Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
[SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaoc <seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net>
- Subject: [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads
- From: "Powers, Tony" <tpowers(--nospam--at)hdrinc.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 96 16:47:00 PDT
- Encoding: 62 TEXT
Assuming you are referring to the difference between the provisions of Sections 3.7 and 3.24 (as opposed to the difference between the truck and lane loads in section 3.7), the difference is basically that the truck and lane loads are generally used for the analysis of the main load carrying members (usually longitudinal beams or girders of some sort) through the application of "distribution factors" as defined in section 3.23, while the distribution of loads for slab design in section 3.24 is an empirical method to arrive at moments in the deck slab without explicitly considering the truck or lane loads. More specifically, the main longitudinal beams or girders are typically designed as two-dimensional members (unless there is some compelling reason to do a three-dimensional analysis, like sharp curvature, heavy skew, variable girder spacing, etc.). The truck load is applied as a single vehicle moving in either direction along the length of the bridge, a fraction of which (the distribution factor) is applied to each longitudinal girder. This distribution factor (which is empirical) is calculated based on the type of girder, type of deck slab, and the girder spacing as described in section 3.23. The lane load is used in a similar manner except that it is a distributed load (with one or more added concentrated loads) acting on all or part of each span and does not "move" as the truck does. The lane load is intended to represent a single loaded truck preceded and followed by a train of smaller vehicles. In contrast, (as is frequently the case in bridge design, where the loads for one portion of the structure are not carried directly down to lower portions of the structure) the deck slab analysis is based on a wheel load form the truck and the span of the slab between girders, but is otherwise empirical and unrelated to the truck/lane loading provisions of section 3.7. Really confused now? Try the AASHTO LRFD Specifications where they have combined the truck and lane loads and changed all the distribution factors, as well as introducing the Ontario method for deck slab design. Seriously, I hope that helps a little. Tony ---------- From: seaoc To: seaoc Subject: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads Date: Wednesday, August 14, 1996 12:25PM The AASHTO manuel requires either a standard truck load or lane load for design, section 3.7. Section 3.24 provides provisions for slab design. Can somone please describe the difference between the two. Anthony ... ...
- Prev by Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads
- Next by Subject: [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads
- Previous by thread: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads
- Next by thread: [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] AASHTO highway loads