This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
C. C. Fu, Ph.D., P.E. and T. Kudsi The Bridge Engineering Software and Technology (BEST) Center Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Maryland September, 2000
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION SURVEY & COMMENTARY Design Of Diaphragm Over Pier Of Precast Beams (Spreadsheet) AASHTO –Girders Analysis, Typical (Spreadsheet Analysis) Bulb-Tee Girders Analysis, Typical (Spreadsheet Analysis) APPENDIX
1 3 10 11 12 13
STUDY REPORT "SURVEY AND DESIGN OF SIMPLE SPAN PRECAST CONCRETE GIRDERS MADE CONTINUOUS"
The objective of this study for the State of Maryland is to provide a standard detail for making simple span pre-cast concrete girders continuous for live load. The use of prestressed pre-cast girders in bridge construction started in the United States in the early 1950’s. Although the girders were designed as simple span for dead load, reinforcement in the deck girders provided negative moment capacity. Recently,
the demand in the State of Maryland for making simple span precast girders continuous over pier has increased, thus a standard detail for diaphragms over piers, showing the necessary reinforcements for different span lengths is needed. The study started by sending letters to the Departments of Transportation in all 50 states requesting their standard detail drawings of diaphragms over piers. Twenty-seven states replied, sending their various approaches to continuity over piers. Although some states did not make simple spans continuous, many states made the deck longitudinal reinforcement resist the negative moment, and some stipulated that the diaphragm over pier resist the negative moment due to live load. In addition to designing for negative moment over pier, many states designed for positive moment at the supports resulting from creep, shrinkage and elastic shortening. The latter subject will be discussed in the section titled: ”Survey and Commentary.”
Next, a spreadsheet was prepared for all the types of AASHTO and Bulb-Tee girders with different span lengths that were cited by the states’ replies. The spreadsheet calculates the required reinforcement for negative moment, and positive moment for the types of girders and span lengths that are listed. It should be noted that positive moment in the diaphragm is usually a result of creep and shrinkage. Many reports have discussed this issue. NCHRPR 322, ”Design of Precast Bridge Girders Made Continuous,” concluded that positive moment connections are costly and provide no structural benefits. On the other hand, an interim report prepared for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 12-53 (1999), “Connection between Simple Span Precast Concrete Girders Made Continuous,” discusses the importance of accounting for positive moment resulting from creep and shrinkage. The author of the 1999 NCHRP Project 12-53 interim report does not give a closed form solution to standardize the calculation of the positive moment; he states that current PCA practice does not perform a time dependent analysis, and, instead, details the positive moment connection using 1.2Mcr. In the spreadsheet the user is left to use the default 1.2Mcr as positive moment at the connection, or he can input the calculated time dependent positive moment due to shrinkage, creep, and elastic shortening.
Survey & Commentary
Letters to fifty states were sent by the BEST Center, asking them to send their standard details for diaphragm over pier. Twenty-eight states replied to our request. Appendix A shows a brief description for every state’s practice for continuity over pier. The states that replied are categorized as follows: A. States using diaphragm over pier to resist live load and superimposed dead load, and using extended dowels or strands into the diaphragm to resist positive moments: 1. Alaska 2. Colorado 3. Delaware 4. Idaho 5. Illinois 6. Kansas 7. Michigan 8. Missouri 9. New Jersey 10. North Carolina 11. Ohio 12. Oregon 13. Pennsylvania 14. New York
Louisiana 3. States having no standards for continuity or not designing for continuity over pier for live load: 1. Wyoming 9.B. Maine 2. Georgia 2. Virginia 7. Kentucky 2. Wisconsin 8. Massachusetts 3. Minnesota D. California C. States using diaphragm over pier without positive moment reinforcement shown: 1. Utah 6. Washington . States using deck slab to assess for continuity: 1. Tennessee 5. North Dakota 4.
However. “Design Of Precast Prestressed Bridge Girders Made Continuous. Two reports were reviewed. the states in category B do not show clearly the assessment for the positive moment resulting from time dependent losses in the precast girders. thereby increasing apparent live load. In reference to Appendix G of the NCHRP report 322. the positive restraint moment resulting from the presence of the reinforcement in the bottom of the diaphragm increases the positive moment within the span. shrinkage.” November 1989. The net result on the effective continuity moment is the . With application of live load. This increase in positive moment when bottom reinforcement is used at supports is virtually equal to the loss of negative moment continuity if positive reinforcement is not used. There is a loss of negative continuity moment associated with the closing of cracks in the bottom of the diaphragm. The presence of positive moment reinforcement in the diaphragm helps to maintain a relatively small crack. the positive moment crack must close prior to inducing negative moment at the continuity connection. and elastic shortening. “Results of an analytical study (G-1) of time-dependent restraint moment and service load moments at supports in prestressed concrete girders made continuous indicate that there is little structural advantage gained by providing positive moment reinforcement at supports.” The report also states that the creep and shrinkage will produce “A positive restraint moment at the supports that will generally induce a crack in the bottom of the diaphragm concrete.In categories A and B where the mentioned states assess for continuity over pier by using a diaphragm. addressing the subject of assessing for positive moment over pier resulting from creep.
the University of Cincinnati submitted an interim report to the NCHRP.” (It is important to note that the unpublished report was obtained from The study team's review of the NCHRP and has not yet been released for publication.) report content is solely for the purpose of the presented study. ” Provision shall be made in the design for the positive moments that may develop in the negative moment region due to the combined effects of creep and shrinkage in the girders and deck slab.2.2." In September 1999. Therefore.2.” NCHRPR 322 proposes that the commentary should be added to section 9. many studies discussed in the report state that the cause . In addition. Sixteenth Edition (1996 with Interims up to 2000) contains the statement for positive moment at connection at piers (9.1). and due to the effect of live load plus impact load in remote spans.7. providing positive moment reinforcement has no significant benefit for reducing service load moments. The report concluded that many engineers and state agencies think that positive moment connections are needed to control cracking in the diaphragm and to provide continuity.7.2 of the Standard Specification (AASHTO). Shrinkage and Elastic shortening of the pier shall be considered when significant. irrespective of whether or not positive moment reinforcement is provided at supports. It should be noted that Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. ”Connection Between Simple Span Precast Concrete Girders Made Continuous.same. The report also revealed that PCA was first to identify cracking of the connection caused by time dependent positive moments.
the user is left with the choice of assessing for positive moment reinforcement at the connection. Based on the above-presented reports. it was worthwhile to assess for positive moment at the connection for crack control. In the submitted spreadsheet. the spreadsheet will use a default entry equal to 1.of cracking appears to be positive moment developed from time dependent deformations of the prestressed girders. If the user does not wish to input any moment due to time dependent losses in the girders.2Mcr to assess for crack control in the diaphragm. .
If the user wishes not to input any positive moment.2.2.7. the user shall input the positive moment due to the combined effects of creep and shrinkage in the girder and deck slab. The user has to input the negative dead load moment combination and live load. and the width was taken equal to the adjacent beams bottom width. . Figure 1 shows the dimensions and reinforcement details of the proposed diaphragm detail over pier for the State of Maryland. and NCHRP Project 12-53 Interim Report prepared by University of Cincinnati. Bars B. Also.1). Bar A is to be found for all types of girders based on the inputted dead load and live load combinations. C. and to the effect of live load plus impact in remote spans (STD. The spreadsheet accounts for all type of AASHTO Girders and Bulb-Tee Girders.2Mcr to assess for crack control in the diaphragm. Referring to the spreadsheet. The design was based on a concrete rectangular block having a height equal to the adjacent beams including the slab thickness. a spreadsheet that calculates the positive moment reinforcement and negative moment reinforcement at a pier was constructed.Design and Analysis A thorough review of standard details continuity over pier from the 28 states. led to the final design of the standard detail for diaphragm over pier for the State of Maryland. The AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (Sixteenth Edition) was used also. and D are standard for all types of AASHTO and Bulb-Tee Girders. The user can still change the latter mentioned bars. Based on the review. 9. NCHRP Report 322. the spreadsheet will use a default value equal to1. The PCI bridge design manual was also referred to for the design of the diaphragm.
Transverse Cross-Section of Diaphragm . a transverse section of the diaphragm between girders is shown. Stirrups calculations were based on minimum The spreadsheet includes a reinforcement as per ACI and AASHTO requirements. and a summary table of all the states which replied is also included. Diaphragm Over Pier Detail In Figure 2. It should be noted that horizontal reinforcements are temperature and shrinkage requirements of ACI and AASHTO.Figure 1. Figure 2. detailed design and analysis for the girders types listed. A table of different types of girder dimensions and parameters is included in the report.
The spreadsheet will calculate the adequacy of the inputted moment for the standard reinforcement. . 3. 7. The user should enter the dead load combination and live load and impact load combination in the assigned cells. and the spreadsheet will check its adequacy (step 12. 6. Design was based on a concrete block with a width equals the girder bottom flange width and the depth equals the beam height plus the thickness of the slab. The user can change the standard. The spreadsheet will check the adequacy of the chosen area of reinforcement. 5. 2. The user has the choice to enter a value for positive moment over pier due to creep and shrinkage and remote spans. and the spreadsheet will check its adequacy (step 13). 8. 11. The spreadsheet calculates the required reinforcement for positive moment as per 1.Design Of Diaphragm Over Pier Of Precast Beams (Spreadsheet) 1. 10. Table 2 (Bar B): the table shows the recommended standard for reinforcement for positive moment. Table 3 (Bar C): the table shows the recommended standard for stirrups. Layout of reinforcement is shown in figures 1 & 2. 4. The user can change the standard. The user should choose the reinforcement to assess for negative moment over pier. and the spreadsheet will check its adequacy (step 11). for any type of girder.2Mcr (by default). Table 4 (Bar D): the table shows the recommended standard for temperature and shrinkage reinforcement. Dimensions of the diaphragm over pier are shown in figure 1. The user can change the standard. Table 1 (Bar A): Spreadsheet user can input the chosen bar diameter and quantity (step 1 – 10). 9.
08 0.918 * As(chosen).66 0.12284 7.00 141.23 3965.87 2396.00 1.62 OK 0.00 0. C.00 3.26 1. k-ft* MLL+I-.06 3947. k-ft 229.00 141.87 0 70 328.23 1518.04 1921. spreadsheet uses a default value of 1.62 OK 0.81 4. k-ft ρ 0. Stirrups.06 0. Note: Design of continuity was based on a concrete block having the width of the bottom flange and the height of the chosen beam and chosen slab thickness Note: Loading is Based on HS-25 .62 OK 0.C.5 Load Input MDL-.1769 11.00 2.62 OK 0.53 5. in Type I 45 36. The Spreadsheet wwill check the adequacy of the user's choice. k-ft* MSDL-.75ρb ρ φ Mn > 1.030813 0.62 OK 0. Bar D Bar D.50 0.68 0.23 3048. in2 As(chosen)+.08 627.7 10.62 OK 0.002382 4. Kudsi.5 * No sign needed Negative Moment Analysis (Bar A) Table 1: Bar A* MU-. Bar C Bar C.66 0.76 804.88 OK 0.82087 3.4 φ β1 m fr 30 in 60000 psi 7000 psi 9 2 0.40 0.005390 0.0291 11. in2 As(chosen)-.030813 0.62 NO 0.34 0 408 1204.50 0.50 0.59 0.006942 0.030813 0.00 142.4119 3.005147 0. Fu & T.98 10.50 0. k-ft Rn.030813 0.88407 4.88 AASHTO Girders Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI Additional As(chosen)12 12 12 12 12 12 # # # # # # 5 5 5 7 7 7 Standard Slab Reinf.62 NO 0.5 0 181 681.75 1803.030813 0.203 670.2Mcr Adequacy of Chosen Area Of Steel Aest->= As(chosen)Aest+>= Achosen+ OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Table 4 :**Bar D AASHTO Girders As(Temperature&Shrinkage) # # # # # # 5 5 5 6 6 6 @ @ @ @ @ @ 12 12 12 12 12 12 in c/c /back & Front in c/c /back & Front in c/c /back & Front in c/c /back & Front in c/c /back & Front in c/c /back & Front Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI Minimum Pier Diaphragm Reinfocement between Beam (Bars C & D) As (Min).2.2 0.5 0 556 1485.84 363.078 381.75837 11.004959 0. As 13 13 13 13 13 13 # # # # # # 5 5 5 5 5 5 0.92701 3. k-ft Rn.60 8.08 0.88 OK 0. psi Aest-.23 3511. T&S).6 290. 8/7/00 AASHTO Girders Max Span Length. in2 0.00 142.00 1.75 1476.38 3145.66 0.88 OK **Note: Tables for Bars B.030813 1079.5 18 Type III 80 53.AASHTO Girder Continuity Over Pier Analysis and Design By C.53 * if no value is input.= Additional As(chosen).08 0.62 401.5 22 Type IV 100 62.75 1187.5 28 Diaphragm Width fy f'c Slab Thickness Haunch 0 283 934.50 0.2Mcr OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK * Over the effective width Table 2 : **Bar B AASHTO Girders OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI 7 7 7 7 7 7 As(chosen)+ # # # # # # 6 6 6 7 8 8 Positive Moment Analysis (Bar B) * Mu+. chosen in2/ft Adequacy of Bar D 0.29 0.36816 5.005010 0.23 1714.96 4.00 143.10 7.37 292. psi ρ 0.08 11.2Mcr.66 0.66 0.006249 0.7755 5.174 300.50 0. in * Girder width.9 0.5 psi in in *Depth = height of Beam + slab Thickness +Haunch . k-ft* 0 57 261. chosen in2/ft Adequacy of Bar C As(Min.5 28 Type VI 140 80.3546 7.5 26 Type V 120 71.66 0. ft Depth.75ρb ρ 642.and D are standards. in2* φ Mn.00 141.18 Table 3 : **Bar C AASHTO Girders Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI # # # # # # 5 5 5 5 5 5 @ @ @ @ @ @ As(Stirrups) 12 12 12 12 12 12 in c/c closed strirrup in c/c closed strirrup in c/c closed strirrup in c/c closed strirrup in c/c closed strirrup in c/c closed strirrup Aest+. user can change the recommended reinforcement by inputting in the related cells the desired reinforcement.+ Standard Slab Reinf As Negative Moment Checks φ M n > Mu ρ < 0.35 314.5 16 Type II 50 44.62 NO 0.05437 7.
assuming the compression block is uniform Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Mu = 1.16. Bar C = 0.5-1) where fy and f'c in step 12 are in KSI bw = width of Diaphragm over Pier.2.1-1. (STD Eq.12.b = width of Selected Girder Reinforcment Limits (Standard Specifications) Step 8 Step 9 ρb =(0. (STD Art.2. 8-17) .2.2 times the cracking moment. Determine the required steel in the deck to resist the total factored negative Moment. in inches Temperature & Shrinkage Reinforcement Calculations Step 13 As (Min.2.75ρb.85f'cb.3*(MDL+MSDL+1.b = width of Selected Girder ρ = (1/m)*(1-sqrt(1-2mRn/fy)). (STD Eq.2. (AASHTO LRFD-5.7.2Mcr Positive Moment Analysis Step 11 Mu+ = User should input its value as per STD Art 9.85f'c).8. Stirrups.1-2. T&S). The cracking moment may be calculated as for a prestressed concrete section except fpe = 0 Step 10 φMn >= 1.b = width of Selected Girder φMn = φAsfy(d-a/2). if no value is inputed spreadsheet will use a default value of 1. 8. (7.67*MLL+I). (8.1. b.0316*sqrt(f'c)*bw*s/fy. 8-16) a = Asfy/0.1) the total amount of nonprestressed reinforcement should be adequate to develop an ultimate moment at the crtical section at least 22.214.171.124. PCI Bridge Design Manual) Rn =Mu/(φbd2). (STD Art.2. (8.1) ρmax =0.3.2.3.1-3. PCI Bridge Design Manual) . PCI Bridge Design Manual) m = fy/(0. Bar D = 0. PCI Bridge Design Manual) As = ρbd .85β1f'c/fy)*(87. 8.3. (8. s = spacing = 12 in. (STD Art. (ACI 7.2.0018*bw*h.8.3: Design of Negative Moment Regions For Members Made Continous for Live Load Use the width of the bottom flange as the width of the concrete compressive block.1-3.1) Minimum Reinforcement.1.1) bw = width of diaphragm .Negative Moment Analysis PCI-8.3.2Mcr Minimum Reinforcement For Stirrups Calculations Step 12 As (Min).3.000+fy)).000/(87.
and D are standards.C. k-ft * MSDL-.00 62.00 1.2. k-ft Rn. * if no value is input.75ρb ρ φ Mn > 1.66 12.53 12.7266 11.00 1.50 0. T&S). ft Depth.084 627.29 1122.2Mcr Adequacy of Chosen Area Of Steel Aest->= As(chosen)Aest+>= Achosen+ OK OK OK OK OK OK Minimum Pier Diaphragm Reinfocement between Beam (Bars C & D) As (Min).64 Bulb-Tee Girders As(Temperature&Shrinkage) Rn. in2 Type I # 8 @ 12 in c/c Back & Front Type II # 9 @ 12 in c/c Back & Front Type III # 9 @ 12 in c/c Back & Front **Note: Tables for Bars B.00 2.7 in psi psi in in *Depth = height of Beam + slab Thickness +Haunch .2 1590.86 0.83 0 479. Bar D Bar D. k-ft * MLL+I-.251 550.23 4239.005759 Table 2 : **Bar B As(chosen)+ # # # 5 5 6 0.030813 0.43 1317.59 10. chosen in2 Adequacy of Bar C As(Min.20 4734.030813 0.50 OK 0.86 0.66 10.93 335. psi ρ +.1673 11. spreadsheet uses a default value of 1.23 φ Mn.75 0.25 349. 2 Aest in As(chosen)+.62 OK 0.627 792.44 382. in As(chosen)-.00 OK Note: Design of continuity was based on a concrete block having the width of the bottom flange and the height of the chosen beam and chosen slab thickness Note: Loading is Based on HS-25 .66 7.88 10.38 3503.00 55.20049 2.23 0.+ Standard Slab Reinf As Negative Moment Checks Table 3 : **Bar C φ Mn > M u ρ < 0. The Spreadsheet wwill check the adequacy of the user's choice. k-ft * 0. psi 2 Aest .50 0.2Mcr.75ρb ρ 372.006007 0.9 0.62 OK 0.006601 0.5 Load Input MDL-.495 psi * No sign needed Negative Moment Analysis (Bar a) Bulb-Tee Girders MU .87 0.32904 1.51 11. user can change the recommended reinforcement by inputting in the related cells the desired reinforcement.5 26 BT-72 146 80.51 Type I 12 Type II 12 Type III 12 * Over the effective width Bulb-Tee Girders Type I Type II Type III 6 6 6 2916.72 0. k-ft * As(chosen) = Additional As(chosen). chosen in2 Adequacy of Bar D 0.71937 1.5 26 Diaphragm Width fy f'c Slab Thickness Haunch φ β1 m fr 30 60000 7000 9 2 0. in BT-54 114 62.Bulb-tee Girder Continuity Over Pier Analysis and Design Bulb-Tee Girders Max Span Length.00 48. Stirrups.50 0.903 1. k-ft * 0 368.5 26 BT-63 130 71.82 0 605.030813 0. in * Girder width. Bar C Bar C. in2 Table 1: Bar A* As(chosen)# # # 7 7 8 Standard Slab Reinf.2Mcr OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Bulb-Tee Girders Type I Type II Type III Positive Moment Analysis (Bar B) # # # 5 5 5 @ @ @ As(Stirrups) 12 12 12 in c/c in c/c in c/c closed strirrup closed strirrup closed strirrup Table 4 : **Bar D Step 11 Mu+. As 13 13 13 # # # 5 5 5 3484.11 OK 0. k-ft ρ 3048.0545 13.62 OK 0.
in 4 Bar # 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 125.73 31.41 12.320 24. in hfb.128 1. in2 659 Ig.410 h.73 29.750 0. in Ac.310 0.180 733.077 392.270 1.894 27.70 0.17 15.790 1.38 224 583 22 16 7 7 330 822 26 20 8 8 514 1055 28 42 5 8 676 1130 28 42 5 8 Properties Sections Bulb Tee Girders BT-54 h.75 0. in r2.979 20. in BT-63 63 713 BT-72 72 767 f'c 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 β1 0. in c2. in c1. plf Wb.270 1.63 32.750 15.83 138 384 18 12 6 6 Type IV 54 789 Type V 63 1013 Type VI 72 1085 Area of Steel Area Diameter 0.375 0.625 0.Look-up Tables for AASHTO and Bulb-tee Girders AASHTO Bridge Girders Type I Type II Type III 28 36 45 276 369 560 22.6 686 743 799 26 42 26 42 26 42 .110 0. plf Wb. in Wt.560 0.80 0.741 521. in wo.59 82 288 16 12 4 5 50.600 0. in2 Sections Ig.638 545.65 Properties 268.390 260.04 35.62 20.875 1.000 1.85 0. in4 ybottom.500 0.200 0.000 1. in2 wo.27 31. in 54 Ac.27 24.440 0.96 36. in Wt. in hft.12 36.
Continuous Not Continuous. No Standards for PB.22 A1. Continuous Continuous A1.13 A1. R/C Diaphragm encasing ends of girder. "-" = Not Available . surrounded by closed 25 mm cell foam NEBT.27 N/A - - Continuous 600 mm 300 mm Extends strands from girder into the diaphragm.2 A1.6 A1. Extended Prestressed strands. Concrete Diaphragm Between PB. or extend min 4 strands from girder into the diaphragm.5 A1. Slab designed to assess for continuity.18 A1.25 12 mm. shown was used on individual bridges. Slab designed to assess for continuity. Continuous Diaphragm keyed into pier 300 mm by a dowel bar extended the strands into diaphragm for +M Continuous - Filler under diaphragm - Not Continuous. preformed joint filler 12 mm cardboard 0'-2'' Not Continuous.3 A1. No Standards for PB diaphragms. shown are for bridges built with the NEBT Girders. Continuous Foam under Diaphragm Foam under Diaphragm - Elastomeric pad Elastomeric pad bearings pads 1/2'' Premolded joint filler - Elastomeric pad Elastomeric pad PB assumed SS for DL and continuous for LL.15 A1. Not Continuous.1 A1. Diaphragm keyed into pier.21 A1.7 A1. Continuous Continuous Continuous Not Continuous.26 A1. min 300 mm to a max 375 mm into the diaphragm Continuous No Standards for PB diaphragms.14 A1. Continuous Polystrene 1/2'' joint filler Not Continuous.23 A1.Table of Survey Summary and Commentary States Colorado Delaware Georgia Idaho Illinois Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri New Jersey North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Virginia Washington Wisconsin wyoming California New York State Alaska Notes = Pre-stressed Beam = Total Diaphragm Width = Clear Space between the Two girders = Space usually filled with cardboard or preformed filled when Deck is designed to account for continuity +M = Positive Moment -M = Negative Moment SS = Simple Span NEBT = New England Bulb Tee Beam PB A1 A2 A3 A1 3'-0'' 634 mm 612 mm 600 760 mm 750 mm 250 mm 3'-8'' 650 mm 300 mm 2'-4'' 2'-3'' 2'-6'' 2'-6'' 2'-0'' 635 mm 750 mm 450 mm 600 mm 300 mm 2'-0'' 1'-0'' 900 mm 1'-8'' - Diaphragm Dimensions A2 280 mm 205 mm 150 300 mm 300 mm 100 mm 0'-4'' 0'-7'' 300 mm 0'-10'' 1'-0'' 0'-9'' 520 mm 250 mm (+M) 100 mm (no +M) 150 mm 250 mm 0'-3'' 250 mm A3 - Filler 13 mm performed cork - Bearing Type Premolded joint filler Elastomeric pad Elastomeric pad Neoprene pad Elastomeric pad Polystrene Elastomeric pad Elastomeric pad Elastomeric pad joint filler Laminated elastomeric pad Styrofoam Additional Descrition Additional Descriptions Continuous.17 A1.12 A1. Deck Slab is Continuous over the intermediate Bents. Continuous Details Dwgs A1.8 A1.4 A1.16 A1. Not official works.10 A1.19 A1. The +M section of PB is designed for SS only.24 A1.11 A1. PB designed as SS for DL and LL.PB provide for LL and DL -ve M. Not Continuous. but frequently used.9 A1.20 A1. Use as per dwgs.
Colorado Appendix A1.1 .
2 .Delaware Appendix A1.
3 .Georgia Appendix A1.
3.1 .Georgia Appendix A1.
4 .Idaho Appendix A1.
Illinois Appendix A1.5 .
5.1 .Illinois Appendix A1.
2 .Illinois Appendix A1.5.
6 .Kansas Appendix A1.
Kansas Appendix A1.6.1 .
Kentucky Appendix A1.7 .
1 .Kentucky Appendix A1.7.
Louisiana Appendix A1.8 .
8.Louisiana Appendix A1.1 .
9 .Maine Appendix A1.
Massachusetts Appendix A1.10 NEBT Beam Continuity .
10.1 Box Beam Continuity .Massachusetts Appendix A1.
2 Pier Diaphragm Plan For Box Beam Continuity .Massachusetts Appendix A1.10.
Michigan Appendix A1.11 .
Minnesota Appendix A1.12 .
13 .Missouri Appendix A1.
New Jersey Appendix A1.14 .
North Carolina Appendix A1.15 .
16 .North Dakota Appendix A1.
Ohio Appendix A1.17 .
Ohio Appendix A1.17.1 .
18 .Oregon Appendix A1.
19 .Pennsylvania Appendix A1.
Tennessee Appendix A1.20 .
21 .Utah Appendix A1.
22 .Virginia Appendix A1.
Washington State Appendix A1.23 .
24 .Wisconsin Appendix A1.
25 .Wyoming Appendix A1.
California Appendix A1.26 .
State Of New York Appendix A1.27 .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.