|
|||||
|
|
Effect of Multilanes on Wheel Load Distribution in Steel Girder Bridges |
|
| Authors: | Mounir E Mabsout Kassim M Tarhini Gerald R Frederick Abbas Kesserwan |
| Affiliation: | 11Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., American Univ. of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. E-mail: mounir@aub.edu.lb
22Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Valparaiso Univ., Valparaiso, IN 46383; corresponding author. E-mail: ktarhini@orion.valpo.edu 33Prof., Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154. 44Grad. Student, American Univ. of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon, and Struct. Engr., Dar Al-Handasah, Shair and Partners, Inc., Beirut, Lebanon. |
| Abstract: | This paper presents the results of a parametric study that investigated the effect of multilanes and continuity on wheel load distribution in steel girder bridges. Typical one- and two-span, two-, three-, and four-lane, straight, composite steel girder bridges were selected for this study. The major bridge parameters chosen for this study were the span length, girder spacing, one- versus two-spans, and the number of lanes. These parameters were varied within practical ranges to study their influence on the wheel load distribution factors. A total of 144 bridges were analyzed using the finite-element method. The computer program, SAP90, was used to model the concrete slab as quadrilateral shell elements and the steel girders as space frame members. Simple supports were used to model the boundary conditions. AASHTO HS20 design trucks were positioned in all lanes of the one- and two-span bridges to produce the maximum bending moments. The calculated finite-element wheel load distribution factors were compared with the AASHTO and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 12-26 formulas. The results of this parametric study agree with the newly developed NCHRP 12-26 formula and both were, in general, less than the empirical AASHTO formula (S∕5.5) for longer span lengths >15.25 m (50 ft)] and girder spacing >1.8 m (6 ft). This paper demonstrates that the multiple lane reduction factors are built into the newly developed distribution factors for steel girder bridges that were presented in the NCHRP 12-26 final report. It should be noted that AASHTO LRFD contains a similar expression that results in a value that is 50% of the value in the equations developed as a part of NCHRP 12-26. This is due to the fact that AASHTO LRFD consider the entire design truck instead of half-truck (wheel loads) as the case in the NCHRP 12-26 report and the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. Therefore, this paper supports the use of the new distribution factors for steel girder bridges developed as a part of NCHRP 12-26 and consequently the distribution factors presented in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. |
| Keywords: | |