Computers & Brucrures, Vol. 2, pp. 915-932. Pcrgamon Press 1972.

Printed in Great Britain

COMPUTERIZED STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

OF CONTINUOUS PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
BOX-GIRDER BRIDGES BUILT BY CANTILEVER
METHOD OF CONSTRUCTIONt

GURDIAL CHADHA and KONSTANIIN KETCHEK

Erdman and Anthony, Consulting Engineers, Rochester, N.Y. 14604, U.S.A.

Aimbad-A computer program for the design and analysis of a prestressed concrete box girder bridge built
by the Cantilever method is presented. The method described herein replaces the costly and time-consuming
manual calculations with an efficient digital computer program.
The input for the algorithm is the description of the cross-section, the longitudinal profile, the sequence
of segmental construction, the weight and dimensions of the form traveller and the temporary and permanent
acting loads.
The output consists of cross-section properties, section forces, prestressing requirements for working and
ultimate load conditions including the acting stresses at each desired joint.
The program offers great flexibility in the design of prestressed bridges built by this construct.ion method.
In addition to a brief description of the cantilever method, the use of the program is explained by designing
the main span of a three span continuous bridge 750 ft long with a 330 ft center span. The example bridge
has a two-cell box girder with the depth varying parabolically from 16 ft at the piers to 7 ft at mid span and
abutments.

NOMENCLATURE
A area of cross-section (fts)
B width of the part (ft)
BW bottom width of section (ft)
BOC bottom cover to the center of prestressing (ft)
BL, A, C dimensions of traveller (ft)
CON. SB, ST. concrete stress in bottom and top fibers (psi)
CON. SL W. SR W concrete stress in extreme left and right fibers due to wind (psi)
DSH distance of top fiber from the top of web
DLF dead load factor
DS depth of section at support (ft)
H height of the part (ft)
HAVN length of the hauch (ft)
HA length of widening (ft)
Z moment of inertia about X-axis (ft4)
ZY moment of inertia about Y-axis (ft4)
NIP number of identical parts
NSEC, NSECZ number of sections
NPART number of parts
NAB distance of neutral axis from bottom flange (ft)
NAL distance of neutral axis from extreme left fiber (ft)
NAR distance of neutral axis from extreme right fiber (ft)
NAT distance of neutral axis from top flange. (ft)
PFB working prestress force/bar or tendon (hips)
PR.FO required prestressing force (Trips)
PR.FOI maximum pm&easing force that can be provided (hips)
PSC allowable stress in concrete (psi)

t Presented at the National Symposium on Computerized Structural Analysis and Design at the School
of Engineering and Applied Science, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., 27-29 March (1972).

915
916 GURDIALCHADHAand KONSTANTIN KETCHEK

SB section modulus bottom (ft3)

S?iP shape of haunch
SH shape of widening
SML section modulus about Y axis-left (ftJf
Sh4R section modulus about Y axis-right (fts)
Sff.CENT. distance of shear center from bottom flange (ft)
SPA length of span (ft)
ST section modulus top (ft3)
T top cover to ihe center of prestressing (ft]
TA slope of widening
TAN slope of haunch
Tt thickness of top slab at the tip of overhang
Tz, 7+x thickness of web (ft)
T, TOG’ top cover to the center of prestressing (ft)
TW top width of section (ft)
7WEB one half of the total thickness of webs (ftt
TF average thickness of top flange at support (ftftf
U constant depth of section (ft)
Ut constant width of top slab (ft)
WC weight of concrete in kipicft
WTR weight of form traveller (kips)
WP weightjft run of forms and working platform (kips)
WI wind load intensity (ksf)
X distance of tip or near side of rectanglefrom bottom fiber (ft)
YY distanceof tip or near side of rectangle from left edge of section (ft)

INTRODUCTION
THE DEVELOPMENT of prestressed concrete has made it possible to introduce me~ba~ization
into concrete bridge construction. One of the methods which permits construction of a
bridge without scaffol~ng, using horizontal sliding forms supported by a traveller crane
located on a previously built portion of the bridge, is usually called “Cantilever Method
of Construction”.
For better aesthetical appearance and economic reasons box-girders are widely used
for prestressed concrete structures. In the free-cantilever method the sofIlt of the canti-
levered beam has a parabolic or similar shape in the longitudinal direction. It is shaped
in such a way that the compressive forces in the lower flange and the tensile forces in the
upper flange increase almost linearly from the end of the cantilevered beam to the support.
This linear variation causes almost constant shear in the webs of the box section along
the entire length of the cantilever. The structure is built across the open span in segments
of IO-15 ft, starting from the supports and closing at the centerline of span. Each segment
is pressed against the previous one by means of post-tensioning reinforcement.
With particular economy and simplicity the Cantilever Method can be applied to a
bridge with one or several equal spans flanked by end spans having lengths equal approxi-
mately to half the main spans (Fig. la). In this case all portions built from each pier are
identical and properly balanced which simpli~es the design and constru~ion. Each portion
starts with the construction of a pier and a section of the bridge over the pier (cap) supported
by scaffolding. On the top of this cap traveller forms are assembled and cantilever con-
struction is proceeded from the pier in both directions. After all the cantilevers are con-
structed they are connected by post-tensioning into a continuous girder or by shear joints,
transmitting shear and preventing independent displacement of the cantilever ends. In
the latter case there is a monolithic moment connection between su~rstructure and pier.
Continuous spans, however, are preferred because they minimize the deflections and
 Computerized Structural Design 917

Po.s/h/ons oi .?2.n,oorcy

FIG. 1. Application of cantilever method.

angular breaks that would be caused in a hinged deck by creep, shrinkage and live loads.
The tips of end spans, of course, are supported by abutment bearings. For a bridge with
different lengths of spans (Fig. lb) a similar scheme of construction can be applied. How-
ever, after construction of parts which are balanced over piers, temporary towers at points
A, and B, would be required for continuing construction of parts Ai,4 and B,B. In a
case where the anchor span is too short for balancing half of the main span, temporary
supports may be required for the main span. For multi-span bridges cantilever construction
can be extended over the pier to the next span by using several temporary towers at different
locations which serve to reduce the negative moments in the span where final moments are
positive (Fig. lc). It can be added that there are numerous combinations where the “Canti-
lever Method” is applicable. In some bridges entire anchor spans can be constructed on
forms supported by scaffoldings, using the Cantilever Method for the central span only.
For a well-balanced bridge, temporary towers may be used for reduction of negative
moments at supports, etc. However, in all these combinations a basic portion of the bridge
is constructed as a cantilever progressively extended from the pier by adding new segments
supported by traveller forms. The analysis of this continuously changing structure is a
problem best solved by computer techniques.
For any concrete structure built by consequently adding segments, the statical schemes
of structure and forces acting at sections are changing by the addition of new segments
and the installation or removal of temporary supports. At the end of the construction
values of moments and shears at each section shall be equal to the algebraic sum of moments
and shears for all the foregoing statical schemes. However, when the structure is finished
and receives the final statical scheme of designed shape, the moments and shears acting at
918 GLJRDIAL CHADHA and KONSTANTIN
KETCHEK

the end of construction would not remain unchanged. Due to creep and shrinkage of
concrete these forces start to change to go through a process of redistribution, with the
trend to attain the values which would be acting in corresponding sections for the structure
built not by segments but on the forms supported by scaffolding (Fig. 2). The degree of
redistribution depends upon the ratio of creep and shrinkage achieved during the con-
struction and the remaining life of the structure. Experience and theory shows [l] that
with the relatively short duration of construction typical for the mechanical segmental
method, the final values of moments and shears due to dead load would be close to the
values for the structure built on scaffoldings. Due to the fact that superimposed dead load

/+?~_hq~sPun _..Cenfra/SpOC-

FIG. 2. Redistribution of bending moments due to creep and shrinkage.

and live load are applied to the bridge after its completion the final statical scheme would
govern design, with regard to proportions and the amount of prestressing. Of course,
some additional prestressing to satisfy temporary conditions during the construction should
be added, but the effectiveness of these tendons would not be fully utilized during the life
of the structure. From these general considerations it can be concluded that, for an
economical design the designer shall use the temporary schemes in such a manner that at
the end of construction the sum of the moments, by stages, shall be close to the values for
the structure built in one piece on formwork. This is possible to a certain degree by using
temporary supports, jacking them if necessary, and manipulating the levels of permanent
supports at piers and abutments. Temporary or permanent ballast may be also applied
if useful.
Without going into the details of this procedure it can be emphasized, however, that
in order to obtain simplicity and economy in the final scheme, many trials should be
performed. For the finally selected scheme, calculations of moments, shears, prestressing
forces and stresses in concrete at each joint for each stage of construction shall be evaluated
both for working stress as well as ultimate design method. The amount of calculations
for the structure constructed by segments is many times more than the amount of calcula-
tions required for a conventional structure, necessitating the use of extensive computer-
aided computations. Although the structure is statically quite simple, the required calcula-
tions become time-consuming because of variations in cross-section along the bridge and
the multiple-stages of construction condition caused by the addition of one segment after
the other. To reduce the amount of time-consuming, repetitive calculations, an electronic
computer program was devised. This program calculates step-by-step cross section pro-
perties, bending moments, shear force, reduced shear due to variable depth of beam, limits
of prestressing forces, extreme fiber stresses at each desired section due to Dead Load,
moving traveller, prestressing and wind loads. In addition, it also calculates deflection at
the end of the cantilever for each additional segment.
 Computerized Structural Design 919

A bridge built by the “Cantilever Method” is finally united by post-tensioning into

one continuous structure which is subjected to superimposed dead load (insulation, wearing
course, railings, utilities, etc.) and live loads. Moments and shears for design of these
loads are obtained by using the program “Stress” or otherwise. Design for final required
prestressing forces and computations of stresses in concrete is carried out by another sub-
program. Stresses are calculated by the working stress method and checked for ultimate
flexural capacity using AASHO 1969 specifications.
The algorithm method is described briefly in the following pages and explained in
flow charts.
The program operates on the IBM 1130, 16K Core, computer with the IBM 1442
card read punch and the IBM 1403 Printer.

ALGORTTHMIC LOGIC AND SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

The computer system described in this paper provides a single program which will
enable the designer to handle the problem in a comprehensive and systematic manner.
The system is programmed to provide flexibility by permitting the designer control over
most of the design procedures. The program is subdivided into the following headings:
1. Cross-section properties “CPROP”.
2. Elastic and ultimate design/analysis of segmental construction “EUDSC”.
3. Elastic and ultimate design/analysis of prestressed box-girders “DASCO”.
Each phase of the design system was developed so that it could be run independently
or linked with another phase. This is shown in Macro Flow Chart of (Fig. 3). The design
engineer can call the desired program. Each input symbol shows possible entry points

FIG. 3. System macro-flow chart.

920 GURDIAL CHADHA and KC)NSTANTIN
KETCHEK

into the algorithm system and each output symbol shows possible exit-points from the
system. A brief description of each phase and its capabilities are given in the following
pages :

CROSS SECTION PROPERTIES (FIG. 4)

In addition to the distances (from the support) where cross section properties are
desired, equivalent transformed areas of prestressing are given as input. The program
has an option to calculate properties for individual sections given as input where there is
irregular variations of the profile in the longitudinal direction. For regular variation in
the longitudinal direction the box-section at the end of the cantilever is described as input.

Sf0rf
CPROP

/npuf
I1

Q Oufpuf

Fro. 4. Flow chart illustrating mechanics of program “CPROP”.

Details about this section are given by dividing it into triangles and rectangles, each con-
stituting one part (Fig. 5). Each part is described by the length, slope and the shape of
the haunch. Depth (function) established variation of the thickness of top or bottom slab
in addition to the depth at any section for members with haunches or tapers according to
the equation: (Fig. 6)
 Computerized Structural Design 921

D,= lJ + (I- XX/SPA) x SLP x SPA + SPA x SLOP x ( I- XX/SPA)s”’

where SHP= 1 describes uniform taper. Any figure greater than 1, integer or decimal,
describes a parabola flattening with increase in SHP.
The program computes the following concrete/transformed concrete cross-section
properties :
(1) Area of cross-section.
(2) Position of neutral axis.
(3) Moment of inertias about X-axis and Y-axis.
(4) Section modulii about X-axis and Y-axis.
(9 Statical moment of areas about neutral axis and the junctions of webs with the
top and bottom flanges.
(6) Torsional moment of inertia.
(7) Distance of shear center from the bottom flange.

FIG. 5. Typical symmetrical box section.

SPA t

~~~~~~~

FIG. 6. Variable longitudinal profile.

ELASTIC-ULTIMATE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF SEGMENTAL

CONSTRUCTION
This program is comprehensive and general to a large extent and will calculate weights
of segments, bending moments, shear force, reduced shear [2] due to variable depth of
beam, prestressing eccentricity and force. required in the top flange and the maximum
prestressing force that can be provided in the top flange without causing tension in the
bottom flange. In addition, it also computes number of tendons or bars required to satisfy
design criteria and the stresses due to wind load. All the above mentioned computations
are performed for each section with the addition of a segment as the cantilever construction
922 GLJRDIAL
CHADHAand KONSTANTIN
KETCHEK

is continued. The designer has the option to compute deflection at the end of the cantilever
due to its own weight, moving travelling forms and prestressing force applied along the
cantilever. The mechanics of the program is illustrated in a flow chart (Fig. 7). After
processing, the design engineer reviews the results to assure that all the design criteria are
satisfied by the cross-section profile chosen. Depending upon the stresses in the top or
bottom flange it may be necessary to vary their thicknesses to bring the stresses within
allowable limits.

L 1
-2?-
,2/o
Fil7MWd
Yes

CPRO

Fm. 7. Flow chart illustratingmechanics of program “EUDSC”.

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PBESTRESSED CONCRETE BOX-GIRDERS

It computes prestressing forces and reinforcement required at the top or bottom

flanges of the box section due to the final acting forces including superimposed dead load,
live loads and secondary forces. It also computes fiber stresses due to vertical loads and
horizontal loads such as wind, centrifugal force, wind on live load, etc. To solve the
problem of shear, diagonal prestressing bars are placed in the solid webs which reduce the
dead weight by minimizing the width of the webs. Diagonal prestressing, therefore, proves
to be the key for the design of prestressed concrete bridges with large spans. The program
 Computerized Structural Design 923

calculates horizontal shear stresses as well as torsional shear stress for each desired section
along the girder. In addition, it computes principle stresses at the junctions of the flanges
with the webs and prints out spacing of the diagonal prestressed reinforcement required.
The program also calculates ultimate flexural strength according to AASHO specifications
1969, para. 1. 6. lo-11 and the prestressed reinforcement required. The algorithm is
briefly explained in a flow chart shown in (Fig. 8).

PRO SfCff-l

YE3 DASCO
Secf/on
Properties

CO/CU/Ute:
A fir working stress de&n.
B-esressing &ce requ/redo/
top, or bottom OMio//
Quon f;tq ofprestressmg re2
repwed of fop, or boffom.
Finoi prcs/rsJing forces /o/9& ./aJscJ
fiber stresses due to ve&co//oodr
fiber stressesdue to horizo&/ looo!
Cam6mcd fiber stresses.
hbr~zo,wbtlhheotstress o/junc/,nj
of web und flanges and ,teutro/
0ru inc/udinp ?orsion ff/ stress.
1onqituoko/ stresses of junc//ons
of web .4 f/cnqes and of nrutm/ax/j
Prmc/pof stresses at ~unc/ions
of web ond ftonqes.
B For u///inate &sign.
U/tin?ate design
W/ma/e ftexuruf cupocifg.
D/apono/ preskessed
re/nforcemenf spacing
No, of hors or tendons repb!

FIG. 8. Flow chart for prestressed box girder design “DASCO”.

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE

To demonstrate the capability of the design system a portion of a three-span continuous

bridge, with the cross-section similar to Fig. 5, shall be designed. The bridge shown in
Fig. 9a is a three-span bridge which is to be constructed by the Cantilever Method.
The construction starts with a cap consisting of three segments built over the pier.
These segments are constructed on forms supported by scaffolds. To secure stability of
the central cap during cantilever construction a temporary tower # 1 (anchor tower) is
erected which gives the cap a two-point support (Fig. 9b). Using two travelling forms
assembled on the top of the cap, each girder is then built out in 15-ft segments on either
924 GURDIAL CHADHA and KONSTANTIN KETCHEK

oftom f/unqe /hickness YOT/~J

from 6’ of cen/er /o .?‘a*ff!,Dier
(a) ELEVATION

(b) STAGE I

FIG. 9. Bridge elevation and construction of cap.

side of the pier, keeping one segment ahead of the construction of the anchor arm to guard
against over-balancing (Stage 2, Fig. 10). To avoid excessive pressure on temporary tower
# 1 caused by the extensions of cantilevers, a temporary tower # 2 can be erected and
tower # I removed (Fig. 1l), thus transferring the load to the second tower.

RENDING MOMENTS DIAGRAM

Fio. 10. Construction stage 2.

Assuming that the bridge is constructed simultaneously from both sides of the center-
line, at the end of Stage 2 both the cantilevers of central span meet and are connected for
contin~ty by means of post-tensioning of tendons located in the bottom flange (Stage 3,
Fig. 11). At this stage of construction there is still no positive moment developed in the
middle portion of the central span. Jacking of temporary towers (in anchor spans) is
recommended. This would create positive moments (Fig. 11) which would prevent opening
of the joints and development of tensile stresses in the middle portion of the central span.
If positive moments by jacking were not created, a certain amount of post-tensioning
would be required in the top flange which would not be an economical solution.
 Computerized Structural Design 9’5

M diugmrn due b
jocking of BWW 6?)

BENDING t&CihlENlS DIAG1)AM

FIG.:~ 1. Construction stage 3.

After continuity is established in the central span the cantilever construction is con-
tinued up to abutments in the anchor spans (Stage 4, Fig. 12). Removal of temporary
towers will complete the construction of the bridge (Stage 5, Fig. 13). Jacking at abutments
is recommended to create positive moments in the anchor spans (Stage 6, Fig. 14) which
will be close to the moments created if the superstructure is built in one piece on formwork.

BENDING MOMENTS DIAGRAM

FIG. 12. Construction stage 4.

The Cantilever Construction on either side of the pier is analyzed by the program
which gives the designer the necessary data to decide how the construction in both directions
from the pier shall proceed, to keep the necessary balance and to assure positive reaction
on temporary towers.
For purposes of illustration, a selected amount of input and output for the cantilever
of the central span is chosen. The details shown are for the first trial design. Tables 2
and 3 give the section properties calculated on the basis of the input data given in Table 1.
Tables 4-6 give moments, shear and prestressing requirements calculated on the basis of
previous computations and additional data given in Table 4. As already mentioned, the
output is given for every section for each addition of a segment. In all the tables the outpui
is presented for the case shown in Fig. 10.
926 GURDUL CHADHA and KONSTANTIN
KETCHEK

BENDING MOMENTS DIAGRAM

FIG.13. Construction stage 5,

BENDING YOMEHTS DIAGRAM

FIG.14. Construction stage 6.

 Computerized Structural Design 927

TABLE1. Input data for example problem

928 GURDIAL CHADHA and KONSTANTIN KETCHEK

TABLE 2. Print out of section properties-Sheet 1

 Computerized Structural Design 929

TABLE3. Print out of section properties--Shed 2

 930 GIJRDIAL CHADHAand KONSTANTINKETCHEK

TW TF BU 3, ?FB t,“FR TLF FLAG

52.000 1.0,o 33.000 ib.000 lZS.O’JC 150.00” 1.500 0.000

EOUIVALENT ‘UNCEU,~L1EU icaos PCTlVG 4T JOl’lTS

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.t0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00

EPUIVILENT ‘OilC. k, iL LL181:; PCTI’IS 4r iil,YTS

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.c3 0.00
0.00 0.00

SE.NO

SE.NO

st.w
st.,ro
SE.NU

SE.YO

SE.NO

SE.r*”

SE.!40

SE.NO

SE.NO

SE.NO

TABLE 4. Print out segmental construction-Sheet 1

 Computerixed Structural Design 931

iCICIS7 3 RLJCX
214.649
2,7.*,,
223,626
232.663
244,blZ
259.bdC
277.698
2*a.fLS
312.133
349.755
379.718

PRESIRESSI.VG ObTA

5EC.W 1 PR.ECC 7.3r PR.FO -0.0 cchi.sn-1708.6 4233b.M CiN.ST-1974.6 CCX.Sb-1355.9

SEC.N" * PH.ECC 6.34 PI.FC 0.0 COY.SB-1782.6 39796.84 CnN.ST-L9so.o CCN.SB-1434.2

StC.NO , P".ECC 5.4, P&.FO -0.0 CON,SB-IR4L.C 31930.37 CUN.ST-1991.2 CCY.SB-,*a+.0

SkC.NO ', PR.ECC 4,‘) PH.‘O -0.0 CUN,Sa-,a7%.1 3523S.08 C”~i.ST-,9lO.u CUU.SB-,519.‘

SEC.NO 5 PI.ECC 3.93 PR.FU -C.O CC’J.SB-lR6C.l 32411.36 C.a.ST-1938.0 Ci?‘i.SD-1512.3

SEC.NU 6 PR.ECC 3.35 PR.Fti -u*u CUii:S8-l7RS.I LW45.94 iW.ST-190J.0 CCI(.S”-Ls4~.1

SECtNO 7 PR.ECC *.w PK.FO -0.0 cm.s3-15c3>.a 27311a. 7I ‘cm.S,-1977.9 CON.SB-lifJ.4

SEC*NO L1 PR.ECC 2.,4 PH.+" -0.0 CON.Sll-,,,a., 24153.89 CLlH.SI-1925.3 CI?N.SB -975.3

SFC.NO 9 PR.ECC 2.27 P7.FO -0.0 ‘CY.SI! -973.5 ‘0700.29 C,N.ST-LB3b.U CCN.SB -641.8

SEC.NOIO PI.EC‘ 2.09 PR.FO -0.3 CON.)rH -538.9 llJ42.48 ‘lD.ST-llbl.8 CCV.S” -227.;

Sec.NO11 PR.kC‘ 1.99 P%*h‘ -0.0 CI;.“.SII -67.8 3487.24 ‘3N.ST -385.6 CCN.SB -0.0

SE‘.NOLZ PR.ECC 2.01 PS.FO (1.0 CCU.SB C.0 o.cc CW*Si 0.0 CUN.SB 0.0

TABLE5. Print out segmental construction-Sheet12

SEC NO NO OF OARSI~ENOWS REOUlREO ELASTIC DESIGN ULTIMATE OESIGN

171 185
158 169
145 lf3
* 130 1.36
* 115 111
96
7”
a
80
61
::
58
9 42
10 22 :z
I1 3 2
lZ 1 0

SlRESSES DUE TO WlhE LUAD

SEC.hO .l DlST 0.000" DEPrH 1*.0000 SW*FOR‘E.YIW 72.68 B.MOU.YINO 5105.92 CON.SLY 3b.OCCN.SRU 36.0

SEC.NO 2 DlSl i5.0000 OEPiH 14.2380 SH.FOR‘E.YING 62.64 s.m**YIND 4090.90 CON.SLY 30.7CON.SRY 35.7

SEC.NO 3 DlST 30.0000 OEPTH 13.026, SH.FORCE.YIND S3.58 B.“OY.YIN” 3219.39 CON.SLY 25.bCCN.SRY 21.6

SEC.%” 4 dlST 4S.0000 DEPTH LL.7603 SH.F”ICE.UIND 45.40 B.MO”.U,NcJ 247*.79 CON.SLY 2O.KON.SRY a.0

stc.m 5 OIST bO.O”OODEPTHIO.CIU46S”.FORCE.U,W38.00 B.WDR.YIND 1851.L9 CON.SLW 16.3CON.SRY 16.3

stc.m 6 DIST 15.0000DEPTH 9.677b S”.FORCE.YIND 31.30 8*NO”.**No 1331.34 CLlN.SLU 12.3CON.SRW 12.3

SEC.NO 7 UlST 9*.c000 "EPW 8.8599 SH.FOR‘E.WIND 23.111 8.MoCI.U2ND 907.67 CON.SLY B.?CON.SRY 1.7

SECINO e ntsr lO5.OOPO DEPTH R.LPOO S".FORCE.Y1NO 19.s B.*m.YINo 572.07 CLIN.SLY S.K(IN.SRY 5.7

!JEC.n)O Y DlST 120.0000 DEPTH 7.6694 S".FO*CE.*IND I,.32 8.*O*.*IND 317.92 CON.SLY 3.2CON.SRU 3.2

SEC.NO 10 OIST 135.0000 DEPTH 7.2975 SH.FORCE.Y,NC 9.3" 8.*O*.Y,NO L40.07 CctH.SLY I.KON,SRY 1.4

SEC.NC IL DlS, ,5O.O000 CEPT" 7*0743’ S”.FORCE.Y,ND 4.6, 8.“O”.W*ND 34.*3 CON.SLY O.ICON.SRY 0,3

stt.tm 12 lllST lb5.0000 DEPTH 7.0000 S”.F*~CE.Y,NO 0.00 a.*p*.w,rro 0.00 CON.SLY O,OCON.SRY 0.0

TABLE6. Prht out segmental ~~tructio~h~t 3

932 CURDIAL CHADHA and KONSTANTIH KETCHEK

CONCLUSIONS
The Cantilever Method is substantially economical since it will permit the bridge to
be fully self-supporting during construction, the river traffic (or city traffic, in the case of
viaducts) remaining free of obst~ction at all times. Concrete can compete with steel for
long-span bridges. This method will have profound effect on long-span bridge design and
construction, traditionally an almost exclusive market for steel,
Erdman and Anthony’s Cantilever Method, computer based, design system has been
under development since 1970 by structural engineers with both structural design and
computer experience, and will likely be under development for some time to come. Due
to the numerous calculations required for segmental construction, the system developed
is extremely helpful in the design and analysis of box-girder bridges built by the method
presented.

Acknowledgements-The basis of this paper is the program developed in connection with the design of the
S-span Genesee River Bridge, 1330 ft long with 430 ft center span (Fig. 1~). The authors are grateful to the
firm of Erdman and Anthony, ConsuIting Engineers, for providing the op~rtunity to explore and develop
the algorithm described in this paper. Mr. Paul Treer, an associate of the firm, is acknowIedged for his
outstanding contribution in the programming of cross-section properties. The writers are also indebted to
the firm’s computer&nter staff, to Mr. Elias Tonias, Director, and particularly to Mr. Charles Hodge for
his valuable assistance whenever required.

REFERENCES
F. LEONHARM, hestressed Concrete Design and Construction. Wilhelm Ernst, Munich (1964).
Y. GUYON, Presrressed Concrete, John Wiley, New York (1955).
American Concrete Institute publication SP-23--first international symposium on Concrete Bridge
Design.
American Association of State Highway Officials-Spec&ationsfor highway bri&es (1969).
American Society of Civil Engineers-Fiftlr co$erence on etectronic commutations.

(Received 11 February 1972)