2007
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2007)12:4(477)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Live-Load Analysis of a Curved I-Girder Bridge

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In order to simplify the analysis, some researchers try to idealize the complex bridge deck structures into a simple structural system such as grillage, equivalent orthotropic plate and some other form [1][2][3] but the solution accuracy is affected with these simplifications which may not be acceptable for a reliable design of these structures. A satisfactory result can be obtained by using a detailed finite element modelling [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] of these curved structures but this is not feasible in a design office, specifically, for a preliminary design of these structures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In order to simplify the analysis, some researchers try to idealize the complex bridge deck structures into a simple structural system such as grillage, equivalent orthotropic plate and some other form [1][2][3] but the solution accuracy is affected with these simplifications which may not be acceptable for a reliable design of these structures. A satisfactory result can be obtained by using a detailed finite element modelling [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] of these curved structures but this is not feasible in a design office, specifically, for a preliminary design of these structures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may be a simple task for a simply supported straight beam but this is not so for curved beams as they are always found to be statically indeterminate. Though some researchers [9,11,12] try to avoid this problem by treating curved beams as equivalent straight beams with altered properties to account for the member curvature. These simplified assumptions can compromise the accuracy of the results significantly which may not be desirable.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Recommendations are made outlining rating of horizontally curved composite steel I-girder bridges through the use of grillage-based analysis, with and without the use of load testing, and within the context of the AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) and Load Factor Rating (LFR) procedures. Barr et al (2007) presented the LiveLoad test results of a three-span, curved steel I-girder with concrete deck bridge, and subsequent comparison with the V-load method to investigate its accuracy. Huang (2008b) put forward the results of field tests, stating that current AASHTO guide specifications regarding the first transverse stiffener spacing at the simple end support of a curved girder may be too conservative for bridge load capacity ratings; moreover, current specifications may greatly overestimate the dynamic loadings of curved box girder bridges with long span lengths.…”
Section: Dynamic and Seismic Responsementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the behavior of curved I-girder bridges is more complex and the curvature makes it complicated to perform numerical analyses compared with straight ones. Some studies of dynamic response of horizontally curved I-girder bridges have been performed for road vehicles in which multi-degrees-of-freedom vehicle models have been used in conjunction theoretical road surface profiles with some assumptions [9][10][11][12]. All of these researches referred above are focusing on multi I-girder bridges, while limited study was on horizontally curved twin I-girder bridges.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%