Recommendations for assessment Eurocodes for bridges

Hendy, Chris R.; Sandberg, Jessica; Shetty, N K

doi:10.1680/bren.900030

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Eurocodes are commonly accepted as having greater economy in design capacities than previous codes of practice (Hendy et al, 2011), being based on more recent design techniques and testing data. Currently there are no assessment codes based on Eurocodes, which means that existing structures are essentially being assessed using superseded techniques and test data, potentially missing out on any benefits which could be brought by applying the latest industry best practice.…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing riveted connections to Eurocode 3

GentDave

Ianakiev

2017

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2The focus of this paper is the assessment of wrought iron and early steel riveted connections in the future, with recommendations as to how different codes currently deal with the assessment and what may change if alternative codes are adopted. As British standards are being replaced by Eurocodes for design, it is inevitable that assessment codes of practice based on British standards will be replaced by those based on Eurocodes. This progression will ensure that future structures are designed and assessed using codes based on similar philosophies. However, this will also lead to older structures designed according to older codes based on different philosophies and constructed of materials not covered by the Eurocodes also being assessed according to Eurocode-based assessment codes. A similar situation already exists with structures being assessed using British standard-based assessment codes, which were written for the design of steel structures. This has resulted in the leading asset-owning organisations, such as Network Rail and Highways England, including guidance on adapting calculations to account for different material types.1. Introduction The history of riveted connectionsConnections are only as strong as their parent material, and therefore both the physical connection (such as a bolt or rivet) and the members they are connecting should be considered when assessing the strength of a connection.Rivets are permanent mechanical fasteners predominantly found on wrought iron and early steel structures. A rivet consists of a smooth cylindrical shaft with a 'head' at one end, with the opposite end known as the 'tail end'. Historical rivets were placed in a punched or drilled hole through two or more plates and the tail was deformed to create another head, sandwiching the plates together.At the peak of their use in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, fabricating riveted structures was very labour intensive, with the rivets being hammered into position manually. It is understood that riveting was generally undertaken in the fabrication shop as opposed to on-site. Figure 1 shows typical rivet design data, given in Molesworth's Pocket Book of Engineering Formulae (Molesworth, 1862).The use of riveted connections rose and fell correspondingly with the rise and fall in favour of wrought iron, approximately between 1830 and 1890, but persisted as a favoured form of connection as early steel replaced wrought iron. Riveted connections appeared in all areas of fabrication, from shipbuilding to bridges, anywhere two or more plates required connecting, until they were slowly phased out by bolted connections, which required less physical effort to install and were less likely to damage the structure during installation or removal.It is important to understand the difference between riveted and bolted connections. When a rivet was driven into position, it expanded to fill the hole completely and therefore removed the potential for slip, in contrast to modern bolted connections, which are provided with a 2 or 3 m...

show abstract

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing riveted connections to Eurocode 3

GentDave

Ianakiev

2017

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coupon testing of steel from the boxes confirmed that the steel did, however, have adequate ductility to satisfy Eurocode requirements. 'Recommendations for assessment Eurocodes for bridges' (Hendy et al, 2011) gives further details of considerations for using Eurocodes for assessment.…”

Section: Steel Box Girdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bearing replacements for Forth Road Bridge approach viaducts

Colford

Chiarello

Hendy

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Bridge Engi

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The existing Forth Road Bridge spans the Firth of Forth in Scotland. The main suspension bridge, with central span of 1006 m, has two multi-span approach viaducts leading up to the main crossing. The deck of the approach viaducts comprises a pair of longitudinal steel box girders supporting a series of transversely spanning steel girders, both acting compositely with a reinforced concrete deck. The steel girders of the approach viaducts are supported on steel roller and rocker bearings on concrete portal piers which vary in height between 11 m and 40 m. An initial study of the bearings identified that the rollers had locked up due to corrosion and distortion, and the concrete beneath the bearings and elsewhere on the pier tops had deteriorated due to chloride contamination. Assessment showed that structural deficiencies in the pier were exacerbated by both the concrete deterioration and change in articulation.These factors led to the decision to replace all the bearings on the viaducts. This paper outlines the design of the strengthening and modifications to the bridge to facilitate bearing replacement, together with a detailed description of the design of the temporary works needed to maintain the bridge's articulation during jacking. IntroductionThe Forth Road Bridge (Figure 1) spans the Firth of Forth and was completed in 1964. The main structure is a three-span suspension bridge. At each end of the bridge, there are two multispan approach viaducts comprising a pair of longitudinal steel box girders with cross-girders supporting a concrete deck slab as shown in Figure 2. The approach viaducts carry two carriageways, each with two lanes, and extend from the abutments to the side towers, which are shared with the main suspension bridge. The total width of the structure is 36 m.The box girders rest on steel roller and rocker bearings on reinforced concrete portal piers, varying between 11 m and 40 m high, founded on rock. The articulation of the two viaducts is shown in Figure 3 During inspections and displacement monitoring, the existing roller bearings were found to exhibit little or no movement and varying amounts of corrosion. At the north side tower, the only roller bearing on the north viaduct, the roller was found to be nearing the limit of its movement range. Figure 4(a) shows a typical roller bearing, and Figure 4(b) shows the roller at the north side tower. Structural assessment of the rollers bearings to BS 5400-9-1:1983 (BSI, 1983) and BS EN 1337-4 (BSI, 2004a showed that the original bearings did not meet modern geometrical limits and were significantly overstressed to the codes.The rocker bearings were generally found to be in a better condition than the rollers, although some corrosion was present. A typical rocker bearing is seen in Figure 5. A structural assessment was also performed on the rocker bearings, which generally found that the bearings complied with the requirements set out in BS EN 1337 -6:2004 (BSI, 2004b).An inspection of the pier tops showed concrete delamination occurring at ma...

show abstract

“…In the first of these, the authors investigate how the new structural Eurocodes for steel and concrete might be applied to the assessment of existing structures (Hendy et al, 2011). It is identified that they lend themselves to adaptation and provide a basis for making a rigorous and accurate prediction of the ultimate strength of a structure based on structure-specific loads and material properties.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial

Lark¹

2011

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Bridge Engi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recommendations for assessment Eurocodes for bridges

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Assessing riveted connections to Eurocode 3

Assessing riveted connections to Eurocode 3

Bearing replacements for Forth Road Bridge approach viaducts

Editorial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About