AASHTO GHC-2003 AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Highway Bridges (Revision 4 Errata 10 2003)《平面曲线钢箱梁公路桥的AASHTO指南规范.修改件4 勘误表 10 2003[替代 AASHTO LRFD I-.pdf

《AASHTO GHC-2003 AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Highway Bridges (Revision 4 Errata 10 2003)《平面曲线钢箱梁公路桥的AASHTO指南规范.修改件4 勘误表 10 2003[替代 AASHTO LRFD I-.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《AASHTO GHC-2003 AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Highway Bridges (Revision 4 Errata 10 2003)《平面曲线钢箱梁公路桥的AASHTO指南规范.修改件4 勘误表 10 2003[替代 AASHTO LRFD I-.pdf（436页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、 John R. Njord, President Executive Director Utah Department of Transportation American Association of State Highway and John Horsley Transportation Officials Executive Director Executive Office: 444 N. Capitol St., N.W., Suite 249, Washington, D.C. 20001 Telephone (202) 624-5800 Telefax (202) 624-5

2、806 Telex 49000095800 HTO ERRATA Dear Customer: Due to errors found after the publication had been completed, AASHTO has reprinted the pages and added two point pages listed below in order to make the following errata changes to the AASHTO Guide Specifications for Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Hi

3、ghway Bridges with Design Examples for I-Girder and Box-Girder Bridges: Page No(s). Affected Section Errata Change Horizontally Curved Steel Box Girder Example pp. 333336 Appendix E.6 Add the following paragraph immediately before the last paragraph on p. 34: In certain situations, the Engineer may

4、wish to consider the effect of the access hole in the diaphragm on the section properties of the effective diaphragm section. From separate but similar calculations to the above, considering the effect of an assumed 36-in deep access hole centered in the middle of the example diaphragm, the maximum

5、shear stress in the effective bottom flange due to the diaphragm shear is calculated to be 6.13 ksi. Therefore, in this particular case, the effect of the access hole on the bottom flange shear stress is not significant. pp. 339340 Appendix E.9 Change “H525” to “HS25” on p. 339 pp. 341342 Appendix E

6、.10 Change “H525” to “HS25” on p. 342 pp. 355356 Appendix E.12 Add the following to the end of the text on p. 355: Eq. (A10) gives the normal distortional warping stress at any point in the cross section. The value of Cwis obtained from either Figure A2, A3, or A9. ()wdwCymor TIa=A (A10) where: y =

7、distance along the transverse vertical axis of the box from the neutral axis to the point under consideration Eq. (A11) gives the axial (brace) force due to distortional forces applied to the box. The value of Cbis obtained from either Figure A5 or A10. 2 Page No(s). Affected Section Errata Change H

8、orizontally Curved Steel Box Girder Example ()2bbab1morT2hFCa a21b+=+A(A11) Since only two loading positions for concentrated loads are considered in the charts, it is often necessary to interpolate between figures. The principle of superposition applies for more than one torque. Figure A11 shows th

9、e effect of on the influence line for diaphragm forces when the diaphragm is rigid.” pp. 355356 Appendix E.12 Add Figures A2 and A3 before Figure A4 on p. 356 pp. 359360 Appendix E.13 In the equation for “ftran” on p. 359, which is the third equation from the top of the page, “50 ksi” should be “20

10、ksi.” pp. 361362 Appendix E.14 In the middle of p. 362, in the equation for “ftran,” “50 ksi” should be “20 ksi.” pp. 363364 Appendix E.14 Change “H525” to “HS25” on p. 363 pp. 365366 Appendix E.15 Change “H525” to “HS25” on p. 366 The following new pages have been added to accommodate omitted figur

11、es: pp. 357357.1 Appendix E.12 Move down Figures A5 through A9 Add Figure A10 on p. 357.1 pp. 357.2358 Appendix E.12 Add Figure A11 on p. 357.2 Please substitute the original pages of text with the enclosed pages. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. AASHTO Publications Staff Oct

12、ober 2003 HORIZONTALLY CURVED STEEL BOX-GIRDER DESIGN EXAMPLE 333R1shall be taken as:1222vys97 kR = f1k + + 4 2Fk Eq. (10-5)where: k = plate buckling coefficientks = shear buckling coefficientTry: k = 4.0 and ks= 5.34Since the denominator of Eq (10-5) is approximately equal to 1.0 in this case, 1R =

13、 97 k = 97 x 4.0 = 194.Since 191 4.0d 0.8752ucc scS = 0.4d f E 60,000A AASHTO Eq. (10-67)(Note: the upper limit of 60,000Ascin the above equation is incorporated in the 2000 Interims to theStandard Specifications and is included here.)2 2scA = (0.875 /4 = 0.6 in)2uS = 0.4 x 0.875 6 x 4,696 = 51.4 ki

14、ps 60(0.6) = 36 kipsuS = 36 kipsCompute the minimum number of shear connectors required on each side of the pier.No. of shear connectors reqd. = sc uP3,305= = 108.0S 0.85(36)Try six studs uniformly spaced across the flange (Figure E.15.1) with 18 rows on each side of the pier (for108 shear connector

15、s per flange on each side of the pier). The studs must be spaced transversely so that the steel plateslenderness limit of R1in Eq (10-4) is satisfied, where bfis taken as the transverse spacing between the shearconnectors (Article 10.4.3.5).Check the computed force on the critical studs at Node 36.C

16、ompute the axial force in the bottom flange concrete due to the vertical moment. Compute the stresses inthe top of the composite bottom flange concrete due to the deck weight without creep. Use the ratio of the distances tothe neutral axis.top32.68 9.25f = 1.93 = 1.44 ksi32.68 1.25-Compute the stres

17、s in the top of the composite bottom flange concrete due to superimposed dead load andlive load without creep.top35.22 9.25f = 0.68 + ( 2.18) = 2.19 ksi35.22 1.25- -366 AASHTO GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR HORIZONTALLY CURVED STEEL GIRDER HIGHWAY BRIDGESFigure E.15.1 Shear Studs on Composite Bottom Flang

18、eCompute the longitudinal force in the composite bottom flange concrete due to vertical bending. Use theaverage bending stress in the concrete times the area of the concrete.1.93 + 1.44 2.86 + 2.19F = + x 81 x 8 = 2,728 kips22Compute the longitudinal force per stud.FL = 2,728/108 = 25.26 kips/studCo

19、mpute the St. Venant torsional shear in the concrete at the Strength limit state. Assume that a single row ofstuds across the flange will resist the torsional shear in the flange concrete.Loading Torque (Table D.3)Deck 48 x 1.3 62 k-ftSuperimposed DL 346 x 1.3 450 k-ftLive load HS25 + Impact 966(5/3

20、) x 1.3 2,093 k-ftTotal 2,481 k-ftAssume all torsion is applied to the uncracked section without creep.Effective concrete thickness = Thickness/n = 8 in /6.2 = 1.29 in.Using calculations similar to those shown on page 332, the enclosed area of the composite box is computedto be Ao= 61.0 ft2.foTV = b

21、2A2, 48181V = = 137 kips2 x 61.0 12-Compute the portion of the torsional shear resisted by the concrete by taking the ratio of the effectiveconcrete thickness to the total thickness of the steel flange plus the effective concrete.conc1.29 inV = 137 kips x = 70 kips(1.25 in + 1.29 in)AASHTO Guide Spe

22、cifications for Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Highway Bridges 2003 With Design Examples for I-Girder and Box-Girder Bridges American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 624-5800 (tel) (202) 624-5806 (fax) www

23、.transportation.org Copyright 02003 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the United States. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publishers. Cover photos courtesy of Bria

24、n Chen, the University of Texas at Austin. ISBN: 1-56051 -1 65-6 GHC-4 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2002-2003 Voting Members Oficers: President: James C. Codell, III, Kentucky Vice President: Tom Stephens, Nevada Secretary-Treasurer: Larry King, Pennsylvania Regional Representatives: REGION I: Carol Murray,

25、New Hampshire, One-Year Term Patricia McDonald, Vermont, Two-Year Term REGION II: Fred Van Kirk, West Virginia, One-Year Term Whittington Clement, Virginia, Two-Year Term REGION III: Henry Hungerbeeler, Missouri, One-Year Term Mark Wandro, Iowa, Two-Year Term REGION IV: Mike Behrens, Texas, One-Year

26、 Term Sleeter Dover, Wyoming, Two-Year Term Nonvoting Members Immediate Past President: Dan Flowers, Arkansas AASHTO Executive Director: John Horsley, Washington, D.C. . 111 HIGHWAY SUBCOMMITTEE ON BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES 2002 TOM LULAY, OREGON, Chairman SANDRA LARSON, Vice Chairman JAMES D. COOPER,

27、Federal Highway Administration, Secretary ALABAMA, William F. Conway, George H. Connor ALASKA, Richard A. Pratt ARIZONA, F. Daniel Davis ARKANSAS, Phil Brand CALIFORNIA, Richard Land COLORADO, Mark A. Leonard CONNECTICUT, Gordon Barton DELAWARE, Doug Finney, Dennis OShea D.C., Donald Cooney FLORIDA,

28、 William N. Nickas GEORGIA, Paul Liles, Brian Summers HAWAII, Paul Santo IDAHO, Matthew M. Farrar ILLINOIS, Ralph E. Anderson INDIANA, Mary JO Hamman IOWA, Norman L. McDonald KANSAS, Kenneth F. Hurst, Loren R. Risch KENTUCKY, Stephen E. Goodpaster LOUISIANA, Hossein Ghara, Mark J. Morvant MAINE, Jam

29、es E. Tukey MARYLAND, Earle S. Freedman MASSACHUSETTS, Alexander K. Bardow MICHIGAN, Steve Beck MINNESOTA, Dan Dorgan, Kevin Western MISSISSIPPI, Harry Lee James MISSOURI, Shyam Gupta MONTANA, William S. Fullerton NEBRASKA, Lyman D. Freemon NEVADA, William C. Crawford, Jr. NEW HAMPSHIRE, Mark Richar

30、dson NEW JERSEY, Haw A. Capers, Jr., Richard W. NEW MEXICO, Jimmy D. Camp NEW YORK, James OConnell, George A. Christian NORTH CAROLINA, Gregory R. Perfettie NORTH DAKOTA, Terry Udland OHIO, Timothy Keller OKLAHOMA, Robert J. Rusch, Veldo Goins OREGON, Mark E. Hirota PENNSYLVANIA, R. Scott Christie P

31、UERTO RICO, Jamie Cabre Duie RHODE ISLAND, Kazem Farhoumand SOUTH CAROLINA, Randy R. Cannon, Jeff Sizemore SOUTH DAKOTA, John Cole TENNESSEE, Ed Wasserman TEXAS, Mary Lou Ralls U.S. DOT, Nick E, Mpras UTAH, David Nazare VERMONT, James McCarthy VIRGINIA, Malcolm T. Kerley WASHINGTON, Jerry Weigel, To

32、ny M. Allen WEST VIRGINIA, James Sothen WISCONSIN, Stanley W. Woods WYOMING, Gregg C. Fredrick, Keith R. Fulton ALBERTA, Dilip K. Dasmohapatra, Bob Ramsey MANITOBA, Ismail Elkholy NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, John C. Pangalinan NEW BRUNSWICK, David Cogswell NORTHAMPTON, R. T. Hughes NORTHWEST TERRITORI

33、ES, John Bower NOVA SCOTIA, Alan MacRae, Mark Pert ONTARIO, Vacant SASKATCHEWAN, Herv Bachelu MASS. METRO. DIST. COMM., David Lenhardt N.J. TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, Richard Raczynski N.Y. STATE BRIDGE AUTHORITY, William PORT AUTHORITY OF N.Y. AND N.J., Joseph BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, Wade Casey MILITARY

34、 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT COMMAND, Robert D. Franz DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Paul C. T. Tan Moreau J. Kelly, Joseph Zitelli US. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS- US. COAST GUARD, Jacob Patnaik U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE- FOREST SERVICE, Nelson Hernandez iv PREFACE AASHTO first published Guide Specifications for

35、Horizontallv Curved Highwav Bridges in 1980. These guide specifications included Allowable Stress Design (ASD) provisions developed by the Consortium of University Research Teams (CURT) and approved by ballot of the AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures in November 1976. CURT consist

36、ed of Carnegie-Mellon University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Rhode Island and Syracuse University. The 1980 guide specifications also included Load Factor Design (LFD) provisions developed in American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) Project 190 and approved by ballot of the AA

37、SHTO Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures in October 1979. The guide specifications covered both I-girders and box girders. Changes to the 1980 guide specifications were included in the AASHTO Interim Specifications-Bridges for the years 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1990. A new versio

38、n of the Guide Soecifications for Horizontallv Curved Highway Bridges was published in 1993. It included these interim changes, and additional changes, but did not reflect the extensive research on curved-girder bridges that has been conducted since 1980, or many important changes in related provisi

39、ons of the straight-girder specifications. The present specifications and commentary were developed to correct these deficiencies. They reflect the current state-of-the-art and are consistent with present straight-girder specifications, except as noted. They were developed in National Cooperative Hi

40、ghway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 12-38 and are fully documented in NCHRP Report 424: Imoroved Design Soecifications for Horizontallv Curved Steel Girder Highway Bridges. The following terms are used to identify particular specifications: Bridge Welding Code refers to the 1996 edition of ANSI/A

41、ASHTO/AWS Bridge WeldinP Code and In- terim Specifications, “previous curved-girder specifications” or Guide Spec refers to the 1993 AASHTO Guide Specifications for Horizontallv Curved Highwav Bridges, o AASHTO or AASHTO LFD/ASD refers to the 1996 AASHTO Standard specifications for Highway BridPes.

42、16th Edition and Interim Specifications, AASHTO LRFD refers to the 1998 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Second Edition and Interim Specifications. Curved girder specifications based on the present AASHTO LFD specifications will be incorporated into the AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Des

43、ign (LRFD) specifications under NCHRF Project 12-52. An extensive theoreti- cal and experimental research program is also being conducted on curved-girder bridges under sponsorship of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This program should permit further future improvements in the present curved girder specifications. V