses by comparing with stresses suggested
by Issa’s previous paper (1998).
-
Apply service loads considering the dynamic allowance factor based on AASHTO
LRFD (2007) and re-evaluate stress levels in the transverse joint.
-
Define a minimum prestress level required to prevent joint opening between precast
panels.
1.4.3 Door Creek Bridge
-
Apply service loads considering the dynamic allowance factor based on AASHTO
LRFD (2007) and re-evaluate stress levels in the transverse joints. Define joint
prestress level needed to prevent joint opening.
-
Determine how large an overload would be required to cause joint opening with the
amount of pre-stressing level that actually exists in the bridge as constructed.
-
Simulate how joint opening under overload would affect the overall performance of
the bridge and how loads are re-distributed as joints crack open when the loading is
increased slowly up toward the factored strength design loads.
5
Chapter 2
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
Three different bridge models were created using SAP 2000 to perform FEM analyses.
In order to verify the accuracy of the current SAP modeling method, a publication was
carefully and cautiously referenced, which was Issa’s article (1998) published in PCI Journal
titled “Analysis of Full Depth Precast Concrete Bridge Deck Panels” This publication
provides the detailed description of the two selected bridges (a simply supported bridge, the
Culpeper Bridge; a three-span continuous bridge, the Welland River Bridge) in terms of
modeling techniques, material properties and recommendations for minimum pre-stressing
levels across the transverse joint to prevent panel joint opening. In addition research papers
published by previous researchers (Scott Markowski, 2005; Greg Ehmke, 2006) were
reviewed to create the finite element model of the Door Creek Bridge and perform the FEM
analyses using SAP 2000. The following section will present detailed information on
previous projects.
2.2 AASHTO Precast Deck Design Provisions
Flexurally discontinuous precast decks should be joined together by shear keys. The
AASHTO LRFD Specification Section 9.7.5.3 recommends that a minimum post-tensioning
level of 250 psi should be provided across the transverse joint. This post-tensioning level was
provided for the Door Creek Bridge.
6
2.3 Description of Bridge Model
Issa’s (1998) analytic models of the Culpeper Bridge and Welland River Bridges were
created using the finite element analysis program, ALGOR. For the two selected bridge
models, five different types of elements corresponding to the types of structural components
were used to simulate the bridge geometry and materials. Table 2.1 summarizes the elements
used by Issa. The Young’s moduli of elasticity were 30 × 106 psi for the reinforcing steel,
4.03 × 106 psi for the normal concrete used in precast panels and 5.1 × 106 psi for the
polymer concrete used in transverse joints. The Poisson’s ratios were assumed to be 0.3 for
the steel and 0.18 for the concretes. The coefficients of thermal expansion were 6.5 × 10-6
per ° F for the steel and 5.5 × 10-6 per ° F for the concretes.
Table 2.1 Types of Elements for Structural Components used by Issa (1998)
Types of Structural Components
Beams and Diaphragms
Precast Panels
Shear Connecting Pockets
Transverse Joints
Closure Pours
Parapets
Shear Connecting Studs
Reinforcement for Precast Panels
Reinforcement for Closure Pour
Post-tensioning Tendons
Types of Finite Elements
Plate elements (4 nodes)
Brick elements (6 nodes and 8 nodes)
Brick elements (8 nodes)
Brick elements (8 nodes)
Brick elements (8 nodes)
Brick elements (8 nodes)
Brick elements (8 nodes)
Truss elements
Truss elements
Truss elements
2.3.1 Culpeper Bridge
The Culpeper Bridge is a simply supported bridge 54.5 ft. in length and 30 ft. in width.
This bridge is located in Virginia and maintained by the Virginia Department of
Transportation. Two exterior beams are W33×125 with 3 ft. deck overhangs and the interior
7
beams are W33×132. All the finite elements corresponding to the structural components are
summarized in Table 2.1. For the Culpeper Bridge model, symmetry was imposed in
transverse direction. A half model was created in order to provide faster and more efficient
FEM analyses.
Issa did not provide clear description, however, of the critical location of the AASHTO
truck loading used in the analysis. The truck loading location in longitudinal direction was
shown in a figure of Issa’s paper that shows stress variation along the bridge length for the
Culpeper Bridge. This figure is reproduced here in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Stress variation of the Culpeper Bridge along the Bridge Length (Issa, 1998)
As shown in Figure 2.1, one small peak and two large peaks clearly represent the
location of the 3 axles of the HS20-44 truck loading used by Issa. The spacing between the
8
two axles of the HS20-44 is approximately 10 ft. However, this 10 ft. spacing is shorter than
the typical spacing (14 ft.) between the two axles of the HL-93 design truck based on
AASHTO LRFD Design Specifications(2007) or the HS20-44 truck from the AASHTO
Standard Specifications(1996).
As shown in Figure 2.1 of the longitudinal stress variation on the bottom layer along the
bridge span in Issa’s article (1998), the maximum tensile stress value was 100 psi near
midspan under the service loading only.
Furthermore, as described in Ehmke’s thesis (2006), there appeared to be an
inconsistency between the construction sequence and the finite element modeling method
described in Issa’s article. Issa describes the deck panels as stressed in the longitudinal
direction before grouting the haunches and shear connector pockets, which means that since
the deck panels are entirely separated from the girder when the deck panels are stressed, the
stress would be carried by the panels alone. Issa’s description of the finite element model
shows that the deck panels are compositely connected to the girders using beam elements
modeling shear studs and brick elements modeling the grout in the shear studs pocket. Issa
used temperature change on the truss element corresponding to the post-tensioning tendons to
simulate post-tensioning force. This modeling method implies that the composite action was
achieved prior to applying the post-tensioning force and the post-tensioning force was
applied to a composite section. Thus, since the post-tensioning force should be applied to the
deck panels alone in a non-composite state, Issa’s modeling method to apply the posttensioning force does not appear consistent with the construction sequence that was described.
Issa’s results also showed that the truck loading caused 100 psi of tension stress in the
transverse joints. When 200 psi of compressive post-tensioning was applied, the truck load
9
tension was only reduced by 75 psi rather than 200 psi. This contradiction would be natural if
Issa’s model was composite, since a portion of the post-tensioning would be absorbed by the
girders.
Issa recommends that a minimum 200 psi longitudinal post-tensioning stress is required
for the Culpeper Bridge, even though this does not fully eliminate the truck induced tension,
considering all the residual stresses in the concrete including creep and shrinkage effects.
2.3.2 Welland River Bridge
The Welland River Bridge carrying two southbound lanes is located near the City of
Niagara Falls and maintained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. As described by Issa,
the bridge consists of 18 continuous spans 48 ft. long and 43.5 ft. wide. Only 3 spans were
constructed using the precast concrete deck panels with 8.85 inches depth. The deck is
supported by four lines of steel bridge girders with sizes of W33X125 for the exterior girders
and W33X150 for the interior girders. All the finite elements used by Issa corresponding to
the structural components are summarized in Table 2.1. For the Welland Bridge model,
symmetry is imposed again in both the transverse and longitudinal directions. A quarter
model was created in order to provide faster and more efficient way for the FEM analyses.
As described by Issa, a double truck loading was applied along the bridge span. Issa
presented a figure of the layout of the AASHTO truck loading which shows the location of
the AASHTO truck loading to cause the maximum negative moment over the pier. This
figure is reproduced here in Figure 2.2. However Issa did not provide a detailed description
related to the critical location of the truck loading. Four axles were shown in Figure 2.2,
which consisted of one complete HS20-44 truck and one axle of another HS20-44 truck. Issa
10
describes that the loads (shears and moments) produced by the rest of the one axle of the
second truck predetermined and superimposed on one edge of his a quarter bridge model to
simulate actual loads.
Thus the loading used by Issa actually appears to simulate the effect of having 2 or more
design trucks on the three-span bridge with a spacing of approximately 24 feet between truck
axles. This is not a standard design loading used in either the AASHTO Standard
Specifications or the LRFD specifications.
Figure 2.2 Layout of the AASHTO Truck Loading in Welland River Bridge model (Issa, 1998)
Issa’s modeling is further thrown into doubt when he notes that the magnitude of
compressive stress in joints is greater than in the panels because the joint material is stiffer.
11
This conclusion ignores the basic requirement of equilibrium: Static force balance must exist
between the joint material and the deck material.
For the Welland River Bridge model, Issa used again temperature change on the truss
element corresponding to the post-tensioning tendons to simulate post-tensioning force. As
mentioned in 2.3.1, there was the inconsistency between construction sequence and the finite
element modeling method described in Issa’s article (1998).
In addition Issa did not provide dimensions in the figure of the layout of AASHTO truck
loading. It is observed that the spacing between the two trucks is approximately 24 ft. based
on the relative dimensions comparing with other elements in the figure. However, AASHTO
LRFD Specifications (2007) have a specified 50 ft. spacing between a rear axle of the first
truck and a front axle of the second truck. In Issa’s double truck loading case, the
longitudinal stress level may be too conservative compared to that obtained using truck
spacing of the AASHTO LRFD Specifications (2007).
Issa recommends that a minimum 200 psi longitudinal post-tensioning stress level is
required near midspan of girders at the bottom layer in the positive bending region of the
deck. The minimum of 450 psi post-tensioning level is required to avoid tension in the
transverse joint over the interior pier supports at the top layer in the negative bending region
of the girders.
2.3.3 Door Creek Bridge
Information describing the Door Creek Bridge was provided in Markowski’s thesis
(2005) and Ehmke’s thesis (2006). The Door Creek Bridge is a single span bridge located on
Interstate I-90 near the city of McFarland, Wisconsin. In 2006 the bridge was reconstructed
12
to replace existing decking and widened to accommodate an additional lane. Two bridges
were actually involved on the divided freeway. As described in Markowski’s thesis (2005)
and Ehmke’s thesis (2006), taking advantage of prefabrication, a full-depth precast deck
panel system was utilized in the westbound bridge. A conventional cast in place steel
reinforced concrete deck system was utilized in the eastbound bridge in order to compare the
differences between the two different systems with respect to constructability, performance
and durability. This research study is focused on the westbound bridge with the full-depth
precast deck panel system.
Both bridges have the same dimensions. Each bridge is a simply supported structure with
8.5” deck thickness, 83’ bridge span and 30° skew angle. The existing bridges originally
were 40’-2” wide, however, the bridges were widened to 64’-6”. Each bridge originally had
five 60” deep steel plate girders spaced at 8’-10” on center with the supporting top flange
measuring 12” wide. Three additional girders with 7’-6”spacing on center were added to each
bridge to accommodate the widening.
The existing steel plate girders are constructed from grade ASTM A36 steel and consist
of a 1¼” × 16” bottom flange, a 3/8” × 60” web, and 5/8” × 12” top flange; the additional
new girders are constructed from ASTM A709 Grade 36 steel and consist of a 1” × 16”
bottom flange, a 7/16” × 60” web, and ¾” × 12” top flange. The haunch between the girders
and the bridge deck varies between 1” to 3” to adjust for camber in the girders. Headed shear
studs are utilized to obtain composite beam action for both bridges. Parapets for each
structure are the typical WisDOT LF constructed from conventionally formed steel
reinforced concrete.
13
2.3.3.1 Longitudinal Joint
The Door Creek Bridge was constructed in stages in order to keep two lanes of traffic
flow during the construction. A longitudinal joint exists between stage 1 and stage 2
construction. As described in Markowski’s thesis (2005), three full-scale longitudinal joint
tests were performed to determine the amount of post-tensioning stress needed across the
longitudinal joints under service level vehicle loads considering impact loads based on
AASHTO Standard Specification (1996).
The design level for transverse post-tensioning in the deck panels on the Door Creek
Bridge was 370 psi. Half of that post-tensioning existed across the longitudinal joint between
stage 1 and stage 2 construction. Figure 2.3 shows the moment per foot versus rotation
relationship measured from the longitudinal joint test with 360 psi post-tensioning level as
performed by Markowski (2005). This test result will be used as the rotational stiffness of the
longitudinal joints considering half as much post-tensioning existed (185 psi) and the joint
spacing in the finite element model.
250
Moment (k-in / ft)
200
150
Softening Moment
100
50
360 psi prestress
0
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
Rotation (rad)
Figure 2.3 Rotational Stiffness of Longitudinal Joint (Markowski, 2005)
14
2.3.3.2 Transverse Joint
Transverse joints exist between the precast panels during both stages of construction. As
described in Markowski’s thesis (2005), one full-scale transverse joint test was performed to
determine the amount of post-tensioning stress level needed across the transverse joints under
service level vehicle loads considering impact loads based on AASHTO Standard
Specification (1996).
The design level longitudinal post-tensioning used on the Door Creek Bridge was 250 psi
in order to keep the transverse joints tight under the service loads. Figure 2.4 shows the
moment per foot versus rotation relationship from the transverse joint test with a 154 psi
post-tensioning level from Markowski (2005). This test result will be used as the rotational
stiffness of the transverse joints considering the post-tensioning level (250 psi) across the
transverse joints and the joint spacing in the finite element model.
100
90
Moment (k-in/ft)
80
70
60
Softening Moment
50
40
30
20
10
154 psi prestress
0
-0.002
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
Rotation (rad)
Figure 2.4 Rotational Stiffness of Transverse Joint (Markowski, 2005)
15
2.4 Summary
In this chapter descriptions were provided for the AASHTO design prestress level,
prestress level suggested by Issa, potential errors in Issa’s results, Markowski data used in
later modeling.
16
Chapter 3
Finite Element Modeling
3.1 Introduction
SAP 2000 was used to create the three sets of three-dimensional bridge models which are
named Culpeper Bridge, Welland River Bridge and Door Creek Bridge. Prior to the bridge
modeling, a simple model was created to check whether the Nlink element behaved correctly
or not.
Two bridge models: the Culpeper Bridge and Welland River Bridge, were created to
verify the accuracy of the SAP modeling by comparing results with previous analyses
published by Issa (1998, PCI Journal). The primary objective of the finite element modeling
was to estimate the tension stresses in the joint due to bending as a means of selecting the
pre-stressing level needed in the three different bridges to prevent joint opening. In addition,
the bridge model of the Door Creek Bridge was created to examine the deck behavior under
overload with non-linear analysis. The following section provides a detailed description of
the three different bridge models with respect to element types, element sizes, material
properties, and modeling techniques.
3.2 Types and Sizes of Elements and Material Properties
Six different elements were prepared to simulate the bridge geometry and materials.
Element types, materials and number of elements equivalent to each structural component
were selected in the bridge models, which are shown in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2.
Distinct differences can be found between the current SAP models and the previous
models created by Issa (1998). Issa included the mild reinforcing steel, post tensioning
tendons and used solid elements for the precast concrete panel and the panel joint. In order to
17
apply post-tensioning force, Issa applied temperature differences to the post-tensioning
tendon elements. The post-tensioning tendons and any mild reinforcing steel were not
explicitly modeled in the current SAP models. It was assumed that the effect of the mild
reinforcing steel and prestressing strand in developing added stress is insignificant as long as
the deck panels remain uncracked.
Table 3.1 Element Types for Each Structural Component (Ehmke’s thesis, 2006)
Structural Component
Precast Deck Panel
Closure Pour
Element Type
Thin shell with appropriate deck thickness
Thin shell with appropriate deck thickness
Thin shell area in correct geometric orientation,
Parapet
but with negligible thickness (0.01 inches)
Frame element located at a distance below the
deck area elements equal to half the girder
Girder
height plus half the deck thickness
Stiff element connecting girders to deck at
discrete points spaced at the shear stud blockShear Stud
out spacing from the actual bridge
N Link elements, all degrees of freedom
assigned fixed condition except longitudinal
Panel Joints
axial and longitudinal bridge bending direction
The material properties were the same as the values that Issa reported for the Culpeper
and Welland River Bridges. The Young’s modulus of elasticity was 4.03 x 106 psi for the
closure pour and parapets, 5.1x106 psi for the deck panels and 29x106 psi for the steel girders
in those bridges. Poisson’s ratios were 0.3 for the steel girder and 0.18 for the deck panels,
closure pours and parapets.
Issa used eight-node brick elements to simulate the transverse joints. In the current model,
transverse joints between the panels were modeled as SAP Nlink elements to simulate either
linear or non-linear springs. For the Nlink elements, all degrees of freedom were fixed except
for axial extension across the joint and bending across the joint. It was assumed that the shear
stiffness of the keyed joint remained high under small joint openings.
18
Table 3.2 Number of Elements for Each Structural Component
Structural
Component
Element
Type
Deck Panel
Shell
Closure Pour
Shell
Parapet
Shell
Bridge Girder
Frame
Shear Stud
Frame
Transverse Joint
Nlink
Longitudinal Joint
Nlink
Size of a Shell element
Culpeper
Bridge
504
72
43
2
132
91
1.667 ft.2
Number of Elements
Welland
Door Creek
Bridge
Bridge
2592
5120
108
712
6
8
108
176
425
594
90
2
1.2303 ft.
1.1041 ft.2
For linear elastic analysis, the joint axial stiffness was calculated using the equation AE/L and
AE/L and the rotational stiffness was calculated using the equation EI/L. ‘A’ is the area of the
the transverse joint computed as the spacing (b) of the link elements multiplied by the thickness
thickness (h) of the deck panels, ‘E’ is Young’s modulus of elasticity for the grout, I is the
moment inertia computed using the equation bh3/12 and ‘L’ is the thickness of the transverse
joint taken as 1.5 inches. For nonlinear inelastic analysis, the axial stiffness is assumed as
infinite and the rotational stiffness is based on the test result in Markowski’s thesis (2005).
Figure 3.1 shows the rotational stiffness used for the longitudinal and transverse joints in
the model of the Door Creek Bridge.
150
143.6
Moment (k-in/ft)
125
101.1
100
95.3
75
50
45.8
25
Transverse Joint
Longitudinal Joint
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
Rotation (rad)
Figure 3.1 Rotational Stiffness for Two different Joints in Door Creek Bridge Model
19
3.3 Testing the Nlink Element for Nonlinear Static Analysis
A two-dimensional simple model was developed to check the input technique and
behavior of the Nlink element in SAP 2000. The model was a cantilever structure shown in
Figure 3.2 and supported at the left end. The beam was modeled as a frame element 10 ft.
long. A very short Nlink element modeling a nonlinear joint was placed between the support
and left end of the beam to check the behavior of the Nlink element under load. The
boundary conditions of the cantilever structure were applied at the support location by
assigning joint restraints all fixed in both axes.
Nlink element
Figure 3.2 Example Modeling for Nonlinear Static Analysis
Figure 3.3 shows the plot of the rotational stiffness assigned as the material property to
simulate the desired nonlinearity of the Nlink element. The ultimate joint load, 2.21 kips was
assigned at the right end of the frame in the vertical direction to cause an ultimate moment in
the structure.
300
265.32
Moment (k-in)
250
200
176.19
150
100
50
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
Rotation (rad)
Figure 3.3 Rotational Stiffness of Nlink Element
0.012
20
The rotational displacements in the Nlink element were then monitored in multiple load
steps to verify whether the Nlink element behaved as expected. Figure 3.4 shows the moment
versus rotation plot resulting from the nonlinear static analysis in multiple steps. The result
shows that the behavior of the Nlink element is entirely dependent on the material’s
rotational stiffness and did provide the response as expected in Figure 3.4.
300
265
239
250
Moment (k-in)
212
200
150
172
159
133
100
106
80
50
53
27
0
0.000
SAP Output
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
Rotation (rad)
Figure 3.4 Result from Nonlinear Static Analysis in SAP 2000
3.4 Description of Bridge Models
Three sets of three-dimensional bridge models were created using SAP. They are
simulating the Culpeper Bridge, Door Creek Bridge and Welland River Bridge. With these
models, three different bridge types were simulated: a simply supported bridge, the simply
supported bridge with 30 degree skew angle and a three-span continuous bridge respectively.
3.4.1 Culpeper Bridge Model
Information describing this bridge was obtained from Issa’s article published in the PCI
Journal (1998). The Culpeper Bridge is owned by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
21
As described by Issa, the bridge is a simply supported structure 54.5 ft. in length and 30 ft. in
width. The girder spacing is 6.25 ft. center to center with a 3 ft. deck overhang at the sides.
The two steel exterior beams are W33X125 and the interior beams are W33X132. As
described in Ehmke’s thesis (2006), the length of overhang was modified to 2.5 ft. in the
model in order to maintain the stated deck width and girder spacing and W33X130 was
assigned to all of the girder sections due to the lack of these older sections in the program
library. This approximation is not expected to affect the deck behavior significantly. Figure
3.5 shows the plan view of an individual precast deck panel for half of the bridge width.
Figure 3.5 Typical Panel Layout for Culpeper Bridge Deck Panel (Ehmke, 2006)
The bridge deck was modeled with shell elements and an appropriate size of shell
elements was selected so that the location of their corner nodes was matched to the location
22
of the composite shear connector installed between the deck panel and the girder. Each
element was 16 inches along one side and 15 inches on the other. In order to connect these
shell elements to the frame elements modeling the bridge girders, very stiff beam elements
between the girder and the deck were used at the discrete locations of shear connectors. The
spacing of the shear connector was 16 inches. It is assumed that the force is transferred from
the deck to the girder by very stiff elements in the actual bridge. Local shear deformation in
the girder web is ignored. Thus, the composite action was obtained between the deck panels
and the bridge girders.
Taking advantage of the bridge’s symmetry in the transverse direction, half of the simply
supported bridge width was modeled in order to provide a faster and more efficient method
of performing the FEM analysis. Thus under loading the model simulated equal trucks
positioned on the two sides of the bridge. The appropriate boundary conditions were applied
to simulate the simply supported condition at the supports and special boundary condition
along the bridge centerline of symmetry. To simulate the simply supported condition,
longitudinal, transverse, and vertical restraints were assigned at one end of the bridge girders
and transverse and vertical restraints assigned at the other end. To create the half-sized model
with symmetry in the transverse direction, transverse displacement and rotation about the
longitudinal axis were restrained at all of the nodes located in the deck elements on the
longitudinal axis of symmetry. This procedure is valid if transversely symmetrical loading
acts on the bridge structure. All of the section properties of the bridge girder along the line of
symmetry were modified to half of their actual section properties. In order to prevent frame
racking, lateral support conditions were applied at the bottom of the deck over both ends of
the girders by assigning transverse restraints. Figure 3.6 shows a three dimensional view of
23
the Culpeper Bridge model with the line of symmetry at the left and the guard barrier at the
right.
Figure 3.6 Three-Dimensional View of Culpeper Bridge Model
A standard AASHTO HL-93 truck loading was applied on the bridge deck. The three
axles were spaced at 14.0 ft. and the two wheel locations across the width of the truck were
spaced at 6 ft. Two cases of the truck loading are applied. One is similar to the truck loading
case that Issa (1998) described, which is named Truck Loading Case 1. The other is the truck
loading case with dynamic load allowance factors based on AASHTO LRFD (2007), which
is named Truck Loading Case 2.
The location of the AASHTO truck loading causing the largest longitudinal moment was
found by using the PCBRIDGE program (1990). To study wheel load effects on the deck
joint, the middle truck axle was located on the transverse panel joint at the center of the
bridge to cause the maximum bending effect in that joint. For the transverse position, the
24
wheel is centered between the bridge girders to cause the maximum bending effect in the
deck panel. Since symmetry was used in the modeling it is assumed that the same truck
loading exists on the other half of the bridge. Each wheel load was applied as a uniform
pressure on the shell elements which are modeling the deck panel. The size of one shell
elements used in the Culpeper Bridge model is 15 in. × 16 in. Figure 3.7 and Figure 3.8
shows the two cases of truck loading location assigned to the deck panel.
Figure 3.7 Truck Loading similar to Issa’s Truck Loading
(Culpeper Bridge Model, Truck Loading Case 1)
25
4
79 ”
3
19 ”
1
43 ”
1
6
35 ”
0”
Figure 3.8 AASHTO Truck Loading for Maximum Bending
(Culpeper Bridge Model, Truck Loading Case 2)
3.4.2 Welland River Bridge Model
Information describing this bridge was again obtained from Issa’s article published in the
PCI Journal (1998). The Welland River Bridge is located near the City of Niagara Falls and
maintained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. As described by Issa, the bridge
consists of 18 continuous spans 48 ft. long and 43.5 ft. wide. Only 3 spans were constructed
using precast concrete deck panels that were 8.85 inches deep. The deck is supported by four
lines of older steel bridge girders with sizes of W33X125 for the exterior girders and
W33X150 for the interior girders. In the SAP modeling, W33X130 was assigned to the
exterior girders and W33X152 was assigned to the interior girders due to the limited library
26
of girders in SAP. This slight variation in girder properties will not significantly affect the
deck stresses. The girder spacing was assumed to be 12.03 ft. with a 3.7 ft. overhang.
The bridge deck was modeled using shell elements and the sizes of shell elements were
selected so that the location of their corner node was matched to the location of the shear
connector. The size of each element used in the Welland River Bridge model is 16 inches ×
11.1 inches. In order to connect these shell elements to the frame elements modeling the
bridge girders, very stiff elements were used at the discrete locations of shear connectors.
The spacing of the shear connectors was 16 inches. It is assumed that the force is transferred
from the deck to the girder by very stiff elements in the real bridge. Thus, the composite
action was obtained between the deck panels and the bridge girders.
No information was given by Issa (1998) with respect to the deck panel joint location in
relation to the pier location. Since it is expected that the negative bending moment region
over a pier is a critical section for transverse crack opening, it is assumed that the transverse
joint could exist directly over the pier. This means that the most critical location of the
transverse joint was considered in the modeling, regardless of where the panels were located
in the actual bridge.
Taking advantage of bridge symmetry in the transverse direction, half of the bridge width
was modeled in order to provide a faster and more efficient way of performing the analysis.
Again the appropriate boundary conditions were applied to simulate the support condition of
the three-span continuous bridge and the symmetrical half modeling. To simulate the support
conditions, longitudinal, transverse, and vertical displacement restraints were assigned at one
end of the bridge girders and transverse and vertical restraints were assigned over the pier
and at the other end of the bridge girder. Other features used in the modeling were similar to
27
those used for the Culpeper Bridge model. Figure 3.9 shows a three-dimensional view of the
Welland River Bridge Model including three spans, centerline at left and guard barrier at
right.
Figure 3.9 Three-Dimensional View of Welland River Bridge Model
A standard AASHTO HL-93 truck loading was applied to this bridge as in the Culpeper
Bridge. Two cases of truck loading were applied. One is a double truck loading case similar
to the loading case with the trucks spaced close together (but not including a dynamic
allowance) that Issa described, named Truck Loading Case 3. The other is the single truck
loading case with dynamic load allowance factors based on AASHTO LRFD (2007), named
Truck Loading Case 4. The AASHTO LRFD double truck case did not control since the
trucks were spaced at 50 ft. while the bridge span was only 48 feet. The critical location of
the AASHTO truck loading was again found by using the PCBRIDGE program. The
28
longitudinal position was selected to cause the maximum negative bending effect over a pier.
For the transverse position, one wheel line is centered between the bridge girders to cause the
maximum bending effect in the deck panel. Since the half sized symmetric model was
created, it is assumed that the same truck loading exists on the other half of the bridge. Each
wheel load was applied as a uniform pressure on the deck shell elements which were 16
inches by 11.1 inches. Figure 3.10 and Figure 3.11 show the locations of the truck loading
case 3 and 4.
Figure 3.10 Double Truck Loading similar to Issa’s Truck Loading
(Welland River Bridge Model, Truck Loading Case 3)
Figure 3.11 Single Truck Loading by AASHTO along Half of Bridge Length
(Welland River Bridge Model, Truck Loading Case 4)
29
3.4.3 Door Creek Bridge Model
A model of the Door Creek Bridge was built using SAP 2000, based on the bridge data
provided in Ehmke’s thesis (2006). The Door Creek Bridge is owned by is owned by the
Wisconsin Department of Transportation and is a simply supported structure with 84.0 ft.
length, 64.5 ft. width and a 30° skew angle. The full-depth precast bridge deck was
constructed in stages in order to maintain the traffic flow with two lanes on the roadway at all
times. Thus, longitudinal joint was required to accommodate staged construction. The
longitudinal joint was located between the bridge girders to avoid possible ingress of salt
solutions and leakage along a joint directly above a girder and to improve the durability of
the deck. Stage 1 panels were 34 ft. - 711/16 in. long, 6ft. - 107/8 in. wide and 83/4 in. deep.
Stage 2 panels were 39 ft. - 101/16 in. long, 6 ft. - 107/8 in. wide and 83/4 in. deep.
Five existing steel bridge girders and three new girders were used to support the bridge
deck. The existing steel plate girders were constructed from grade ASTM A36 steel and
consist of a 1¼ in. x 16 in. (32 x 406 mm) bottom flange, a 3/8 in. x 60 in. (10 x 1,524 mm)
web, and 5/8 in. x 12 in. (16 x 305 mm) top flange; the additional new girders were
constructed from ASTM A709 Grade 36 steel and consist of a 1 in. x 16 in. (25 x 406 mm)
bottom flange, a 7/16 in. x 60 in. (11 x 1,524 mm) web, and ¾ in. x 12 in. (19 x 305 mm) top
flange. The girder spacing was 8 ft.-10 in. for the existing girders and 7 ft.-6 in. for the new
girders with deck overhang of 3 ft. -7 in. Figure 3.12 shows the skewed panel layout for the
Door Creek Bridge with the supports at left and right.
30
Figure 3.12 Typical Panel Layout for Door Creek Bridge (Plans by WisDOT)
The bridge deck was modeled with shell elements having a trapezoidal shape selected to
accommodate a 30º skew angle of the bridge. The size of shell elements was selected so that
the location of their corner node was matched to the location of the shear connector. Each
element was 12 inches along one side and 13.3 inches on the other. In order to connect these
shell elements to the girder elements, very stiff links were used at the discrete locations of
composite shear connectors. The spacing of the shear connector was 4 feet. It is assumed that
the force is transferred from the deck to the girder by very stiff elements in the real bridge.
Thus, the composite action was obtained between the deck panels and the bridge girders. For
both the longitudinal and transverse joints, Nlink elements were used between the bridge
deck panels with approximately 1ft. spacing between adjacent links along the joint length.
A full model of the bridge was created in order to perform the FEM analysis since the
longitudinal joint eliminated the possibility of using transverse symmetry. To simulate the
simply supported condition, longitudinal, transverse, and vertical displacement restraints
31
were assigned at one end of the bridge girders and transverse and vertical restraints assigned
at the other end of the bridge girders. In order to prevent frame racking, lateral support
conditions were applied at the bottom of the deck at both ends of the girders by assigning
transverse restraints. Figure 3.13 shows a three dimensional view of the Door Creek Bridge
model with supports at top and bottom and guard barriers at left and right. The heavy lines
indicated deck panel joints.
Figure 3.13 Three-Dimensional View of Door Creek Bridge Model
A standard AASHTO HL-93 truck loading was applied to the bridge with dynamic load
allowance factor, 1.33 based on AASHTO LRFD (2007). The three axles were spaced at 14.0
ft. and the wheel lines were spaced at 6 ft. Each wheel load was applied as a uniform pressure
on the shell elements.
An initial possible location of the truck for maximum joint moment was found by using
the PCBRIDGE program. Since the results from the PCBRIDGE program provide only the
location of the truck loading for a linear beam and this bridge has a 30°skew angle, several
transverse and longitudinal locations of truck loading were applied in order to find the critical
location of the truck loading causing the maximum bending effect at both transverse and
longitudinal joints.
32
A basic location of the front axle in the longitudinal direction was selected with the aid
of PCBRIDGE and iterations were used to find the truck loading location causing the
maximum bending effect in the transverse joints. The transverse wheel location was
constrained by AASHTO LRFD 3.6.1.3; center of the wheel is not closer than 1.0 ft. from the
face of railing. The truck loading location was moved by small increments transversely and
longitudinally while monitoring the increment of moment value in the transverse joints for
each case. Figure 3.14 shows this process to find the critical location of the truck loading
with the arrows showing how wheel lines and axle location were changed.
Figure 3.14 Finding Critical Location of Truck Loading for Transverse Joint
In the same way, the basic location of the right wheel line in the transverse direction and
the truck loading location in the longitudinal direction causing the maximum bending effect
in the longitudinal joints were located. The truck loading location was again moved by small
increments transversely and longitudinally while monitoring the increment of moment value
33
in the longitudinal joints for each case. Figure 3.15 and Figure 3.16 show the critical location
of the truck loading assigned to the deck panel.
3
29 ”
1
69 ”
1
69 ”
78 ”
5
99 ”
Figure 3.15 Critical Location of Truck Loading for Transverse Joint
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 5)
34
9
9”
1
68 ”
1
69 ”
7
8”
2
84 ”
Figure 3.16 Critical Location of Truck Loading for Longitudinal Joint
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 6)
3.5 Summary
In this chapter descriptions were provided for the three different bridge models created
by using SAP. The main objectives of the modeling are to verify the accuracy of the bridge
modeling technique by comparison with other results, to establish a minimum amount of prestressing needed to limit joint opening by examining bridges under a standard AASHTO
truck loading and to examine the joint behavior under loads that cause joint opening. Prior to
the bridge modeling, a simple model was created to check whether the Nlink element
behaved correctly or not.
The Culpeper and Welland River bridges were both chosen as bases to compare
modeling techniques and results with those of other researchers to validate our methods. The
Culpeper Bridge was a single span simply supported structure. The Welland River Bridge
35
was a three span continuous structure. The Door Creek Bridge was a single span simply
supported structure with a 30° skew angle.
Linear elastic analysis will be performed on the single span Culpeper Bridge in Virginia,
and the multi-span Welland River Bridge in Ontario, Canada. Both linear elastic and
nonlinear inelastic analyses are intended to be performed on the Door Creek Bridge in
Wisconsin. Table 3.3 shows the summary of the finite element modeling with respect to
types of analysis, load cases and objectives. The results of the FEM analysis will be
discussed in Chapter 4.
Table 3.3 Summary of the Finite Element Modeling
Bridge
Model
Type of Analysis
Culpeper
Linear, Elastic
Load Case
Objectives
Service (Issa)
Verification of Accuracy
Service + Impact
Pre-stressing Level
Service (Issa)
Verification of Accuracy
Welland
Linear Elastic
River
Service + Impact
Pre-stressing Level
Service + Impact
Joint Stress Check
Linear Elastic
Door Creek
Overload
Joint Opening Check
Nonlinear, Inelastic
Overload
Effect of Joint Opening
Note: Both the Culpeper and Welland River bridges were examined with AASHTO HL93 loading and an alternate truck load case
36
Chapter 4
Results
4.1 Objectives
The Primary objective of the FEM analyses is to evaluate the stress level in either the
transverse joint or the longitudinal joint under service loading conditions for the three
different bridges, considering the dynamic load allowance factor and design truck based on
the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2007). To achieve this primary objective,
it was first necessary to verify the accuracy of the finite element modeling by comparison
with Issa’s previous published results for the Culpeper and Welland River Bridges. The
secondary objective is to determine how much overloading would be required to cause joint
opening with the amount of pre-stress that actually exists in the Door Creek Bridge. The third
objective was to examine how the joint opening would affect the overall performance of the
bridge and how the loads are redistributed as joints crack open while the loading is increased
slowly toward the factored strength design loads. The following sections provide the results
with respect to the verification of the modeling accuracy and results of the finite element
analysis for each bridge.
4.2 Verification of Finite Element Modeling
The results for the Culpeper and Welland River Bridges were compared with the results
that Issa described. Maximum longitudinal tension stresses in the transverse joint were
examined. The sign convention used for all plots is that a positive value corresponds to a
tensile stress.
37
4.2.1 Moment Equilibrium Check
Since the Culpeper Bridge is a simply supported, statically determinate structure, it was
known that there is only one distribution of internal forces and reactions which satisfies
equilibrium. The rotational stiffness described in 3.3 was assigned to joints in the Culpeper
Bridge to check the behavior of the Nlink elements. The longitudinal bending moment,
including the moment caused by axial force, was checked in the Culpeper Bridge model
under both the service load and 5 times the service load. The total longitudinal moment
resistance in the bridge model is determined by combining the girder moment, moment in the
deck and the axial forces in the girder and the deck. The contribution of the axial forces is
computed using the moment arm of 20.55 in. between the center of the deck and the center of
the girder. As shown in Figure 4.1, the moment values of one row of the Nlink elements
(deck moment) modeling transverse joints and three frame elements that modeled the bridge
girders (girder moment) at the critical location were summed.
Figure 4.1 Location of Moment Checking
38
The summation of moment under the service load multiplied by 5 was compared with the
summation of the moment calculated under 5 times the service load. As shown in Table 4.1,
the difference of the moment was 0.012 kip-in and it clearly shows that the response of the
bridge model is linear. Note that Link elements 40 – 52 are at the section shown in Figure 4.1
Table 4.1 Moment Check in the Culpeper Bridge
4.2.2 Verification of Culpeper Bridge
Figure 4.2 presents the longitudinal stress variation (as variations in shading) on the top
surface for the Culpeper Bridge model as a result of the AASHTO truck loading case similar
to Issa’s truck loading case which is described in 3.4.1. As shown in Figure 4.2, the critical
longitudinal section was selected along the second row of nodes away from the bridge center
line.
The stress values in the transverse joints were calculated by the equation P/A ± My/I,
using the SAP output of the axial force (P) and bending moment (M) in the joint elements.
Since a node is connected to either four shell elements or two shell elements, the stress value
of a node was taken as the average stress value from either four shell elements or two shell
elements connected at that node.
39
Figure 4.2 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface
(Culpeper Bridge, Truck Loading Case 1)
Figure 4.3 shows the longitudinal stress variation along the bridge span length at the
critical location. Maximum positive longitudinal bending moment exists at the location of the
middle axle with the Truck Loading Case 1. As shown in Figure 4.3, the maximum
longitudinal tensile stress was 98 psi due to the truck without dynamic effects. This stress is a
result of truck loading alone, which means that any post-tensioning forces or stresses were
not included in the results. Since the dead load was already applied before grouting of joints
between deck panels, the joints do not have any dead load stress. In this case, the maximum
longitudinal tensile stress that Issa reported was approximately 100 psi. The difference
between the SAP result and Issa’s result was 2 psi. The result from the SAP analysis clearly
corresponds to the results previously analyzed by Issa (1998).
40
0.200
98 ksi peak tension
0.100
stress (ksi)
0.000
-0.100
-0.200
-0.300
-0.400
-0.500
-0.600
-0.700
S11Top
-0.800
0
100
200
300
400
500
S11Bot
600
700
distance along bridge length (inches)
Figure 4.3 Longitudinal Stresses along Bridge Length
(Culpeper Bridge, Truck Loading Case1)
4.2.3 Verification of Welland River Bridge
Figure 4.4 presents the longitudinal stress variation on the top surface for the Welland
River Bridge model as a result of the Truck Loading Case 3, which is similar to Issa’s double
truck loading case described in 3.4.2.
The stress values in transverse joints were calculated by the equation P/A ± My/I, using
the SAP output of the axial force (P) and bending moment (M) in the joints. Since a node is
connected again to either four shell elements or two shell elements, the stress value of a node
was taken as the average stress value from either four shell elements or two shell elements
connected at a node. The critical location for longitudinal stress due to Truck Loading Case 3
was selected along the fourth row of nodes away from the parapet line and is shown by the
cross section indication in Figure 4.4. Figure 4.5 shows the longitudinal stress variation at the
critical location along half of the bridge length. The maximum negative bending moment
41
exists at the location of the pier along the exterior bridge girder with the Truck Loading Case
3.
Figure 4.4 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case 3)
The longitudinal stress plot in Figure 4.5 is not smooth. The multiple small peaks occur
where the studs connecting the deck and girder are located. The stud connections create
stress concentration since deck-girder shear friction was ignored. The stress concentration,
however, dissipated a short distance away from the location of the shear studs. The Nlink
element was 16 inches away from the location of the very stiff element modeling the shear
studs. Thus, the effect of the stress concentration was minimal and the stress values in the
transverse joints are reasonable to use.
42
0.400
Maximum stress over pier
0.300
stress (ksi)
0.200
0.100
0.000
-0.100
-0.200
-0.300
S11 Top
-0.400
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
distance along the bridge length (inch)
Figure 4.5 Longitudinal Stresses along Bridge Length
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case3)
Figure 4.6 shows the variation of the longitudinal tensile stress in transverse joints over
the pier 1 across width of the bridge. Figure 4.7 shows the longitudinal tensile stress values at
the discrete locations where each transverse joint was located along half of the bridge length
with the discrete point connected by a dotted line.
0.300
transverse joint stress (ksi)
0.272
0.250
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
S11 Top
0.000
0
44.4
88.8
133.2
177.6
222
bridge width from exterior girder to interior girder (inch)
Figure 4.6 Longitudinal Stresses in Transverse Joint along Bridge Width
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case3)
43
As shown in Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress was
272psi in the transverse joint due to the truck without dynamic effects. This stress is the
result of the truck loading alone, which means that any post-tensioning forces or stresses
were not included in the results. In this case, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress that
Issa reported was approximately 250 psi. The difference between the SAP result and Issa’s
result, 22 psi, may be due to incorrect assumed locations of the axles in Issa’s model.
The maximum longitudinal tensile stress was a little different from Issa’s result because
the loading condition in the SAP model was different from Issa’s. Issa did not provide the
detailed description of the double truck loading case. Issa used double truck loading in the
quarter model of the Welland River Bridge superimposing the point loads of two axles of the
second truck on the centerline of the bridge to simulate the actual loading. In the current SAP
modeling the Welland River Bridge model was half sized model. Thus the double truck
loading was fully applied to the bridge without superimposing any truck wheel load. In spite
of that, it was checked that the result from the current SAP model was similar to the result
from Issa.
0.300
0.272
S11Top
stress (ksi)
0.200
0.100
0.043
0.027
0.000
-0.046
-0.059
-0.100
-0.119
-0.090
-0.087
-0.148
-0.200
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
distance of the bridge length (inch)
Figure 4.7 Longitudinal Stress in Transverse Joint along Half of Bridge Length
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case3)
44
4.2.4 Stress Analysis of Shear Studs
A stress analysis of the shear stud block-out was performed to examine whether the studs
are in the yielding state due to the service loads. Figure 4.8 shows the internal forces of the
exterior bridge girder due to the service load in the Culpeper Bridge model. As shown in
Figure 4.8 the longitudinal bending moment fluctuation observed in the bridge girder is
caused by the discrete shear connectors. If shear-friction between the deck and girder had
been included in the model, the fluctuation I girder moment at the shear connectors would
not be as severe.
Figure 4.8 Internal Forces of Exterior Bridge Girder in Culpeper Bridge Model
45
Figure 4.9 shows the design shear stud layout for each block-out. Actual as constructed
stud layouts were probably different. The stress analysis was performed to examine the
maximum stress in the shear studs, assuming that the cross section of the block-out was a
beam cross section and the shear studs were reinforcements.
The maximum bending moment in the shear stud block-out was taken as the maximum
bending moment in the very stiff frame element of the analytic model This would be a
conservative over-estimate since shear-friction was ignored. Based on detailed calculations
for a cracked section analysis, the maximum stress in a stud was 7.4 ksi which is small
relative to the yielding stress, 50ksi. This means that the shear studs have enough strength to
resist the internal forces due to the service load.
Figure 4.9 Shear Studs Layout for Each Block-out (Plans by WISDOT)
46
4.3 Results – Required Prestress
4.3.1 Culpeper Bridge Model
The modeling procedures and assumptions for the Culpeper Bridge were previously
discussed in 3.3.1. The linear static analysis was performed to examine the longitudinal stress
in order to design the minimum pre-stress level required to avoid tension stress in the
transverse joint. Truck Loading Case 2 which is based on AASHTO LRFD (2007) was
applied to the Culpeper Bridge model with a dynamic load allowance factor of 1.33. The sign
convention used for all plots is that a positive value is equivalent to a tensile stress. Figure
4.10 shows the longitudinal stress variation on the top surface of the deck.
Figure 4.10 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface along Bridge Length
(Culpeper Bridge, Truck Loading Case 2 = AASHTO HL-93 truck)
47
As shown Figure 4.10, the critical longitudinal section was selected along the second row
of nodes away from the bridge center line. The stress values in the transverse joints were
calculated by the equation P/A ± My/I, using the SAP output of the axial force (P) and
bending moment (M). Since a node is connected to either four shell elements or two shell
elements, the stress value of a node was taken as the average stress value of either four shell
elements or two shell elements connected at a node.
Figure 4.11 shows the longitudinal stress variation along the bridge span length at the
critical location. The maximum positive bending moment exists at the location of the middle
axle with the Truck Loading Case 2, which corresponds to the location of the transverse joint.
As shown in Figure 4.11, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress was 120 psi without
considering the dynamic allowance factor. With the dynamic allowance the stress would be
160 psi. Post-tensioning forces or stresses were not included in the results.
0.200
0.120
0.100
stress (ksi)
0.000
-0.100
-0.200
-0.300
-0.400
-0.500
-0.600
S11Top
S11Bot
-0.700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
distance along bridge length (inches)
Figure 4.11 Longitudinal Stress Variation along Bridge Length
(Culpeper Bridge, Truck Loading Case 2 without Dynamic Allowance Factor)
In this case, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress that Issa reported was
approximately 100 psi. Since the location of the HL-93 truck loading was different from the
48
location of Issa’s truck loading, there was a difference of 20 psi from the SAP result to Issa’s
result. The applied truck loading in the current SAP model is the correct case of the truck
loading which is based on AASHTO LRFD (2007).
Figure 4.12 shows the longitudinal stress variation along the bridge span length at the
critical location considering the dynamic load allowance factor. One small peak and two
large peaks indicate the location of the applied wheel loading. The maximum local bending
existed at the middle axle of Truck Loading Case 2. In this case the maximum longitudinal
tensile stress was 160 psi.
0.400
0.160
0.200
0.000
-0.050
stress (ksi)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
-0.200
-0.400
-0.600
-0.800
S11Top
S11Bot
-1.000
distance along bridge length (inches)
Figure 4.12 Longitudinal Stress Variation along Bridge Length
(Culpeper Bridge, Truck Loading Case2 with Dynamic Allowance Factor)
4.3.2 Welland River Bridge Model
The modeling procedures and assumptions for the Welland River Bridge were previously
discussed in 3.4.2. The FEM analysis was performed to examine the longitudinal stress in
49
order to design the minimum prestress level required to avoid tension stress in the transverse
joint. Truck loading case 4 was applied to the Welland River Bridge model with a dynamic
load allowance factor of 1.33 which is based on AASHTO (2007). The sign convention used
for all plots is that a positive value is equivalent to a tensile stress.
Figure 4.13 shows the longitudinal stress variation on the top surface of the deck. As
shown Figure 4.13, the critical longitudinal section was selected along the fourth row of
nodes away from the parapet line. The stress values in the transverse joints were calculated
by the equation P/A ± My/I, using the SAP output of the axial force (P) and bending moment
(M). Since a node is connected to either four shell elements or two shell elements, the stress
value of a node was taken as the average stress value of either four shell elements or two
shell elements connected at a node.
Figure 4.13 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface along Half Bridge Length
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case 2)
50
A stress concentration was observed at the discrete nodes where the very stiff elements
modeling composite shear connectors were located. However, the stress concentration was
dissipated a short distance away from the location of the shear studs. The Nlink element was
about 16 inches away from the location of the very stiff element modeling the shear studs.
Thus, the effect of the stress concentration was minimal and the stress values in the
transverse joints were reasonable to use.
Figure 4.14 shows the longitudinal tensile stress values at the discrete location where
each Nlink element modeling the transverse joint was located along half of the bridge length
with a dotted line connecting discrete points. The maximum negative bending moment exists
at the location of the pier with the Truck Loading Case 2, which corresponds to the location
of the transverse joint. As shown in Figure 4.14, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress at
the top of the bridge deck over the pier was 199 psi considering the dynamic allowance factor
of 1.33. The stress would have been 150 psi due to the truck without dynamic effects.
0.250
0.199
0.200
stress(ksi)
0.150
0.100
0.057
0.050
0.062
0.036
0.000
-0.035
-0.050
-0.099
-0.100
-0.117
-0.110
-0.150
-0.169
S11Top
-0.200
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
distance along half bridge length (inch)
Figure 4.14 Longitudinal Stress in Transverse Joints along Half Bridge Length
(Welland River Bridge, Truck Loading Case2 with Dynamic Allowance Factor)
51
4.3.3 Door Creek Bridge Model
The modeling procedures and assumptions for the Door Creek Bridge model were
previously discussed in 3.4.3. To examine the longitudinal stress in a transverse joint, Truck
Loading Case 5 was applied to the Door Creek Bridge model with the dynamic load
allowance factor of 1.33 which is based on AASHTO LRFD (2007). Figure 4.15 shows the
calculated longitudinal stress variation on the top surface of the deck.
Figure 4.15 Longitudinal Stress (ksi) on Top Surface
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 5)
As shown in Figure 4.15, the critical transverse section was selected along one transverse
joint near bridge mid span. The maximum positive bending moment exists at the location of
the right middle axle close to the east parapet line with the Truck Loading Case 5. The stress
values in the transverse joints were again calculated by the equation P/A ± My/I, using the
52
SAP output of the axial force (P) and the longitudinal bending moment (M). Figure 4.16
shows the longitudinal stress variation in the transverse joint across the bridge width at the
critical location. The sign convention used for all plots is that a positive value is equivalent to
a tensile stress.
0.300
0.251
0.200
0.100
Stress (Ksi)
0.000
-0.100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
-0.200
-0.300
-0.400
-0.500
S11Top
S11Bot
-0.600
Distance from the east end (in)
Figure 4.16 Longitudinal Stress Variation in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 5 with Dynamic Allowance Factor)
As shown in Figure 4.16, the maximum longitudinal tensile stress was 251 psi,
considering the dynamic allowance factor, which is a result of truck loading alone and posttensioning forces or stresses were not included in the results.
To examine the transverse stress in the longitudinal joint, Truck Loading Case 6 was
applied to the Door Creek Bridge model with dynamic load allowance factor (1.33) which is
based on AASHTO LRFD (2007). Figure 4.17 shows the transverse stress variation on the
top surface of the deck. As shown in Figure 4.17, the critical transverse section was selected
53
along the bridge length. The stress values in the longitudinal joint were calculated by the
equation P/A ± My/I, using the SAP output of the axial force (P) and transverse bending
moment (M).
Figure 4.17 Transverse Stress (ksi) on Top Surface
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 6)
Figure 4.18 shows the transverse stress variation in the longitudinal joint across the
bridge length. This stress is a result of truck loading alone which means that any posttensioning forces or stresses were not included in the results. This tensile stress could be
taken as the minimum required post-tensioning level for the longitudinal joint. The design
54
level of post-tensioning used in the Door Creek Bridge was 370 psi transversely in the panels.
Half of the post-tensioning level (185 psi) existed across the longitudinal joint.
0.300
0.239
0.250
stress (Ksi)
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
-0.050
-0.100
-0.150
-0.200
S11 Top
-0.250
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
S11 Bottom
800
900
1000
distance from the north end (inch)
Figure 4.18 Transverse Stress Variation in Longitudinal Joint across the Bridge Length
(Door Creek Bridge, Truck Loading Case 6 with Dynamic Allowance Factor)
4.4 Overloading and Joint Opening Effect in Door Creek Bridge Model
To determine overloading level causing the joint opening in the Door Creek Bridge
model, the service load including the impact load was factored by 1.62 for the transverse
joint and 1.59 for the longitudinal joint. As shown in Table 4.2, these factors were calculated
by the ratio of the maximum moment value under the service load to the softening moment in
the rotational stiffness for each joint. The softening moment, shown in Table 4.2, is
associated with a crack opening in a joint. The overload factor to cause the joint opening was
the combination of the impact load factor of 1.33 and the overloading factors which were
1.62 for the transverse joint and 1.59 for the longitudinal joint.
Table 4.2 Overloading Factor for Each Joint
Joint Type Msoften(kip-in) Mservice impact (kip-in) Overloading Factor
Transverse
95.3
58.8
1.62
Longitudinal
51.2
32.3
1.59
Note: Mservice impact includes dynamic load factor of 1.33.
55
Furthermore the factored overloading cases were increased up to 150%, 200% and 500%
of the softening moment level in order to evaluate the joint opening effect while the factored
overloading is increased slowly up toward the factored strength design loads. Table 4.3
shows the applied over loading cases for the Truck Loading Cases 5 and 6.
Table 4.3 Load Factor of Overloading
Load Case
Service + Impact (SL+IM)
Overloading (OL)
150% Overloading (150%OL)
200% Overloading (200%OL)
500% Overloading (500%OL)
Input Load Factor
Truck Loading Case 5 Truck Loading Case 6
1.33
1.33
1.62×(SL+IM)
1.59×(SL+IM)
1.5×OL
1.5×OL
2.0×OL
2.0×OL
5.0×OL
5.0×OL
Figure 4.19, Figure 4.20, Figure 4.21 show the results from the five loading cases in
Truck Loading Case 5 with respect to the local bending moment, rotation and vertical
deflection in the transverse joint across the bridge width at the critical joint. Since the Door
Creek Bridge was a skewed bridge with a skew angle of 30 degree, there was one peak which
indicated the location of the middle axle close to the east end. The softening moment was
95.3 kips-in. for the transverse joint.
120
SL+IM
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
100
60
40
200
%O
150% L
OL
SL+
IM O L
softened joint area
500%
OL
Moment (kip*in)
Msoften　=　95kip*in
80
20
0
-20
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Bridge width(inch)
Figure 4.19 Longitudinal Bending Moment in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width
56
In Figure 4.19, it was observed that the bending moment in the transverse joint was
redistributed to the adjacent transverse joints, once a transverse joint softened. Also, the
bridge structure was supported by not only the deck but also the bridge girder. Once the
transverse joint softened, extra moment flowed to the bridge girder so that the deflection was
gradually increased across the bridge width. The arrows show the portion of the transverse
joint that reached a softened state for each overloading case.
0.004
0.0035
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
0.0025
softened joint area
0.002
0.0015
20
0
15 %O L
0%
O
L
0.001
0.0005
0
OL
SL+IM
-0.0005
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Bridge width(inch)
Figure 4.20 Rotation about Transverse Axis in Transverse Joint across Bridge Width
0
Bridge Deflection (inch)
Rotation (radian)
SL+IM
500%O
L
0.003
SL+IM
OL
150%OL
200%OL
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
SL+IM
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
-2.5
500%OL
-3
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Bridge width(inch)
Figure 4.21 Vertical Deflection at the critical section across Bridge Width
800
57
The length of the softened transverse joint was compared with the deck span length
between the bridge girders. The deck span is taken as the center to center distance between
the original girders or 8’-10”. Table 4.4 shows the percentage of the softened transverse joint
relative to the deck span for each overloading cases. As shown in Table 4.4, the calculated
percent was 36.8 % for the overloading case increased by 150%, 63.2 % for the overloading
case increased by 200% and 192.5 % for the overloading case increased by 500%. By
interpolation, it is expected that the transverse joint between two bridge girders entirely
softens under a overloading increase of 250% and 300%.
Table 4.4 Percent of Softened Transverse Joint to Deck Span
Load Case Length of Softened Transverse Joint Deck Span Ratio
(text)
(inch)
(inch)
(%)
SL+IM
0
106
0
OL
0
106
0
150% OL
39
106
36.8
200% OL
67
106
63.2
500% OL
204
106
192.5
Figure 4.22, Figure 4.23 and Figure 4.24 show the results from the five loading cases in
Truck Loading Case 6 with respect to the bending moment, rotation and deflection in the
longitudinal joint along the bridge span.
0.0035
SL+IM
0.003
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
500%OL
softenedn joint area
Rotation (radian)
0.0025
0.002
0.0015
0.001
200%OL
150%OL
OL
0.0005
SL+IM
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Bridge Span (inch)
Figure 4.22 Rotation about longitudinal Axis in Longitudinal Joint along Bridge Length
58
In Figure 4.22 one small peak and two large peaks indicate that high local bending exists
in the longitudinal joint due to the applied wheel loads. The softening moment was 49 kips-in.
for the longitudinal joint. As shown in Figure 4.22, the rotation value increased rapidly once
the longitudinal joint softened as more overloading was applied. In Figure 4.23 it was also
observed that the moment was redistributed to not only the joints adjacent to the softened
joint but also to the bridge girder so that the deflection was gradually varied along the bridge
length. With an overload of the 200%OL or less the plot shows distinct moment at the axes.
With the 500%OL the joint moment is more uniform. The arrows show the portion of the
softened transverse joint for each overloading case.
90
SL+IM
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
80
softenedn joint area
70
Moment (kip*inch)
500%OL
60
50
Msoften = 49 kip*in
200%OL
40
30
150%OL
OL
SL+IM
20
10
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Bridge Span (inch)
Figure 4.23 Transverse Bending Moment in Longitudinal Joint along Bridge Length
0
SL+IM
-0.2
Bridge Deflection (inch)
OL
-0.4
150%OL
200%OL
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.4
-1.6
500%OL
SL+IM
OL
150%OL
200%OL
500%OL
-1.8
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Bridge Span (inch)
Figure 4.24 Vertical Deflection at the Longitudinal Joint along Span Length
1000
59
The length of the softened longitudinal joint was compared with the bridge span between
the bridge supports. Table 4.5 shows the percentage of the softened longitudinal joint relative
to the bridge span for each overloading case. As shown in Table 4.5, the calculated percent
was 10.8% for the overloading case increased by 150%, 24.2% for the overloading case
increased by 200% and 64.3% for the overloading case increased by 500%.
Table 4.5 Percent of Softened Longitudinal Joint to Bridge Span
Load Case Length of Softened Longitudinal Joint Bridge Span Ratio
(text)
(inch)
(inch)
(%)
SL+IM
0
996
0
OL
0
996
0
150% OL
108
996
10.8
200% OL
241
996
24.2
500% OL
640
996
64.3
60
Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations
5.1 Introduction
As discussed in the previous chapters, the three three-dimensional bridge models, the
Culpeper Bridge, Welland River Bridge and Door Creek Bridge, were created using SAP
2000. The primary objective was to evaluate the pre-stress level needed across joints to
prevent joint opening. In order to verify the accuracy of the current SAP modeling method,
the results of two bridge models(the Culpeper Bridge and Welland River Bridge) previously
analyzed by Issa (1998, PCI Journal) were compared with the results from the SAP analyses.
Furthermore the bridge model of the Door Creek Bridge was created to examine the nonlinear joint behavior under overload with non-linear analysis.
5.2 Summary
5.2.1 Verification of Finite Element Modeling
The longitudinal stress levels on the top surface in the Culpeper Bridge model and
Welland River Bridge model were examined to verify the accuracy of the current SAP
modeling. The maximum longitudinal tensile stress in the Culpeper Bridge was 98 psi from
the SAP analysis and 100 psi from Issa’s report. The two analyses agree well.
Figure 4.5 shows the variation of the maximum longitudinal tensile stress in the Welland
River Bridge. It was observed that stress concentrations were caused by the discrete shear
connections between deck panels and girders. Figure 4.7 shows the variation of the
maximum longitudinal tensile stresses in the transverse joints. The maximum longitudinal
tensile stress from the SAP analyses was 272 psi in the transverse joint, which is 22 psi
61
higher than the result provided by Issa (1998). The difference might be due to slightly
different truck positioning.
5.2.2 Pre-stressing Level for Bridge Joints
A linear static analysis was performed on the Culpeper Bridge to re-evaluate the
minimum pre-stress level required to avoid the tension stress in the transverse joint under
AASHTO LRFD (2007) truck loading.
The maximum longitudinal tensile stress in a transverse joint due to the design service
truck load was 120 psi without considering the dynamic allowance factor. In this case Issa
reported that the maximum longitudinal tensile stress was approximately 100 psi. Issa,
however, used shorter spacing between the point loads from the truck wheels on the deck
panel. The applied truck loading in the current SAP model is the correct case based on
AASHTO LRFD (2007). The maximum longitudinal service load tensile stress was 160 psi
when a dynamic load allowance of 33% is applied. This tensile stress could be taken as the
minimum required pre-stressing level across the transverse joints.
A linear elastic analysis was also performed on the Welland River Bridge to re-evaluate
the longitudinal stress and design the minimum pre-stressing level required to avoid the
tension stress in the transverse joints. Since this is a continuous multi-span bridge with a
composite deck the tension stress in a transverse joint is a combination of flexural stress and
axial with the deck acting as a beam flange. The stress over a pier would be a critical case
since negative beam bending would cause axial tension in the deck.
The maximum longitudinal tensile stress at the top of the bridge deck over the pier was
150 psi when loaded with the AASHTO LRFD HL-93 truck and excluding the dynamic load
62
factor. With a dynamic load allowance of 33% included, the stress would be 199 psi. This
tensile stress might be taken as the minimum required pre-stress level in transverse joints of
continuous span bridges. In this case Issa suggested a 450 psi recommended pre-stressing
level which is substantially higher than 199 psi. Issa, however, used two trucks with a shorter
spacing of 24 ft. between trucks to cause the maximum negative moment over the pier. This
loading was not consistent with the AASHTO standard or LRFD specifications.
A linear elastic analysis was also performed on the skewed Door Creek Bridge to
evaluate stresses and design the minimum pre-stressing level required in the transverse and
longitudinal joints.
The maximum longitudinal tensile stress in a transverse joint is 189 psi due to an HL-93
truck without dynamic effects. Using a dynamic load allowance of 33% creates a tension of
251 psi. This tension stress might be taken as the minimum required post-tensioning level for
transverse joints. The design level of post-tensioning used in the Door Creek Bridge was 250
psi for the transverse joints. This showed that the recommended design longitudinal posttensioning level for that bridge was appropriate.
The maximum transverse tensile stress in the same bridge is 180 psi due to the LRFD
HL-93 truck without dynamic allowance. Using a 33% of dynamic allowance results in a 239
psi tension. This tensile stress might be taken as the minimum required post-tensioning level
across longitudinal joints. The design level of post-tensioning used in the Door Creek Bridge
was 185 psi across the longitudinal joint. The result from the FEM analysis without dynamic
allowance was 5 psi lower than the design level of transverse post-tensioning used in the
bridge deck.
63
Table 5.1 provides a summary of the minimum prestressing stresses identified for each of
the three bridges examined along with the AASHTO LRFD (2007) prestress requirements.
The minimum prestresses given from the analyses reflect the amount needed to prevent any
tensile stress from developing in the joints.
Table 5.1 Minimum Prestress in Joint
Bridge
Culpeper
(simple span)
Welland River
(continuous span)
Door Creek
(simple span, skewed)
Minimum Joint Prestress to Prevent Tension Stress(psi)
Transverse joints
Longitudinal joints
Current AASHTO Value
due to HL-93 Service Load due to HL-93 Service Load
No
33%
75%
No
33%
75%
Transverse Longitudinal
DLA
DLA
DLA
DLA
DLA
DLA
120
160
210
N.E.
250
N.S.
150
199
263
N.E.
250
N.S.
189
251
331
250
N.S.
180
239
315
Notes: N.E. = not examined for this bridge, N.S. = not specified in AASHTO,
Table 5.1 shows minimum stresses required due to service truck loading alone and the
service truck with dynamic load allowance shall be taken as 75% for deck joints in all limit
states for all other components in all limit states except fatigue. Since a precast full-depth
concrete bridge is designed with grouted post-tensioned deck joints that are assumed to act
monolithically, the joints would not be considered as “deck joints” and the 33% dynamic
factor is most appropriate.
5.2.3 Overloading and Joint Opening Effect in the Door Creek Bridge Model
A non-linear analysis was performed on the Door Creek Bridge to determine an
overloading level to cause joint softening with the amount of pre-stressing level that actually
existed in the bridge and to examine the effect of joint softening as overload approached the
64
factored strength design loads. Softening was defined from deck joint test results provided by
Markowski (2005) and shown earlier in Figure 2.3 and Figure 2.4.
The overload factor to initiate joint softening was a combination of the dynamic load
factor of 1.33 and additional overloading factors. An added overload of 1.62 for the
transverse joint and 1.59 for the longitudinal joint was required before softening occurred.
These factors are close to the LRFD live load factor (1.7) for the strength limit state. Under
this overloads the deck deflection relative to the girders increased by 62% compared to the
service load condition with dynamic allowance.
When the overload was increased to 150% of the amount needed to initiate joint
softening the portion of the joint below the wheel displayed a yielding type behavior with
moment capacity staying constant while joint opening/rotation increased. Portions of the joint
adjacent to the loaded were able to help the overload portion in resisting load. Joint softening
actually developed over only 37% of the deck span (beam center to center spacing). The
vertical deflection of the deck relative to girder at the load point increased by 143%
compared to the service load condition (with dynamic allowance) and by 50% compared to
the overload condition needed to cause joint softening.
5.2.4 Summary
The modeling accuracy using SAP was verified by comparing the predicted stress values
with those determined by Issa (1998) in a previous publication. Table 5.2 summarizes the
maximum longitudinal stress values in a transverse joint comparing the SAP analysis with
the analysis performed by Issa.
65
Table 5.2 Comparison of the results from SAP and Issa
Name of Bridge
Culpeper
Welland River
Maximum Longitudinal Tensile Stress
SAP
Issa
98 psi
100 psi
272 psi
250 psi
The minimum prestress needed to avoid any tension in the bridge deck joints when
loaded with the AASHTO LRFD HL-93 truck were:
-
Culpeper Bridge (Transverse joints): 120 psi
-
Welland River Bridge (Transverse joints): 150 psi
-
Door Creek Bridge (Transverse joints): 189 psi
-
Door Creek Bridge (Longitudinal joints): 180 psi
When the Door Creek Bridge resisted an overload, softening of the transverse joints did
not initiate until on overload equal to 162% of the service plus dynamic allowance was
applied. This is close to the 170% live load plus impact increase used in LRFD strength state
design. At this load joint softening was initiating, but the deck was still well below its
strength capacity.
5.3 Conclusions
Modeling of bridges using the FEM method and joint link elements (SAP 2000 Program,
V. 10.0.4) can produce response estimates that compare accurately with results from other
methods and researchers.
The AASHTO LRFD (2007) specified minimum prestress of 250 psi across transverse
joints in full-depth precast concrete bridge decks is sufficient to ensure that joint opening will
not initiate under LRFD HL-93 service load truck wheels with a 33% dynamic allowance.
66
AASHTO should add provisions for minimum prestress in longitudinal joints of fulldepth precast decks. When the longitudinal deck joint is placed midway between girders the
minimum prestress should be at least 240 psi if the intent is to ensure no joint opening with
the LRFD HL-93 service truck wheel load and dynamic allowance. A prestress of 250 psi for
both transverse and longitudinal joints is appropriate for preventing joint opening under
service load.
AASHTO should clearly specify that prestressed grouted joints are not to be considered
as “deck joints” so the appropriate dynamic allowance factor is taken as 33%.
Prevention of joint opening by providing a prestress that is higher than the tension caused
by truck service loading may not be a good basis for design. The development of tension
stresses may cause a small amount of joint opening in a very local region but has an
insignificant effect on the rotation of the joint, deflection of the deck or moment resistance
capacity. Overloading with loads, as high as 240% of the design service truck wheel load
with a 33% dynamic allowance, can be resisted by the deck before serious softening of the
joints occurs.
5.4 Recommendations
1. Consideration should be given toward developing an alternative to designing prestress
at joints on the basis of eliminating all tension stress under service limit wheel loads with the
dynamic allowance. Joints can sustain moments larger than those causing initial tension
stress without any deleterious effects since initial cracking is minor and constrained to a very
small region of the joint.
67
2. AASHTO should clarify the dynamic allowance factor applied to wheel loads to be
used for designing the prestress in precast deck systems. The 33% value is appropriate not
the 75% specified for deck joints.
3. AASHTO should incorporate specification for the prestress needed across longitudinal
joints. The LRFD Specifications at present only include prestress across transverse joints.
4. Further investigation of the transfer of shear between the deck and girder should be
conducted. If shear friction is accounted for in the joint, the stress concentration caused by
discrete groups of shear studs would be reduced.
5. Long term monitoring is needed to evaluate the long term bridge performance related
to the joint deterioration, composite action and prestressing level of recently constructed fulldepth precast concrete bridge decks with prestressing.
68
References

AASHTO. “LRFD Bridge Design Specifications”, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, Third Edition, 2007, Washington D.C.

AASHTO. “Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges”, American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials, 16th Edition, 1996, Washington D.C.

Forrest G. Ehmke (2006) “Analysis of a Bridge Deck Built on Interstate Highway
39/90 with Full-Depth Precast Prestressed Concrete Deck Panels” MS Thesis,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of WisconsinMadison.

Forrest G. Ehmke, M. Oliva, L. Bank, J. Russell, “Rapid Staged Construction with
Full Depth Precast Deck Panels,” American Concrete Institute, Spring Convention,
Atlanta, GA, April 22-26, 2007, (invited presentation)

Forrest G. Ehmke, Scott Markowski, M. Oliva, J.W. Carter, L. Bank, J. Russell, S.
Woods, R. Becker, “Rapid Staged Construction with Full Depth Precast Deck Panels”,
Ed. A. Azizinamini, 2005 FHWA Accelerated Bridge Construction Conference, San
Diego, CA, Dec 15-16, 2005, pp105-110

Issa, M., Idriss, A., Kaspar, I., Khayyat, S. (1995a). Full Depth Precast and Precast,
Prestressed Concrete Bridge Deck Panels. PCI Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, Jan-Feb 1995,
pp. 59-80.

Issa, M. A., (2003) Composite Behavior of Shear Connections in Full-Depth Precast
Concrete Bridge Deck Panels on Steel Stringers. PCI Journal, Vol. 40, No. 3, SepOct 2003, pp. 2-14.

Issa, M., Yousif, A., Issa, M.A., Kaspar, I., Khayyat, S. (1998). Analysis of Full
Depth Precast Concrete Bridge Deck Panels. PCI Journal, Vol. 43, No. 1, Jan-Feb
1998, pp. 74-85.

Issa, M., Yousif, A., Issa, M.A., Kaspar, I., Khayyat, S. (1995b). Field Performance
of Full Depth Precast Concrete Panels in Bridge Deck Reconstruction. PCI Journal,
Vol. 40, No. 3, May-Jun 1995, pp. 82-108.

69
J.W. Carter III, F. K. Hubbard, M. Oliva, T. Pilgrim, T. Poehnelt, “Wisconsin DOT's
First Use of Innovative Full-Depth Precast Concrete Deck Panels Keeps U.S. I-90
Open to Traffic”, PCI Journal, V. 52, N. 1, Jan-Feb 2007

Mast, Robert M, (1998) Analysis of Cracked Prestressed Concrete Sections: A
Practical Approach

Markowski, S. (2005). “Experimental and Analytical Study of Full-depth Precast /
Prestressed Concrete Deck Panels for Highway Bridges,” MS Thesis, Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

M. Oliva, Bae, H., Bank, L., Russell, J., “New Materials and Methods for Rapid
Bridge Construction”, Mid-Continent Transportation Research Forum 2006: Making
Research Pay Off, MRUTC, Madison, WI, August 17-18, 2006

Plans of the Door Creek Bridge prepared by Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

PCBRIDGE Program(1990, Version 2.6) by Joe Murphy

SAP 2000 Advanced Version 10.0.4 Structural Analysis Program

Scott Markowski, F. Ehmke, L.C. Bank, M.G. Oliva, J.S. Russell, J.W. Carter, S.
Woods, “Full Depth, Precast, Prestressed Bridge Deck Panel System for Bridge Deck
Construction in Wisconsin,” 2005 PCI-FHWA National Bridge Conference, CDROM, Oct. 16-19, 2005
70
Appendix 1: Truck Loading Location (Culpeper Bridge)
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
71
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
01-30-2007
15:56
File (Project) Name : Culpeper Bridge Longitudinal Location
1 Span Bridge took less than
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1
54.5
1.00
0.00
3 Concentrated Loads
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
< 0.0>|
0 minute(s) to analyze.
...
8.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <14.0>| 32.00|
User Def Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
54.5
MAX
Reaction
28.0
26.5L
59.7
59.7
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
MAX |
+Moment|
1
-0.0
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MAX |
-Moment|
708.2
CUL_SUNGJE
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
01-30-2007
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
13.5L
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
29.5
58.3
86.5
114.1
140.9
167.1
192.7
217.5
241.8
265.3
288.2
310.5
332.0
353.0
373.2
392.8
411.7
430.0
447.6
464.6
480.9
496.5
511.5
525.8
539.4
552.4
564.8
576.4
12.0L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-0.0 -13.5L
0.0 28.5
0.0 29.0
0.0 29.5
0.0 30.0
0.0 30.5
0.0 31.0
0.0 31.5
0.0 32.0
0.0 32.5
0.0 33.0
0.0 33.5
0.0 34.0
0.0 34.5
0.0 35.0
0.0 35.5
0.0 36.0
0.0 36.5
0.0 37.0
0.0 37.5
0.0 38.0
0.0 38.5
0.0 39.0
0.0 39.5
0.0 40.0
0.0 40.5
0.0 41.0
0.0 41.5
0.0 42.0
15:56
MAX | MAX
Shear |
Deflect
Coeff
59.0
-3795.9
01-30-2007
15:56
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
55.2
59.0
58.3
57.7
57.0
56.4
55.7
55.0
54.4
53.7
53.1
52.4
51.7
51.1
50.4
49.8
49.1
48.4
47.8
47.1
46.5
45.8
45.1
44.5
43.8
43.2
42.5
41.8
41.2
30.5L
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
Deflect
Coeff
-0.0
-110.4
-220.8
-330.9
-440.8
-550.3
-659.4
-767.9
-875.7
-982.9
-1089.2
-1194.6
-1299.1
-1402.5
-1504.7
-1605.7
-1705.3
-1803.5
-1900.1
-1995.2
-2088.5
-2180.0
-2269.8
-2357.8
-2443.7
-2527.4
-2609.0
-2688.3
-2765.1
72
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
587.4
597.8
607.5
616.5
624.9
632.6
639.6
646.0
653.8
661.9
669.4
676.3
682.4
687.9
692.8
697.0
700.5
703.3
705.5
707.1
708.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
40.5
39.9
39.2
38.5
37.9
37.2
36.6
35.9
35.2
34.6
33.9
33.2
32.6
31.9
31.3
30.6
29.9
29.3
28.6
28.0
27.3
44.5
44.5
44.5
44.5
44.5
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.5
46.0
46.0
-2839.8
-2912.1
-2981.8
-3048.8
-3113.1
-3174.5
-3233.5
-3289.7
-3342.9
-3393.1
-3440.4
-3484.8
-3526.6
-3565.4
-3601.2
-3634.0
-3663.7
-3690.4
-3714.1
-3734.9
-3752.8
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
CUL_SUNGJE
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
12.5L
13.0L
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
50.0
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
12.5L
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
708.2
707.7
706.6
704.9
702.5
702.5
704.9
706.6
707.7
708.2
708.0
707.1
705.5
703.3
700.5
697.0
692.8
687.9
682.4
676.3
669.4
661.9
653.8
646.0
639.6
632.6
624.9
616.5
607.5
597.8
587.4
576.4
564.8
552.4
539.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
-0.5L
0.0L
0.5L
1.0L
1.5L
2.0L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
12.5L
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
01-30-2007
15:56
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
26.6
26.0
25.3
24.7
24.1
24.1
24.7
25.3
26.0
26.6
27.3
28.0
28.6
29.3
29.9
30.6
31.3
31.9
32.6
33.2
33.9
34.6
35.2
35.9
36.6
37.2
37.9
38.5
39.2
39.9
40.5
41.2
41.8
42.5
43.2
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.5L
9.5L
9.5L
9.5L
9.5L
9.5L
10.0L
10.0L
10.0L
10.0L
10.0L
10.5L
10.5L
10.5L
10.5L
Deflect
Coeff
-3767.6
-3779.3
-3787.9
-3793.5
-3795.9
-3795.9
-3793.5
-3787.9
-3779.3
-3767.6
-3752.8
-3734.9
-3714.1
-3690.4
-3663.7
-3634.0
-3601.2
-3565.4
-3526.6
-3484.8
-3440.4
-3393.1
-3342.9
-3289.7
-3233.5
-3174.5
-3113.1
-3048.8
-2981.8
-2912.1
-2839.8
-2765.1
-2688.3
-2609.0
-2527.4
73
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
525.8
511.5
496.5
480.9
464.6
447.6
430.0
411.7
392.8
373.2
353.0
332.0
310.5
288.2
265.3
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
43.8
44.5
45.1
45.8
46.5
47.1
47.8
48.4
49.1
49.8
50.4
51.1
51.7
52.4
53.1
10.5L
10.5L
10.5L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
11.0L
-2443.7
-2357.8
-2269.8
-2180.0
-2088.5
-1995.2
-1900.1
-1803.5
-1705.3
-1605.7
-1504.7
-1402.5
-1299.1
-1194.6
-1089.2
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
CUL_SUNGJE
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
41.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
241.8
217.5
192.7
167.1
140.9
114.1
86.5
58.3
29.5
0.0
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
42.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.0
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
68.0
01-30-2007
15:56
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
53.7
54.4
55.0
55.7
56.4
57.0
57.7
58.3
59.0
55.2
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
24.0
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-982.9
-875.7
-767.9
-659.4
-550.3
-440.8
-330.9
-220.8
-110.4
-0.0
74
Appendix 2: Single Truck Loading Location (Welland River Bridge)
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
75
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
02-28-2007
00:13
File (Project) Name : Welland River Bridge 1 Truck Loading
3 Span Bridge took less than 1 minute(s) to analyze.
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1
2
3
48.0 48.0 48.0
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
3 Concentrated Loads
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
< 0.0>|
...
8.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <14.0>| 32.00|
User Def Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
48.0
96.0
144.0
MAX
Reaction
28.0
64.0
80.0L
116.0L
54.9
68.1
68.1
54.9
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
1
2
3
WELLAND_1TRUCK
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
MAX |
+Moment|
MAX |
-Moment|
464.4
376.5
464.4
-299.5
-299.5
-299.5
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
02-28-2007
0.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
27.0
53.1
78.3
102.6
126.0
148.6
170.2
191.0
210.9
230.0
248.2
265.6
282.1
297.7
312.6
326.6
339.8
352.2
363.9
374.7
384.7
394.0
402.5
0.0
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0 -13.5L
-2.4 28.5
-4.8 29.0
-7.2 29.5
-9.6 30.0
-12.0 30.5
-14.4 31.0
-16.8 31.5
-19.1 32.0
-21.5 32.5
-23.9 33.0
-26.3 33.5
-28.7 34.0
-31.1 34.5
-33.5 35.0
-35.9 35.5
-38.3 36.0
-40.7 36.5
-43.1 37.0
-45.5 37.5
-47.9 38.0
-50.3 38.5
-52.7 39.0
-55.0 39.5
00:13
MAX | MAX
Shear |
61.2
58.1
61.2
-1955.8
-1494.0
-1955.8
02-28-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
51.6
54.0
53.1
52.2
51.3
50.4
49.5
48.6
47.8
46.9
46.0
45.1
44.3
43.4
42.5
41.7
40.8
40.0
39.1
38.3
37.5
36.6
35.8
35.0
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.5
40.5
00:13
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
-70.4
-140.6
-210.7
-280.5
-349.9
-418.9
-487.4
-555.2
-622.2
-688.5
-753.8
-818.1
-881.4
-943.4
-1004.3
-1063.9
-1122.0
-1178.7
-1233.7
-1287.1
-1338.7
-1388.6
-1436.8
76
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
1.5L
2.0L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
410.3
417.3
423.6
429.2
434.0
438.2
441.6
445.3
450.1
454.3
457.7
460.4
462.4
463.8
464.4
464.4
463.8
462.4
460.5
458.0
454.8
451.6
452.2
452.1
451.3
449.7
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
-57.4
-59.8
-62.2
-64.6
-67.0
-69.4
-71.8
-74.2
-76.6
-79.0
-81.4
-83.8
-86.2
-88.6
-91.0
-93.3
-95.7
-98.1
-100.5
-102.9
-105.3
-107.7
-110.1
-112.5
-114.9
-117.3
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
-7.5L
-7.0L
-6.5L
-6.0L
-5.5L
-5.0L
-4.5L
-4.0L
-3.5L
34.2
33.4
32.6
31.8
31.0
30.2
29.4
28.7
27.9
27.2
26.4
25.7
24.9
24.2
23.5
22.8
22.0
22.1
22.9
23.7
24.5
25.3
26.0
26.8
27.6
28.3
40.5
40.5
40.5
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
-1482.9
-1526.9
-1568.8
-1608.8
-1646.7
-1682.4
-1715.9
-1747.2
-1776.2
-1803.3
-1828.2
-1850.9
-1871.3
-1889.5
-1905.5
-1919.2
-1930.7
-1940.1
-1947.3
-1952.4
-1955.2
-1955.8
-1954.2
-1950.4
-1944.3
-1936.1
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND_1TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
12.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
447.5
444.6
441.0
436.7
431.8
426.2
420.0
413.2
405.8
397.8
389.3
380.1
370.5
360.3
349.5
339.5
329.2
318.2
306.8
294.8
282.2
269.1
255.5
241.5
226.9
211.9
196.4
180.5
164.2
147.5
130.4
113.0
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-119.7
-122.1
-124.5
-126.9
-129.2
-131.6
-134.0
-136.4
-138.8
-141.2
-143.6
-146.0
-148.4
-150.8
-153.2
-155.6
-158.0
-160.4
-162.8
-165.1
-167.5
-169.9
-172.3
-174.7
-177.1
-179.5
-181.9
-184.3
-186.7
-189.1
-191.5
-193.9
-3.0L
-2.5L
-2.0L
-1.5L
-1.0L
-0.5L
0.0L
0.5L
1.0L
1.5L
2.0L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
12.5L
02-28-2007
00:13
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
29.1
29.8
30.6
31.3
32.1
32.8
33.6
34.4
35.2
36.0
36.9
37.7
38.5
39.3
40.1
40.9
41.7
42.4
43.2
44.0
44.7
45.5
46.2
47.0
47.7
48.4
49.1
49.9
50.6
51.3
51.9
52.6
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
43.0
43.0
43.0
4.5L
4.5L
4.5L
5.0L
5.0L
5.0L
5.0L
5.5L
5.5L
5.5L
5.5L
5.5L
6.0L
6.0L
6.0L
6.0L
6.5L
6.5L
6.5L
6.5L
6.5L
6.5L
7.0L
Deflect
Coeff
-1925.8
-1913.4
-1898.9
-1882.2
-1863.3
-1842.2
-1819.2
-1794.3
-1767.3
-1739.9
-1710.8
-1679.7
-1647.2
-1612.8
-1576.6
-1538.7
-1499.1
-1458.2
-1415.6
-1371.5
-1326.0
-1279.5
-1231.7
-1182.8
-1132.9
-1082.1
-1030.6
-978.5
-925.7
-872.4
-818.7
-764.8
77
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
13.0L
13.5L
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
95.2
77.1
65.5
66.3
67.1
67.9
68.6
69.4
70.2
71.0
71.8
72.5
73.3
74.1
74.9
71.0
67.1
63.2
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
5.5L
6.0L
7.0L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
-196.3
-198.7
-201.0
-203.4
-205.8
-208.2
-210.6
-213.0
-215.4
-217.8
-220.2
-233.5
-255.0
-277.0
-299.5
-295.6
-291.7
-287.8
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
61.5
76.5
77.0
77.5
53.3
53.9
54.6
55.2
55.9
56.5
57.1
57.7
58.3
58.9
59.5
60.1
60.7
61.2
57.8
58.1
57.4
56.7
7.0L
7.0L
7.0L
7.0L
7.0L
7.0L
7.0L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
16.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
-710.8
-656.7
-602.6
-548.8
-495.2
-441.9
-389.2
-337.2
-285.9
-235.4
-185.9
-137.5
-90.3
-44.4
-0.0
-38.9
-78.8
-119.8
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND_1TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
69.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
59.3
55.4
51.5
47.6
43.7
39.8
53.6
71.2
88.4
105.2
121.5
137.3
152.7
167.5
181.9
195.7
209.0
221.8
234.0
245.7
256.8
267.4
277.3
286.7
295.5
303.7
311.4
319.0
326.9
334.2
341.0
347.2
352.8
357.8
362.2
366.0
369.3
371.9
374.0
375.4
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-283.9
-280.0
-276.1
-272.2
-268.3
-264.4
-260.5
-256.6
-252.7
-248.8
-244.9
-241.0
-237.1
-233.2
-229.3
-225.4
-221.5
-217.6
-213.7
-209.8
-205.9
-202.0
-198.1
-194.2
-190.3
-186.4
-182.5
-178.6
-174.7
-170.8
-166.9
-163.0
-159.1
-155.2
-151.3
-147.4
-143.5
-139.6
-135.7
-131.8
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
02-28-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
56.0
55.3
54.6
53.8
53.1
52.4
51.6
50.8
50.1
49.3
48.5
47.7
47.0
46.2
45.4
44.6
43.8
43.0
42.2
41.3
40.5
39.7
38.9
38.1
37.3
36.4
35.6
34.8
34.0
33.2
32.4
31.5
30.7
29.9
29.1
28.3
27.5
26.7
25.9
25.1
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.5
88.5
88.5
88.5
88.5
89.0
89.0
89.0
89.0
89.5
89.5
89.5
90.0
90.0
90.0
90.0
90.0
90.5
90.5
90.5
90.5
90.5
90.5
90.5
91.0
91.0
91.0
00:13
Deflect
Coeff
-161.6
-204.2
-247.4
-291.2
-335.5
-380.0
-424.8
-469.8
-514.8
-559.8
-604.6
-649.1
-693.2
-736.9
-780.1
-822.7
-864.5
-905.4
-945.6
-984.7
-1022.8
-1059.6
-1095.4
-1129.8
-1162.8
-1194.3
-1224.7
-1253.4
-1280.6
-1306.2
-1330.3
-1352.9
-1373.9
-1393.2
-1410.8
-1426.8
-1441.0
-1453.7
-1464.7
-1474.0
78
70.0
70.5
71.0
71.5
72.0
72.5
73.0
73.5
74.0
74.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
376.3
376.5
376.2
375.3
373.8
375.3
376.2
376.5
376.3
375.4
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
-127.9 98.0
-124.0 98.5
-120.1 99.0
-116.2 99.5
-112.3 100.0
-116.2 44.5L
-120.1 45.0L
-124.0 45.5L
-127.9 46.0L
-131.8 46.5L
24.3
23.6
22.8
22.0
21.3
22.0
22.8
23.6
24.3
25.1
91.0
91.0
91.0
91.0
91.0
53.0L
53.0L
53.0L
53.0L
53.0L
-1481.5
-1487.3
-1491.3
-1493.6
-1494.0
-1493.6
-1491.3
-1487.3
-1481.5
-1474.0
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND_1TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
75.0
75.5
76.0
76.5
77.0
77.5
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
98.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
58.0L
58.5L
59.0L
59.5L
60.0L
60.5L
61.0L
61.5L
62.0L
62.5L
63.0L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
374.0
371.9
369.3
366.0
362.2
357.8
352.8
347.2
341.0
334.2
326.9
319.0
311.4
303.7
295.5
286.7
277.3
267.4
256.8
245.7
234.0
221.8
209.0
195.7
181.9
167.5
152.7
137.3
121.5
105.2
88.4
71.2
53.6
39.8
43.7
47.6
51.5
55.4
59.3
63.2
67.1
71.0
74.9
74.1
73.3
72.5
71.8
71.0
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
137.0
138.0
138.5
56.5L
56.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-135.7
-139.6
-143.5
-147.4
-151.3
-155.2
-159.1
-163.0
-166.9
-170.8
-174.7
-178.6
-182.5
-186.4
-190.3
-194.2
-198.1
-202.0
-205.9
-209.8
-213.7
-217.6
-221.5
-225.4
-229.3
-233.2
-237.1
-241.0
-244.9
-248.8
-252.7
-256.6
-260.5
-264.4
-268.3
-272.2
-276.1
-280.0
-283.9
-287.8
-291.7
-295.6
-299.5
-277.0
-255.0
-233.5
-220.2
-217.8
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
58.0L
58.5L
59.0L
59.5L
60.0L
60.5L
61.0L
61.5L
62.0L
62.5L
63.0L
63.5L
64.0L
64.5L
65.0L
65.5L
66.0L
66.5L
67.0L
67.5L
109.5
124.5
125.0
125.5
126.0
126.5
02-28-2007
00:13
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
25.9
26.7
27.5
28.3
29.1
29.9
30.7
31.5
32.4
33.2
34.0
34.8
35.6
36.4
37.3
38.1
38.9
39.7
40.5
41.3
42.2
43.0
43.8
44.6
45.4
46.2
47.0
47.7
48.5
49.3
50.1
50.8
51.6
52.4
53.1
53.8
54.6
55.3
56.0
56.7
57.4
58.1
55.9
61.2
60.7
60.1
59.5
58.9
53.0L
53.0L
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
54.0L
54.0L
54.0L
54.0L
54.0L
54.5L
54.5L
54.5L
55.0L
55.0L
55.0L
55.0L
55.5L
55.5L
55.5L
55.5L
55.5L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
64.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
136.5
Deflect
Coeff
-1464.7
-1453.7
-1441.0
-1426.8
-1410.8
-1393.2
-1373.9
-1352.9
-1330.3
-1306.2
-1280.6
-1253.4
-1224.7
-1194.3
-1162.8
-1129.8
-1095.4
-1059.6
-1022.8
-984.7
-945.6
-905.4
-864.5
-822.7
-780.1
-736.9
-693.2
-649.1
-604.6
-559.8
-514.8
-469.8
-424.8
-380.0
-335.5
-291.2
-247.4
-204.2
-161.6
-119.8
-78.8
-38.9
-0.0
-44.4
-90.3
-137.5
-185.9
-235.4
79
99.0
99.5
3
3
3.0
3.5
7.5L
7.5L
70.2
69.4
56.5L
56.5L
-215.4 127.0
-213.0 127.5
58.3 136.5
57.7 136.5
-285.9
-337.2
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND_1TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
100.0
100.5
101.0
101.5
102.0
102.5
103.0
103.5
104.0
104.5
105.0
105.5
106.0
106.5
107.0
107.5
108.0
108.5
109.0
109.5
110.0
110.5
111.0
111.5
112.0
112.5
113.0
113.5
114.0
114.5
115.0
115.5
116.0
116.5
117.0
117.5
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
123.5
124.0
124.5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
7.5L
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
98.0L
98.5L
99.0L
99.5L
100.0L
100.5L
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
68.6
67.9
67.1
66.3
65.5
77.1
95.2
113.0
130.4
147.5
164.2
180.5
196.4
211.9
226.9
241.5
255.5
269.1
282.2
294.8
306.8
318.2
329.2
339.5
349.5
360.3
370.5
380.1
389.3
397.8
405.8
413.2
420.0
426.2
431.8
436.7
441.0
444.6
447.5
449.7
451.3
452.1
452.2
451.6
454.8
458.0
460.5
462.4
463.8
464.4
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-210.6
-208.2
-205.8
-203.4
-201.0
-198.7
-196.3
-193.9
-191.5
-189.1
-186.7
-184.3
-181.9
-179.5
-177.1
-174.7
-172.3
-169.9
-167.5
-165.1
-162.8
-160.4
-158.0
-155.6
-153.2
-150.8
-148.4
-146.0
-143.6
-141.2
-138.8
-136.4
-134.0
-131.6
-129.2
-126.9
-124.5
-122.1
-119.7
-117.3
-114.9
-112.5
-110.1
-107.7
-105.3
-102.9
-100.5
-98.1
-95.7
-93.3
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
144.5
145.0
145.5
146.0
146.5
147.0
147.5
148.0
148.5
149.0
149.5
150.0
150.5
151.0
151.5
96.0L
96.5L
02-28-2007
00:13
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
57.1
56.5
55.9
55.2
54.6
53.9
53.3
52.6
51.9
51.3
50.6
49.9
49.1
48.4
47.7
47.0
46.2
45.5
44.7
44.0
43.2
42.4
41.7
40.9
40.1
39.3
38.5
37.7
36.9
36.0
35.2
34.4
33.6
32.8
32.1
31.3
30.6
29.8
29.1
28.3
27.6
26.8
26.0
25.3
24.5
23.7
22.9
22.1
22.0
22.8
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.0
137.5
137.5
137.5
137.5
137.5
137.5
138.0
138.0
138.0
138.0
138.5
138.5
138.5
138.5
138.5
139.0
139.0
139.0
139.0
139.5
139.5
139.5
101.0L
101.0L
101.0L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.5L
102.5L
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-389.2
-441.9
-495.2
-548.8
-602.6
-656.7
-710.8
-764.8
-818.7
-872.4
-925.7
-978.5
-1030.6
-1082.1
-1132.9
-1182.8
-1231.7
-1279.5
-1326.0
-1371.5
-1415.6
-1458.2
-1499.1
-1538.7
-1576.6
-1612.8
-1647.2
-1679.7
-1710.8
-1739.9
-1767.3
-1794.3
-1819.2
-1842.2
-1863.3
-1882.2
-1898.9
-1913.4
-1925.8
-1936.1
-1944.3
-1950.4
-1954.2
-1955.8
-1955.2
-1952.4
-1947.3
-1940.1
-1930.7
-1919.2
80
WELLAND_1TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
125.0
125.5
126.0
126.5
127.0
127.5
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
137.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
464.4 56.5L
463.8 56.5L
462.4 56.5L
460.4 56.5L
457.7 56.5L
454.3 56.5L
450.1 56.5L
445.3 56.5L
441.6 56.5L
438.2 56.5L
434.0 56.5L
429.2 56.5L
423.6 56.5L
417.3 56.5L
410.3 56.5L
402.5 56.5L
394.0 56.5L
384.7 56.5L
374.7 56.5L
363.9 56.5L
352.2 56.5L
339.8 56.5L
326.6 56.5L
312.6 56.5L
297.7 56.5L
282.1 56.5L
265.6 56.5L
248.2 56.5L
230.0 56.5L
210.9 56.5L
191.0 56.5L
170.2 56.5L
148.6 56.5L
126.0 56.5L
102.6 56.5L
78.3 56.5L
53.1 56.5L
27.0 56.5L
0.0 115.0
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-91.0
-88.6
-86.2
-83.8
-81.4
-79.0
-76.6
-74.2
-71.8
-69.4
-67.0
-64.6
-62.2
-59.8
-57.4
-55.0
-52.7
-50.3
-47.9
-45.5
-43.1
-40.7
-38.3
-35.9
-33.5
-31.1
-28.7
-26.3
-23.9
-21.5
-19.1
-16.8
-14.4
-12.0
-9.6
-7.2
-4.8
-2.4
-0.0
97.0L
97.5L
98.0L
98.5L
99.0L
99.5L
100.0L
100.5L
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
157.5
02-28-2007
00:13
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
23.5
24.2
24.9
25.7
26.4
27.2
27.9
28.7
29.4
30.2
31.0
31.8
32.6
33.4
34.2
35.0
35.8
36.6
37.5
38.3
39.1
40.0
40.8
41.7
42.5
43.4
44.3
45.1
46.0
46.9
47.8
48.6
49.5
50.4
51.3
52.2
53.1
54.0
51.6
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
112.5
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-1905.5
-1889.5
-1871.3
-1850.9
-1828.2
-1803.3
-1776.2
-1747.2
-1715.9
-1682.4
-1646.7
-1608.8
-1568.8
-1526.9
-1482.9
-1436.8
-1388.6
-1338.7
-1287.1
-1233.7
-1178.7
-1122.0
-1063.9
-1004.3
-943.4
-881.4
-818.1
-753.8
-688.5
-622.2
-555.2
-487.4
-418.9
-349.9
-280.5
-210.7
-140.6
-70.4
-0.0
81
Appendix 3: Double Truck Loading Location 1 (Welland River Bridge)
with 24 ft. spacing
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
82
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
03-20-2007
16:20
File (Project) Name : Welland River Bridge 2 Truck Loading 24ft spacing
3 Span Bridge took less than
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1 minute(s) to analyze.
1
2
3
48.0 48.0 48.0
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
6 Concentrated Loads
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
...
< 0.0>| 8.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <24.0>|
<14.0>| 32.00|
8.00| <14.0>| 32.00|
User Def Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
48.0
96.0
144.0
MAX
Reaction
28.0
92.5
51.5L
116.0L
54.9
83.6
83.6
54.9
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
MAX |
+Moment|
1
2
3
464.4
297.7
464.4
WEL24FTSPACING
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
MAX |
-Moment|
-498.3
-498.3
-498.3
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
03-20-2007
0.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
27.0
53.1
78.3
102.6
126.0
148.6
170.2
191.0
210.9
230.0
248.2
265.6
282.1
297.7
312.6
326.6
339.8
352.2
363.9
374.7
384.7
394.0
0.0
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0 -65.5L
-1.6 28.5
-3.3 29.0
-4.9 29.5
-6.5 30.0
-8.2 30.5
-9.8 31.0
-11.4 31.5
-13.1 32.0
-14.7 32.5
-16.3 33.0
-17.9 33.5
-19.6 34.0
-21.2 34.5
-22.8 35.0
-24.5 35.5
-26.1 36.0
-27.7 36.5
-29.4 37.0
-31.0 37.5
-32.6 38.0
-34.3 38.5
-35.9 39.0
16:20
MAX | MAX
Shear |
62.7
61.4
62.7
-1955.8
-915.3
-1955.8
03-20-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
51.6
54.0
53.1
52.2
51.3
50.4
49.5
48.6
47.8
46.9
46.0
45.1
44.3
43.4
42.5
41.7
40.8
40.0
39.1
38.3
37.5
36.6
35.8
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.5
16:20
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
-70.4
-140.6
-210.7
-280.5
-349.9
-418.9
-487.4
-555.2
-622.2
-688.5
-753.8
-818.1
-881.4
-943.4
-1004.3
-1063.9
-1122.0
-1178.7
-1233.7
-1287.1
-1338.7
-1388.6
83
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
-50.5L
-50.0L
-49.5L
-49.0L
-48.5L
-48.0L
-47.5L
-47.0L
-46.5L
-46.0L
-45.5L
-45.0L
-44.5L
-44.0L
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
402.5
410.3
417.3
423.6
429.2
434.0
438.2
441.6
445.3
450.1
454.3
457.7
460.4
462.4
463.8
464.4
464.4
463.8
462.4
460.5
458.0
454.8
451.6
452.2
452.1
451.3
449.7
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
-37.5
-39.2
-40.8
-42.4
-44.1
-45.7
-47.3
-48.9
-50.6
-52.2
-53.8
-55.5
-57.1
-58.7
-60.4
-62.0
-63.6
-65.3
-66.9
-68.5
-70.2
-71.8
-73.4
-75.1
-76.7
-78.3
-79.9
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
-9.0L
-8.5L
-8.0L
-7.5L
-7.0L
-6.5L
-6.0L
-5.5L
-5.0L
-4.5L
-4.0L
-3.5L
35.0
34.2
33.4
32.6
31.8
31.0
30.2
29.4
28.7
27.9
27.2
26.4
25.7
24.9
24.2
23.7
24.6
25.5
26.3
27.2
28.0
28.9
29.7
30.5
31.3
32.1
32.9
40.5
40.5
40.5
40.5
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
-1436.8
-1482.9
-1526.9
-1568.8
-1608.8
-1646.7
-1682.4
-1715.9
-1747.2
-1776.2
-1803.3
-1828.2
-1850.9
-1871.3
-1889.5
-1905.5
-1919.2
-1930.7
-1940.1
-1947.3
-1952.4
-1955.2
-1955.8
-1954.2
-1950.4
-1944.3
-1936.1
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WEL24FTSPACING
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
-47.5L
-47.0L
-46.5L
-46.0L
-45.5L
-45.0L
-44.5L
-44.0L
-43.5L
-43.0L
-42.5L
-42.0L
-41.5L
-41.0L
-40.5L
-40.0L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
447.5
444.6
441.0
436.7
431.8
426.2
420.0
413.2
405.8
397.8
389.3
380.1
370.5
360.3
349.5
339.5
329.2
318.2
306.8
294.8
282.2
269.1
255.5
241.5
226.9
211.9
196.4
180.5
164.2
147.5
130.4
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
-5.0L
-4.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-81.6
-83.2
-84.8
-86.5
-88.1
-89.7
-91.4
-93.0
-94.6
-96.3
-97.9
-99.5
-101.2
-102.8
-104.4
-106.1
-107.7
-109.3
-110.9
-112.6
-114.2
-115.8
-117.5
-119.1
-120.7
-125.8
-138.9
-152.6
-166.8
-181.7
-197.2
-3.0L
-2.5L
-2.0L
-1.5L
-1.0L
-0.5L
0.0L
0.5L
1.0L
1.5L
2.0L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
03-20-2007
16:20
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
33.7
34.5
35.2
36.0
36.7
37.4
38.1
38.9
39.7
40.5
41.3
42.1
42.8
43.6
44.3
45.1
45.8
46.5
47.2
47.9
48.6
49.3
49.9
50.6
51.2
51.9
52.5
53.1
53.7
54.3
54.9
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
42.5
43.0
43.0
43.0
-47.5L
-47.5L
-47.5L
-47.0L
-47.0L
-47.0L
-47.0L
-46.5L
-46.5L
-46.5L
-46.5L
-46.5L
-46.0L
-46.0L
-46.0L
-46.0L
-45.5L
-45.5L
-45.5L
-45.5L
-45.5L
-45.5L
Deflect
Coeff
-1925.8
-1913.4
-1898.9
-1882.2
-1863.3
-1842.2
-1819.2
-1794.3
-1767.3
-1739.9
-1710.8
-1679.7
-1647.2
-1612.8
-1576.6
-1538.7
-1499.1
-1458.2
-1415.6
-1371.5
-1326.0
-1279.5
-1231.7
-1182.8
-1132.9
-1082.1
-1030.6
-978.5
-925.7
-872.4
-818.7
84
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
-39.5L
-39.0L
-38.5L
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
113.0
95.2
77.1
65.5
66.3
67.1
67.9
68.6
69.4
70.2
71.0
71.8
72.5
73.3
74.1
74.9
71.0
67.1
63.2
-4.0L
-3.5L
-3.0L
-2.5L
-2.0L
88.5
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
-213.1
-229.4
-246.1
-263.1
-280.4
-298.1
-316.5
-335.3
-354.4
-374.0
-393.9
-414.1
-434.7
-455.6
-476.7
-498.3
-478.3
-458.7
-439.3
12.5L
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
61.5
76.5
77.0
77.5
55.5
56.1
56.6
57.2
57.7
58.2
58.8
59.3
59.8
60.3
60.8
61.3
61.7
62.2
62.7
59.8
61.4
60.8
60.2
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-45.0L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
16.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
-764.8
-710.8
-656.7
-602.6
-548.8
-495.2
-441.9
-389.2
-337.2
-285.9
-235.4
-185.9
-137.5
-90.3
-44.4
-0.0
-26.5
-53.7
-81.6
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WEL24FTSPACING
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
144.5
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
59.3
55.4
51.5
47.6
58.6
73.8
88.4
102.5
116.1
129.1
141.6
153.6
165.1
176.1
186.6
196.5
205.9
214.8
223.2
231.1
238.5
245.5
251.9
257.8
263.3
268.2
272.7
276.8
280.3
283.3
286.3
289.3
291.8
293.8
295.5
296.6
297.4
297.7
297.6
94.5
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
98.5
99.0
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-420.2
-401.5
-383.1
-365.1
-347.4
-330.0
-313.0
-296.4
-280.2
-264.3
-248.8
-241.0
-237.1
-233.2
-229.3
-225.4
-221.5
-217.6
-213.7
-209.8
-205.9
-202.0
-198.1
-194.2
-190.3
-186.4
-182.5
-178.6
-174.7
-170.8
-166.9
-163.0
-159.1
-155.2
-151.3
-147.4
-143.5
-139.6
-135.7
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
03-20-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
59.5
58.9
58.3
57.6
57.0
56.4
55.9
55.3
54.7
54.1
53.5
52.9
52.3
51.6
51.0
50.4
49.7
49.0
48.4
47.7
47.0
46.3
45.6
44.9
44.2
43.5
42.7
42.0
41.3
40.5
39.8
39.0
38.2
37.5
36.7
35.9
35.1
34.3
33.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
140.5
141.0
141.0
141.0
141.0
141.0
141.0
141.5
141.5
141.5
141.5
142.0
142.0
142.0
142.5
142.5
142.5
143.0
143.0
143.0
143.5
143.5
143.5
144.0
144.0
144.0
144.0
144.0
144.0
144.5
144.5
144.5
145.0
145.0
145.0
145.5
16:20
Deflect
Coeff
-110.1
-139.0
-168.3
-197.9
-227.8
-257.9
-288.0
-318.2
-348.2
-378.1
-407.8
-437.3
-466.4
-494.9
-523.1
-550.8
-577.7
-604.0
-629.7
-654.5
-678.3
-701.5
-723.7
-744.7
-765.0
-784.0
-801.9
-818.8
-834.2
-848.2
-860.8
-871.9
-881.8
-890.4
-897.7
-903.7
-908.6
-912.0
-914.2
85
69.5
70.0
70.5
71.0
71.5
72.0
72.5
73.0
73.5
74.0
74.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
55.5L
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
297.0
296.1
294.8
293.0
290.9
288.5
290.9
293.0
294.8
296.1
297.0
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
-131.8 97.5
-127.9 98.0
-124.0 98.5
-120.1 99.0
-116.2 99.5
-112.3 100.0
-116.2 44.5L
-120.1 45.0L
-124.0 45.5L
-127.9 46.0L
-131.8 46.5L
32.7
31.9
31.1
30.3
29.5
28.7
29.5
30.3
31.1
31.9
32.7
145.5
145.5
145.5
146.0
146.0
88.0
-2.0L
-2.0L
-1.5L
-1.5L
-1.5L
-915.3
-915.0
-913.4
-910.7
-906.8
-901.9
-906.8
-910.7
-913.4
-915.0
-915.3
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WEL24FTSPACING
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
75.0
75.5
76.0
76.5
77.0
77.5
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
-0.5L
0.0L
0.5L
1.0L
1.5L
2.0L
2.5L
3.0L
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
11.5L
12.0L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
297.6
297.7
297.4
296.6
295.5
293.8
291.8
289.3
286.3
283.3
280.3
276.8
272.7
268.2
263.3
257.8
251.9
245.5
238.6
231.1
223.2
214.8
205.9
196.5
186.6
176.1
165.1
153.6
141.6
129.1
116.1
102.5
88.4
73.8
58.6
47.6
51.5
55.4
59.3
63.2
67.1
71.0
74.9
74.1
73.3
72.5
71.8
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
45.0L
45.5L
46.0L
46.5L
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-135.7
-139.6
-143.5
-147.4
-151.3
-155.2
-159.1
-163.0
-166.9
-170.8
-174.7
-178.6
-182.5
-186.4
-190.3
-194.2
-198.1
-202.0
-205.9
-209.8
-213.7
-217.6
-221.5
-225.4
-229.3
-233.2
-237.1
-241.0
-248.8
-264.3
-280.2
-296.4
-313.0
-330.0
-347.4
-365.1
-383.1
-401.5
-420.2
-439.3
-458.7
-478.3
-498.3
-476.7
-455.6
-434.7
-414.1
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
58.0L
58.5L
59.0L
59.5L
60.0L
60.5L
61.0L
61.5L
62.0L
62.5L
63.0L
63.5L
64.0L
64.5L
65.0L
65.5L
66.0L
66.5L
67.0L
67.5L
161.5
124.5
125.0
125.5
126.0
03-20-2007
16:20
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
33.5
34.3
35.1
35.9
36.7
37.5
38.2
39.0
39.8
40.5
41.3
42.0
42.7
43.5
44.2
44.9
45.6
46.3
47.0
47.7
48.4
49.0
49.7
50.4
51.0
51.6
52.3
52.9
53.5
54.1
54.7
55.3
55.9
56.4
57.0
57.6
58.3
58.9
59.5
60.2
60.8
61.4
58.1
62.7
62.2
61.7
61.3
-1.5L
-1.0L
-1.0L
-1.0L
-0.5L
-0.5L
-0.5L
0.0L
0.0L
0.0L
0.0L
0.0L
0.0L
0.5L
0.5L
0.5L
1.0L
1.0L
1.0L
1.5L
1.5L
1.5L
2.0L
2.0L
2.0L
2.5L
2.5L
2.5L
2.5L
3.0L
3.0L
3.0L
3.0L
3.0L
3.0L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
64.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
188.5
Deflect
Coeff
-914.2
-912.0
-908.6
-903.7
-897.7
-890.4
-881.8
-871.9
-860.8
-848.2
-834.2
-818.8
-801.9
-784.0
-765.0
-744.7
-723.7
-701.5
-678.3
-654.5
-629.7
-604.0
-577.7
-550.8
-523.1
-494.9
-466.4
-437.3
-407.8
-378.1
-348.2
-318.2
-288.0
-257.9
-227.8
-197.9
-168.3
-139.0
-110.1
-81.6
-53.7
-26.5
-0.0
-44.4
-90.3
-137.5
-185.9
86
98.5
99.0
99.5
3
3
3
2.5 -44.5L
3.0 -44.5L
3.5 -44.5L
71.0
70.2
69.4
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
-393.9 126.5
-374.0 127.0
-354.4 127.5
60.8 188.5
60.3 188.5
59.8 188.5
-235.4
-285.9
-337.2
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WEL24FTSPACING
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
100.0
100.5
101.0
101.5
102.0
102.5
103.0
103.5
104.0
104.5
105.0
105.5
106.0
106.5
107.0
107.5
108.0
108.5
109.0
109.5
110.0
110.5
111.0
111.5
112.0
112.5
113.0
113.5
114.0
114.5
115.0
115.5
116.0
116.5
117.0
117.5
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
123.5
124.0
124.5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
-44.5L
182.5
183.0
183.5
184.0
184.5
185.0
185.5
186.0
186.5
187.0
187.5
188.0
188.5
189.0
189.5
190.0
190.5
191.0
191.5
98.0L
98.5L
99.0L
99.5L
100.0L
100.5L
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
188.0
188.5
189.0
189.5
190.0
190.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
68.6
67.9
67.1
66.3
65.5
77.1
95.2
113.0
130.4
147.5
164.2
180.5
196.4
211.9
226.9
241.5
255.5
269.1
282.2
294.8
306.8
318.2
329.2
339.5
349.5
360.3
370.5
380.1
389.3
397.8
405.8
413.2
420.0
426.2
431.8
436.7
441.0
444.6
447.5
449.7
451.3
452.1
452.2
451.6
454.8
458.0
460.5
462.4
463.8
464.4
55.0L
55.5L
55.5L
146.0
146.5
147.0
147.5
148.0
148.5
149.0
60.0L
60.5L
61.0L
61.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
3.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-335.3
-316.5
-298.1
-280.4
-263.1
-246.1
-229.4
-213.1
-197.2
-181.7
-166.8
-152.6
-138.9
-125.8
-120.7
-119.1
-117.5
-115.8
-114.2
-112.6
-110.9
-109.3
-107.7
-106.1
-104.4
-102.8
-101.2
-99.5
-97.9
-96.3
-94.6
-93.0
-91.4
-89.7
-88.1
-86.5
-84.8
-83.2
-81.6
-79.9
-78.3
-76.7
-75.1
-73.4
-71.8
-70.2
-68.5
-66.9
-65.3
-63.6
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
144.5
145.0
145.5
146.0
146.5
147.0
147.5
148.0
148.5
149.0
149.5
150.0
150.5
151.0
151.5
152.0
152.5
03-20-2007
16:20
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
59.3
58.8
58.2
57.7
57.2
56.6
56.1
55.5
54.9
54.3
53.7
53.1
52.5
51.9
51.2
50.6
49.9
49.3
48.6
47.9
47.2
46.5
45.8
45.1
44.3
43.6
42.8
42.1
41.3
40.5
39.7
38.9
38.1
37.4
36.7
36.0
35.2
34.5
33.7
32.9
32.1
31.3
30.5
29.7
28.9
28.0
27.2
26.3
25.5
24.6
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.0
189.5
189.5
189.5
189.5
189.5
189.5
190.0
190.0
190.0
190.0
190.5
190.5
190.5
190.5
190.5
191.0
191.0
191.0
191.0
191.5
191.5
191.5
101.0L
101.0L
101.0L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
101.5L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.0L
102.5L
102.5L
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-389.2
-441.9
-495.2
-548.8
-602.6
-656.7
-710.8
-764.8
-818.7
-872.4
-925.7
-978.5
-1030.6
-1082.1
-1132.9
-1182.8
-1231.7
-1279.5
-1326.0
-1371.5
-1415.6
-1458.2
-1499.1
-1538.7
-1576.6
-1612.8
-1647.2
-1679.7
-1710.8
-1739.9
-1767.3
-1794.3
-1819.2
-1842.2
-1863.3
-1882.2
-1898.9
-1913.4
-1925.8
-1936.1
-1944.3
-1950.4
-1954.2
-1955.8
-1955.2
-1952.4
-1947.3
-1940.1
-1930.7
-1919.2
87
WEL24FTSPACING
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
125.0
125.5
126.0
126.5
127.0
127.5
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
191.0
191.5
192.0
192.5
193.0
193.5
194.0
194.5
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
122.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
464.4
3.5L
463.8
3.5L
462.4
3.5L
460.4
3.5L
457.7
3.5L
454.3
3.5L
450.1
3.5L
445.3
3.5L
441.6
3.5L
438.2
3.5L
434.0
3.5L
429.2
3.5L
423.6
3.5L
417.3
3.5L
410.3
3.5L
402.5
3.5L
394.0
3.5L
384.7
3.5L
374.7
3.5L
363.9
3.5L
352.2
3.5L
339.8
3.5L
326.6
3.5L
312.6
3.5L
297.7
3.5L
282.1
3.5L
265.6
3.5L
248.2
3.5L
230.0
3.5L
210.9
3.5L
191.0
3.5L
170.2
3.5L
148.6
3.5L
126.0
3.5L
102.6
3.5L
78.3
3.5L
53.1
3.5L
27.0
3.5L
0.0 121.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-62.0
-60.4
-58.7
-57.1
-55.5
-53.8
-52.2
-50.6
-48.9
-47.3
-45.7
-44.1
-42.4
-40.8
-39.2
-37.5
-35.9
-34.3
-32.6
-31.0
-29.4
-27.7
-26.1
-24.5
-22.8
-21.2
-19.6
-17.9
-16.3
-14.7
-13.1
-11.4
-9.8
-8.2
-6.5
-4.9
-3.3
-1.6
-0.0
153.0
97.5L
98.0L
98.5L
99.0L
99.5L
100.0L
100.5L
101.0L
101.5L
102.0L
102.5L
103.0L
103.5L
104.0L
104.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
209.5
03-20-2007
16:20
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
23.7
24.2
24.9
25.7
26.4
27.2
27.9
28.7
29.4
30.2
31.0
31.8
32.6
33.4
34.2
35.0
35.8
36.6
37.5
38.3
39.1
40.0
40.8
41.7
42.5
43.4
44.3
45.1
46.0
46.9
47.8
48.6
49.5
50.4
51.3
52.2
53.1
54.0
51.6
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
102.5L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.0L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
103.5L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.0L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
104.5L
112.5
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-1905.5
-1889.5
-1871.3
-1850.9
-1828.2
-1803.3
-1776.2
-1747.2
-1715.9
-1682.4
-1646.7
-1608.8
-1568.8
-1526.9
-1482.9
-1436.8
-1388.6
-1338.7
-1287.1
-1233.7
-1178.7
-1122.0
-1063.9
-1004.3
-943.4
-881.4
-818.1
-753.8
-688.5
-622.2
-555.2
-487.4
-418.9
-349.9
-280.5
-210.7
-140.6
-70.4
-0.0
88
Appendix 4: Double Truck Loading Location 2 (Welland River Bridge)
with 50 ft. spacing
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
89
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
03-05-2007
17:21
File (Project) Name : Welland River Bridge 2 Truck Loading 50ft spacing
3 Span Bridge took less than
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1 minute(s) to analyze.
1
2
3
48.0 48.0 48.0
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
6 Concentrated Loads
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
...
< 0.0>| 8.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <50.0>|
<14.0>| 32.00|
8.00| <14.0>| 32.00|
User Def Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
48.0
96.0
144.0
MAX
Reaction
28.0
64.0
80.0L
116.0L
54.9
68.1
68.1
54.9
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
MAX |
+Moment|
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-299.5
-299.5
-299.5
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
MAX |
-Moment|
476.6
370.0
476.6
WELLAND 2TRUCK
03-05-2007
0.0
0.0
0.5 28.5
1.0 29.0
1.5 29.5
2.0 30.0
2.5 30.5
3.0 31.0
3.5 31.5
4.0 32.0
4.5 32.5
5.0 33.0
5.5 33.5
6.0 34.0
6.5 34.5
7.0 35.0
7.5 35.5
8.0 36.0
8.5 36.5
9.0 37.0
9.5 37.5
10.0 38.0
10.5 38.5
11.0 39.0
11.5 117.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
27.0
53.1
78.3
102.6
126.0
148.6
170.2
191.0
210.9
230.0
248.2
265.6
282.1
297.7
312.6
326.6
339.8
352.2
363.9
374.7
384.7
394.0
403.2
0.0
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0 -91.5L
-2.3 28.5
-4.6 29.0
-6.9 29.5
-9.2 30.0
-11.5 30.5
-13.8 31.0
-16.1 31.5
-18.4 32.0
-20.7 32.5
-23.1 33.0
-25.4 33.5
-27.7 34.0
-30.0 34.5
-32.3 35.0
-34.6 35.5
-36.9 36.0
-39.2 36.5
-41.5 37.0
-43.8 37.5
-46.1 38.0
-48.4 38.5
-50.7 39.0
-53.0 117.5
17:21
MAX | MAX
Shear |
61.2
58.1
61.2
-2038.3
-1470.3
-2038.3
03-05-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
51.6
54.0
53.1
52.2
51.3
50.4
49.5
48.6
47.8
46.9
46.0
45.1
44.3
43.4
42.5
41.7
40.8
40.0
39.1
38.3
37.5
36.6
35.8
35.1
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
119.0
119.0
119.0
119.0
119.0
119.0
119.0
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.5
120.0
120.0
120.0
120.0
120.0
120.0
17:21
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
-71.0
-142.0
-212.8
-283.3
-353.5
-423.2
-492.5
-561.2
-629.2
-696.4
-762.8
-828.3
-892.8
-956.2
-1018.5
-1079.4
-1139.1
-1197.3
-1254.3
-1309.6
-1363.4
-1415.4
-1465.6
90
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
7.0L
7.5L
8.0L
8.5L
9.0L
9.5L
10.0L
10.5L
411.9
420.0
427.4
434.1
440.1
445.5
450.3
454.4
457.8
460.7
462.9
465.7
469.1
471.9
474.0
475.5
476.4
476.6
476.2
475.3
473.7
471.5
468.8
465.5
461.6
457.3
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-55.3
-57.6
-59.9
-62.2
-64.5
-66.9
-69.2
-71.5
-73.8
-76.1
-78.4
-80.7
-83.0
-85.3
-87.6
-89.9
-92.2
-94.5
-96.8
-99.1
-101.4
-103.7
-106.0
-108.3
-110.7
-113.0
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
123.5
124.0
124.5
125.0
125.5
126.0
-7.5L
-7.0L
-6.5L
-6.0L
-5.5L
-5.0L
-4.5L
-4.0L
-3.5L
34.3
33.6
32.9
32.2
31.4
30.7
30.0
29.3
28.6
27.9
27.2
26.5
25.9
25.2
24.5
23.8
23.2
23.8
24.5
25.1
25.8
26.5
27.2
27.9
28.5
29.2
120.0
120.5
120.5
120.5
120.5
121.0
121.0
121.0
121.0
121.0
121.5
121.5
121.5
121.5
121.5
121.5
122.0
122.0
122.0
122.0
122.0
122.0
122.0
122.5
122.5
122.5
-1513.9
-1560.6
-1605.4
-1648.0
-1688.5
-1726.8
-1763.3
-1797.5
-1829.3
-1858.8
-1886.1
-1911.3
-1934.2
-1954.8
-1973.1
-1989.0
-2002.8
-2014.4
-2023.8
-2030.8
-2035.6
-2038.1
-2038.3
-2036.4
-2032.4
-2026.2
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND 2TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
11.0L
11.5L
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
123.5
124.0
124.5
125.0
125.5
126.0
126.5
127.0
127.5
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
12.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
452.3
446.9
444.5
442.3
439.6
436.2
432.3
427.7
422.5
416.8
410.4
403.5
396.1
388.1
379.5
370.4
360.8
350.7
340.1
329.0
317.4
305.4
293.0
280.1
266.8
253.0
239.0
224.5
209.6
194.5
179.0
163.3
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
86.5
86.5
86.5
87.0
87.0
87.0
87.0
87.5
87.5
87.5
87.5
88.0
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-115.3
-117.6
-119.9
-122.2
-124.5
-126.8
-129.1
-131.4
-133.7
-136.0
-138.3
-140.6
-142.9
-145.2
-147.5
-149.8
-152.1
-154.5
-156.8
-159.1
-161.6
-164.9
-168.2
-171.5
-174.8
-178.2
-181.5
-184.9
-188.3
-191.6
-195.0
-198.4
-3.0L
-2.5L
-2.0L
-1.5L
-1.0L
-0.5L
0.0L
0.5L
1.0L
1.5L
-76.0L
-75.5L
-75.0L
-74.5L
-74.0L
-73.5L
-73.0L
-72.5L
-72.0L
-71.5L
-71.0L
-70.5L
-70.0L
-69.5L
-69.0L
-68.5L
-68.0L
-67.5L
-67.0L
-66.5L
-66.0L
-65.5L
03-05-2007
17:21
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
29.9
30.5
31.2
31.9
32.5
33.2
33.8
34.6
35.3
36.0
36.9
37.7
38.5
39.3
40.1
40.9
41.7
42.4
43.2
44.0
44.7
45.5
46.2
47.0
47.7
48.4
49.1
49.9
50.6
51.3
51.9
52.6
122.5
122.5
122.5
122.5
123.0
123.0
123.0
123.0
123.0
123.0
123.5
123.5
123.5
123.5
124.0
124.0
124.0
124.0
124.5
124.5
8.0L
8.0L
8.0L
8.0L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
8.5L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
9.0L
Deflect
Coeff
-2017.8
-2007.1
-1994.2
-1979.2
-1962.1
-1943.0
-1921.8
-1898.4
-1873.0
-1845.4
-1816.1
-1784.9
-1751.5
-1716.2
-1679.1
-1640.3
-1599.7
-1557.2
-1513.3
-1468.0
-1421.5
-1375.0
-1327.1
-1277.6
-1227.0
-1175.4
-1122.5
-1068.6
-1013.9
-958.5
-902.4
-845.6
91
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
147.4
131.2
114.6
97.7
80.4
67.9
68.6
69.4
70.2
71.0
71.8
72.5
73.3
74.1
74.9
71.0
67.1
63.2
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.0
88.5
88.5
88.5
88.5
96.5
97.0
97.5
-72.0L
-71.0L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-201.9
-205.3
-208.7
-212.2
-215.6
-219.1
-222.6
-226.1
-229.5
-234.6
-240.4
-246.5
-255.0
-277.0
-299.5
-295.6
-291.7
-287.8
-65.0L
-64.5L
-64.0L
-63.5L
-63.0L
-62.5L
-62.0L
-61.5L
-61.0L
-60.5L
-60.0L
-59.5L
-59.0L
-58.5L
61.5
76.5
77.0
77.5
53.3
9.5L
53.9
9.5L
54.6
9.5L
55.2
9.5L
55.9 10.0L
56.5 10.0L
57.1 10.0L
57.7 10.0L
58.3 10.0L
58.9 10.0L
59.5 10.5L
60.1 10.5L
60.7 10.5L
61.2 10.5L
57.8 16.5
58.1 -28.0L
57.4 -28.0L
56.7 -28.0L
-788.4
-730.9
-673.1
-615.1
-557.0
-499.1
-441.4
-384.0
-326.9
-270.4
-214.6
-159.5
-105.3
-52.1
-0.0
-37.4
-75.9
-115.4
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND 2TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
69.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
158.5
159.0
159.5
160.0
160.5
161.0
161.5
162.0
162.5
163.0
163.5
164.0
164.5
165.0
165.5
166.0
166.5
167.0
167.5
-30.0L
-29.5L
-29.0L
-28.5L
-28.0L
-27.5L
-27.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
59.3
55.4
51.5
47.6
43.7
49.6
65.9
81.8
97.4
112.6
127.5
142.0
156.1
169.8
183.0
195.9
208.3
220.3
231.9
243.0
253.7
263.9
273.6
282.9
291.9
301.5
310.5
319.0
326.9
331.8
336.2
340.5
346.8
351.6
355.9
359.6
362.8
365.3
367.4
368.8
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
8.0L
8.0L
8.5L
8.5L
9.0L
9.0L
9.5L
9.5L
10.0L
10.0L
10.5L
10.5L
11.0L
11.0L
11.5L
11.5L
11.5L
12.0L
12.0L
12.5L
12.5L
13.0L
13.0L
13.0L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-283.9
-280.0
-276.1
-272.2
-268.3
-264.4
-260.5
-256.6
-252.7
-248.8
-244.9
-241.0
-237.1
-233.2
-229.3
-225.4
-222.3
-220.6
-218.8
-217.2
-215.6
-214.1
-212.7
-211.3
-210.0
-208.8
-207.6
-206.5
-205.5
-204.5
-203.5
-202.7
-201.9
-201.1
-200.4
-199.8
-199.2
-198.7
-198.3
-197.8
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
03-05-2007
17:21
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
56.0
55.3
54.6
53.9
53.2
52.5
51.8
51.0
50.3
49.6
48.8
48.0
47.3
46.5
45.8
45.0
44.2
43.4
42.6
41.9
41.1
40.3
39.5
38.7
37.9
37.1
36.3
35.5
34.7
34.0
33.3
32.7
32.0
31.3
30.6
29.9
29.3
28.6
27.9
27.2
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
Deflect
Coeff
-155.6
-196.6
-238.2
-280.4
-323.0
-366.0
-409.3
-452.8
-496.4
-540.1
-583.7
-627.1
-670.3
-713.2
-755.7
-797.7
-839.2
-879.9
-919.9
-959.1
-997.4
-1034.6
-1070.8
-1105.8
-1139.4
-1171.8
-1202.7
-1232.1
-1259.8
-1285.9
-1310.2
-1332.9
-1353.8
-1373.1
-1390.6
-1406.3
-1420.4
-1432.7
-1443.3
-1452.2
92
70.0
70.5
71.0
71.5
72.0
72.5
73.0
73.5
74.0
74.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
58.0L
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
369.7
370.0
369.7
368.9
367.6
368.9
369.7
370.0
369.7
368.8
13.5L
13.5L
14.0L
14.0L
129.5
130.0
130.0
130.5
130.5
131.0
-197.5 98.0
-197.2 98.5
-197.0 99.0
-196.8 99.5
-196.7 100.0
-196.8 44.5L
-197.0 45.0L
-197.2 45.5L
-197.5 46.0L
-197.8 46.5L
26.6
25.9
25.3
24.6
23.9
24.6
25.3
25.9
26.6
27.2
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
-28.0L
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
-1459.3
-1464.7
-1468.3
-1470.2
-1470.3
-1470.2
-1468.3
-1464.7
-1459.3
-1452.2
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND 2TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
75.0
75.5
76.0
76.5
77.0
77.5
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
83.5
84.0
84.5
85.0
85.5
86.0
86.5
87.0
87.5
88.0
88.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
93.0
93.5
94.0
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
98.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
89.0
89.5
90.0
90.5
91.0
91.5
92.0
92.5
171.0
171.5
172.0
172.5
173.0
173.5
174.0
-23.5L
-23.0L
-22.5L
-22.0L
-21.5L
-21.0L
-20.5L
-20.0L
-19.5L
-19.0L
-18.5L
-18.0L
-17.5L
-17.0L
-16.5L
-16.0L
-15.5L
-15.0L
-14.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
-70.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
367.4
365.3
362.8
359.6
355.9
351.6
346.8
340.5
336.2
331.8
326.9
319.0
310.5
301.5
291.9
282.9
273.6
263.9
253.7
243.0
231.9
220.3
208.3
195.9
183.0
169.8
156.1
142.0
127.5
112.6
97.4
81.8
65.9
49.6
43.7
47.6
51.5
55.4
59.3
63.2
67.1
71.0
74.9
74.1
73.3
72.5
71.8
71.0
131.0
131.0
131.5
131.5
132.0
132.0
132.5
132.5
132.5
133.0
133.0
133.5
133.5
134.0
134.0
134.5
134.5
135.0
135.0
135.5
135.5
136.0
136.0
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
214.5
215.0
216.0
46.5L
47.0L
47.5L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-198.3
-198.7
-199.2
-199.8
-200.4
-201.1
-201.9
-202.7
-203.5
-204.5
-205.4
-206.5
-207.6
-208.8
-210.0
-211.3
-212.7
-214.1
-215.6
-217.2
-218.8
-220.6
-222.3
-225.4
-229.3
-233.2
-237.1
-241.0
-244.9
-248.8
-252.7
-256.6
-260.5
-264.4
-268.3
-272.2
-276.1
-280.0
-283.9
-287.8
-291.7
-295.6
-299.5
-277.0
-255.0
-246.5
-240.4
-234.6
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
55.0L
55.5L
56.0L
56.5L
57.0L
57.5L
58.0L
58.5L
59.0L
59.5L
60.0L
60.5L
61.0L
61.5L
62.0L
62.5L
63.0L
63.5L
64.0L
64.5L
65.0L
65.5L
66.0L
66.5L
67.0L
67.5L
187.5
202.5
203.0
203.5
204.0
204.5
03-05-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
27.9
28.6
29.3
29.9
30.6
31.3
32.0
32.7
33.3
34.0
34.7
35.5
36.3
37.1
37.9
38.7
39.5
40.3
41.1
41.9
42.6
43.4
44.2
45.0
45.8
46.5
47.3
48.0
48.8
49.6
50.3
51.0
51.8
52.5
53.2
53.9
54.6
55.3
56.0
56.7
57.4
58.1
55.9
61.2
60.7
60.1
59.5
58.9
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
64.5
133.5
133.5
133.5
133.5
134.0
17:21
Deflect
Coeff
-1443.3
-1432.7
-1420.4
-1406.3
-1390.6
-1373.1
-1353.8
-1332.9
-1310.2
-1285.9
-1259.8
-1232.1
-1202.7
-1171.8
-1139.4
-1105.8
-1070.8
-1034.6
-997.4
-959.1
-919.9
-879.9
-839.2
-797.7
-755.7
-713.2
-670.3
-627.1
-583.7
-540.1
-496.4
-452.8
-409.3
-366.0
-323.0
-280.4
-238.2
-196.6
-155.6
-115.4
-75.9
-37.4
-0.0
-52.1
-105.3
-159.5
-214.6
-270.4
93
99.0
99.5
3
3
3.0 -70.5L
3.5 -70.5L
70.2
69.4
55.5L
55.5L
-229.5 205.0
-226.1 205.5
58.3 134.0
57.7 134.0
-326.9
-384.0
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
WELLAND 2TRUCK
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
100.0
100.5
101.0
101.5
102.0
102.5
103.0
103.5
104.0
104.5
105.0
105.5
106.0
106.5
107.0
107.5
108.0
108.5
109.0
109.5
110.0
110.5
111.0
111.5
112.0
112.5
113.0
113.5
114.0
114.5
115.0
115.5
116.0
116.5
117.0
117.5
118.0
118.5
119.0
119.5
120.0
120.5
121.0
121.5
122.0
122.5
123.0
123.5
124.0
124.5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
-70.5L
-70.5L
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
12.0L
12.5L
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
68.6
67.9
80.4
97.7
114.6
131.2
147.4
163.3
179.0
194.5
209.6
224.5
239.0
253.0
266.8
280.1
293.0
305.4
317.4
329.0
340.1
350.7
360.8
370.4
379.5
388.1
396.1
403.5
410.4
416.8
422.5
427.7
432.3
436.2
439.6
442.3
444.5
446.9
452.3
457.3
461.6
465.5
468.8
471.5
473.7
475.3
476.2
476.6
476.4
475.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
55.5L
55.5L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.0L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
56.5L
57.0L
57.0L
57.0L
57.0L
57.5L
57.5L
57.5L
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
-222.6
-219.1
-215.6
-212.2
-208.7
-205.3
-201.9
-198.4
-195.0
-191.6
-188.3
-184.9
-181.5
-178.2
-174.8
-171.5
-168.2
-164.9
-161.6
-159.1
-156.8
-154.5
-152.1
-149.8
-147.5
-145.2
-142.9
-140.6
-138.3
-136.0
-133.7
-131.4
-129.1
-126.8
-124.5
-122.2
-119.9
-117.6
-115.3
-113.0
-110.7
-108.3
-106.0
-103.7
-101.4
-99.1
-96.8
-94.5
-92.2
-89.9
206.0
206.5
207.0
207.5
208.0
208.5
209.0
209.5
210.0
210.5
211.0
211.5
212.0
212.5
213.0
213.5
214.0
214.5
215.0
215.5
216.0
216.5
217.0
217.5
218.0
218.5
219.0
219.5
220.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
144.5
145.0
145.5
146.0
146.5
147.0
147.5
148.0
148.5
149.0
149.5
150.0
150.5
151.0
151.5
18.0L
18.5L
03-05-2007
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
57.1
56.5
55.9
55.2
54.6
53.9
53.3
52.6
51.9
51.3
50.6
49.9
49.1
48.4
47.7
47.0
46.2
45.5
44.7
44.0
43.2
42.4
41.7
40.9
40.1
39.3
38.5
37.7
36.9
36.0
35.3
34.6
33.8
33.2
32.5
31.9
31.2
30.5
29.9
29.2
28.5
27.9
27.2
26.5
25.8
25.1
24.5
23.8
23.2
23.8
134.0
134.0
134.0
134.5
134.5
134.5
134.5
135.0
135.0
135.0
135.0
135.5
135.5
135.5
135.5
136.0
136.0
136.0
136.0
19.5L
19.5L
20.0L
20.0L
20.0L
20.0L
20.5L
20.5L
20.5L
20.5L
21.0L
21.0L
21.0L
21.0L
21.0L
21.0L
21.5L
21.5L
21.5L
21.5L
21.5L
21.5L
21.5L
22.0L
22.0L
22.0L
22.0L
22.0L
22.0L
22.0L
22.5L
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
17:21
Deflect
Coeff
-441.4
-499.1
-557.0
-615.1
-673.1
-730.9
-788.4
-845.6
-902.4
-958.5
-1013.9
-1068.6
-1122.5
-1175.4
-1227.0
-1277.6
-1327.1
-1375.0
-1421.5
-1468.0
-1513.3
-1557.2
-1599.7
-1640.3
-1679.1
-1716.2
-1751.5
-1784.9
-1816.1
-1845.4
-1873.0
-1898.4
-1921.8
-1943.0
-1962.1
-1979.2
-1994.2
-2007.1
-2017.8
-2026.2
-2032.4
-2036.4
-2038.3
-2038.1
-2035.6
-2030.8
-2023.8
-2014.4
-2002.8
-1989.0
94
WELLAND 2TRUCK
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
125.0
125.5
126.0
126.5
127.0
127.5
128.0
128.5
129.0
129.5
130.0
130.5
131.0
131.5
132.0
132.5
133.0
133.5
134.0
134.5
135.0
135.5
136.0
136.5
137.0
137.5
138.0
138.5
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
141.0
141.5
142.0
142.5
143.0
143.5
144.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
139.0
139.5
140.0
140.5
21.0L
21.5L
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
26.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
118.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
474.0
471.9
469.1
465.7
462.9
460.7
457.8
454.4
450.3
445.5
440.1
434.1
427.4
420.0
411.9
403.2
394.0
384.7
374.7
363.9
352.2
339.8
326.6
312.6
297.7
282.1
265.6
248.2
230.0
210.9
191.0
170.2
148.6
126.0
102.6
78.3
53.1
27.0
0.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
172.0
114.5
v2.60
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-87.6
-85.3
-83.0
-80.7
-78.4
-76.1
-73.8
-71.5
-69.2
-66.9
-64.5
-62.2
-59.9
-57.6
-55.3
-53.0
-50.7
-48.4
-46.1
-43.8
-41.5
-39.2
-36.9
-34.6
-32.3
-30.0
-27.7
-25.4
-23.1
-20.7
-18.4
-16.1
-13.8
-11.5
-9.2
-6.9
-4.6
-2.3
-0.0
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
26.5L
105.0L
105.5L
106.0L
106.5L
107.0L
107.5L
108.0L
108.5L
109.0L
109.5L
110.0L
110.5L
111.0L
111.5L
112.0L
112.5L
113.0L
113.5L
114.0L
114.5L
115.0L
115.5L
235.5
03-05-2007
17:21
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
24.5 22.5L
25.2 22.5L
25.9 22.5L
26.5 22.5L
27.2 22.5L
27.9 23.0L
28.6 23.0L
29.3 23.0L
30.0 23.0L
30.7 23.0L
31.4 23.5L
32.2 23.5L
32.9 23.5L
33.6 23.5L
34.3 24.0L
35.1 24.0L
35.8 24.0L
36.6 24.0L
37.5 24.0L
38.3 24.0L
39.1 24.0L
40.0 24.5L
40.8 24.5L
41.7 24.5L
42.5 24.5L
43.4 24.5L
44.3 24.5L
45.1 24.5L
46.0 24.5L
46.9 24.5L
47.8 24.5L
48.6 25.0L
49.5 25.0L
50.4 25.0L
51.3 25.0L
52.2 25.0L
53.1 25.0L
54.0 25.0L
51.6 112.5
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-1973.1
-1954.8
-1934.2
-1911.3
-1886.1
-1858.8
-1829.3
-1797.5
-1763.3
-1726.8
-1688.5
-1648.0
-1605.4
-1560.6
-1513.9
-1465.6
-1415.4
-1363.4
-1309.6
-1254.3
-1197.3
-1139.1
-1079.4
-1018.5
-956.2
-892.8
-828.3
-762.8
-696.4
-629.2
-561.2
-492.5
-423.2
-353.5
-283.3
-212.8
-142.0
-71.0
-0.0
95
Appendix 5: Truck Loading Longitudinal Location (Door Creek Bridge)
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
96
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
02-01-2007
13:08
File (Project) Name : Door Creek Bridge Longitudinal Location
1 Span Bridge took less than
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1
83.0
1.00
0.00
3 Concentrated Loads
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
< 0.0>|
0 minute(s) to analyze.
...
8.00| <14.0>| 32.00| <14.0>| 32.00|
HS 20-44 Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
83.0
MAX
Reaction
28.0
55.0L
63.9
63.9
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
MAX |
+Moment|
1
-0.0
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MAX |
-Moment|
1218.7
DOOR CREEK
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
02-01-2007
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
30.0L
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
31.7
63.0
93.9
124.3
154.3
183.9
213.0
241.7
270.0
297.8
325.2
352.2
378.7
404.8
430.5
455.7
480.5
504.9
528.8
552.3
575.3
598.0
620.2
641.9
663.3
684.1
704.6
29.5L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-0.0 -13.5L
0.0 28.5
0.0 29.0
0.0 29.5
0.0 30.0
0.0 30.5
0.0 31.0
0.0 31.5
0.0 32.0
0.0 32.5
0.0 33.0
0.0 33.5
0.0 34.0
0.0 34.5
0.0 35.0
0.0 35.5
0.0 36.0
0.0 36.5
0.0 37.0
0.0 37.5
0.0 38.0
0.0 38.5
0.0 39.0
0.0 39.5
0.0 40.0
0.0 40.5
0.0 41.0
0.0 41.5
13:08
MAX | MAX
Shear |
Deflect
Coeff
63.5
-9631.0
02-01-2007
13:08
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
58.2
63.5
63.0
62.6
62.2
61.7
61.3
60.9
60.4
60.0
59.6
59.1
58.7
58.3
57.8
57.4
57.0
56.5
56.1
55.7
55.2
54.8
54.4
53.9
53.5
53.1
52.6
52.2
54.0L
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
54.5
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.5
55.5
Deflect
Coeff
-0.0
-181.2
-362.4
-543.4
-724.3
-904.9
-1085.2
-1265.1
-1444.6
-1623.6
-1802.0
-1979.9
-2157.1
-2333.5
-2509.2
-2684.0
-2857.9
-3030.8
-3202.7
-3373.4
-3543.1
-3711.5
-3878.6
-4044.4
-4208.8
-4371.7
-4533.1
-4693.1
97
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
724.6
744.2
763.4
782.1
800.4
818.2
835.7
852.7
869.2
885.3
901.0
916.3
931.1
945.5
959.4
972.9
986.0
998.7
1010.9
1022.7
1034.0
1044.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
51.8
51.3
50.9
50.5
50.0
49.6
49.2
48.7
48.3
47.9
47.4
47.0
46.6
46.1
45.7
45.3
44.8
44.4
44.0
43.5
43.1
42.7
55.5
55.5
55.5
55.5
55.5
55.5
55.5
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.5
56.5
56.5
56.5
56.5
56.5
57.0
57.0
-4851.4
-5008.1
-5163.0
-5316.1
-5467.3
-5616.6
-5763.9
-5909.2
-6052.6
-6193.9
-6332.9
-6469.7
-6604.2
-6736.3
-6865.9
-6993.5
-7118.5
-7240.9
-7360.6
-7477.6
-7591.9
-7703.8
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
DOOR CREEK
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
26.5L
27.0L
27.5L
56.0
56.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
1055.4
1065.5
1075.1
1084.3
1093.0
1101.3
1110.6
1120.0
1129.1
1137.7
1145.8
1153.6
1160.9
1167.7
1174.2
1180.2
1185.7
1190.9
1195.6
1199.8
1203.7
1207.1
1210.0
1212.6
1214.7
1216.3
1217.5
1218.3
1218.7
1218.6
1218.1
1217.2
1215.8
1214.0
1215.8
1217.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
02-01-2007
13:08
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
42.2
41.8
41.3
40.9
40.5
40.0
39.6
39.2
38.7
38.3
37.9
37.4
37.0
36.6
36.1
35.7
35.3
34.8
34.4
34.0
33.5
33.1
32.7
32.2
31.8
31.4
30.9
30.5
30.1
29.6
29.2
28.8
28.3
27.9
28.3
28.8
57.0
57.0
57.0
57.0
57.5
57.5
57.5
57.5
57.5
58.0
58.0
58.0
58.0
58.5
58.5
58.5
58.5
58.5
59.0
59.0
59.0
59.0
59.0
59.5
59.5
59.5
59.5
59.5
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
22.5L
23.0L
23.0L
Deflect
Coeff
-7812.9
-7919.1
-8022.3
-8122.4
-8219.9
-8314.5
-8405.9
-8494.1
-8578.9
-8661.2
-8740.1
-8815.6
-8887.7
-8956.7
-9022.6
-9085.1
-9144.1
-9199.6
-9252.2
-9301.4
-9347.1
-9389.4
-9428.0
-9463.8
-9496.1
-9524.9
-9550.1
-9571.7
-9590.3
-9605.6
-9617.2
-9625.3
-9629.7
-9631.0
-9629.7
-9625.3
98
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
1218.1
1218.6
1218.7
1218.3
1217.5
1216.3
1214.7
1212.6
1210.0
1207.1
1203.7
1199.8
1195.6
1190.9
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15.0L
15.5L
16.0L
16.5L
17.0L
17.5L
18.0L
18.5L
19.0L
19.5L
20.0L
20.5L
21.0L
21.5L
29.2
29.6
30.1
30.5
30.9
31.4
31.8
32.2
32.7
33.1
33.5
34.0
34.4
34.8
23.0L
23.0L
23.0L
23.5L
23.5L
23.5L
23.5L
23.5L
24.0L
24.0L
24.0L
24.0L
24.0L
24.5L
-9617.2
-9605.6
-9590.3
-9571.7
-9550.1
-9524.9
-9496.1
-9463.8
-9428.0
-9389.4
-9347.1
-9301.4
-9252.2
-9199.6
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
DOOR CREEK
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
69.5
70.0
70.5
71.0
71.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
58.5
59.0
59.5
60.0
60.5
61.0
61.5
62.0
62.5
63.0
63.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
69.5
70.0
70.5
71.0
71.5
64.0
64.5
65.0
65.5
66.0
66.5
67.0
67.5
68.0
68.5
69.0
27.5L
28.0L
28.5L
29.0L
29.5L
30.0L
30.5L
31.0L
31.5L
32.0L
32.5L
33.0L
33.5L
34.0L
34.5L
35.0L
35.5L
36.0L
36.5L
37.0L
37.5L
38.0L
38.5L
39.0L
39.5L
40.0L
40.5L
41.0L
41.5L
42.0L
42.5L
43.0L
43.5L
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
1185.7
1180.2
1174.2
1167.7
1160.9
1153.6
1145.8
1137.7
1129.1
1120.0
1110.6
1101.3
1093.0
1084.3
1075.1
1065.5
1055.4
1044.9
1034.0
1022.7
1010.9
998.7
986.0
972.9
959.4
945.5
931.1
916.3
901.0
885.3
869.2
852.7
835.7
818.2
800.4
782.1
763.4
744.2
724.6
704.6
684.1
663.3
641.9
620.2
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
25.0L
25.5L
26.0L
26.5L
27.0L
27.5L
28.0L
28.5L
29.0L
29.5L
30.0L
30.5L
31.0L
31.5L
32.0L
32.5L
33.0L
33.5L
34.0L
34.5L
35.0L
35.5L
36.0L
36.5L
37.0L
37.5L
38.0L
38.5L
39.0L
39.5L
40.0L
40.5L
41.0L
41.5L
42.0L
42.5L
43.0L
43.5L
02-01-2007
13:08
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
35.3
35.7
36.1
36.6
37.0
37.4
37.9
38.3
38.7
39.2
39.6
40.0
40.5
40.9
41.3
41.8
42.2
42.7
43.1
43.5
44.0
44.4
44.8
45.3
45.7
46.1
46.6
47.0
47.4
47.9
48.3
48.7
49.2
49.6
50.0
50.5
50.9
51.3
51.8
52.2
52.6
53.1
53.5
53.9
24.5L
24.5L
24.5L
24.5L
25.0L
25.0L
25.0L
25.0L
25.5L
25.5L
25.5L
25.5L
25.5L
26.0L
26.0L
26.0L
26.0L
26.0L
26.0L
26.5L
26.5L
26.5L
26.5L
26.5L
26.5L
27.0L
27.0L
27.0L
27.0L
27.0L
27.0L
27.0L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
27.5L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
Deflect
Coeff
-9144.1
-9085.1
-9022.6
-8956.7
-8887.7
-8815.6
-8740.1
-8661.2
-8578.9
-8494.1
-8405.9
-8314.5
-8219.9
-8122.4
-8022.3
-7919.1
-7812.9
-7703.8
-7591.9
-7477.6
-7360.6
-7240.9
-7118.5
-6993.5
-6865.9
-6736.3
-6604.2
-6469.7
-6332.9
-6193.9
-6052.6
-5909.2
-5763.9
-5616.6
-5467.3
-5316.1
-5163.0
-5008.1
-4851.4
-4693.1
-4533.1
-4371.7
-4208.8
-4044.4
99
72.0
72.5
73.0
73.5
74.0
74.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
72.0
72.5
73.0
73.5
74.0
74.5
44.0L
44.5L
45.0L
45.5L
46.0L
46.5L
598.0
575.3
552.3
528.8
504.9
480.5
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
44.0L
44.5L
45.0L
45.5L
46.0L
46.5L
54.4
54.8
55.2
55.7
56.1
56.5
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
-3878.6
-3711.5
-3543.1
-3373.4
-3202.7
-3030.8
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
DOOR CREEK
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
75.0
75.5
76.0
76.5
77.0
77.5
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
75.0
75.5
76.0
76.5
77.0
77.5
78.0
78.5
79.0
79.5
80.0
80.5
81.0
81.5
82.0
82.5
83.0
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
53.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
455.7
430.5
404.8
378.7
352.2
325.2
297.8
270.0
241.7
213.0
183.9
154.3
124.3
93.9
63.0
31.7
0.0
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
83.0L
53.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.0
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
49.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
51.5L
52.0L
52.5L
53.0L
53.5L
54.0L
54.5L
96.5
02-01-2007
13:08
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
57.0
57.4
57.8
58.3
58.7
59.1
59.6
60.0
60.4
60.9
61.3
61.7
62.2
62.6
63.0
63.5
58.2
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.0L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
28.5L
29.0
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
-2857.9
-2684.0
-2509.2
-2333.5
-2157.1
-1979.9
-1802.0
-1623.6
-1444.6
-1265.1
-1085.2
-904.9
-724.3
-543.4
-362.4
-181.2
-0.0
100
Appendix 6: Truck Loading Transverse Location (Door Creek Bridge)
(AASHTO Standard Truck Loading by PCBRIDGE V. 2.6)
101
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
02-08-2007
16:15
File (Project) Name : Door Creek Bridge Transverse Location
7 Span Bridge took less than
Span Number
Span Length
Relative EI
Dead Load
:
:
:
:
1
8.5
1.00
0.00
2 Concentrated Loads
2
9.0
1.00
0.00
0 minute(s) to analyze.
3
8.5
1.00
0.00
4
9.0
1.00
0.00
5
7.5
1.00
0.00
6
7.5
1.00
0.00
7
7.5
1.00
0.00
(Loads INCLUDE distribution factor of 1.00)
<spacing>|load|<spacing>|load|
...
< 0.0>| 16.00| < 6.0>| 16.00|
User Def Vehicle is MOVING
Bridge|@ Veh
Dist | Loc
0.0
8.5
17.5
26.0
35.0
42.5
50.0
57.5
MAX
Reaction
6.0
11.0
20.0
29.0
37.0
45.5
53.5
57.5
19.2
26.2
25.3
25.2
24.7
23.4
24.5
18.0
________tm
Summary Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
| Span
|No
|
|
MAX |
+Moment|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
-24.9
-24.9
-23.7
-23.5
-22.5
-21.8
-21.8
0.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
2.5
-3.0L
3.5
4.0
4.5
-1.0L
-0.5L
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
0.0
8.6
15.3
20.3
23.6
25.4
27.2
27.9
27.8
26.7
24.9
22.4
19.4
16.1
11.4
5.5
0.0
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
10.5L
16.5
16.5
16.5
10.5L
16.5
5.0L
Deflect
Coeff
20.2
20.2
19.4
19.4
19.4
17.0
18.1
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
0.0
-0.7
-1.4
-2.2
-2.9
-3.6
-4.3
-5.0
-5.8
-6.5
-7.2
-7.9
-8.7
-9.4
-10.1
-12.3
16:15
MAX | MAX
Shear |
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
MAX |
-Moment|
27.9
22.5
20.8
22.1
17.8
17.8
24.5
D_C_TRANS_LOC
02-08-2007
0.5L
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
2.5
3.0
3.5L
4.0L
4.5L
5.0L
5.5L
6.0L
6.5L
1.0L
1.5L
-17.2
-12.0
-9.9
-11.4
-6.9
-6.8
-13.2
02-08-2007
16:15
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
17.3
17.3
15.3
13.5
11.8
10.2
9.1
8.8
10.0
11.2
12.3
13.3
14.1
14.9
16.7
18.5
0.0
-2.5L
3.5
-2.5L
-2.5L
3.5
3.5
-2.0L
-2.0L
4.0
4.5
-1.5L
-1.5L
4.5
5.0
5.0
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
-3.3
-6.5
-9.5
-12.1
-14.3
-15.9
-16.8
-17.2
-16.7
-15.7
-14.2
-12.2
-9.9
-7.3
-4.8
102
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.5
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
8.0
8.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
25.5
19.5L
25.5
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
11.5L
18.0
18.5
13.0L
13.5
14.0
8.5L
9.0L
15.5
16.0
16.5
28.0L
-1.0L
5.0
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
22.0
16.5L
23.0
23.5
24.0
24.5
2.7
2.8
2.1
6.3
11.8
16.2
19.4
21.5
22.5
22.5
21.6
22.2
22.1
21.1
18.9
15.5
11.0
5.4
3.1
3.8
3.5
6.7
11.9
15.9
18.6
20.3
20.8
20.4
20.3
20.8
20.2
18.6
15.8
11.8
11.0
5.5L
11.5
12.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
-1.0L
-1.0L
5.0
5.0
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
19.5L
20.0
14.0L
20.5
20.5
21.0
9.5L
15.5
9.5L
9.5L
15.5
15.5
34.0
28.0L
34.0
28.0L
28.0L
34.0
-18.5
-24.9
-18.4
-12.5
-10.8
-9.8
-8.8
-7.9
-6.9
-5.9
-5.0
-4.9
-5.6
-6.4
-7.2
-7.9
-8.7
-11.8
-17.6
-23.7
-17.4
-11.7
-10.4
-9.4
-8.4
-7.4
-6.4
-5.4
-5.3
-6.2
-7.2
-8.2
-9.1
-10.1
2.0L
8.0
15.0
15.5
16.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0L
13.5L
14.0L
14.5L
15.0L
15.5L
10.0L
10.5L
11.0L
17.0
24.0
24.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0L
22.5L
23.0L
23.5L
24.0L
24.5L
20.2
20.2
19.2
17.5
15.9
14.8
13.9
12.9
11.8
10.5
9.3
10.5
11.7
12.8
13.7
14.6
16.1
17.8
19.4
19.4
18.5
16.8
15.5
14.6
13.6
12.6
11.4
10.1
10.1
11.4
12.6
13.6
14.6
15.4
5.0
3.0
16.5
10.5L
16.5
17.0
17.0
17.0
11.5L
11.5L
16.0
9.0L
14.5
15.0
9.0L
15.0
9.5L
9.5L
15.5
12.0
19.5L
25.5
25.5
20.0L
26.0
26.5
26.5
20.5L
17.0L
23.0
17.0L
23.5
17.5L
24.0
-2.3
-0.0
-2.1
-4.3
-6.4
-8.4
-10.0
-11.2
-11.8
-12.0
-11.8
-11.9
-11.7
-11.0
-9.8
-8.2
-6.3
-4.1
-2.0
-0.0
-1.8
-3.8
-5.6
-7.3
-8.6
-9.5
-9.9
-9.8
-9.8
-9.9
-9.5
-8.6
-7.3
-5.6
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
D_C_TRANS_LOC
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
31.0
31.5
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
7.5
8.0
8.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
0.5
1.0
25.0
15.5
9.5L
15.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
29.0L
35.5
36.0
36.5
25.0L
25.5L
32.0
32.5
33.0
33.5
34.0
24.0
24.0
18.0L
42.0
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
6.6
2.5
3.5
3.3
5.7
11.1
15.5
18.8
20.9
22.0
22.1
21.4
21.9
21.7
20.5
18.3
14.9
10.4
4.9
2.4
3.2
3.0
8.2
28.5
28.5
23.0L
29.5
29.5
18.0L
24.0
24.0
24.0
18.0L
24.0
24.0
43.0
43.0
37.0L
43.0
37.0L
43.0
37.0
37.5
31.5L
38.0
33.0
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-11.6
-17.3
-23.5
-17.4
-11.6
-8.7
-7.9
-7.1
-6.3
-5.5
-4.7
-3.9
-3.4
-3.9
-4.5
-5.0
-5.5
-6.1
-11.2
-16.7
-22.5
-16.4
-11.6
19.0L
19.5L
25.5
32.5
33.0
33.5
28.0
28.5
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5L
31.0L
31.5L
32.0L
32.5L
27.0L
27.5L
28.0L
28.5L
34.5
35.5
36.0
02-08-2007
16:15
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
16.9
18.6
18.6
19.2
17.5
15.9
14.5
13.7
12.7
11.6
10.4
9.2
10.4
11.5
12.5
13.5
14.5
16.1
17.8
19.4
19.4
16.9
16.2
18.0L
18.0L
20.5
28.0L
28.0L
34.0
34.5
28.5L
35.0
35.0
35.0
29.0L
26.0L
32.0
26.0L
32.5
32.5
27.0L
33.0
33.0
29.5
43.0
37.5L
Deflect
Coeff
-3.7
-1.8
-0.0
-1.9
-4.0
-6.0
-7.9
-9.5
-10.6
-11.3
-11.4
-11.2
-11.3
-11.1
-10.4
-9.3
-7.8
-5.9
-3.9
-1.8
-0.0
-1.4
-2.9
103
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0
39.5
40.0
40.5
41.0
41.5
42.0
42.5
43.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5
47.0
47.5
48.0
48.5
49.0
49.5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
42.5
43.0
37.5L
44.0
38.5L
39.0
39.5
40.0
34.5L
41.0
41.5
59.0
33.0
33.0
49.5
50.0
50.5
45.0L
51.5
46.0L
46.5
47.0
47.5
42.0L
48.5
49.0
49.5
12.4
15.3
17.1
17.8
17.6
17.0
17.4
16.7
14.9
11.9
7.7
3.0
3.7
3.4
7.7
11.9
14.9
16.7
17.4
17.1
17.5
17.8
17.0
15.2
12.3
8.1
2.7
27.0L
33.0
33.0
27.0L
27.0L
33.0
50.5
50.5
50.5
50.5
39.0L
39.0L
39.5L
40.0L
46.0
40.5
40.5
40.5
40.5
53.0L
59.0
59.0
53.0L
53.0L
59.0
52.5
53.0
-10.4
-9.3
-8.1
-6.9
-5.7
-4.5
-4.2
-4.9
-5.6
-6.3
-9.7
-14.9
-20.6
-14.9
-9.7
-6.4
-5.6
-4.9
-4.2
-4.0
-5.0
-6.1
-7.1
-8.2
-9.2
-10.5
-15.9
36.5
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
39.0L
39.5L
40.0L
40.5L
41.0L
41.5L
36.0L
42.0
49.0
43.5
44.0
44.5
45.0
45.5
46.0
46.5L
47.0L
47.5L
48.0L
48.5L
49.0L
43.5L
15.3
14.3
13.2
12.0
10.6
10.4
11.7
12.8
13.9
14.8
15.6
17.0
17.0
17.0
15.6
14.8
13.9
12.8
11.7
10.4
10.5
11.9
13.1
14.1
15.1
15.9
16.8
43.5
37.5L
38.0L
38.0L
44.5
38.5L
33.5L
40.0
40.0
40.0
34.5L
40.5
0.0
50.5
44.5L
45.0L
51.0
51.0
51.5
40.5L
46.5
41.0L
47.0
41.5L
41.5L
47.5
42.0L
-4.4
-5.6
-6.4
-6.9
-6.8
-6.5
-6.4
-6.0
-5.3
-4.1
-2.8
-1.3
0.0
-1.3
-2.8
-4.1
-5.3
-6.1
-6.5
-6.4
-6.8
-6.8
-6.3
-5.5
-4.3
-2.9
-1.4
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
D_C_TRANS_LOC
________tm
Bridge Analysis by PCBRIDGE v2.60
Bridge| Span |@ Veh
Dist |No Dist| Loc
50.0
50.5
51.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0
55.5
56.0
56.5
57.0
57.5
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7.5
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
40.5
40.5
57.0
57.5
58.0
52.5L
59.0
53.5L
60.0
54.5L
55.0L
61.5
56.0L
56.5
57.0
56.5
MAX |@ Veh
+Moment| Loc
2.1
2.0
7.1
11.8
15.5
18.7
21.4
23.3
24.4
24.5
23.5
21.3
18.0
13.9
7.9
0.0
47.0L
47.5L
54.0
48.0
48.0
42.0L
48.0
48.0
48.0
42.0L
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
59.5
MAX |@ Veh
-Moment| Loc
-21.8
-15.9
-10.3
-6.3
-5.8
-5.3
-4.7
-4.2
-3.7
-3.2
-2.6
-2.1
-1.6
-1.1
-0.5
-0.0
49.5
56.5
57.0
51.5
52.0
52.5
53.0
53.5
54.0
54.5
55.0L
55.5L
50.0L
50.5L
51.0L
57.0
02-08-2007
16:15
MAX |@ Veh
Shear | Loc
16.8
18.1
16.1
15.0
14.3
13.5
12.5
11.4
10.2
8.9
9.4
10.7
12.0
13.9
15.9
15.9
0.0
53.0L
59.0
53.5L
53.5L
53.5L
59.5
54.0L
54.0L
60.0
60.5
60.5
60.5
60.5
60.5
0.0
NOTE:SHEAR values are calculated just to the
LEFT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing right and
RIGHT of Bridge or Span Dist(ance) for vehicles facing left.
Deflect
Coeff
0.0
-2.0
-4.1
-6.4
-8.6
-10.4
-11.9
-12.8
-13.2
-12.9
-11.9
-10.3
-8.2
-5.7
-2.9
0.0