Use the AASHTO Guide Specification for Pedestrian Bridges. This document
was created for this very case, a BRIDGE that isn't a HIGHWAY bridge. "Golf
course bridge" manufacturers were faced with the same dilemma you are
facing, so they advocated this document. Basically it says 65 to 85 psf ped
loading, depending on loaded area, and H-10 truck loading for a deck width
of over 10' and no impact factor required. It also gives recommendations
for wind and pedestrian vibrations. You'll also need the basic AASHTO
bridge specs for allowable stresses.
Toss out UBC, IBC, or any LRFD documents for this project.
From: Neil Moore [mailto:nmoore(--nospam--at)innercite.com]
Sent: June 04, 2001 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: Golf Course Bridge
Wouldn't these bridges also be considered pedestrian bridges with a live
load requiredment of 100 psf? If your bridge is ten clear feet wide, then
the loading would be 1000 lb/lineal foot times the span - big load!
Remember, pedestrians flattened out the Golden Gate Bridge a few years ago.
Neil Moore, S.E.
neil moore and associates
shingle springs, california
At 09:55 AM 6/5/2001 +1000, you wrote:
I am designing two cart path bridges for a golf course. First bridge is 3
span 70'+50'+50', second bridge has a single span of 70'.
Wonder of wonders, the owner and the contractor both want to minimize the
cost on the structures, and are asking that I use the minimum live loading
The largest vehicle used on the golf course is a mower/utility vehicle with
a gross weight of about 2 tons, well below H15 loading. The bridges
themselves are to be 10 feet wide, and the approaches are so hilly that it
is unlikely that a truck could even get to the bridges.
Soooo, my question is : Does anyone have experience regarding the use of
loads substantially less than those required by AASHTO for the design of
NON-highway bridges. If so, are there standard loads? I was thinking of
using 5 tons as a minimum, and having the owner post a permanent sign
showing the weight restriction.
Also, does the AASHTO manual govern the design of the bridges? We are
currently under UBC94, soon to switch to the IBC, but I am not all that
familiar with AASHTO requirements (not much bridge work on Guam). I would
prefer to use UBC94, LRFD 2nd Ed for the girders, and refer to AASHTO for
load distribution (based on 5 ton total weight) and seismic design.
T. Eric R. Gillham PE
PO Box 3207 Agana Guam 96932
Ph: (671) 477-9224
Fax: (671) 477-3456
Cel (671) 687-7115
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org