http://researchspace.auckland.ac.

nz

ResearchSpace@Auckland

Copyright Statement
The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New
Zealand).
This thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the
provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use:

Any use you make of these documents or images must be for

research or private study purposes only, and you may not make
them available to any other person.
Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the
author's right to be identified as the author of this thesis, and due
acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate.
You will obtain the author's permission before publishing any
material from their thesis.

To request permissions please use the Feedback form on our webpage.

http://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/feedback
General copyright and disclaimer
In addition to the above conditions, authors give their consent for the
digital copy of their work to be used subject to the conditions specified on
the Library Thesis Consent Form.

BB.

IDGE

DEOK AT{AI,TSIS
-r--

being a thesis

in trw vo}rnes

suMtted f,or the

r.'
af
SCTMOL OF

the

EIIIEINEBffG

ITIE T'NIVEA,Tff OF

NEW

ATICKT,AITD

ZEAL.0ND

byr
' I.G. BItCtf,E, B.& (GLv5I) (Hons).
196t+

1967

Vi0f,. I.

SYNOPffS

'

In this thesis the stmctural analysis of tuo baslc troes of bridge

deck syetene are dissussed:

I. the rnrltibearn bridge deck

II. the skewed. anisotropic bridge

deck.

diffieulty in the analysis of I, the nultibeam deck, arises

from its lack of transverse bend5-ng stiffness; Ioad distribution ocorr"e by
shear transference at interlocking shear ke;rs. An analysis method, dweloped
fmm transfer nratrix theory is proposed and shoun to be satisfactory for such a
structure. Model studies on a quarter scale m:ltj-bean bridge deck are
described together r.dth field tests on the prototlpe decks - the southern rnotorway bridges crossing Slippery Creek. Agreenent between theory, nodel studies
and field tests is i]Justrated.
The major

satisfactory analysis of II, the skewed anisotropic deck, ls

conqplicated by its enlstropic elastic properbles and ekewed geonebry. An
analysis procedure i-s introduced whj-ch is an exbension of the finlte element
technique already established in other plate bending and plane stress pr"oblm,s.
Using therefore the matrix displacament method and finite eletent discretization,
the nethod has been programed for solution by digital computer. ConEarison of
the computed displacernents with those obtailed by eperjment on skewed isotropic
and anisotropic steel plates is given. ltre fjlite dlaent method is seen to be
a powerful analybical tool, parbicularly becanse of its ability to handle eLastic
anisotropy and arbitrary geometric shapes.
The

Ttris thesis

is

accordi.:rgly divlded

into

tr,m vo}rmes as below:

Il trt"Iatri:c Analysis and Stnrctural Behaviour of lfirltibem Bridge l)ecks,n

l/qbns ff3 tlMatrix analysls of skewed Anisotr"opic Bnifue Decks.n
Volune

ACKNO}IIEDGN,IENTS

the work that is described in this thesis wa,s carried orlt at the School
of &tgineering under the joint supenrisibn of Mr. R.A. Jones, Senior Lecturer,
and Pr"ofessor N.A. Movibray, Head of the Deparbment of CiviJ- &rgineeri-ng.
Mr. Jones directed the work through its initial stages and his
enthusiastic support w:ith the design, constrmction and testing of the qrrarter
scale, rnrltibeam model is gratefully acknowledged. His contirrrilg advice and
corcrents on later phases of the rrcrk were also appreciated.
On the registration of this project, for a Ph.D degree, Pr"ofessor
Mowbray accepted sponsorship of the roork and. his helpful guidance and pertinent
criticj-smr with parbicular reference to the fjnite e.Lment matrjx work described
in Volume II, is also acknowled.ged. For hj-s eneouragsnent and interest irr alt
pha.ses of the project, I owe 4y grateful thanks.
Thanks are also due to the folloruing ne'rrbers of the Schoolrs Staff for
their interest and usefirl diss,ussion: Associate-professors. C.M. Segedin and
J.H. Percy and Messrs. M.S. Rosser and P.D. Strith. Mention is al-so nade of the
untiri-:ng efforbs of the library and workshop staffs and Mr. N. Kirbon, to satisfy
nty nlrmerous requeEts for }Lt,erature end equipment. In panbiculer, uy thanks go
to Mr. Cyril Collins for his va-luabIe assistance j-n the laboratories and his
photographic skill in the dark room. the interest of fdllow research graduates
and their a^ssistance is also acknowledged.
I also wish to acknowledge the co-operation and assj-stance received
from the Ministry of Works during the field testing of the Slippery Creek bridges.
In partiailar f should like to thank the q<-Chief Design Engineer, Mr. B.G.Noruan,
for his synpathetic attitude towards the ai-n of the project and to Mesars.
Dnrpsteen (Auckland Dj-strict Design Engineer) and Herbert (Senior Engineer,
Arckland) for their advice and assistance during the planni-ng and eceeution of the
tests. To Mr. John Clark and the draughting cadets of 195j, I owe thanks for
their steadfast a,ssistance durilg the field tests, and also to the staff of the
Southern Residency who nade available plant and other equipment necessarXr for the

project.

of the
to n1y
mother for typing the draft marruseripts in a language entirely foreign to her,
and for her continued patience and active jntere-st in ny work. (Similar thanks
Ire e4pressed to Mrs. S'h-irrni:r, who tSped the final script under the same
These asknowledgwtents would not be corplete without mention
encourAgqnent and he.lp received from ny fani-Iy. lry sincere thanks go

tffiqlr,lties). To ry br^other, DerrLd, and lfi.ss ftir11r fudth, I owe .sfuLlar

qprecLationr foi their lnf,erest and patience, nith di,gttal corputels olr the one
hsrd and cfurAl engineed.rrg on the other,

hrfttg the aoursd of thls uor*r the

by the lftrr:lptz-g of fiorks of, the Sew Zeelerd

enrthor was fJ.nancf.ally erpporteit

Govenmetit.

VOIUME

I.

MAM.IX AXIALYSIS AND STRUCTIJRAL BEI{AMOUB

OF MULTIFEAI,I BRIDG,E DECKS.

CONTENTS
Slmopsis.
Acknowledgqtrents.

Contents.

Chapter

Introduction to ltrltibearn
Bridee
-

Decks

1.0 Description
1.1 lryorbance
1.2 Structural Behaviour and Coverning
1.3 E:cisting Methods of Analysis
1.4 Frrpose and Scope
1.5 Srumary

Ch4ter

Review

of Methods of

Ana-lysis

2
2

Parmetere

2
h

4
6

for }frrltibean Bridse

Decks

2.O fntroduction
2.1 Analysis by Orthotropic Plate ltreory
2.2 Analysis by Articulated Plate Theory
2.3 Analysis by Obher Methods and present Design practice
2.1+ Index to Exalryles of sone of the above Methods
2.5 Surnary and Conclusion
Chapter J

Transfer Matrix Analysi-s of Multibean Bridse Decks

Notation
fntroduction
3.0
Transfer Matrjx Theory: Terminolog and Concqt
3.1
Transfer Matrix Theory: applic'ation to Multibean
3.2
Analysis by Hand Calculation
3.3
3.h Analysis by Digital Conputer
the lbansfer Matri-rc Procedure Conpared with Obher
3.5

Chqter

&cperirnentat Verification

9
19

23
25
25

29

30

n
Debks

Methods

3.6

3l
t&
43
I+6

of transfer Matrix

1treory

h9

4.O fntroduction
l+.1 Organ-isation, Frrpose and Quarter Scale Model
4.2 Description of $llppery Creelc Bridges
4.3 Mat,erialg and Design of Slippery Creelc Bridges
4.1+ Applied Ioading and Special Test Vehic.Les

5l

5l
52
53

58

b.5 fnstnrnentation
4.6 Test Progranne and Pr"ocedure
U.7 F\rrbher Tests
I

Chapter

63
65

trfodel Tests on the ]tultibeam Bridges

5.0 Introduction
5.1 Design of Model
5.2 Construction of Model Testing
5.3 Constnrction of Model

Chapter

60

at Slipoerp' Creek
58

58

Faci

lily

74
75

5.1+ Instrunentation

e7

5.5
5.6

90

Test Progranrne and procedure

Determination of Actual Scale Factors

92

6.1 Model Comelation

6.2 verification of the Transfer Matrix Analysis Method
6.3 The Effect of Transverse prestress and Obher
Rei-nforcernent

6.h

Ihe Relative Behaviour of the log and Hollorrcored

Ifultibean Decks

and

100

107

6.5 I?re Effect of Span/Width Ratio

6.6 flre Effect of l Jo of Skew
6.7 The'Effect of Shear Key Shape
6.8 Ultimate Ioad Behaviour
6.9 Miscellaneous Results
Ch4ter

99

llo
114

tt5
tt6
lr?
127

c.lusions

ture llork

7.1

Suunary and Conclusions

7.2

Recent Developments and Suggestions

for

l.

Dig:ital Corputer Facilities and the

OpUS progranme

t32
F\rture Work

t37

Appendices

2.

3.

Series

OPUS

lt0

ONE: Deternr-lnation of the Distribution

Coefficient Matrix, K6

OPUS TWO

and

OPUS THREE:

Computer Progranmes

t43

for

the lbansfer Matrix Analysis of Multibeu

tn

Stmctures
l+.

OPUS

FTVET

Statistical Analysis

prrcgrannre

for

Concrete

173

to a Sri.lrg Mare glateu

5.

Trrrncfer Matri.?( TtreorT fuplied

6.

ln .hpro+iaate ltresretlsal Justif;icetion f,on Slngle

Distrihrtlon of Inad,at the Shegr EeJrs ot

!fultibean Deck
$orsional AnEksfs of a $i4il.5r Srpported Eeo
Xlpteal Galeu.lattons {bom the tbqrsfer l[et-l-{x lnd.pts
of, a !firltibem, Blddge Deck
Oont'rract Pilaa.e of the fll{pper.ff 6reek Bridge
tlnetable end Load Aragrgement use!, eu'i-ug t}e E[e]d
Testing of, the ftippeqp Creek Enldges
!,teterdal Pnogertles of the lfodet
Trangduoer for the lletefd-natd.on of Elast{c !&drXrrs

tgz

Po:int
a

7.
8.
9.

lo.

ll.
lE.
E[bJtogf4fqr
Photogrqrhic

of

Goncrete Etootrs

te7
19l
195

@
b2
&'h

w
2lr

PiLatEs

2t7

CIIIPlEE:

CE{E

.I[!Er

INtnoutcTIoN IO

UULTTBEAI,I BRrpcE pECKs

GONIENTSI

f.O DeocrlptLon
l. I lportance
1.2 Sbnrotural Behaniotrr and Gcverntng parueterg
1.3 &dsttng tfie hods of Analysls
f.lr Purpose and Soope
l.4l Proposed Method of AnalysJs
- .1.42

&per"lmental !bd<

l.l+21 nield Teotlng

l.W
.

the S,fippery Greek

Brtdges

Laborato4r Testing the l{odal of the $ltppery Cseek

Bridges

'1,,5 s:mary, Becert Dweropuentsy

Rrture Tforrk and Appendiceg

'

'

CHAPIER, OIIE

1.0

2.

INIRODUCTTO'I TO MT[,?IBEA},T BruDGE DECKS

Description

bridge is constnrcted fron a nunber of preca.st concr"ete

beans, ntrlch are usua]ly prestressed, and laid along side one another to span
Jongitudinally betueen piers. ln alternative nane for this type of deck i.s
-the term tlseudo-slabtr since
Lt is in effect an articrr-lated slab btrt of
non.rrniform depth. (FiSs l. I and 1.2)
Some meagure of transverse rein-forc@ent, prostressed or othenrise, is
4pJied and in some cases a rei:rforced deck slab is poured over the beos
and folloned later rith hot nl:c or ta::seaL. In other cages the hot nftr i,s
laid dlrectly over the bems thernseilves.
Special edge beans rnay be placed to provide edge stiffening, a curb and
support for the gUardrAils. ltre bea,s ars usually seated throrrgh neoprene
pad's on to pier cqs with some fou of hold{ng down reinforcqent pnovided.
betr+een the deck and the cql bem^s for the resistance
of earLhquake, rf,ind,
and other horizontal loads.
A ru.Itibearn

l.l

Inoortance

d-r-

rt riJt

be seen

that the rn:ltibean

deck is a coryaratlve\y sJrr,J-e fo:m

of bridge constnrction and. as such possesses advantages over other bridge
deck systems.

Si-ryIicityr

constnrction tLne have nade this systeo

poprrlar, not only for shorb span bridges but also for walls, floors,
roofs,
and wharf deck sSrstems. Recent yea,rs have shown an ery:rnsion
ln the precast,
prestressed concrete j.ndustry and the j-rryortance of the nrltibean
systeo

is

ercorpnV and redrrced

beconing more wid.ent. l, 2, f,.

preca'st units 8re now sveilabls (ri-g

shear keys

deck
and sh4le

variety of size
of
t.2) together rrith swera]. tlpes of
A rride

tno systenos of transverse reinforcem,ent.

Ttre superionity of the systo is demonstrated by a recent\y coryleted
tuo-span nrltibem bridge deck on the .Arrclcland-Hmilton Mcto:*rry nhlch
took
just three weeks for constnrctlon flom foundations to guardrcils
and showed a
20S reduction il total cost over that eripected had a conventional
declc type
s114

been used.
1.2

Ioad distr{-bnrtion acnoss the mr.Itlbean declc

is effected br shear trans-

* fuperscript rnurbers refen

to the references cited i' the brbJ.J.ogr4ftp.

3.

L!9.1.1 Perspedf ive of a Mulfibeam Bridge DeCk.

transverse stressing
cable

shear keys
10

precast crrrde beams

midgan

h'

ference across the Joint or jrrterfece betw,een two adjacent bearns; there
is llttle or no transverse bending strength ln these decks. Some decks
are provided wlth shear keys wir5le in others the reinforced deck slab
ensures transference of the 10ad betr+een the beans. The transverse
reirrforcement nay a^ssist the load distribution brrt unless it is of
relativdy large pr.oportions its effect is insignificant.
ltre parmeters govend-ng the stnrctural beh$riour of the mrltlbeu
deck are considered to be a,s follolrs:
(t) t?re ratio of tran:ver:se to longitudtnal relnforcenent.
(b) The size and shape of the preca,st be&,.

(c) I?re ratio of the span to the nidth of the decrc.

(d) Ttre angb of skew of the deck.
' (E Ttre size and sh4e of shear kery.
It is unforbunate that despite its r,videspread adoption a,s, a brldge
deck and floor system, IittLe ha.s been record.ed concernirg the effect of

these parameters on the stnrctural beharriour of the mrltibean deck.

the dwelopnent of a srritable analysis nethod spperrs to hwe suffer"ed a
sjmiJar fate r'rith only slight progress being made elnce the int:roduction
of the m.rltibeu deck some year, ago.

1.3

Elcisting Methods

of

.Analysis

Analysis nethods so far proposed by other rrnrkers rh r9t 24t 4, g,

h, 32t fala into tr.ro c.Lasses a,s rrjJ-l be considered in Chapter 2. These
c'lasses are d:istinguished by the parbictrlar theoretical nodel adopted for
their respective methods. The orbhotropic plate model is a.ssumed in the
first cra^ss a,nd the arbisulated node.l in the second.
Methods based on the orthotropic theory are elther in4propriate or
colplerc and diffisutt to qpp1y, Relocation methods based on the articu.lated
model, whiLst si.ryle in concqlt, are handic4ped with tediow nunerical
calctrlations which are diffictlt to progrume for solution by dlgital
corqmter.

1.4

hrr:pose and Scooe

It is the purpose of this thesis to introduce

a new natrlx analgis

method, and by e:ctensive erperlmental nor* examine the
4plication of this
theory to real mr,ltibean decks and detendne the signiflcance of the
goverrring parameter.

5.
Analysis
the proposed anal{rsis nethod wtrich is presented in Ch4ter 3r rses
transfer matrjx theory to deterralne the forces and deflections in the
articu-lated modal of the mrltibem deck. Progranmed for solution by an
rm4 1620 Conputer, this nethod once provided r,r:ith the brldge dimensions,

l,4l

Proposed Method

of

ela.stic pr.operties and loadtng.s,rrangements, wiIL give the def,Lected

proflle, thb load distribution and the shear force at arry bean lnterface.
Design charbs are ea,sily prepared; a ready analysis by hand ca,lcL1atlon
is also possible.

l.hz

&cperimental Work

test the sigruificance of the govenaing parameters and to checlc the

relisbility of the proposed analysis method a pr.ogrume of ecqler{mental
nork wa's initiated. Both field and laborator';r testtng has been condtrcted
and is deseribed irr Ch4ters 4 and ! respectively.
To

l.l42l
With the co-operation of the Nerr Zealand Ciover:rmerrtrs Ministty of
wor*s, the southern Motonyay Bridges cr"ossing sJ.ippery creek, eighteen
udj'es south of Arrckland Gity, were J.oad tested fu l{ay 1961,. Five spans
of
the two bridges were irnrestigated under different abnormal load,s by
obsenring changes in straln and deflection.
^0IL five paraneters rere
e:csdned drrring an eight week test prograrnne. The nature of these tests
and the procedure adopted for conducting them are described in Chapter

[;

the results and conc-lusions drarvn fr.on this uork are presented in Chqter
6.
l.W L*bo""tory Toting th" Mod.r of thr slioo"r.o cr"uk Bridgru
A quarter scale nodel of the S.ippery Creek Bridges wa.s built ln the

Stnrctures Laboratory to reprodrrce the five spans tested et the slte.

Again tests were camied out to obsenre, under laboratorXr controlled
conditj-ons, the stmctural behauj-our of the rurd-tibem deck qrstem.
In
addition rnore extensive tests were conducted on the nodel than were
possible on the firll scale stmcture; for exapJ-e the deterrdratlon
of

ultimate strength, the overload safety factors and the effect of trara:verse
prestress. Constnrctlon of both the nodel and the pernanent testi4g
facrlities necessaJxr for these studies is described in chryter j.
Correlation of nodel end 1\.rtL sca,le stnrctures and conc,lusLorF fron these
tests are also presented and dissussed irr Ch4ter 6.

1.5

6.

$m43rr. Recent Devalonneqts. future lfork and lppendices

Chqter f presents a SmarXr of .the naJor resuLts and concilusions that
ere plesented ln Ghryter 6. Reient developnents since the eomencement of
thls thesis and possible frrture llnes of research are also outHned Ln ttrjs
Chapter. I\rcIve AppendLces follor Ch4ter ? Iistlng Coryuten progrme
and adillttonal eperinenrtal'and theor"etLcal nor{c that has been necessary to
the pmJect as a dpJ.e..

1.

Descri tion Use

(a)

ooo

b)

(c)

15t - 40'

bridges

dou ble- U

oooo

hollow

ors

17'

roo fs

20'

lo

- 3g

(d)
(e)

solid

(f)

dou

(9)

FIG

ble tee

singh tee

1.2 Typicat Unifs

40'-100'

Available for Mullibeam

truct'u res

8.

CHAPTER:

1$10

.@:

REVIE1I

!F

METT{ODS

oF AL.AIYSIS

FOR I',IULTIBEIM BruDCE DECKS

@I!'
2.O Introduction
2.1 Analysis of Orthotropic Plate Theortr:
2. t I Historical Dwelopment
2.12 Finst Method

of

Orbhotropi-c Plates

(A)

Qryonl Massonnet

of Distribution Coefficients 2.121 Applicatlon to ltuItibearn Decks

(Method

Rowe, Mord.ce,

Llttle)

2.l2l.l

2.2

Appli-cation by Morice and Llttle

2.121.2 Application by Park
2.lJ Second ltethod of Orbhotr-opic Plates
(Lehigh l,lethod - Roes1i, Walther, Na.sser)
2.14 Tlaird Method of Orbhotropic P1ates (UoAltieA Method of Distribrrtion Coefflclents - Cusens, Paa)
Analysis by Arbisulated Plate TheorTr: (B)

2.21 Preanble
2.22 Fi.ret Method of Articulated Plates

(I'llinois

2.3

Khachaturian et al)
2.23 Second Method of Arbigulated Plates
(nela:cation Method - Norrran, Nathan)
2.2\ Ilrird Method of Arbisul-ated Plat,es
(Differential Equation Method No. | - &irldal, Best)
2.21 Fourbh Method of .Articulated Plates
Differential Equation Method No. 2 - Clrsens, Pana, Almed)
Analvsis by Other Methods and Present Deqieq Pfectlqg
Method

2.3t

AnalJrsis by a Four-sided Grld

2.32 Present Design Practice

2,4

Index

2..5

Srmnar:r and Conclusion

to Exaples of

Some

- Gallia

of the Above Methods

CHAPIM'

TwiC.

9.
B6'\i:TEIff OF METI{ODJ OF

AIIAITSIS FOR UULTTBEAI,{

BRIDGES

2.O, Irtr.oduction
the histori-cal deve.lopurent of load distribrrrtion theori.es, and therefore
bnidge deck analysis, is exbensiver re[ dosumentea lb 18, and again
reviermed in Chapter 9 (Vol. n)..
Ihis present Ch4ter is concerned.rith
those theonies that have been derreloped and 4plied to the mr.ltibean brd,dge
deck. these can be grouped into the trrc forlowing categorl_es:A. Methods using an approxi:nate solution to the cla.ssica,l
differentiar equation govern:ing the anisotr.opic brifue deck.
B. Methods using an ecact solution to a plysical 4proximatlon
of the parblcr.rlar (rm.rltfbean) bridge deck.
It should be noted that aJ-l analysls methods so far pr.oposed for bridge
decks fal] into one or other of these two classes but this volume ig
primari-ly concerned rni-th the parbiorlar ca.se of the uultibean bridge declc.
Analysis by the Orbhqtropic plate Ttreory (A).

.
of

2.1

2. | |

Ilistorical

De,/eropment

for the fl-exure of thin isotropic plates wa.s

derived by Lagrange in lgll, brrt it wa.s not rurtil lg2O that Narier solved
the equation for a rectangular plate ldth ari edges siryl,y supporbed..
In 1829 Poisson publlshed a paper on e-1a^stlcity, and set forbh the firpt
acceptable derivation of this equation and a set of general boundary
conditlons. Plates of ardsotr^opic naterial were fir"st considered in lBZg
by Boussines9 4 and the governing differential equation for the bending of
thin adsotropi-c plates a.s set donn by him is as fo]-lor.lsl
Ttre firndmenta.L equation

D,33,, + e(q

-a\)ffi*+B#

tlfuil..tJ.D

is the fle:mral stiJfness of the plate in the x di-rectJ-on,

D" is the flermral stlffness of the plate in the y dlrection,
Dt is a constant 5.ncorporating the tuo Poisson ratLos for the plate

where D*

and the flercural stiffnesses D* and

ard Dtry is the torsional stiffness of the

It

i,e usual

to let

Do.r

p[te.

r Dl + z.D)qr.

the qpplication of this theory to reinforced concrete slabs was not

untll l9l4 u?ren tfuber pubilS-shed a series of pqrers on the subJect.
1?re p'tncipal

lO.

results are co]-lected in hls books 5' 6, which rre concemed with the determination
of the fleccural and torsional rigidities D*, H and Dy for concrete s1abs.
ot"lut
in f 946 and again in 1949 G:yon published his qproach for isotrnpic slabs t ' v'
based on &he arrlsotropic plate theory and developed a solution assumlng a Tevy
series for deflection and a Fourier sine series for load. ltris pproach wa.s
gener+aised W Manaonet 9 in tgtO to include the effect of torsion and this rlork

lO' | |

13

*d nor"l2t
t954 by Morice and Litt'I"
to provide a design pr"ocedtre for the orbhotr.opic bridge deck.
Ttr:is design procedrrr, presented as a d:istributj.on coeffici.ent nethodt
is given ln detail in Ror,rers book ltConcrete Bridge Desiglrr 14 *a ryarb fron the
disc'ussion wtrich follolw jrt sec. 2.12, is again rerriewed in Chqter p.
At about the ssne ti-ure ( 1954) lror* wa.s comnenced at the trlitz
&egineeri:rg Laboratory of the tehlgh University on the specific qplicatlon of the
orbhotropic plate equation (2.1) to the nnrltibean bridge deck. ftrj.s'nor'lt wap the
2lr md Nasser 2 ort i"t prroposed a design
ba.sis of papers by RoesJi 19, w.ttt
""
procedure for the lateral. Ioad distribution in rmr.Ltlbeam bridges.
Further ruork on the 4plication of the orthotroplc plate theory to
mrltibean decks has been camied out by 6\rsens and Palaa, in 19611. Thig paper
presents an ad4tation of the theory a.s presented W Qryon and Massonet and is
therefore identical to that given b5r Rowe except for slight, ht slgnlficant
nodj-fications nade to the defjn:itions of the governing patra'neters.
The above methods use E)prroxi-mations of one forn or another to enable
a solution to the orbhotropic equation (eqn 2.1) to be obtajned. I?re accrrracy of
the rypr"oximatlon and the suitabjlity of the pplieation form the ba.sis of the
foJ-lowing disqrssion.
was ftrrbher developed. and exbended

in

2.12 First

Method of Orbhotr"opic P1ates - ftqron, Massonet

(l'netnoa of Distribution Coefficj-ents - Rorrc, I"Iorice,

Littte)

of this nethod is the study of an eqtrivalent elastic system,

obtained by replacing the stiffness of the longitudinal and transverse bems
with a unifornly distributed systerm of the sane overall stiffness. Ttris
eqrrivalent systa js a slab of unifom depth, with orthotrcrpic ela.stic
prrcperbles given by those of the origi:ral deck. It is conrrenient to
combine the geonetrical pnoperbies into one paranerber wtr-ich defines this
re.latlon betneen longitudinal and transverse pr"operties. Denoted by g ft
The basis

is defired

by:

'= 2tflT

---(z,z)

ll.
is the width of the equivalent slab
is the actual span
i is the longltudinal second nonent of area per unit width
and J is the transverse sesond moment of area per unit length.
In addiiion to the effect of 0 the dietnlb'ution coefficlents are e18o

nhere 2b
2a

sensltive to the degree of torsional stiffness exhibited by the br{.dge.

An overall torsLonal parameter d is introduced and defined by

=s.$u!

----( 2.3)

where G js the torrsional nodulw

is the elastic of Toungrs modulus of the naterd-al of the br{.dge

, io is the torsional inerbia per unit width
and io S the tor.sional inerbia per rur:it length.
In the ca.ge of a slab d rduces to unity and for a no-torsion
grillage d. is zero. lhus for arry real bridge deck d, riIL talce on a
va,l-ue ln the ranges d\<4 </
E

Using the Gryon-Massonet theory tabulated and grryhed distrlbutlon

coefficients have been prepared by Rowe using O as the independent
variable. I\n sets of crrrrres harre been prepared for each of the trp
errbrene values for q ; fl r O and el c l.
For a4p lntemediate
val:ue of 4 the qpropriate distribution coefficients are glven by the
approximate interpolation for:mla suggested by Massonet:

K4 is the distributlon coefficient for the particrilar

Ko is the distribution coefficient for f,. 0
and Kt j.s the distribtrtion coefficient for d, l.

where

requir"ed

the grqphs the distribution coefficielrts give

the profile shq>e, longitudinal moments and stresses relafive to the mean
def,Lection, mean long"itudinal moment, and stress Et nine equally dlstributed
standard positlons ecross the deck wldth,
Trsr.r,sverse bendtng moments nry also be determtned, usiag a dl,fferent
set of coefficients ntrtch are again plotted agal-rFt O as the lndependent
variable for the trc ecrbreme values df 0( .
Once e:rbracted from

12.

is now widely used in design offices, but it shouLd be

remeuibered that it j,s 4plicable in the first instance onJ.y to the orthotropic (right) brifue deck. Obher restrC-ctiorur rrjll become eyideht.
2.12 lpplleation to Mrltibean Bridge Decks.
It is unforbunate that the distribution coefficient method, although
a powerful and rddeJ.y adopted design tooJ- ha.s littJ.e qplicatton to the
analys5-s of the mrltibea bridge declc.
If an attqt is made to carr;r out such an analSrsls the waluation
of'a and O leads to dtffisulties since j and Jor me&sures of the transveree
fle)cural and tortional stiffnesses, are assuned zer.o for the mrltibean deck.
the method

the shear kqrs provide J.oad distribution by shear alone and nei.ther bending
monents nor twisting nonents are distributed or resisted at the a.esumed
hinge. Horrever, in practice the transverse prestress provi.d.ed nry pennit
some derre1opment of bending and torsion noments of resistance by introdrreing
coryressi.on and hence friction, between affacent be&s. Itrls, howerrer, is
usually noninar and the effective values of J and jo are zsror

loplication bv ltcrice and Littlel5

Notr+lthstanding this aiffictr]-ty Morice and Little load tested a snall
mrJ-tibean bridge jn Hapstr-ire and 4pIied the dlstribnrtion coefficlent
2.122

to

lts reliability.
the bridge sdlected for the test wLs a 5irple supported tlseudo-slabtt
of l5o skew, containing b prestressed bearos of 33ft 6in span transver.sdlr
stressed together by cables lying par.e'l'lel to the abutments. The bridge uao
designed to carry the Mjnistry of Transporb distributed and knlfe edge
loadings snd a noninal transverse prestress of ?O lb/sq.in. was introduced
to produce trconposite actlonrt of the individrral besns.
nethod

check

the operi-rnental distributlon profiles utrich could be coryared with

theory were for those for wtrich the transvere uorking load had not been
exceeded. In that ca^se, the stmcture wao a,ssrrraed to be rrflenurally
continnrousrr in each direction and the values of e , ! and 61 c I was
2a
a.ssumed relevant as for a s1ab.
Neglecting the l5o aqgle of skew, an initial analysis was nade by
ldorice and Little for an equivalent right slab wh:lch garre o 0.1r. Horvever,
the actual distributions rere narkedly inferior to thosd calcu,lated for
e r 0.1+r d t I using the ![essonet - Ro'rve malysis. In fact the
distributiorrs wer"e ... trinferLor to the Gryon ( A . O) dlstributlon which

l5

13.

represents the x|Drfrt possible distribution for a glvep value of orr.

A second analysis consldered a shorbened effective span giv:ing e r 0.5.
Ttre erperi-nental beharriour now lay between the theoretical behan:iour for
OI - | and g( t O. Yet no one valle of O( couLd be forrnd whictr satisfied
either all load positions or each point on a given transvete section f6r e
glvcn load pooition..
EVentualJy it was found that good agreenent between theorlp and measurement existed for g r 0.684 and d, O.52 for the bridge. Ihe vaLue for d
w&3 found by a rearrangement of the interpolatlon eryression glven by
equatlon (2.& ):

E = L-Ko

where Kd

wa.e

ffi
of dlstribution coefficients

^lu
set

--( z.4u)
obseryed drrniq

the tqgt

on the bridge
and

Kosclct the distribution coefficients as defined ear.Lier.

Thus an equivalent value for 4 wa.s detetrjJred qinically for the nrltlbeam deck under test, no rea^sonable explanation beilg found for such e value.
It isr however, obvious that 6 would hsrre a value less than udty Lf the

total

insufficient to induce the sme tor"sional,

flentrral, and shear properties found in the eErivalent anisotropic slsb.
r?ris condition ( A q t) is more comnonly found irr practice nhere the transverse
tran'sver"se prestress were

prestress

ls only

nonrinal.

the other hand the value of O j 0.694 is qparently erplained by

taking 2a in equatton (2.3) a.s the length of span over nhlch the transverse
prestressing force was applied ignoring the effect of the t5o ang!.e of skew
on the deck. firis procedure can lead to d:ifficultj-es when lt ie re,nmbered
that in the nore recent tlpes of mltibesn decks onJ;r one single transverse
stressing cable is used and 2a is then effectively zer.o.
The eqirical approach used by Morice and Liittle to fit the distribution
coefficient nebhod to the obsenred behavj.our ha.g also been crj-ticised by
Hend:ry and Jaeger l5t l7t authors of the harmonic analysis nethod for grid
franewrorks and related stnrctures. ls they have pointed out any sort of
assuq>tion cqu.l-d be made on the behariour of the bridge and by suitable
selection of pararneters results could, be obtained 4parently agreeing with
those found by eperi-nent in a parbiarla.r caee. In particular they
qhasized, ... nbhat ryparent agreement obtained by nanlpulatlon of parameters
Oa

ll+.

ln a given theory was meaningless in the absence of sound theoretical

justification of the values selecte4,r.l5 It could not be egreed by Hendry
and Jaeger that the va.lues of O and ( had been theoreticaldy justiJied.
Again the ogerimental. obsenrations did not re,produce the forr of the
transverse distribution profile both at nrid span and at the quarber polnts.
the distribution coeffLcj.ent method insists on geometrically s:irrlller
profiles at these points, since it means that one set of relative arlthmetica.l coefficients mry be used for defining the deflected sh4e of all transverse sections - the cnr:c of the distribution coefficie,lrt method. Ttris Lack
of similarity is illustrated ln figures l8O and 182 of reference l!; a p+er
presented hy Morice and Little to the Conference on the Corrclation between
Cal.cu.lated and Obsenred Stresses and Displacements in Stmctures, he.Ld ln
Iondon in 1955.
2.123 4pplication by park.lS

StiIL f\rrbher widence against the use of the distribution coeffl.cient

nebhod in the analyeis of nnrltibearn bridges is pr"ovided in a thesis by Partc
from the University of Canterbu\T U9|7).
Parkrs work irrvolved the testing of five coryosite post-tensioned
prestressed concrete slabs to determj-:ae their distributive properbles and
ultimate strength; the obsenred behaviotrr being coryared lcith theory - the
distribr.rtion coeffi-cient method for ela.stic behaviour and Johansents Yield
Line theory for ultirnate load behaviour. Since these slabs were ln effect
rnr.ltibeanr slabs Parlkrs conclusions concerning the distnthtion coeffi-cient
method are of interest.
Parkls eperimental results showed that the theoreticaL estination of
transver"se nonents to be high (by 23fi), Poissonts ratio and all teras of the
l-oad series being j-ncluded jrr this estimation. In the case of tongitudinaL
noments the theory wap shorin to under esti-nate the naximm value (ry eO and
tlrus in thjs ca^se the error is serious. Possible discrqrancles (ap suggested
by Park) jn the analysis for longitudina.l noments could bel
l. Orrer sirnpllfication in the initial a.ssrqltions.

2.
3.

Neglect of Poissonts ratio.

Consideration of only the first tern of the load sdries.
Consideration ha^s been given to these factors by the originators of the theory
and a recorrmendation by Q.qyon of increastng the naxi.mrn theoretical bending
noment W l}-1[fr wan adopted W Bowe, lbri.ce and Iiittle.
Rone hap eince

15.

shoxm 13

tft"t the inclusion of Poi.ssonrs ratio in the ana\ysis makes ltttle

difference to his theoretical results - taking the ratio 4t 0,1! redrrces the
theoretica,l

by qproximateLy ffi.
It r+ouId +pear however, from Parkts work that'the theoretical
naxi-mrur long:itudinal nonrent should be lncrea,sed not by l1it but by zy-nfi.
In doittg so the distribrrtj-on coefficient nethod r+ould then arbtrtrar5Jy
estlnate the naxi-mrm longitudinal moment and considerably over estirnate the
naximulr transver^se noment wtren 4pried to a ru,ltibean deck.
Such a result is not difficult to reconcjJ-e when the plry;slcal nature
of the nultj-besl deck ls considered. Since there is no transverse bending
medium the theoretical moments, derived assuning there l"s such a medirm., wjIL
naturally over estimate the actual moment. Again, because of the lack of
transverse stiffness a greater proporbion of the qpJ-ied load mrst be carried
long'itudinal\y and a theory whieh ignores this eituation rrllL under estLnate
the actual moment in this direction.
2.13 Second Method of Orthotropic plateE
(tetrigh Method - Roe.sh_, Walther, Na.sser)
The nultibean. dech is agai,n repJ-aced by an orthotropic plate r+ith
ela^stic properti-es equlvalent to those of the origlnal deck. Taklq equation
(2.l) and divid.ing thrrcugtr bV Dx we have:

nhere

moment

r t(#+a,#
#
iltDy'/Dx and
p"H/+.

hgJL

@s)

Note that-q has been redefined to conform rci-th the notation used by noesll 19,
Walther 2l *d Nasser 2 of the University of Lehighr ond should not be
conl\rsed with the defini-tion used by Rowe (eqrration (2.3)).

il and f

are therefore nondjmensional parameter.s involving the ratio

of longitudinal and transverse bending stiffnesses and a coefficient of
torsional rigidity, A solution to equation (2.fl has been deueloped by the
roor{<ers at Lehigh but no details are given either by Walther or Na.sser and
Roesllrs paper is not readily available. The solution 4parent\y lrrvolves
and two fur4her paramebers re.Latlng the geometry pf the wtrole deck to the

of a single bem.
the derivation of Ct is

geonetrlr

difflsult

no theoretical appr"oach
has yielded satisfactory results sirce accord:i.ng to Walther nthe lateral
bending stifftress is by no meane constant.tr It varies not only fron point
soneuhat

and.

16.

to point in the brldge

is also dependent on the nagnitude and location of

the concentrated load - at least according to tilalther - naking tt inpossible
to derlve d theoretically. In e4lerimenta.]. irrvestigation b
nade by
"the tean at Lehigh and enptrical formrlae rlere developed for an average va.lue
of d over the entire bridge, a.s a f\rnction of load and transvere prestreng
only. lhese are given as:
brut

o( = 0.23 /F
\t -c
d =: u'o^1l il3F
F"
where F ls the total transver:se prestressing
and P l-s the load qplied at, the centre or
with the restriction that: O < F/p

for centre load .......

(2.6)

...'.....

(2.7)

for

edge Load

force
edge

<20

Ttre

theorobical derivation for

proposesS

is also i-ryossible and noes:l

'3h(r -q,"') + q

19

(r.s)

k is a comstant of torsiona.l rigidity of rectangular beam, de,pendent

on thejr geometry.
Huber 5 ana Massonet t h*" both given relationsluips rvtrich ln effect link
d, ,,tiilh /3 , brt according to Walther 2l ... trthe assrrrytions nade for
these relationships proved to be 5-ncorpatible nith the theoretical conpider
ations for orbhotropic platestt - presumably w?ren 4plied to mr.ltibean bridge
where

decks.

interesting feature of this work is the consideration made for s'liF

between adjacent beans. I?re effect of saip or incorplete interaction
between the beans wa^s detemined e:qperimentally and a nodification is therefore made to the m:Dcifium moment coefficient during the design pr.ocedure.
The nodification takes the for:n of a percentage increa,se to this coefficient
a^s read from a grqph plotted with F/P as the independ.ent variable. It should
a.lso be noted here that similer worik ha.s been ca*i-ed out W the Univer"sity of
Missouri Engineerlng Eperimental Station during an ecqperjrnental studgr on
precast concrete brifue untts 23. In this investigation to determi-ne the
effectiveness of load transfer between three such units obsenrations were made
on the relative slip between adjacent units and the resuLts plotted against
the load 4plled.
As uith the distributi.on coefficient method. of sec. 2.12t the theoretical
derivatlon of the tra$svexe stlffness and tor:sional prcperties of the
An

17'
equj-valent plate is exbrernely difficult and an estimation is nade only afber
exbensive testing. A.: already stated iJr sec. 2.12b, w?ren the physical
nature of the m.rltibean bridge is considered it l-s not surprising that such
diffistrlt'ies have been encountered. Both the Rowe - Morice - Little and the
Ih:igh University tesns have resor{ed to the apirical determinatlon of the
governing parueters - a techniqr.re which lrilt only prove a nethod for the

parbiarrar condit'ions under which the tests were

z.lL

conducted.

of Orbhotropic plates
(l{odified Method of Distribution coefficients - crrsens, pma)
Aware of the diffisultles encountered by l{orice, Idttle and others
(sec.2,l2) C\rsens ha.g teken nore care ln the deffurltton of the f,LermraL and
torsLonal parmeters O and A :
Ttrird Method

t=fffi
ltlhere

T* = &io

(2.91

=lft:-,',

and
5 = G.io, are the torsional stiffnesses rrith respect to the x and y
ures. Cusens agrees that wtren ihe orthotroplc plate equation (2.1) is
4plied to gri.Llages the value of D, is negllgi-ble, but jn the ca.se of so3.id

is signi-ficant and this term should therefore be considered in the

solution of mrltibeu decks. Conparison of eguations (2.9) with Rowers
definitions of (2.2) and (2.3) wj-l-t j.rrd.icate Rowers omlssion of Dr.
lgainr in order to 4ply the orbhotropic plate theory, the m.rltibean
deck is assrrmed contirnrous in both longitudinal and transverse directlons.
slabs Dt

that iJl the trarrsverse direction the thickness of the slab

actually var*ies from a maxfuum value equal to the depth of the individual
lsans to some value ll aL the joi-nt betneen bem,s, pr.orrided that the ratio
of bean wtdth to overal] deck width is small (crrsens suggests in the order of
rcn a conseryative mean effective depth of the transverse section rmuld. be
the value of 9d . It i.s suggested, therefore, that in the presence of shear
keys for a bridge of negligible transverse prestress the effective depth shorr-ld
be taken to the ba.se of the shear key. A sirnl'lar. suggestion ha^s been put
fortard by Best of the Caent and Concrete .0,ssociation 25 tho, after testlng
a prestressed concrete bnidge wtrich incorporated transverse mild steel shean
Qrsens notes

lg.
connectorsr a9sulned the concrete in the joirrts to be cracked to the J-errel of
the connector. the uncracked part of the concrete section is then used to

calculate j.

of

Orsens and Psna therefore propose the use of h .

ld in the calculation
the parameters O and d, where h is the thickness of the plate, 'brpen-

irnental tests were ca.rried out at the SEAT0 Graduate School of E:gineering in
Bangkok and are described by the Authorsi The proposed changes to the
Distribution Coefficient method are contra.sted against the obsenred
e:qrerJmental coeffieients. UltjJnate load tests are a]-so described and
analysed using the Iie1d Line theory. the value of the tor"sion parameter is
shonn to increase with the value of transverse prestress and also rrith the
span/raiath ratio; its va,lue a,s given by eqrration (2.91 is also jndicated to be
consenative.
The experimental tests also showed that the ratio i/; is independent of
both load and transverse prestress wlr-ich conflicts rrith the results of
Wa).therts rork 2l (sec.(2.13)). rn partiorlar it appear that equation
(2.8) j-s not gener+'lly valid and Waltherrs results should therefore be treated
with care. tr\rrbher, coryarisons were made with the results the Lehigh
Urriversity obtained on the Centerport Bridge & *A the enrthorst theory shovrn
to give closer agreement than that obtained by the Lehi-gh tean. Refer sec.

J.tf

figures 3.8 and 3.9 of Chapter 3.

Cusens also compares his method vrith the tests perfor:ned by Morice and,
Little on the Hanpshire Bridge (sec. (2.t2211. Assuming h, O.5d
theoretical values of O r 0.65 and d. e.5l+ are obtained. These coryare
favourably r,cith the erpirically derived values of o r 0.68 and et o.52.
ft would q:pesr therefore, that a conserrati-ve, yet apparently
safisfactory estimate of general stmctural behaviour may be obtained by
assr"ming an effective depth (h . qd) in a transverse direction and applying
the Distribution Coefficient Method. However, it is seen that the Gryonlilassonet theory is invalid if one half the sum of J.ongitudinal. and transverse
torsional stiffnesses enceeds the square root of the product of the corres:
pondilg f]-exrra]. stiffnesses. In this case a is greater than unity and
the Distributi-on Coefficient Method, which is based upon ttris theory, is no
longer applicable. This si-tuation is particularly preva.lent when the
and

as in mtuqr practica.L ca^ses oi v*ren the prestress

onitted corup].ete].y (a,s seen in sec. 6.23f of Chapter 6 - analysis of nodel

transverse prestress

is

SA).

is snall

19.

Aware

of the above
an articu.lated Plate Theory ln an att4t to handle tlris

of this fact

p4perr developed

Grsens and.Parna have, sinco the publlcation

sonewtrat, embama^ssing

2.2

situatlon.

ltrd nethod

is

rwiened

in

sec. 2.2J.

Analvsis bv futimJ.ated Plate theonr (B)

2.21

Preamble

In the foltor*ing method,g of ana\ysis the rnrltibean deck ie agsumed to

be en artiq,lated plate composed of a number of sqlarate beam interconnested
by joints or a^ssumed hinges. Only shear forces are a,esuned to be transfetred through this joint wh:ich are thw free to rotate - the transverse
flecural- sti-ffness of the plate is zero. the arbicrrlated plate pron5ses,
therefore, to be a more realistic nodel of the nritibean declc.
2.22 First Method of Articulated Plates
(Ilf:nois Method - Khachaturian et al)
Ttre first of these analysis nethods was proposed irr 1960 by Drberg,
Khachaturian and Fradinger 26 of the Univerrsity of llli.nois and later their
nork formed the bagis of BuILetLn 183 (authored by Pool, Arya, Robinson and
t4
Khachaturian) o( of the Tllinois &rgineering @eriment Station (1961).
The method handles the analysis of single span, right, mrl-tibeam brddge
decks having beans of solid or hollow section. It treats the beans as
individual e.lqnents connected to one another by frictionless hinges. These
hinges are a,ssuned to act a.long the ndd-depth of the shear kenr such that no
relative movement except rotation is possible. 1?rus the transverse flextrral
strength of the bridge is a,ssuned zero and load distnibrution occur by transfer
of longitudinal, vertical and transversre joint forces u?rich are assuned to aeb
at each hinge. The basic equations for finding these forces are dervelopbd
from the conpatibiJ.ity conditions for displacement at each tr-lnge.
As the bem,s are si:rp1y supporbed at their ends, Fourier series
erqparrions for al-l forces and displacenents are used to reduce the problem to
the solution of sets of si-mrl-taneous linear algebraic equations. UnfortunateJy
the Fourj-er series for the joint forces either do not converge or else colwerge
too slowly for practical use - moments, houerrerl ar obtained by straightfonvard
calculations. Ba,sed on a study of the asyrrytotic behaviour of the coefficient
of the Fourier series a nethod of accelerating the convergence for the iotnt
forces is adopted. lhig nethod is apparent\y ncoryutationa[y practlcaltt and
allorc the opllcit deterrnilation of the nost Lryortant characteristics of the
joint forces.

4,

results for the joint force distribrrtions, beam shears and

are tabulated 2? to* four sets of a four-beu deck and one set

Computed

bean moments

of an eight-bean deck. No eperimental justification of the analysis nethod

is given in either reference and therefore there are no colryar.Lsons arrailable
betueen theoretical predictj.on of joint forees, shears and moments, and those
values obsenred in practice. fuch conparisons r,muld be of interest since
the method a,ssumes the e:cistence of three joint forces. It is considered
that with low transverse prestress, a.s cornnonly found in practlce, the
horizontal and longitudinal joint forces may not derreilop. on\y by the
fo:mation of substantial bond and friction forces between the concrete shear
keys and adjacent beans rrj-Il such forces erise. ltre resistance and transfer
of these forces is therefore il doubt and an analSrsls based on the assurytion
of their existence nay seri-ously r:nderestimate the aetual J.oad.s and stresses
in the beans.
2.23 Second Method of Arbiculated P1ates
(Relarcation Method - Norrnan, Nathan,)
In 1962, Nonnan of the Ministry of Works, New Zealand, published a
method for the distribution of loads in preca^st froorrs systeros I which aLso
that shear and not bending moments could be transnitted lateralJy
across the systen (only verbi-cal shear considered). Ttre approach is nade b5r
considering the bending and torsiona.l stiffnesses of a slngle bean utrose ncidspan section is li-lcened to a rigid plate supporbed b;r a series of spr:lngs.
Edge and centre stiffnesses for the bean are derived and a ca,rryover factor"
relating these stiffnesses, is defined. A distribrution factor for each Joint
assumed

j-n.the overa]-l deck systems is a]*so de,rreloped l*rich is proporbionaL to the

relative edge stiffnesses of adjacent beams. fire parameterrs thus estabLished
formr not surprisingly, the ba^sj-s for a relar<ation method of anbJysis ntrich Ls
exactly analogous to the Hardy Cross Moment Distribution Mebhod weIL
established in the stnrctural analysj_s of fruqs.
It is unfortunate that Nonnants definition for the carryover factor is
incomectr hrt this ls onty a technical emor and the merit of the pri-nciple
upon which the analysis is ba.sed (i.e. the step-by-step relalration procedure)
is not affected.
fn the fotloraing year ( 1963) Natha,n 4 *1"o presented a nethod ba,sed on
$ectJy the sae prlnciple except that he bypa.ssed the analogy of the elastic
beam and eqrrivalent

spring s;rstet, norking directly ln the stlffhqeses of the

21.
bean

ltself.

Nathante presentation

is slightly

more e:rbensive and a brd.ef

outline follous:
A single hinge or joint connection is a^esumed at nidspan, verttcal
shears only being transmitted through the corurectlon. In practice ttr:is
joint nrns the length of the bea but in the ca.se of some roof T-beans lt
takes the form of steel connectors spaced at intenrals along the bean.
The analysi-s is, however, si:rplified by the a^ssurytion of onJy one joint and
the cotputed force at this one joint may later be approximately distributed
on the ba^sis of a parabolic distribution.
Initially aIL beans are considered fixed in position at zero deflecti.on
under the action of the 4plied load and a rnrmber of hoJ-ding forces (wtr:ich
are calcu.lated fr.om the +plied loading). these holding forces or restraints
are removed in turn and the deflection noted for that pojrrt together n:lth the
cart'Jrover or change in the tuo neighbouring restraints. The restraint ls
again replaced so that this joint is fjxed in its new position; the nerb
restraint j.s now removed. In its turn it wilL affect, by carryover, the
restraints on thd prevlous joint' and the one follolring. ltre amount to be
carried over frorn joint to joint is dependent on the ralativq dlstribution
of the holding forces between beans and is therefore given by the distribution
factor. The process is reiterated until the restraints harre been reduced to
zero or negligible yalues. At this stage the changes jn deflection are
sunrned and the deflected transverse pr^ofile of the deck obtained. Ttre
defLection that each bearn lrcul.d have if it alone withstood the pplied Load
is calsulated. The ratio of thjs value to that of the beam rchen fonoring
parb of the deflected stnrcture is then a measure of the load distribution
coefficient for that be&. Verbical shea::s betueen the beanr,s mry then be
found and distributed along the length of key if necessany.
The method ls thus seen to be practica-l from a corryutational point of
vj-ew since the arithnetic is silple and can be carried out by hand. Howwer,
under cerbaln cond:itions the calguJ-ation may becone very tedious and
jnaccurate. This is parbicularly the ca.se tf ;bhe values of the fle:nrra1 and
torsional stiffnesses are nrarkedly different fr.om one another; for in such
an instance the value of the carqf over factor is close to unity and the
corffergence of the relanation procedure is very sJ.ow r.equirlng maqp cycles
of calculatLon before a satisfactory result j.s obtained. See also sec.
factor of 0.95 was obtalned. Becanse the nethod
a step-by-stq relaxation technique it cannot be easily

6.232 rvhere a crrqr over

of solution is

22.
not

for solution by dig:ital corputer and the above sltuation is

readi.ly avoided. Again, the preparatlon of design charts is also a
diffisult ta,sk.
The method is suitable for edge stiffened decks and decks whlch nay
not be si-mply supporbed. A,s with the Tllinojs nethod, no erperi-nental
justification is made either by Norgrair or W Nathan for their method but tt
wiIL be inferued from erperjmental widence g'iven in Chqltel $ (sec. 6.232)
that the relarcation method is 4pli-cable and sufficiently accurate for the
analysis of the mrltibearn deck.
2.24 Third I'Iethod of Arbiculated Plates
(Differential Equation Method One - fuindel, Best)
The deck is a,ssumed to have no tra$sverrse stiffness so that all
d;istributi-on of load is by shear, and the differentlal equation
progrrEted

r ht*yl

F*.+q

@.to)

to be ryplicable. (F and G are the longitudj.nal bendi:rg and

twistlng stjjfhesses per unit width). By erpressilg the ryplied Loadlng
in the forrn of a Fourier sine series j-n the x direction. bindet h tra,g
obtained a solution for wrrr the n th tenr of the series representing the
deflection. Values for longitudlnal bending noment, torque and longitudinal
and transverse shear are then obtained by suitable differentiation of the
e:pression for deflection.
For deflection and longitudinal noment the fir"st term of the serles
(wt and II1) is taken as being sufflciently close to the ttrre sum. Howwer,
the erpressj-ons for the remaining guantities J.jsted above are not found to be
rapidly convergent and fuinde1 discusses thj-s probJ-m of convergence in order
1s

a,ssuned

to give reasonably
Best 25

accurate anslrer.

the approach of Spindel and shom that tbe artic&lated

plate theory gives better agreernent than that obtained under a nodifled
orbholropic plate theory such as that proposed by G\r"u* 24.
ha^s

used

2.25 Fourth trfethod of

Articu-tated Plates
(Differential Eqrration Method 1\ro - Orsens, pma,

Pama and Crrsens (now

Ahned)

jntend short\y
which they have generalised the

of the University of St.

Andremrs)

to publish two pqpers 31, 32 in

approach ad.opted by Sinde.L and considered the effect of longitudinal torslon
and Poissonts ratio.
Itre effect of edge stiffening beans can also be

(1966/1967)

23.

consldered by the nethod ntr-Lch

is

based on

the differential eqrratlon for the

adisulated plate:

a?1. +(Dxy*Dy"*D1
, Ab
Dx?t(
+ (D + D r rr 1ffi,
= p(x) ------(2,11)
A solution to this equation ls dweLoped using ua Le'ry series of the form

Ff ..

nT "r arldI"rr.
I' is

where AIn=
T
derived by energir methods

ln

aLn

g(4

a f\rnction of y

------( 2.12)
onlyi the load

frrnsblon being

with a Fourier series.

An edge stiffening paraneter l , relating the stiffness of the edge
beam to the .tor^sional stiffnesses of the interior deck, and a flernre-torsion
conJunction

are defined. For a parbicular

are glven whlch
Fn ,
T4areqrationg
relate thei naxirmrn distribution coefficient fr"l to the load position for a
range of va.lues of 7 , An optilnrn value
A- may therefore be determi.ned
"f
for the particu.lar pn uu"n that K*o is a constant across the d,eck ridth.
Ttms an optimr:m size of edge stiffening beam mry be detemined.

paraneter

Comparisons are nade between theory and tests condusbed on the Langstone
brldge ln Faeglsnd and the Centerport brlfue in &aerlca (prevlouely tested by

t6 ** tested by Rone and

the Lehigh Urriversity b).
The Langstone bridge
had small fa.scia beanus which were elq)ected to have some edge stiffening effegt.
C\rsens shor"p that for
L t O.lzL good agreement is obtained between the
obsenrations and theory. ltre anthors have also enamined a bridge deck 32 fo,
whi.ch il t t.26, and is therefore outside the range of the G.ryon-Ma,ssonet
theory. Close correlation wa,s again obtained betneen e:per5ment and the
theoretical results obtained using thls arti-culated plate theo4r.
2.3 Analvsis bn Other Methods and present Desisn practice
2.31 Analysi-s bnr a Four Sided Grid - GaILia
A grid supporbed on four sides is regarded as the ba.sic stnrcture for a
nu:ltibesr bridge wlth stiffened exbeni.or beans and dl4hralls. The grid is
cottposed of longitudinaf and transverae member"e represented by the precast
beams and trhi_ddenrt dj.aphra,gms.

by GaILia first in 1955 33 *a agaln ixL lg|;| 3lr.

stijfened e:rberior beans and. di4hragns are not genera4r fotrnd. in mrltibean
decks since they require special constmctlon dsfeil,s. However, the nethod
is of interest si.nce the problern of transverrse stiffness is a\rolded by heilcting
Ttre nethod wa.g proposed

into the deck transvere nembers (diryhragm,s); the analrysts ls then

}fa.ssonetts method

for

gri.Llages 6.

based on

24'
No evidence

of ocperimental Justificatlon is

theoretical design suwes relating the

members to the sprn are given.
where only

2.32

rnade

in

eLther paper

naxi-mrn rnoment

in the grid

Present Desisn Practice

Present d4r design practlce i-s ba,sed 1a::gely on code recomnendations

of which at least two have been nade regarding the distrihrtion of'live load
or heavy concentrated load^g in bridge decks. One r,ra.s specificall5r made for
the design of preca,st decks, (ACI 7ll-i>S) and the other for the design of
ordina:ry s1abs, but wtrich ha^s been used for nany nrltibeanr decks to date
(MsHo : 1.3.2(c)).
2.321 ACI Standard 7tl-58

foraer is the ACI standard for Preca.gt Concrete Eloors and Roof
Units, section 412(b) of v*ri-ch states that extra or concentrated loads;
'trn may be considered to be unifornly distributed over not more than thr.ee
identical units on either side thereof hrt never over a greater total width
than 0.4 of the clear span distanc rrrt? In section 6.222,2 of Chqter 6
this recormendation has been conpared with obsenred beharriour and its
The

suitabillty noted.
2.322

AASHO

Standard Specifications

for

Highwar Bridges

- ?th Edition

latter is the reeonnendation due to lrlestergaard and adopted by

AASHO in sectj-on 1.3.2(c) of their standard. The sme recornnendation,has
also been included by the Mlnistry of Works (N.2.; in their Bridge Manral
section 3.3.2(c) for the Distribnrtion of Wred[ Ioads il Concrete S.abs.
For spans over tr,velvd feet it is recorune.nded that the rddth ln feet
over wtrich a nheel load is to be distri-buted be grven by
t?re

n = lQIri-E
is the nwrber of lanes of traffic on the bridge and
W is the width of roadway between curbs on the bridge.
Again ftrrbher dissussion on the value of this reconnendation rjIL
iL: sec. 6.222.1 of Chryter 6,

_____( 2.1 3)

where N

be forrnd

2.323 Obhers

, Roesli et al jn his pqper on the testing of the Genterport Briagea

reports another recomnendation that each beam be designed to carry 8OS of
the right or left wtreel l'oads of an H2O-S|6 tnrck. Roeslirs oiun erperimenta'l results do not supporb such a hlgh percentage and nor does the eqler-J-nent-

25.

al

rllork wtrich follor^p

ln this thesls; refer sec. 6.222.3 of Ch4ter 5.

2.1+ Index to Exaples of Some of the Above Methods

In the folloyrtng Ch4ters most of the above nethods are agaln dlpslrssed,
nith parbicu.lar reference to the new method that is pr^oposed in Chept,er 3.
Below is a short jndex indS.cating where in the texb these methods nry again
be fowrd.
Method

of Distribution Coefficients +

of Orthotropic Plates
Re.larcation Method of Arbiculated Prates
fuinaelrs Method of Articulated plates
Grsenst Method of ArbicuLated plates
Code Recomnendati-ons
Lehigh Method

Chqter
6

Section
6.23t

Rigure(s)
6.08a,
6ro8b.

3
6
3
3
6

3.jl
6.232
3.jl
3.jl

3.8e 3,g.
6.09

3.8, 3.9.
3.8t 3.9.

6.222

+ This method has been prograrm.ed ln PDQ FORTRAN for use on an IEI 164 rnactrlne;
a listing and description of this progranEre is given J.n Appendlx 2. Its use
is described in the section indicated above (i.e. 6.231).

2.5

Sunsnary and e,onclusion

It

would seem, therefore, that orbhotropic plate theory is of lirdted

applleation i:r the analysj-s of mrltibeam bridge decks. Onl;r by the eryirical
determination of qparent transverse bending and torsional stiffnesses or in
some cases by the estimation of an effective depth and subsequent ryplication
of the Distribution Coefficient Method can thjs theory be wed. In any event
a solution ttms obtained should be Snterpreted with care because the above
stjffnesses of a typical miltibearn bnidge arise by nonrlnal transverse prestress
forces and the doubtfrrl ability of the shear keys to resist transverse monenbs.
fn view of this uncerbainty it is considered r,riser to make the
consenrative a,ssr.rrption that the shear keys nay only transfer shear forces.
Thls assurytion forms the basis of the arbiculated plate theory wtrich is used
in the development of the se\reral analSrsis nethods just reviewed. However,
each sufferr a partiorlar disadvantage: for exanpJ.e the faulty ba.sj-c
assutrption nade by the Tllinois method concerning the trar:,snltted shear forces,
and the healy nr:nerica.l nork required by the other methods.
There ls, therefore, a need for a new rnethod v&ich is founded on rea.sonable assrmptionsr ed nh-ich is accrrrate and versatj-ler snd aborre a,tl easi.ly
calculated and progratmed to give a solution by hand or digital coryuter.

26.

&rch a nethod is proposed in Chryter 3 which is ba-sed on the 4plication of

transfer matrices to the solution of the arbisulated plate nodal.

27.
CH{PT&,:

THREE

fITT,EI

TRANSF@ MAIRTK ATIALTSIS OF I{ULTTBEAI,T BRIDGE DECKS

CONIENTS:

3.0

--

3'l

fntroduction
Transfer Matrix,lheory: Terminolo$ and Concept
3.11 State Vectors
3.12 Transfer Matrices

Concept
3.13
3.2

Transfer Matrjx Theorrr: Appli-cation to M:ltibean

Decks

f a tnans

3.21

3.22, Assurytions.

3.23 Derivation of State Vectors Z. and Z^

3.231 Determination of Z,
3.232 Deterrninati-on of ZO
3.232.1 % for Bridge Decks
3.232.2 fo for Floor Systeros

3.2h Derivation of

Fie.LO

trarrlfer

Matri-ces

3.21+l Definition of Fie1d Transfer Matr{.ces

3.21+1

.l

3.241.2

X
Y

3.2112 Derivation

of F and FE

3.243 Derivatj.on of

FO,

and PW (inct C,. and

Cp)

3.216.1 F* for Ioaded Beam

3.21,3.2 P* for Ioaded Joint.

3.25 Srrnrrary of C,eneral Matrlx Fquations for rpbem declc.

3.251 Beanlload:ing
3.252 Joint Ioading
3.26 Catalogue of Matrices.

3.3

3.4
3.5

Analysis by Hand Calculation

3,31 Ba'sic Stqs
3.32 Notes and Aids to Calsulation
3.321t 3.322, 3.3231 3.324t 3.325
Analysis by Digital Computer
Ttre Tran'sfer

Matrix Pr.ocedure Conoared w'ith Other Mettgds

213.

3.5t
3.52
3.6

Ttre Methods
Ttro Methods

LittJe.

of Roe$Ii, Spindelr Cusens and Pama.

of Norman and llathan and Rowe, Mor{-ce and

&oerirnenta.l Verification

of Transfer Matrix

Ttreonr.

29..

Notation

in this ch4ter are defined where they first

qppear i-n the texb. Below is a list of the more comronly occurring synbols
includSlg a brief definition and the page nurnber where each is fir"st jrtroduced.
Ttrey are divided into groups according to their nature, i.e, matrices,
variables and Greek letters. S;rmbols used outside this ch4ter are also
defjned where they flrst 4pear btrt have not been listed below or elsewttere.
The spnbols used

Matrices
A
B

CF'CP

F.

t-

Fr,th
E

'w
FEtrtFna,

2x2

square )
)
columr )

Zxl
2 x I columns
2 x 2 square
2 x 2 squares
2 x 2 squre

2 x 2 squares

2 x 2 square

P.
L
p

2 x 2 square

-If
z.
I

z.z
o-n

I
2x I

and load

in boundary vector determination (35)

J-oad matrices for bean and joint loads resp. (3g)
field transfer matrlx for the ith field (30)
field transfer matrices for beans to lefL and.
right of the loaded beam resp. (38)
field transfer rnatrjx for the loaded bean (38)
used

fie].d transfer matri-ces for the ]-eft and

right edge stiffening bearrus resp. (361
unit or identity matrjx (3O)

cofunn

state vector at the ith point

colunns

state vectors at the boundarXr points (34)

Variables
Za
d

bean width (36)

beam depth (36)

ela,stj-c mod:.lus of bem naterial (36)

shear or torsional rnodulus of bearn matenial (36)

moment

of jnerbia of a single beatr (36)

tor"sional inertia of a singJ.e Uean (35)

span (36)

total

N.

natrices (35)

point transfer matrix for the ith point (J6)

point transfer matrdx for the loaded joint (3S)

x 2 squar

2x

natrix product of a]'l field

of

in the deck (tg;

shear fprce at the ith joint (34)
number

beams

(30)

4a.

Variables (Contd.)

NL'NB
r

rf
*i
x,%

of beans to the lef.t and right'of the load, resp. (t+3)

location of the loaded bearn (tO)
ntrmber

toad rypried (36)

deftection at the

ith

Jojrrt (34)

frexura.l flerd-bility of inside and edge stlffening bearns rspr

$6'

YrYE

torslonal flexibirity of i-nside and edge sttffenjng bemp rspr

$6'

Greek Svnbols

O
An
A;
6

391

rotation due to tor.sion; also angle of sker.r (36, t5ty

verticar deflection drre to internar shears, Ni (34)
verbical deflection due to external load,s, II (ijg,
torsion coefficient (36)

367

h.
CHAPTER TI{RM.

mlNsFm, MAIRD( INALYSIS Or MULTTBEIM BRJpcE pEe(S

3.O Introduction
In thj-s present chapter a new procedure is presented for the analysis
of nrltibeam decks. The method uses transfer matrix theory to anatyse the
ar-bicu-lated.p1ate rrodel discussed in the preuious chE)ter. Ttre theory is
4plicable not onJy to bridge decks, but al.so to floor sJrsterLs, wtrarrres and
roofs. It is suitable,for a deck rith si-npJ.e or fixed support condltions,
of arV tiidth or spltr continuous or otherwlse and for decks wtrich nqr or nay
not be edge-stiffened.

be also considered. fire analysis

nay be performed by hand although the method ha,s been progrmned for eolutlon

bf digital

3.1

Skewed decks mry

conputer.

Transfer Matrjx Ttreory: TerminoloFo. Definitions and Concept

Itre terninolory and notation used in the following presentation

is thet

of Pestel and Leckle35. ff the reader is unfanlliar with tlansfer Matrlx

theory it is suggested that he exani-ne Appendix ! before proceeding ftrrther
with this Chapter. In this Appendix the defjrritions and concqtt wtrich
follow are illustrated by application to a st,lple spring-naes s5rstim.
3.11 State Vectors
Ttre state vector, ?rr at a point L of an qlastic syrsten is s colunn
vector, the colponents of which are the displace,nents of the point I and the
corre.sponding internal forces.

3.12

Transfer Matrices
1\ro types of transfer matrices atre definedl
3.121 Field Transfer lfatrix. F.

fierd tran'sfer natrix or fierd matrix, Fir for the i th fierd

rnith-in an elastic systeur is a sguare matrjx the conponents of r*rich relate the
state vectors that exist at those boundaries wtuich deftne the ljmits of the
The

fi.e.ld.
3.122 Point Transfer Matrix. p.

rt-i or point natrix, prr at a poirrt i of an

ela,stic system is a square natr'fur the coryonents of which relate the state
vectors rvh,ich exist innnediately to the lefb and to the right of that point.
Eccept wtren the i th point 1s acted upon by an exbernar force, p,
wiIL be equal to the identity matrix, I.

31.

3.13

Concept

rnrltiplication of state vectors with field and point transfer

matrices allor,vs the conputation of aIL displacements and internal forces for
e-la,stie systera to be made. Initial bound.a.ry cond:itions nust be set and
ftrccessive

erbernal loads known from which the initial state vector,

is calcu.lated.
.ZOr
Subsequent natrix multiplication gives the rernaind.er of the state vectoris.
The field transfer matrices are conputed fron elastic pr^operbies of the
system and may therefore'vary fr.onr fiefd. to fieId aecordjng to their
distribution. llithin a field, however, these properbies are consider"ed to be
constant and discretization may therefore be necessurxrr

3.2

Transfer Matrj:c Ttreory: Apph-cation to Mrltibean Deck:

3.21 Forrmrlation of a Transfer Matrjx solution for a lo-beanLDesE

If the mrlti-beam deck is

assrmed to act a.s an arbiq.lated plate in nh:ich

jnterconnected
the beams are
only through a,ssumed hinges, then the above
transfer matrjx theory may be successfrrJAy qplied to the analysis of this an
elAstic (dect") syst,ern.

conpider a transverse section of a l0-bean ruttibeara deck (tig. 3.1).

For convenlence s lg-bean deck is dlscussed here but the theory is ioryletely
general and nry be qplied to a deck with any nr-rmber of beams and of any rrid.th.
the general nratrix equations for the solution of a deck wlth n beans is
presented in sec. 3.25.
I

123456
| | |

0
1

|
4

7
Load,W

Appried
5

t)
e

Foints)
10 -shear

keys

110
berns
(tields)

Fig. 3.1
'
Let {O be the state vector for the exbreme left hand edge of the deck
ZtO be the state vector for the ercbreme right hand edge of the deck
Flr F2r F3r ... FIO be the field transfer matrices for the slmten
P1t P2, P3r ... Pl. be the point transfer matrices for the sSrstern
W be the load 4p1ied to the deck (acting on beanr /).
fhe field transfer matrices of sec. 3.12 ane.in ttr-is application, beam
transfer natrices. Aaln, the point matrices of the preceding section
relate to the shear kgn of the multibean deck and occept wtren the shear key

32.

Ls ltseilf loaded, this natrix wiIL be unLty.

We

nry therefore

rrite:

4 B t,{
4 a ,r4 r prFrzo
4 t ,r4 E Ffrrrzo
4 | ,"4 n pzFeprFrls
:

4 . pe4 = peFepft pr*rr*%rrpzPfrrr%

+Ps FrT[ + C, !
*l

Ff

oFoPrFs

,F t Pllr- t tZtfe ...

*l

...

PrFrZo

PrFrfr +

C,

P7c7

:
a
T

and

finally % r

trOPgFgtgFg

... F'P'F'ZO +

ErOPgFgPeteP?t?

hrt clnce in general P, r Prr ... .pl. r I, the

"*.;;;;;:'3t
beans in a deck sr'6 usuqlly the same size and stijfness, that is
Fl . F2t ... r FlOr F, equatlon J.l reduces to:

zlo, f.F*.F6.zo + f.t,,

where the

and R

(3.2)

superscripts are deleted, silce the Prrs are unity and no

distinction exists betr+een { *ta { t

*d q,f is the field transfer matrix for the loaded bem (F" . F7, C,

Note: If
equal F,

edge

hrt

stiffening

bearns

are required

if

Cr)

in the deck, F, and FrO rdl.L not

sone other value Fgr salr,

In this i-nstance, eqFl 3.1 uould be of the form:

zlot tu.f,.fu.F5.F".2o + %.f.t,'
Hertce

"

qor$ and, the

o.3)

field natrLces are knorfir, arv lntemediate etate vector

,
Zt

33.

by successive mrrltiplication of the 4propriate number of

field matrices t'o Zg and the load natrJx Cr. I?re progressive calctrLatlon
terninates when ZIO i" found. The derivation of 7,g the starttng potnt
for the calculation, is e:plained in sec. 3,232.
n^ry be found

3.22

Assurqltions

It rpuld

be of value at th:is sta,ge to }[st the asorrytions nade thrrs

far and al.so those yet to be rnade in the derivatj.on of the necessarlr tranpfer
natr:ices and state vectors.
l.
I?re beans are fjxed-ended rrith respect to toreion.
2. the beagrs are si-nply srpporbed rith respect to longitudinal
bending. In the field matrix d.erivations rytrich follow
(sec. 3.21+) sfurple supporb conditions are a^ssrm.ed, but aq7 known
degree of fi:city is pernuissible including bems continuous over
intermediate eupporLs .
3. I?re arbicrrlated plate mode.l is a,ssuned qplicable. Therefore,
onJ{r shear forces are transndtted across the a,ssuned hinge
between adjacent beans. No relative movement except rotatl-on
is possibl-e at the joints; the transvere fle:nral strength is
a-ssumed zeroo Dre consLderation of the sh4e and nature of the
shear keys leads to the conclusion that only verbical shears
need be considered.
4. A single such connection is a.ssrmed at nidspan bebween adJacent
bea.s, and a single concentrated force acts thr"ough this
connesbion.

this is the major si-nprification nade jn the method but it, can
be shown (refer fupendix 5) that it is a reasonable one to make.
In any event it idrl set a lower bound to the distribution of
load out of the rrost heaviry loaded. bean and is therefore not
5.

6.

only reasonable but a].so safe tomake such an assunption.

Each individual bean is a.ssrxned to have infinite transverse
frexural and torsional stiffness. rhis condition r*i.Ll be tnre
if the widthr/span ratio of a single bem is sma]l-. Some precast
nnrltibean decks are corposed of ttplanksrr which are mrch wider
than the usual bem and in such a case the transvere bending of
the plank mry have to be considered.
The

4pried load,s are assrmed to be concentrated loads

take up arryr longitudinal position on the deck, tut are

and ean

3l+'

'1.
8.

restricted in the transverse direction to either the centreline

of the beam or a hinge line betueen adjacent beams.
The beans are arssum.ed to behave elastically and superposition is
assumed to hold with respect to torsional and flexural deflections.
ltre normal theory for the bending of thin beans is al.so assumed..
Deflections and rotations under torsi-on rre &ssumed smal] so that
seconda.rXr effects such a.s bending i-n plan, ard-al changes in
rength, shear deformations, and cross section warping nay

be

neglected.
T!9se eight a.ssurptions lri"Ll be seen to be 5imilsr. to those adopted b,y
I and Nathan 29 *a to a certain exbent by Khachatrrri 27
Norman
ur .
3.23 Derivation of State Vector.s Z- enrl 7
3.231 Determination of Z,
Since only verbical shears are considered at each shear key I.et their
value be Nr. AgaiJtr let the verbica-l d.eflection of the key, wtrich ocsur"g
under the action of the 4pJ.ied road W, be given by xr. Itren Zir the state

vector for the 5-th key wirl be the 2 x I co}:rnn matrixl

Z.E
L

L-2

Lil Lil,

1-1

(3.1r.)

1+ 1

Nt_

3.232 Determination

.l

Fig,. ).2

of

ZO

% i" determined by the boundary condltions at those edges parallel to

the bem's of the deck under consideratj-on. Hence, it is possi-ble to find.
?6

for both bridge

the equations

floor s;rsteos.
3.1, 3.2 or 3.j can be reduced to:

decks and

zto

'

A.%+B

(3.5)

wherd ZtO,
A

and

are 2 x I column state vector"s,

%
is a 2 x 2 square matri:c rq>resenting the rnatrjx pnoduct
I
FAFW'FB
in equation 3.3t
is a 2 x I column matrix representing the matrix
2
FSfCa again in equation 3.3.

35.

pr.oduct

&parrding equation 3.5 we harret

3.232.1

lf [,:],+ lll

[;].:
[:
L for
Bridee

Decks

Sj-nce NO and NrO rePresent

the shear forces at the

right hand free edges of the bridge deck:

No Nto
deflection in

The unlcrrovrn
becomes:

-l*l

(i.e.

l-^

= l^tt

rJ fo Lq,
0 o hl'*o +
tnl

which gives

xO)

is

-l

^tzl

\r) [:]

errbreme

lefb and

o;
found from equation 3.6 which

.
.

Bzt

tll

- $.7)

t .-hbt

therefore
and

?O

9.67

hence

(for

a bridge deck)

f--

=L:1
"'-l

(3.s)

3.232.2 ZO for Floor Svstems

In this ea,se xO *d
the deflections at the exbreme left and right
"lO,
hand edges, must be zero because a floor system is suppozted at a]'l four
edges. The unknovm shear forces NO and NlO, *u in fact the reasbions at
these sqrporbs. Equation 3.6 now becomes:
(3,9)
wtdch gives

0 .

therefore

NO

A'2.NO

-tu
Atz

Bl

[;:l
I

and

hence

ZO (for a floor

system) a

36.
(3. to)

[il

3.24 Derivation of Field Transfer Matrices

In thjs section erpressions are derived for the field transfer matrices
F, FE and F" (incI. Cp.

3.24t
Xr .E{ I
ft is convenient at this point to defi-ne the bending and torsional
flexibilities of a si_ngJ.e beam.
3.21+l.l Consider the i th beanr loaded by a single point load, W. (fag j.3a,
Fj.g 3.3a
lf the span is t and the fle:<ural
rigidity EI
?
then:. Ilaxirrurn deflectior, , -l . Y
ll8ET
(3.lta1
Therefore J.et X , J.t
A8 Ur
.Again consider the beam, but in torsion under the action of
3.241.2
concentrated loads at nridspan as i_n fig J.Jb.
Fig 3.3b
In this case, if O be the r.otation
at, midspan due to the actj.on of N,
N1*1
and Ni+t then:
T
t

a9

r *'k(Ni* Ni*r)
d
Therefore l-et' Y
.......... .. (i.r rb) +
v. . 1.#
4JG

N.

and
Errrcr.

JG
rr(.t

where 2a

Ls
is lne rorsl-onal
torsional rigj-dlty
rigidity of the section:

i.e.

*ere p

is the r+idth of the beam

JG =

.2a. d'. G
is a constant depenclent on the geornetry of
(refer Tab1e J.l below)

the bean crpss-section

d i.s the beam depth

and G is the nodulus of tor"slonal rigidity.
TABLE 3.1

za/a

z{a

r0

.141

.24

.267

.281

.299

+ Note: the above eryression for T (eqn 3.llb)

An exact eryression
is derived

.307

is a first

.313

.333

appnoxination only.

in Appendln ? where lrmits on the

37'
use

of

equation 3.llb are given. In parbicular

is less than or equal to 6, special care

if the ratio
in the wa,luation of

/IEI
l, --7 3tc
Y is needed: refer equations A7.4 and A7.5 of Appendjx f.
3.21A Derivati-on of F and F.-

of fj.g ).2 isolated fr.om the rest of the deck and

under the action of the shear forces ll, and Ni*t i jJ the J.oad is to the right
of th:is bean then it $rilt behave as represented fu fag 3.4a and if it is to
the lefb, as in fig 3.4b.
Consider the

ith

bean

loadr

an

AN

ae
ag

A*-aoFN+as
*1=A N-ae

xr{r+aO

*i*1 =A N+ag

*i+14.r-"e

Flg
The

A1+aoTrAo-ae

Fls

3.4a

deflection of the bean nay thereforebe considered

corryonent

defLections: one due to pure

These are denoted a.s

AN

bendi.ng and

and a0 respectively.

J.4b

a.s

the sre of

two

the other to pufe torsion.

It is seen that:

(nis

AN

(Ni*l - Ni).x

- (Nl

Ni*r) .X

ag

(Ni+l + Ni).r

'(N.

Ni*t) 'Y

and

A-

therefore x.
tand

*i*l

with

little

form:

or

38.

(rie 3.4b)

3.4a)

rA+

aO

d+

aO

Ni,(x+Y)

- Ni*r.(x-D
- Ni*t.(x+r)

-Ni.(X-Y) * Ni*1.(X+Y) =A - aO Ni,(X-Y)

efforb these equations are rearranged into the foltowing matrj:r
aO

|.-l
[*
| | =lor

L'1,., 1*

Zi*l = Ft'2,
field

t\ro

-N'.(X+I) * Ni*'.(X-Y)

ffil

I X-Y
f{ f&r

FJ L{'

l-r

X.T

FR'zi

ffil 14

(3.t27

transfer rnatrices are therefore necessarXr for the deck

according to the position of the fie.Lcl (bearn) with respect to the load.
These are denoted b;r F, and FO for the beans to the left and right of the Ioad
respectively; they are defined by equations 3.12.
Hence equations J.2 and J.J should read:

zto

(beanr)

?.42
ii,rrdizo+rncp
)8,

and Zn .

ErR%FiFezo

(3.t3a1

+ r*dt,

(3. r3u)

field

matri-ces are dependent only on X and I rdrich in turn depend only

on the geonetry and naterial of the deck (sec 3.241). ltrerefore, if a deck is
to be edge stiffened this is reflected by the field natrices for the edge beans;
The

F*orF*

' FlX.
J(r

3.243 Derivation of

3.243.1

F'W

xE,

f r

j,Bd

e* (incI.

Yn
CF

3ng

Cp)

h for a load.ed Bearn

Consider the load applied

deck a.s in fig 3.5.

to the centre 1jne of the ith

beam

ln a nulti-

39.

Ni*1

aIy

Aty

l-lAn

AN

te

trrrr-_
tlTI

xr=An-AN-ae

xi o W.X (Ni

- (t{f

*i*l'

W.X

N===.e
*i*1=An{r+a9

.a,_(Ni
- ri-N-i+l ).Y
I.L+t)f .X

(3.t4a)

Ni*l ).Y

(3.ttru)

N.

-J
Nit+t)l..X
.X: + (ll,
i-\
+

Fig.
E. 3.55
Ag&in these equations mryE
ybbe
INE
ce reu
rernd.ttten

' l- -l

I r.rE
I .l
| *-t
Ll*' L-*
and therefore, slnce

4g
4sl
@

*rl

and

r F.T
#t

I
fu=l-

-2,
L

Flg'zi
F.
nz.

ltil:

fi|
"'lLX-TJ

tcr

il,

t- ,D"l

l-El

(3. t5a)

L #.J
(3.t5u7

I il
@
rl

l
x-,r

x-I
x-v.
rYJ

rhen

'l,[,

XFT

EtE
xiJ

in nsirix fonr:
:

ITX'l
r- ItX
r-l
:l

(3.

t 5c1

N.T

(3.tia)

40'

3.43.2
in

P,.,
Il-

for the loaded

Joj-rnt

Consider now the load rypLied

fig 3.6

to the ith joint jn

nu.ltibea deck

Fron the conditions

this Joint:

for

as

equllSbrinm at

RL
X.rX.
t-t

and,

4' -{. *,

wtrich

innatrjx

form gives

o'l [*l " hl

f--l*
[r
lll+ll--9.1e1
ll'I
-d
L-J' L' L-J' L''j

l"

but {
"*4

l-'

ol
hence "" "
Lo -,J

cp

-----(3.16b

---

(3.t6c1

and ^co'|t-tl
---------q3.
.
|

LWJ

Eig 3'6

Note: For wery other

unloaded

joint

-p

tnu unit nainirr

[l !-l
' Lv
.J ,

and cpE-. lol

LoJ

- General Matrix Equations for an n-beam Mrltibeanr

3.251 Ca.se A - Ioalat the Centreline of the r th Bem
3.25

Ssrmrarw

r-1

|r

Deck

lr+1
r+1

F,,,
vf

cF

Fig. 3.7a

A'

h+tt-ttr+tlo

--H---E--(3.174)

r6d)

B.

41.

r*s-t-tr,

[: t*oo'"t l-:e,']
I
+'
lt I
| o-'-J

i.0

to-f

LorrJ
-

zL

nlipr

zL- S-"\fi-"oro + S-"r,

n

\,

3.252. Case B

bnlfue decks)

-__o-.

(3. tga)

r)i)f
iE

{-troro

(3. t9a1

t*S-t-rrn'r-2F'zo + %*S l-f.'"F

I,oad

at the Centreline of the i th Joint

t

ln

lr-1F-F+'il
r-? r-1 r r+1

n'2

n-1

rv

cP

Fig. 3.7b

A = h$-t-"rrflro
B=

t*S-l-\

l-ol
(rloors);
%=f

i=Q

,,, |

L- E,J

r;t)

(3.rzb)

tE {-th,ro

(Uridee decks)

fl

-E-

(3.teu1

n)ilr
irn

lc.

S-",,fftto% + *-t,

\=
Z!n

ro$- | -'errr t ro%.* ro$-

(3. tgb)

t-\

3.26 CatalgFue of Matrices

l- x+y ,Jnl
|tl r:?l
N+rl
| |
i=i
r=IJ
L

;;

PL'

l-x"r
lf:i

nH'

It

II."

Fn,

&rs-l

x=f

cF=

**rl
i=IJ

hr Ff, fx rrt

FB'

FR

lr rYe

l-r

t*=

.19

X+I

&sl
- x-*

x+I

N-I

i=il

Frl
LffiJ
'h
l*
lr YE

.-l

bE

-d

X.

ILJ
[E.ET ;

h '

IE

!.!g2;

YE

4JG

x-r

X., calctrla$ed

for the

edge

t;l

stiffened beo (tdgher I).

= Y, calanlated for the edge stiffened beu (frl.gher J).

3.3 Inalrrsis Procedure: fuitable fpr

3.31 Basic Steps

Hand Calanlation

ltre procedure has four basic steps3

l.

2.

3.

the dirnensions and naterial propertl-es of the deck find the

frod.bilities x and Y fron equations 3.ll; if edge stiffening
is to be provided find h *d fo, also from equatlon 3.il.
Using these values for J( and I a.gsemble the transfer natrices
Fgpr F4r Ftrr Fjr {ri, *d P* (e+ratlons 3.20). Note the
repetitive nature of the sstrlx erernents ntrlch considerably
sirrylifles the anount of r'pr.k lrrvolved at this stage. .0lso
find CF and C, using the 4plled load W and equations 3.b.
B5r successive post-multiplication of these fteld natr.rces find
A and B (eqtrat{os 3.1?a and 3.17b). Hence obtain
fron
fo
either equatlon 3.lga or J.lgb, depending on the positlon of
Erom

l3'
the 4pJ-led load. Ihe type of nultibean deck (UriAge deck or
f,Loor systm) also determines at this stage the vdue of
%.

4.

Again, by usJng post-ntrltiplicatlon fjnd. the euccessive state

vectors Z, to 7n A check on acqrracy ls provided b5r the
condition, \ - A.% + B. lhese state vectors (Zr) Stve tne
transverse deflectlon profile of the'deck (r1) tosether rith the
shear force transnitted through each shear key (Ni). Ibom thls
infortation the load sustained by each lndividual beo is
readi-ly calculated and the load distribution anonget the beas

of the deck is therefore found.

Notes and Aids to Calcrflation
3.321 Since matrjx nnrltiplication is irrvolved, care 'rnrst be talcen to preoerre
the order of the n:.ltiplication. AIL natrices s^re post-urltlplSed but sLnca
the field matrices are only 2 x 2 sguares, the aount of arithneblc involved

3.32

is not large.

3.4

3.322 As already noted a check on accuracf is provlded in the nethod; use

should be nade of the erpressio. Zr, - Arfo + B.
3.323 A recomended tabulation for ftnding the values of X and Y and the flejld
matrices is preser$ed jn Table 3.2. A suggested scheme for the natrC:c
rnrltipllcation of the field natrices and the state vectors Ls also g:iven and
presented in TabLe 3.3 (&eciaUy drar,m up for a ten-beam deck but the
e:rbension to a deck of arly other width is obnrious).
3.32h An ecrqle of the anallrsis of a ten beam deck by ha,nd calsrflatlon ie
given ln Appe,lrd:ix 8.
3.325 ft is sometl-m.es preferable to number the beos of a deck fron right to
left instead of lefb to right as irl the above presentation. If ttris is done,
an alteratlon jn sign of the (1re1 and (2rl) e.Laents of both the F, and F*
field matrices is necessarlr.
fhe advantage of such a practice is a reduction in rnrnerical rcrik, sirrce
for exap1e if # t" known, t U
be written dorrn lmedlately, afLer a Llke
"*
change in sign.
Renmbering is however only recomrrended if NR b greater than N, .
See Appendix I for an ecryle of its we.
Analysis btr DlsitaL Conputer (tm{ t6Zol
1\o corputer pnogrumeo based on the above trangfer natrix theory have
been deneloped, which together analyse uriltibean bridge declcs and f,Ioor s5rstmt
for arry knorn l.oadt, e.lastlc and geonebric propertles. De{Lections, joint

CAI.,CUIATIONS FOR TFE IRAI{SFER MATNIX ANATYSTS OF:

Bean Poslttl
Seern Yftclth 2a

Sean

Deptb

cl

Seam Span

Elastlc Mod E
Shear MocI G

za/a

(^.t'"ot" ,''
ro2?. a3/'tz

u A. za. d,3

3ler.R1g. EI
f

ors.Rig.

t3
reZ.

.I

x,h=13 /+gnt

T;Yr=l,st/4tg
X+Y

x-I

T:T
XY
4XY

x=T
2XY

x-Y

x-Y

cI.acP

IAELE 3.2

t'

-45FIG 3.3

Analys is

45,

Mal'rix Scheme for fhe

of the
the

13

M ult
ultibe
ibe am

7g

Bridge Deck.
l1

14

71

FEn

15

FR

h Frn

72

FR

FR.FER

^3

zg

^4
FT
.R'ER

74

16

17

5
a

6
Fw

Er,,fi+FER

19

[vzor i,cF =,

F.

[-

7r+1

Fr-

Fi^u

FL

frt-

21

22

1*z

I
I

F pn-r-1

tr

ELL

'?,vE

r
13

(10)x(6)
ln'l

to'LXl

zn

10

(6)
(10)

23

12

11

(11)x

C-

[Rl r

Be,l)

i-tA

> ror bridgedecr.'<

20

zr-

l+6.

shears, the load carried per bear and. the load distribution erpressed an e
percentage of the total load, mry be celsu.lated and pJolted (tf required)
uslng the 1620 Console Tfpewriter.
Dre to the Urnlted storage capacity of the 1620 (/1OK) tno progr&mes
lrere necessarXr for this ta.sk. These harre been noed OPUS I'IilO snd OPUS
I'l{R@ and are vrritten in PDQ FORTB.0N. ltre fonner calaflates the deflections
and shear"s fronr the data descnibing the load and'deck'concerned. fire latter
uses these results a.s dat'a and colryutes the correspondi:rg load dl-str{.bution;
the graph plotting subnoutine ls included in this pnograrftrnsr
Appendix 3 dves the details of these programtres jncludlng storage
requirements, data specifications, fJ-ow cha:ts, pnograme listiJtg and a
specinen set of results. See also fupendix I for a general deecription of
the OPUS Progranune Series.

3.5 the Transfer Matrix Procedure Compared with Obhel Methods

3.51 the Methods of Roesli. Splndel. C\rsens and Pqa
In order to coryare the proposed natrix nethod rith those of Soesll
(sec 2.l3), &jrrdel (sec 2.24, and G\rsens and Poa (sec 2.2fl, an analysis
wa's made
,a^

of the Centerport Bridge detaiJ.s of r*rich

Roeslla.

The resuLts obtained fr^on

harre been used by

the firll

had been publlshed by

scale testlng of thj'e Bridge

the above anthorrs from ti.me to tj-ne to coryare thelr

onn

various methods.
Figs 3.8 and 3.9 rqreat these results and tlms conprre the proflles
predicted by these sweral methods. Shown in red ls the transfer natrjx
predLction wlrich is seen to coryare most farrourably rdth the eryerC-nenta.l
obser:vations.

discrqpancy does exist but rnore parbicrr,larJy for those profi.les

obtained under an outside edge loading (fig. 3.9). 0ther anthor"s show
s{rni141'dlvergence and cu""rr"24 suggests that tt... the position of the Load
wa,g not precisely as defined in the ercperd:nenta.l reporb. Ttre e:peri-nental
distribnrtion coefficlents exhlbit a characteristic to be erpected of a load
r+ith s1i6htly larger eccentricity.tt If allowance were made for the Larger
Some

eccentricity then the transfer natrjx theory would show erren better agree,nent
parbi-crilarly jl the vicinity of the load.
3.52 the Methods of Norrran and Iathan and Rowe. Morice and Little
Coryarison with the nebhod,g of Nor:nan and Nafhan (sec 2.2i) and RonBt
Morice and Llttle (oec 2.12) are made ln Ch4ter 6, sec 6.23, and illustreted

in figs 6.08a, 6.OBb and 6.o9.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

z 0.8
H
H
Fq

f-,

1.0

z
H
H

D
/n

1.2

&
H

(n

1.4

1.6

1.8

mcuBts 3.8
IEGEND:

//
a

in Field
Roesli et al
Observed

-? SPintlel
- - Cusens and Pama
Transfer Matrix
l,fethod

CENTERPORT SRIDGE

Description: span... 32ft.

width..27f,t.

\/

Number
Loaded.

of Units...$

on Beam J with47,70o

TRANSVERSE DISTRIBUTION
COEFFIC]ENT PROFTLES.

0.0

Q.A

0.4

0.6
g

zfrl

H
O
H

trr

t'l
O

1.0

H
F-.4

Fq

et

a
H

1.6
FTGTIRE

3.9

CENTERPORT BRIDGE

CO}/IPARATIVE TRANSVERSE DISTRISUTION

1.8

COEFFICIENT PROFTLES.

!
?.o

ig1ig3: Span,.,3zft;

wid.th.

Nurnber of Units.,,,., j
Loaded on Beams '1 & 2 with a

single axl-e l-oad of

7"2

,,27ft

47

'700
Observed in field test
Roesli et aI.
Snindel

Cusens and

2.4

Pama

Transfer l/latrix Theory.

Lb

9.6

h9'
Soertnental. Ver{.fication of Tnansfer Matrix Ttreonr
Both fleld and 1aboralory studLes hErre been conducted to firrther
verd.f! the proposed theory. tULl scale teste hst/e been performed on flve
. spans of, e rultibeo bridge gn{ stnil rr" teets condusted on a quarter ecal.e
nodel of ttds bridger
Ghptells 4 alrd j descr{be these tests and Chqter 5 givea the
vertfiLcation rdrLch ts tl.uptrgted in fteg 6.01, 6.02, 6.03 and 6.0l of
Ghryten 6.

5o.

CHAPTER,:

Ff,IJR

fiTLE:

FIU,D 1ESTS C,l fi{E

MULTIBEAI,f BRID9ES AT

S,IPP&Y CREK

C0NIENTST

lr.o Introduction
4.1 Or'reanlsation. Rrrpose and Quarber Scale l{odel
4.It Organieatlon
l+.12

Rrrpose

L.t3

l{odel

4.2 Description of Slipperr Creek Brid.ees

4.21 General
\.22 Descriptlon of log-Bean Bridge
h.23 Decription of Hollow-Cored Br{dge
4.3 }lateria]s and Desien of S'Llppecr Creek Bgidses
l+.31

Concrete

h.32 Steel
h.33 Design Stresses

4.4

Applied Ioading and Special Test Vehicles

b.l+l
h.M
'

Genera].

Lane Ioader

h.l+3 Point Ioader

'l+.5

Instrrrmentation

l+.51 DefLection
l+.52 Strain

b.6

l+.7

Test Pr.ogrflfiIe and Procedure

4.61 Lane and Pojrt Ioading Procedure
I+.62 Tests for the Effect of Transverse Reinforcement
4.63 Tests for the Effect of fuany'fidth Ratlo
h.6l+ Tests for the Ef,fect of Skew
F\rrbher Tests

l+,71 Additlona.l Tests for Ilifferentlal

b.72 tr\rture Tests under Norma} Ilaffic

's'liP
ConditLons

51.
SHAPIER FtX'N

FIED

1ESTS ON THE I'{UIITBEAM BRIDGES AT

S,IppSf

CREEI(

4.0 Introduction
In 1964 the Ministry of Woriks of the Nen Zealand Goverrment brxilt by
contract tro nultibean bridges to span Slipperlr Creekr 18 niles south of
Auckland City. Ttre trin bridges l-ie on the Southerrr Motonrry er:berrion
between Takanlni and Dmry. Each is three traffic lanes nide, one bridge
being for norbhbound t'raffic into the City and the other for southborrnd
traffic leav:ing the City, A set of the Contract Plans for these bridges
has been included ln Appendix p.
At.the ti-ne of constmction the bridges r+ere both three spans 5.rn
lerrgth b'ut d:iffered in the type of mrltibeam deck used for their sqlarate
st4lerstmctures. In March, 1966 healy flooding caused ssrrerE scouning
under the southern abutnents of the bridges snd both decks hsrre now been
lengthened fron three to five splns. Plate I shor'p the bridge af,ber the
errLensions had been coryIeted and the brifue qlened for traf,fic.

4.1

Orgarrlsation. Rrmose and QUarber Scale l,fode1

4.ll Oreanisation

that the info:sration cvailable concerni.ng the behaviour of

mrltibearn decks was inadequate, the Ministry of Wor*cs announced ear\y 5-n
196h., their intention to conduct Load tests on the Slippery Creek bridges.
$rbsequent negotiation between the ltinistry of lforiks and the Schoo1 of
F.ngineering of the Unlversity of Arrckland, r.esulted in the anthor condrrctirg
these tests on behalf of the Ministry of Works. ltre tests lrere, holrever,
financed by the Ministry of l{orks, who also nade avai-Iable se,trior staff,
Knowi-ng

cadet personnel, plante nachinery, equipnent and other

faciJities,

necessar1r

for a field project of this size.

the tests took place in April and l{ry, 1965, and la^sted for a period
of eight rueeks. At this time the brifues were each only three spans long
and five of the possible six spans were investigated for verbical deflection
and long'itudlna.l

straln ns the bridges were Loaded nith the special test

vehicles.

l+.12

Rrrpose

In brief, the tests were conducted to detersine the i-ryortance of the

serreral design parmeters, the acsuracy of recent\r prcposed design nethod,s
and the transverse distribution of load oorgst the seryere.l beaF of theset
tno of the nost co@on t5rpes of mrltibeu bridge decks.

52.
More
Creelc

speci-fically, there r'rere sjx objectives in nind durtng the $-ippery

Tests. I?rese lrere:

To check the vnlidity of
l.
.2.

..

design methods of both those in surrent

use and those recentJy proposed (especially the tra$sfer natrix
nethod of Chryter lhree).
To .deterrine the effect on the beha;riou.r of the decks of trarr'sverse
reinforceanenb, both ordina^ry mild glsel and prestressed reinforcement.

3.

To determi.rne

the reilative beharlour of hollorrcored units

and

log-

beo units.

h...
5.

the effect of variation in the span/rrldth ratio on the

beheviour of the hollorrcored units.
To d.etermine the effect of flfteen degrees of skew on the behsviotrr
To deternine

of both dechs.

6.

4.2

lto obtain lnfluence lineg for deflection and

(") coryare rrith results obsenred under lane loading
(b) cotrpare rith results of model tastilg.

h.l3

Model

l+.21

C,enera1

Conqrgent ryith the preparation and execution of the field testingr a

quarber sca.le nodel of the .slippery Greek Bnldges was buLlt in the Stnrctures
Laboratory. Testing of the mode.L actualJy cmnenced before thai in the flaldt
and. prelS-udnu1r results from the nodel influenced to sone extentr the tests nade
on the prototlpe (refer sec. 4.31). The constnrctlon and testing of the nodel
is disctrssed in Chryter J. The results, and their analSrsio, of both the fleld
and nodel testing is presented Joiltly 1n Ch4ter 6.
Description of the S].ipperv Creek Bridees
Both brldges harre been bqilt in concrete using cast-in-situ piles, cqlped
with ordinary reinforced. concrete besn^s to act a's piero, Each deck consists of
precast, prestressed beams which lle side by slde across the rridt'h of the deck
and. are reinforced transver.,sety to provide the transvere shear colurection.
Again, both bridgeg qrhibit the ssne l5o of sken and each consisted (at the tjmE
of testing) of three, 37 foo+, spur,s (sker,vspan). The notmal width of each deck

LgS6feetrrithnoprovisionforfootpaths;theguardrailqareboltedtothe
si-des of the deck. Refer to the Contract .Plsr,s in Appendi:c t.
althorgh 4parently iderrtical in rypearance tbe decks of the tr5nbridges
the deck'
differ in the t5rpe of prestressed unit or beu used to corylle

53'

l+.22 Description of Iog'{rrLit Bridee - Figs 4. I and &.,2a

Tlne ea.stern bridge (tfrat carryilg Southbound traffic) was constructed
fron the Ministry of Wor*s designed tt1ogtt bean. Each preterBioned beam was
35r-lltt lorr lr-lQrr wide, 14tt deep and carried a lrt longitudinal nib along
each lower outer edge. ltrus wtren the beans were asserrbled together to form
the decks a 2rr gap ocgurred between the.units. Ihie gqp wap fl.Iled wlth .
concrete after the fourbeen lfr dia[. D.s. ti rods had been threaded through
the deck. A firrbher 4rt of deck, reinforced at 8tt centres r*itfr $r 4lan. rod,
was then poured over the beau:. Shear reinforcement between the besns and
this exbra deck s].ab wa,s provj-ded in the form of spj-ral cojjs (f,tt dian. m.s.
rrcd) set jnto the beans wtren they were preea,st.
Eighteen of these 1og bean^s were used to obtain the firIL width for
each of the three spars, but for the purposes of this load testing programe
the degree and t;rpe of transverse reinforcement wa,s varied as the tests
proceeded - such variations are ciescribed j:l sec. 4.j2.
4.23 Description of Holloru-Cored Bridge - Figg 4.1 and 4.2b.
fire western bridge wa,s constmcted fr.om the Cerbi-fied Concrete decigned
Ithollow-corerr bean. Each bem wa,s 36r-llrr long, of two $ridths,
3t-64" ana
3r-gltt, l6tr deep and hollow. three hexagonal cores mn the lerrgth of the
units excqrt r.rhere diaphragms have been inserbed at each end and at, nidSpan.
Provision for a shear key wa^s made by casting a 4rr x |n resess into the side
of the units. After the deck was a,ssembled and the shear kqrs poured the
single transver"se cable at nidspan wa,s stressed. No deck slab was prrcvided
and the decks r,vere reaSr for imrnediate use.
,

For the purpose of these load

tests,

of ttr-ls bridge wa.B a'

different r,ridth; the first was the fbIL width eouprising ten of the hollor+cored unitsr the secondr half the r"ridth, coryrising five units and the third
was quarber the width corprisi-ng only three units. In the second and third
sprns the renainder of the bems to make up the f\rIL coryJ-ment of ten, were
in place during the tests but free frorn that porbion of the deck under test.
the log and hollow-cored decks are sumarised in Table [.J w?r.ich
each span

follows in sec. 4.4.

h.3

lulateria.ls and Desien

h.3l Concrete

of

S].ipperlr Creek Bridges

for the manufacture of the preca.st bealog for the SJ-ippery

Creek Eridges was as iridicated in Table !.,l.
Ttre ntix used

54Slippery Creek

FIG 4.1

(a) Elevation along

(b) Plan

,4,
B

riclge

Skew

d twin bridges
areas not test

hollow-cored
NORTH

(AuOdanal

logpbeam \deck s

#
SOUTH

14 transverse tenildir

18 log beams per dek

55,

IIG 4.2

6 at

d'spirat

2ry

15 trarsverse 1"fl m.s bolts

at 30" c,ss.

6tcs

lr-424n

a /
d6strands

Typieal Cross-seclions of fhe Log Beam Deck

+beams

sfrear

key

7"x 2"

9"x 7" void

osingle cable
at m idspan

34

/tg

strands

p-

4t$

Typical Cross-secfions of fhe Hollow-cored Beam Deck

(b)
.b

+l0beams36'- 6"
n

56.
TABLE
CONCR3TE MIX

aggregate

fitt

nggregate

DESIG{ T'OR SLIPPERY CREA( BRIDGES

Mortrrlrrsf

passing ttt *d retalned ftr;

?O% retained on frn.
pa.ssing t" 6fi passing No. 8

WA pa^ssing No,16
206 pa.gsjrg No.3O

beach sand

pa.ssing No.

cement

tfilsonite Rryid

Weight per

Firteness

Sieve Analysis

Description

*tt

4.I

5O

hof.nh (Th-q\

-M-1

6.6

25n

3.2

e6

1.36

370

Hardening

700

Total Weight
per Batch:

Nqls:

t+58O

l.

The anount

Z.

ltre aggregate/cement ratio was 5.55.

Ihe units were steam sured for I hours; relea,se of prestress at
12 hours (concret,e strength not less than 5000 lbs/sq.in.).
Ttre cernent, aggregate and water, block tests, nix proporbions,
adrnixbures, mea,surement of material-s and the handling and placing
of the concrete was required to conform to the [irri-stry of Works
Specification for Precast Pretensioned Bridge Units39.
Laboratory tests at the School of Qrg:i:ceening for the crushing'
strength and the elastic modulus for this concrete gare the
fo]-lowing results:
Cnrshing Sbrenglh: Ilr3OO lbs/sq.in.

3'
4.

5.

of water added wa,s governed W ryparent worikability.

Elasric

Mod.rlus

5.7ox to5 ru"/"elll8

nonths'

Refer also sec 5.612.

l+.32

Stee]-

Wire strand of fitt noninal. d.j-aroeter was wed to pretension both the log
and hollow-cored urrits. The various prroperbies of this high tensi-le wire
are surmarj-sed in Table 4.2 below:
TABLE 4.2
HIq{ TENSILE SIFT, PROPMTT&S FOR S,IPPENY CEEEK BEAMS
UJ.timate Strength of Wj.re
l,Ioc Diarneter of Wlre
Noninal Diameter of Strand
No. of llires to the Strand

Min. Breakine Ioad

l;ad at t%. Elongation
l{in.
Erogf
No. of
strands per Q.
loe bean ilk.'6d*8fl gilSsEdntl*H:"gs*"f "

100

- llo

0.128
0.375
7

2t,000

B^?n
4L

21,

B/76*s

tons/sq.in.
iJlF.

ins.
lbs/.strand.
J.bs/strand.

DetaiJs of nonp'restressed reinforcernent can be found in the Contract

Drawirrgs for the slippery creek Bridges which are found in Appendix !.
b.33 Design Stresses. Ioads and Djmensions for log and Holloru-Cored Decks

57'

In the foJlow:lng Table (b, 3) a conparative listing of desin stresses,

desJ-gn load':, dasign dimensionsr transverse tj.e arrangements and Live load.
dlstribution is presented for both the J.og and hollow cored mrltibem decks.
TABLE

4.3

DF'SIG{ STRESSBS' LOADS' DIMENSJOIS, IBANSVERSE TfE AIID

DESIq\I SffiESSES

Conpressive Stress

at tran^sfer

Tensile Stress at transfer

Coryressive Stress under Design Ioad
TensiJe Stress under Design Ioad
Initial Ioad per $rt Strand
Final Ioad (a.ssr:ning &F losses) p"r Strand

LM

IOAD DIStRIBUItCI{

rog

H/c

25oo

27oo

4oo

2oo

2ooo

Untts

Lbs/sq.in.
Lbs/sq.in.
Lbs/sq.in.
Lbs/sq.fn.

,T

200

ll+.7

14.7

| 1.8

| 1.8

50-170
H2oSt5
Tt6

rfr-170

Kips
Kips

DESICilI IOAD

Concrete Deal,{ Ioad

Live load

*s/x3

r{2ost6
Tt6

Additional Surfacing

ws/x2

t6

DESICJ'T DIMENSICN{S
I

Unit Width (overall)

frtor

l
I

Unit De"th
Ilolerancesl Width

lStt+

1$n

Length

*"

of Units required per $an

Total rn:mber required for Bridge
Gr"oss-sectional Area of Deck
Moment of Inertia
of Deck
Secti.on Modulus
of Deck
Number

M-ANSIIERSE TTE

f8

to-

54

30

216+

rM

in2/ft.r+dth.

5832+

)84

in4ft.wath.

6l$+

l+78

in3/ft.wdth.

Either; l\r1tt E.s. diElmo

transverse bolts

lre

3te2,
l6n

!*"

Depth

DESIq{

316*n
&

avi.ly
-

OR:
.

S5u%3!u

"39fiF:f
l4r}!276n H.T.

sj.ngJ.e tendonp

FsFfiEF$"FlESs"iHtr*

"

Single four rrire

Q.275rt diam tendon

il5Tifihti"f;:*

No enbra deck slab

but. shear kqrs
ctElt.

tr

58.

+ These figures for the_Iog bean units incllde the e:rbra 4rr of depth provided
by the in-situ deck s1ab.
DE$eil{

SIRESSES,

IOADS, DIIiffiNSIC[ilS, lnAI{SrruRS TIE AND

IJVE IOAD DISIRIBUTTOI'I

No qlparent

live

load distrib,ution
a,ssumed

gq{]AACT

DRAIUING NUMBER"S

ln

MINISmg Or

30923

(AIII$IDED)

l+.4

deslgn

LM

IOAD DTSTRIXTUTICII

In

accordance with

of

AASHO/PCI

section

3:j.2

(c)

Joiirt

Cotmittee fuecification.

WOnKS

CERTTFTED CCIICREIE
DlilG

NO. 503a

l.{of.

ADO 31316

lpplie4 loading and foecial Test Vetr-ic1es

4.1+l C'eneral
It wa.s originally planned to use a single eight ton load. in the form of
a concrete plpe to be lifted jnto the various loarLi-ng positS-ons by nobile
cFElrlr As a result of nodel tests nra.de at the School of &rgineeri,nge it was
decided to i:lcrease the load in order to obtain nore signlficant deflections
and strains (sec 5.63). Accordi-rrgJy, tno abnormal loading vehlc.les were
a,ssembled and transported to the slte.
l+.1+2 Lane loader

For lane loading a Falcon, 2J ton Coryactor was used (plate lA). I1e
boxes were filled r+ith sand and a fnrbher tr.ro l$ton concrete blocks rrere
added to give a tota.l all-up weight of 5?16oo lbs (30.2 tons). The jsner
pair of wtreeJ-s were removed to provide a single axle loading through t5rres
$r$rt 4arb. The tor,eber was lengthened to allow a tractor to position the
coryactor r.rithout resting on the span i-tserf. see also Eig 4.36.
h.l+3 Point loader
For point loa*ing a forfy foot long traiJ-er loaded lrith five l*f, ton
concrete blocks was used (ftate e). ftre traiJer was supported on a single
axle and camied two DC 3 aircrafb tyres spaced, dE 2r4tr centres. I6e load,
was thus sltghtly unstable and outrigger"s were provided to help stabjlise tbis
6410OO lbe (28.6 ton) Joad. Howsver, the advantage pf this vehicle lry in

the fact that the Joad was, !e aIL intents and purposes, a rtroint,rr load.
Such a load wa.s invaluable when analysing the results of the tests, in the
4plication of design theories and in the derivation of influence llnes,
since the superpositlon effects of other toad,g need not be considered. At
the conmencaent of testing with this tr+l],er the load w&e Jscked off tbe

59.

40ft.

3/2O"x6*"

nSJ

POINI IOADINC TEST VEIIICTE

28.6 tong al1-up rveight

2t -6"ece
-l

5/4+ ton concretc blocks

z/DCa

aircraft

wheelg on

a slngle axle

Flg 4. 3a

extendecl towbar

2/+*ton concretc blo'c

sand

IAI{E IOADIRG fES[

fll.Icd

VEHICI,E

(25 ton Falcon

30"2 tong al.l-up welght

l!
Fig 4.3b

e|-5ce6

boxge

fo.

with a

ton Tangre hydra'rlic jack to obtajn a tnre poi.nt Load.

A. corparison between deflections obsenred fu ttris posltion and ]ater in the
ttlheels doutltr positLon shorred no appreciable dtfference
and Jackisg was
ground

100

discontinued.

l+.5 Instrruentation

See also Ri 4.3a.

The behaviour of the decks under load was observed by nea.suring

changes jl deflection and long"itudinal strain.

Refer to AppendiJc fO
used drrring the teste.
4.5t Deflectlon

for the dial

and

strain gaue recordfu

sheebs

firirby iLial gauges of variorrs travel (*n to erj and marnrfacLure

(Mercer and Batty) were nrcunted und.er each span in turn,
where tuo separate
systens
of
scaffolding
'
had been erected. One set supported the dial
gnrges and the other camied the walkways giving access
for the sjx
engirreering cadets wtro read the ganges. T?re diar ga'ges wer.e qt,bached
through aluniniun blocks to Dexion fastened to the scaffotting (Rate
3n;.
Ten ganges were mounted under each quarber, half and three-qua.rter
line,
one galge at the centre of wery second bem. except where tlm wi;re pnovlded
on
each side of the centre line of the deck (f.ig
A.4).

4.52 Strain

electrical resistance fojl strain gauges, of [rr g4rrge length

and szunder"s-Roe manufacturer were mounted longitudinal-ly under
the five spans
tested' The ganges were glued to the under surface of the deeks which had
been suitably prepared by wire bnrsh-ing and the
4plicatlon of degreasing and
neutralising agents (trictrloroethylene and zinc chloride respectively); the
cement used wa.s Araldite, Casting Resin D.
Deteil-s of these Sauges have been incfuded in Table
5.T of Ch4ter J.
strain gangqs were pnovided onry at rnidspan and were primari.ry
insta]] ed to check on the possible overloading of the outside besp under the
abnortal Joading - tr,uo ganges were cemented to each outside bean
for this
re&sonr on spans A and D the ganges were, honever, distrihrted acnoss the
whole wldth in a pattern similar to that of the dlal gd,gas. I?ris
enabled a
transverse pr"ofiJ-e of Jongitudinal strain for both the 1og and
horlorrcored
decks to be obtajned (fig 4.4).
Forty-1611r

Cables leadtng from

the gauges to a nobiLe control and recording centre

51.

Flg 4.4a Iyplcal

gauges.

SectLone

of

the Sllppery Creek Srltlges

showlng the traneverse

dietrlbutlon of both dlal & etreln

IIollow
Deck

cllal

* etraln gauges

gauges

spans DrErF

spans ArC

log

Deck

Flg 4.4b Plan Ylew of the Brltlges showlng the 0vera11 Dlstrlbutlon
of both dlal ancl etraln gaugee; legend as a G.
(

hoDow-cored

be

I{ORTH

3Q

SOUfH

*--

-H

3Q H

(roe

beane)

o
o
(l'

jd
q0

tr+{
.rlo

,d

tr
r{

*'t{
oo
o+5

d
tr
r{

HO
6
dq
dE

o.+
h
oq)
.rt

+t

Ei

.d
(l)${
=
{Jo

Fa

Fioo
o b0(l)
E5o
ocd
oq0 l
aA A
odF:
qO'-l O
5'td..l
dP.-rl
Q0

([)E

15

.$

tn

to

oo
HC)

[i+'

d'rl

|rF

Pql
O
Fol
.r{ ${ P.

6s{
t{oh

PAld
Ut Fl
.!d .rl

ooE
ts o'-t

h0

.r'l d

F{

+)

d
q0

U)

ooFl
(Il {J."{

tr
d
d

$J

Fl

{J

o
q0
5
(s

O t-l

t{P

T{d

q0

BO

h
do
o
tr
o
A
E
o

t{
tr

c)

C)

q0

4tr
4
t{
o
c)
o
h
g
.r{
d
h

sto
oFlo)
Ho.c
rl+J
d
r{ r'l
o)oo
.rlOd

q0 0)
g
.r{ T{
t{PA

0)

t d
,dd

b0d

oh0
oI{tr
.rl
o

'dtr-l
.r{(dO
|{+{ot +{
trl
(l) -6

o'

oo
Jd
u)o
o
5t{d)t0
o)
5
qOtr o d
t. dP
()
ot
s
oP
tr
t-l
h r{
ko dqos{d
g
h O'r{
d
& Prl
od
tr
A
.r{
t{OO
Fl +{ o.r{ .{
CN O OPP
o6
o' P t{{5${
H trO
T
P OO(l) g
sl.d o
(!,{J
c, o
.s!
ts b0 t{r{
5 trd p{P

o
t{
.C
{J

dtrocd
hdktr
t{
;{
qlooo

t-l'rl O
S ,-l OPP
O dr{ (U O
.r{
O.q E
P.d(l)o)|u

o
9{>.qE
oP
o
h
a P q)o t'l
o
cldtr d o
o{J${
ho
o q)o s)
o)ttql
tr B'd
qrdrld
clt O
f{.cloFt{
e{ Ol.{ qtP

ql

F'{sE a

{5

r{
'rl
P
o

62,

q0

o)l

Jdl
o.
oh

d
,d)d
EFI

5(t
poB
.q

+'

k
o
tr

;l

63.

the strains to be obsenred re.note from the span under test (ftate 4a
and Fig 4.51. Arrtomatic electronic switching 4paratus and a'PtriIlips NulJ.
Point Strain Gange Bridge were used for the obsenrations. Both the dtal and
stratn ganges were read for zero load at each occa.slon the load was off the
span. this ocsurred at the conclusion of er/ery third set of readings utdJ-st
the loader was being changed fr"om lane to lane or row to row. A nrnning
check on the zer.o shift wa.s thus malnbained.
It wa,s found that a coupensat5-ng gauge cernented to an 8t? x 4n block of
the bridge concrete was subject to greater variation of te,nperature than the
decks thqn'selves. Large zero shifts and inaccrrrate obserrrations resulted.
thj.s wa^s corrected by using a garge on a span rot unaelf?3 tn" eoryensator.
Ociginaflf it wa^s planned that strains should be recorded a.rtomatically
. by pen recorder and a Direct Reading Bridge. ltris, horoerrer, proved. lrrFractical
beczuse of the large drift which wa.s e:,perienced r,rith this Strain Br:ldge.
This wa's due to the fact that the very small changes in straln, which occurred
wen under these abnoraal loads, necessitated the use of the highest
sensitivity rurge in the Bridge cj-rcuits, which in turn arylitied the alrea{y
considerable vaniatj-on in ].ine voltage anraiaah].e on the site. $rch variaiions
rendered the drift 5-npossible to control nj.thout the jretallation of nore
e.laborate eleetronic apparatus.
alJowed

l+.6

Test trograrune and Procedure

for testing the bridges was such ag to include the

necesaaJXr tests to satisfy the objectives of sec. I+.12.
Appendix lO includes prints of Tables issued in a reporb rrritten for the
l[inistry of lfor{ts indlcating a proposed testing timetable and a srrggested
I?re programne adopted

loading pr"ocedure which wa,s subsequently adopted.

4.61 Lane and Point Ioading proeedure
Lane loading was accorplished W placing the Compactor in each of four
f-anes for each fUIL width span, Readings of deflection and strail rvere taken
when this vehicle was positioned at, the three-quarter (3e), half (10 and
quarter (Q) points.
Similarly, when ppint loadilg, the forby foot trai I er was placed in nj.ne
Tows across the vridth of the deck for spans A and C and in ten rows for span D,
five for E and three for F. the n:lne ru,s for spans A and C correspond to the
nine standard load positionl proposed in the Rorre-Morice-Llttle bridge deck
design method

(refer sec, 2.12).

The

ten, flve

and

three rords correspond, to

6b.

on each bean of the holf.ow-cored d.ecks. Again, wtrS-lst in each

row the load was positioned in turn on the three-qrarter, half and qua'rter

I point load

po5-nts and rcadilgs nade

of deflection and strain.

elperienced when loadirg over the outside edge

beans and. the gUardraiJs had to be rernoved j.nr order to allow the trai'le3 stt4
corpactor to be manoeuvred into these positions.
4.62 Tests for the Effect of Transverse Reinforcernent
Variation in transverse rejnforcernent wa.s achieved W testing and
retestisg the spans of the ea,stern bridge (log-bean bridgel sparrfl designated
A, B and. C a,s in fig, 4. tb) with gradually increa^sing uounts of relnforcement.
Span A wa,e transver"sely reilforced with lrr iliam. n.s. bolt's threaded at each
Some

difficulty

wa.e

prior to gr"outing.

not tested and fran C wa's

transversely reinforced with 0.2?6rr dian. prestressing tendong stressed to
9 Kips. and. grouted. Initial tests began on span A with only one bolt in
positlon at raidspanr md on $pur C with no transverse reinforcernent 8i sILt
exce,pt for that provided i:r the Att deck srab ($n dian' rod at 8n ccs')
Ttre tests for transverse rejnforcement then proceeded ag below:
Span A
Series Al : single bolt at n-idspan of bridge deck.
A2 : tuo bolts added et quarber points: total now J bolts at 3Qr H & Q.
A3 : four bolts added: totat now ? bolts at 5r-gn centres.
A[ 3 eight bolts added: total now l! bolts at 2t-6n centree;
i.e. uniformly spaced along the span.
end and tightened

Span B was

Span g

Serie

: no transverse prestress pmvided.

Cl : tr,rrc O.2l$rr dlam. prestressi-ng tendons each I t-3tt from midspan.
c2 : two tendons added at quarber points: total now 4 at 3Qr H & Q'
C3 : four tendons added: total now I tendons ai 5r4r centreg.
C4 : six tendons added: total nory 14 tendons at 2r-6n cer$res;
CO

1.e. uniformly spaces along the span.

tr.63 Tests for the Effect of SpanAlidth Batio
Conparative tests on spans D, E and r' (spdr+idth ratios of l.Oe 2.0
j.311) were conducted !o test for the effect of ttr-is ratio on deflectiont
strai-n and load distribution.
l+.6b Tests for the Effect of skew

8nd

of readi-ngs of deflectl-on and stral-n

afber posittoning the Coryactor ffust rnith its wheels parallel to the sides
llhese were performed by taking sets

65'
angl-es to the abutmelrts; the

of the deck and then with the wheels at rigirt

difference in readings, if ar1y, is a measure of
l+.7

skew.

Nrrbher Tests
As dissussed in later sections (Chpter 6) slip wa.s obsewed. betr,reen
the beams of span E drrring the above tests. It waa subsequently decided to
conduct further tests of those exbra spans added to the bridge afber the
flood damage of March t966 (sec 4.0). these r,rere carried out in Ocbober
1966 u,sing a twin a:cle, self prope]-led conpactor r,rith a lmrdlnm anle load of
A derrice, which wa^s essentially a t/tOrOOOth lnch dial ga'rge
3lr0OO lb.

cIaryed

to

a healry ba,se ptrate, wa,s wed for obsenring the differential

movenent between beans under various load positions. These tests took only
half a day to nrn through and required four men to operate the coryactor and
record the resu].ts.
4.72 ftiture Tests under Nor::nal 1baffic Condi-tions
At the colqpletion of these tests the site wa^s c.leared of scaffold, the
eUardrai-ls r^ep1aced, the hot rdx surfacing laid and. the bridges opened for
traffic. I?re strain ganges glued. to the soffit #f8."r." were sealed off
sgainEt the weither with P1asti-Bond Fibreglass Csnent, OnJ;r the rirri-plug
socket at the end of the shorb cable soldered to the gauge wap J.efb eryosed.
If firture tests for ffn:'nic characteristics of these bnldges are cont"{Flated
these sane garges could be used. More sophistieated electronic strain gange
4parat'us with good sensitlvity woutd be necessary, but the informatlon fnm,
such tests rrculd be valuable (refer sec 7.22).

66.

.9@:
JILE:

FII/E
MODU, TESTS ON

lIiE I.'lULfiBEAl,l BRIDGF,S AT S,IPPffiY

C,RIE(

CONlENTS:

5.O
5.1

Introducti-on
Desien of Mode1
5. | | Dimensional AnalYsts
5.12 Modelling Criterla
5.13 Choice of Model Tlpe and Dimenpions
5.lt+ Special Probleros associated with $pe

5.ll+l

Model M5x Design

l{odels of Concrete Stnretures.

Criteria

5.ll& Scaling the Transrnission Length

5.143 Tests for Ultinate load Characteristl-cs
5.ll+3.1 Use of Overeized Stressing Tendono

5.2

5.ll+3.2 Dead Ioad Fquivalence

5.lM Casting Model Cores
5.1 45 MaiJltaining Cover Requirements
Cohstmction of Model Testine Fecilitv
5.21 Constmction of Test Floor
5.2 Design and Assenrbly of Ioading Frane

5.23 Wdreulic Load Systen

5.3 Constnrction of Model
5.31 Materia'ls - Concrsbe and Steel

5.32
5.33

5.311 Concrete
5.312 Steel
5.312.1 Prestressed
5.312.2 Non Prestressed
Conptmction of Piers
Beam l,Ianufacture
5.331 Stressing and Casting Bed
5.332 Procedure

5.31+ Assembly

of the Multibean Deckg

5.31+l Deck
5.3/,t2 Deck

SB

5.31+3 Deck

SHC

5.1+ fnstntnentation
5.41 Strain

SA

6?.

fi.h,Instrunen!:at*ot1

.i'.bl

Str.ain

5.1+ll Deek Sbrains

5.\12' Pi'er Sbraip

5rl+2 De{LestJ-on
' 5.1&l D[al

5.W

5.5

Garges

Prsol,se l"w.etLing

Teet Progr@rc ard Procqdpre

5.51 Testg on Indtvidtlal BeaEF

5.itt Tot" for $liffnegs and C@b

'5.512 Tests

for F'ai-lure IPad.

5.52 Teat Progrmre for lltodeL Deckc

5.6

5.521 stfinsr,lsed hrtPose

5152 Tept Prooedure for Modeil Deaks
D*e.dnatlon of Is-tua[ Scale Eagtons

g.6f

Deter.rnlnati.an
5,.61'1

of ff

0 Ibgrs&roe.r ilk

II

5.612 Resu.lts fnom E lban'sducer

5,.62 i$umaris'ed Soaile' Factons

69.

qIA]PI@

5.0

ETVE

MqQELIESTS ON IIIE MULTTBEAM BRIDTIES AT tr,IPP&Y

CREEK

Introducti-on

it

early in 1964 that the Ministry of Works i.:rtended

to load test the Slippery Creek Brifues it wa.s decided to congtnrct a qrarter
scale model of the SJ-ippery Creek Bridge decks, for J.oad testing in the
Stnrctures Laboratory at the School (nate t;.
the basic rea.son for the constnrcti.on and testing of the uaodel was to
determine the load distribution behaviour of nrnrJ.tibem decks. Howerrer, the
irvestigation eryanded to jnclude tests to e-stablish the validity of the
proposed transfer matrix theory as well a.g to detenrine the effect of
transverse prestress, span/width ratio, lJ degrees of skew, and the tSrpe of
preca.st unit used in the deck. In shorb, the testing progrulme for the
model ernbraced at leapt five of the six objectives listed in sec. l+.12 fot
the testing of the full scaLe stnrcture. lhe tests, thus duplicated on the
model decks gave the opporbunity to confirm the behaviour observed at the
site and also the necessarJr circumstances to check node-l and prototype
correlation. An i-ryora'arrt bSproduct of this r,ork wa,s therefore concerned
r,rith nodel studies on concrete stnrcLures.
Tests on the node-l were conducted under better conditions than were
possible on the ftrIL scale stmcture since they rrere independent of the
weather, flood and tide conditions and motorway constmction, In addition,
the range of tests perfomted on the nod.el wa.s rmch greater than that
pemS-ssible at the site. A study of transverse prestress, an eranination of
the sh4e of shear key and u.Lti:nate tests to faiJure harre been possible durisg
the nodel studies. there were, therefore, sweral advantages to be gai;1ed in
carrying out both nodel and fielrt studies.
the t'heory used for the design of the modal, its constnrction and
testing progrannner are described belor. Three nodel spans were j-nvestigated
(SAr SB and SHQ r and the various tests performed in separate stages to
corresPond to a'11 fj-ve spans tested at the slte.
I?re presentation and
discussion of the results of both the nodel and field test pnogrames is given
When

jointly in
5.1

was announced

Chapter 6.

Desisn of Model
5.ll Djrnensional Analwis

lhe followJng presentation gi,ves the baslc concepts for nodel design
ba^sed on a dimensionar analysis of the statics
of moder and {\rL scare
structures.

69,.

Ihe reproduction in a model of a particular state of deforration j.n a

ftrll scale stmcture requlres that at wery point the corresponding strainp
rnrst be equal.
I?rat

ls:

""=l

(5. r)

where e ie the strain

and srm are the suffixes representing the stnrcture and nodel respective\r.
Ifr as seemed rea.sonable in these gtudles, tine-dependent phenonena are
lgnoredr and the tr.ro free quantities, Iength and stress, are fixed, then the
choi-ce of trp scales

?t = F

.g
q

and

detenmjJles every

6t

il

(5.2)

&
pn

$.3)

other quantity to be considerd. In these equations

I
,
$

represents length
represents deflection
Crepresents norma,l stress
p rqpresents pressure
and srr the suffixes a.e'before (egn 5.1).
Hence the scales for concentrated forces and loads
(or density) forces (f) are given by:

(f

4 ' rslqn=Pu/Pr=Kt
*V r
F/f^ -K/^

ana

e) and vollme
(5.4)

proof of these relationsh:ips

for 4 *d7 are easlly demonstrated u,sing

rnelslenal analysis techni$rs .
It should be noted that the choice of K in eqn (5.3) detenclnes the
e:Lastlc and rflti-rnate strength characteristics of the nodel natenial becarrse:
The

rti

y-

'4 -qq
=g
-5 =F;
=""3" -q
=t"

is the ultjmate strength

and I is the elasti-c modulus of the materia.l.

where R

Ttms defotmation

---'(5.6)

characteristics under norrlinear or inela.gtis conditions

such yiellding or settlement are fixed provided they are independent
of ti.ne.
on the other hand, such phenomena such as viscous faon, creqp, re.lacation were
exc.luded fr"on these nodel studies.

7o'

5.12 Model]ine Criteria

In practice a distinction is made between trm kinds of nodel-s: Direct
and Indirect lfodels. Dlrect rnodels'can be firrther subdivided into three
types:

I
II
III

Modelsinwhlch N'>l

(5.Ta)
i K.t
Models in whieh N.>l ; K) |
( j.|b)
Model-s in which
; K) | and wtlich (5.?c)
are tested onry in^>l
their ela^stic rmgei i.e. are dlstjlct
fr.om tlpe II in that their behaviour does not rqrroduce
that of the f\rrl scale stnrcture once their erastic road.
rurge ha.s been exceeded.

Models belong:ing

to types E

Thus:

Kr

hence

d a t6;

III are usualJgr constnrcted from nraterial-s

of low elastic rnodulus in order to either redrce the intensity of the requi-red.
Ioadine or to nragnlfy the snall deforsrati.ons irvolved ti:us facjlitatilg their
neagurement- However, the choice of model nateria.l is an i.urportant factor
partictrlarly for type II nodels; for exarple, the successf\el use of concrete
nixes 5-ncorporating purnice aggregates ha,s been re,ported3?, $pe rrr node.Ls
perult a unrch wider range of nateriaJ-s; for exenple, celLuloid, phenollcetlSrlene resins, mbber, cork, paraffin wax etc. Such rnodels are wide\y used
in the preriininary design stages of the nore corylex stnrcture.
5.13 Choice of 4odel IVpe and Djmensions
the Sllppery Creek Bridge I'bdel was designed as a di.rect nodel, type I.
It was therefore built to a geomebrical scale of one quarber and used concr.ete
for its base material.

Each span

of the

l;

nod.el wa.g

and

Lrl+i

(5.8a1

J't
therefore 9r-3tt along the
-

(5.8b)

skew span 9r-On rigbt

or
4t?
4|tt duep, and entr-ibited the sarne lJ degrees of skew.
Since two spans i.rere b,uilt at a ti-ne the overall di.nensiorrs of the nodel
mea'sured about 20 ft by ro ft and wa,g seated about ft above the f!-oor
3
(Plate 5).
Not only were the decks scaLed but also the pier cqrs and pier colunns3
three 6n diaeter boiler tubes srrpporbed the 9n x 9n pier caps on wtr-ich the
deck was sested through a bright stee.l bearing pad. A forrndation bem was
prcvided for each pier to naintain stability and ti1t the deck to a conventent

widthr either

height.

5.14

5.ll+l Mode1 Mjx Desien Criterj-a

the choice of a suitable nix for the concrete of the nodel wa.g made
rrith eare. The ni:r had to satisfy the follor*ing trarc requ:lrementsg
Ttre ela^stic modulus of the mode| concrete unrst equa,l that
l.
of the frrll scale str:ucture for K to be unlty (eqn J.8a).
The si-uplest wqy to ensure thi.s ra.s to use the sane ntix in
both stnrctures, but difficu.lties rrith aggregate size
arose a.s described in (2) beJow.

'

:::":H:;T:',ff":::'";TH:"I":#lilnT:

conerete Jn these, pretensioned, prestressed units.

Aggregate size was thus 5-uportant and the f\ll scale
aggregate had to be reduced before use in the noder. The
actua-l amount of redtrction was dictated by the spacing
betr'reen the stressing tendons and cover reqtrirenarts in the
model units. In general, therefore, the aggregate was
al*so scaled down by 7L r 4 and hence I nancilum aggregate

size of ttt
used; the guararrtee of eEral era.gtic noduli
"r"s

being lost.

A corpromise between (l) and (2) had been jndicated and the mix design
used was iul atterryt to satisi! both criteria - see sec 5.311 and. also
5.612
for a determination of K.
5.llQ Scaling the Transnrission Length
Since the beans were all pretensioned units the transfer of prestress
from tendon to concrete was effected by bond betr+reen concrete and. tendon.
Ihe length at each end of each beam for the b'liJ.d up of stress in the concrete

is of great i-ryorbance and is ca'l'l ed the transnlssion length. T?ris length is

of the order of 55 r,rire diaru"t"r=38 and thus for a O.&O inch diameter tendon
it was about | | inches. ft determines the effective span of the mmber over
wttich the firJ-l working prestress mqy be derreloped. and it is therefore desirable
to keep the ratio of this transrnlssion length to the overall span &s small as
possible. fn the Slippery Creek bridge deck nenbers this ratio is of the
order ot 2bfi.
'&lthough linear dirnensions and aggregate size mry be reduced it is not
possible to scale donn the tran'srnission length r+ithout a coffriderable reducbion

'

72.

Without such a reduction being made the ratio of

transmission length to overall span for the model uould have been as large
Le lO/.. However, the use of a reduced wire diameter to give a shorter

ln wire diameter.

transnission length had three disadvantages!

Fron test results published3S th" probable comect choice of
l.
rrire uould be g.g$4rt diameter. About 5O of these wires ryould
have been required to carry the necessarlr prestressing force
which rrlould have made the placing of the concrete diffisult and
.
inserbion of transverse ducts :inpossible within the confined
sectj-on of these scaled units.
2. Specia.l stressing jacks and anchorages worfld be required to
stress the system.
3. Ihis high tensjJe wire wa^s unobtainable jn New Zeal.and.
It ua^s therefore decided to use the 0.20orf diameter rire sjnce this
was readlly available a.s was the a,ssociated PSC Ore Wire $tresslng Qystem.
To overcone this problem of transrnission length nechsrical anchorages rrere
buried at each end of each wire il,side the beam itself.
ltrese served to
reduce the transmission length down to the overall length of each anchorage
(a barrel and wedge! t-8t ! l/l6t\.
5.1[1J Tests for Ultimate Ioad Characteristics
5.ll+3.1 Use of Otrersized Stressing Tendons
the use of O.2OOtt diameter stressing tendons a,s discussed jn sec 5.llQ
violated the scale factor relationship for stee,l crpse-sctional ErF&er
Horrer/er, si-nce the model wa^s a prestressed stnrcture the uount of prestressing
steel provided i+ould not affect the fJ.e:aral prcperbies of the deck. I?nrs
tests rdthin the elastic range wjIL be comparable with simiJ.ar tests on the
ftrll scale stmcture provided. Of cour"se, the total prestress force had been
scaled accordi-ng to eqns 5.4 and 5.8b. On the other hand the model rri.Ll not
faithfully predict the behaviour of the fuIL scale stnrcture outside these
conditions, that is under ultjmate load conditions,
5.ll+3.2 Dead Ioad Equivalence
Consideration of eqn (5.5) wiIL indicate that for K ' I and ?, r 4
the scale of densities for f\rIL scale and rnode.L structures should be in the
ratio of | : I respecbiveJy. Obviously ntren the nodel is constnrcted from
the sste material a.s the firll sca.le stmcture such a scale factor relationshlp
is also violated.

73.

the density of the nodel should be /a times that of the stmcture and
the dead J.oad of the model should therefore be in0reased by the addition of
a unlformly ryp1ied Load. For tests within the ela.stic range such qplied
lrdeadtt load is not necessaqr, but for tests under conditions of ultimate
load it plays gn iq'ortant parb in the mode of failure and affects the
safety factors against coJ-l4se of the mode.l. One series of these tests
on the nodel w8e therefore conducted with six tons (162,83 Ib. ingots) of
lead unifonnly distributed over the surface (plate 12) but for practieaL
reagong alone the lead was not used for simi141. tests on other nodel apanF.
Ilne calcr.lation for this applied dead load (P) ua.g made by eErating

y'^= 4'ft
'/^ = r:o * P/volrrme laa/n3

whcre
1. 8.

150

P/29.5 = 4.150

ffi

p = 1jr280 lber^ eay 6 tons.

assrndng the density of concrete at l5O tU/ttt for both model

$.9)

therefore

and f\rlJ. scale

stnrctures.
5.lhL Casting ItIodeI Cores

prwiously

illustrated ln fig. 5.3b one set of nodel units

were hollow. Three hexa,gonal hoJ.low cores were to be ca^st into each un:it
and a'l'lowance made for a diaphragm at each end and one at nidspan. For the
As noted

f\rIL scale stnrcture, the

and

cast using a collapsible forrn

which could be r,rithdrawn and the end diaphragns cast subsequentJy.
For the urodel units the manufacture and use of withdrawable formworlk
was not wamanted and in its place lengths of pol;rstyrene, sut to the sh4e
and slze of the scaled core, were buried j-n the un:its. These cores csuld
later have been dissolved out r,rith petrol hut this wa.s not considered
necesserXr since they contributed neither weight nor strength to the beem
itself. See Plate 7A.
hol-Low cores were

5. | 45 Maintainj.ng Cover Requirements

A firrbher problem arose wtren boxing up and placir4g the reinforcenent

cage (sec 5.32) in the pier caps of the nodel. Whereas a clear cover of 3rr

in a f\rIL scale stnrcture

makes due allowance

for

normal tolerances

in

fonn
work and bending steel, should this cover be redrrced to 8tt * in the nodel
nuch greater care and c.loser tolerances are needed. If such attenbion is not

it is possible a,s wa,e found here that the cover rdJL be nonexlstent or at most very snall; again, a srnall aggregate siZe is essential'

given then

7l+'

5.2

Constmction of Model Testjrg Facjlity

Before constrrrction and testin$ of the rnodel could itself take placet
it wa.s necessary to design and buj,ld requisite testing equipnent and
faciJ-j-ties within the Stmctures Laboratory. A test floor, loading frue
and hydraulic remote controlled loading systero were desigledr buiJ-t and
assobled together t'o fom the model facillty as described below.
5.21 Constnrction of Test Eloor

test floor wa,s laid in the laboratory wtrich

provided holding down sockets at convenient intenrals throughout the 3.T&r
Ttre lLoor, mea.suring 20 ft long and 12 ft wide, wa,s set lErt futo the ground
beneath the existilg laboratory floor. Heavily reinforced with railwry tees,
the fl-oor took 13 yds of concrete and 3 tons of steel giving a total deail
load of 4proxi:nat&y 27 tons.
ltrirby, tln eianeter sockets rlere set into the floor and walded to the
steel t,ees. Each socket wa,s c4able of transnritting lO tons to the floor,
it being consldered that a maximum, fuD scale stnrcture load of 16O tons
nou-Ld be adequate to calse fai-lure. The Iqlout of the socket was such aE
to acconmodate not only any position of the J.oading frme a,ssociated with
these nodel tests but also for ftrture tests on other sirnilar projects.
5.22 Desisn and Assenbllr of Ioadine Frame
A loadJr frame wa,s designed and bui.lt in the Schoolrs Workshop to
span across the nodel and carry an trydraulic jack for the application of load
to ar5r desired point on the rnodel decks.
A special healry duty

triangular legs and four 6tt dian. ca,stors.

It cou.ld be bolted to the test floor by locating ary one of three possible
sockets under each frme leg. (fig 5.larbrc). Ttre frame wa,s designed to
carry a ten ton load on each J-eg and a twenty ton point load ai mid span of
the two lgr * 3*tt channel head beans. The leg were each p5nned to the
channel beams so that any angle of skew mry be taken up; one pln l'tag fiJrcd
and the other sliding so that the distance separating the legs could also be
The frane wa,s supporbed on tr"m

adjusted.

5.23 Hydranlic Ioad $ystemn

For the 4plication of point loads to the mode.l deck an tydranlic jad<
rated at a c4acity of ten tons was also designed and bui.It. llrls jaclc was
qlerated flom a rernote console fitted rith a snall purying urit nm off the

75.

volt mains supply. $rpplied u-ith return and needle valves, the
direction of motion of the loading ram could be reversed allowing the
loading and unloading cycles to be carried out smoothly and Erickly. ltre
230

iack itself wa^s suspended fr'om the loading frame by a skat,e board and a 2n
d:i-aneber spherical steel balj sandwiched betueen two adjustable plates.
lhis adjust'nent allowed the line of action of the jack to be made verbical
and the ball prevented the application of arry torque to the deck. For the
sane rea,son a second steel ba'l'l wa.s pruvided between the jack and the deck;
this a,lso ensured tlrointtr contact wtrich wa^s made through a small square of
pinen used to locate the bal] over the desired point on the deck. (plate IOA).
T?re load actually 4plied to the deck wa.s measured by the deflection of
a proving ring suspended betr.reen the piston of the jack and the second steeL
!e'l'|. ltris ring was calibrated up to J tons (t *tvision - l4.t8 lbst
marciJmm load 800 divisions) arrd wa,s used for aIL the ela.stic tests perfo:med
on the model. ltre jack itself weighed about l8O lbsrl w&e about 16r iJr
overall height and carried a 6tt di-ameter piston lrittr dln naxirmn trave.l.
5.3 Construction of the Model

5.31 Materia.ls - Concrete and Steel

5.311 Concrete
Bearirg in mind the considerations of sec. 5.131 a suitable nix was
rfdesS-gnedtt by adopting a trial and errrcr
4pr"oach. I?rree trial batches were
made up and tested for workability and strength. The sane
ftt .ggt*gate and
beach sand as used on the fuIL scale stmcture wa,s used in these trial-s
(refer sec 4.31). SiJ( Itr X [rr 61o"ns were made from each tria-l and a fixal
rnix chosen fr.om the results of cmsiring tests on these blocks. Table 5.1
below presents detai-l-s of the nrix used for aIL model units.
TABTE 5.1
CONCRETE

DESISI FOR MODS,

Sierre Analysis

f,tt nggregate

passi-ng |tt:
9o.7fr passing No. 4
56.2fi passj-ng No. I
4l.l+i6 passing No. 16
3O.9%

passing No. 30

21.ffi passing No. 50

13.hfi pass5-ng No. IOO
pa.ssing No. 50

continued over.

76.
podel
(n

\o

ftg

.+

5.1a

Elevatlon on

AJ

A-A

ffii"'blx"','

-;qi-{..\,,1.";:

tegt floor

. . -.,.1o. .*
loadlng

\\\
ll'

franre

,j\

\\
It

il

lr

\
I
I

I
t

5.1b
' PLau

\\
I
I

Fig, 5.1

hydraultc

load Jack
cap

bearn

plers
fouadatlon

ModeL Teetlng

Faclllty

fLB 5'1e
ELevatlon on.3-3

77.
Description
water

Sieve Analysis

Weight per Batch

water/cenent ratio 0.45

13.5

Total Weight per Batch

164-t

Nsle:

l.

Awaler/cement ratio of 0.45 wa,s nalntajned throughort by the det,er=

rnlnation of the moistut'e content of both aggregates before eactr nix wa.s
prqlared and the subseErent calculation of the additional water that needed
to be added to bring the total anount per batch up to 13.5 lbs. Both
aggregates were stored in open bins outside the laboratory and thus subject
to a variation in moisture content that was governed by the loca1 raidal-l.
2. FoJJ-or+ing the practice adopted in the nanufacture of the Slippery
Creelc units, Wi-J-sonite R4id Hardening Cement was used, af, least in the
iJritiaf stages. Howe.r/er, because of i_rndustrial shortages of this brand of
cemerrt it becane necessar1r to change to Grardian Ordinary Gement wh-ich,
together r,rith the addiij-on of calcium chlori-de, gave the mix a sufficiently
high early strength. Ttds was necessar]r to allow the ralease of .the units
at l8 hour"s in order that a turn-around for the ca.sting beds based on a two
day cycle could be naintained. In fact the strength wa.g sufficient at
24 hours to a]low one set of 18 log beans to be poured on a one day cycle.
the casting procedure is erylained in sec. 5.33

quantities in TabLe 5, I are per batch; tlro batches were sufficierrt

to nake one log bean and six 8fr x 4tt btocks with spillage; three batches
were necessar;r for each hollow cored urdt with sjx Srt x 4r blocks and
spil.lage. Qrantities used for individuat parts of the rnode.l are srmnarised

3.

T?re

in Tab1e 5.2
I+. No steu curing faciliti-es

were available in the laboratory, but the

units were kept wet under hessian for at lea.st seven drys af,ber pouring and
then allowed to dry. the 8rt x 4[ control blosks were sinl'lgr:Ly treated.
TABLE

5.2

qTANTITIES 0F C0'IC?EIE IN MoDEI

78.
TABLE 5.2
QUAIITITTES OF CONCNETE

OrreraLI

Description
Test Floor

C4
Iog

HoILow-core

29r;s12r11|r

l3.33yd

2[ ton

13.33

2.o

3.33
6.0

30.0

o.60
1.08

31.08

l.ll
0.20

o.36

37

O.076l+

o.138

t0

o.25

o.45

0.O1y'+5

l$ttl4ttl9rgtt

SA

or

9r)r9rxl

rr

o.o8

5/n$&nsTtsn

Beans

Deck S].ab

Cum.

Totals

Weight

9qx9tt29r$n

Beans

No,
Ilead

Volume

2lttls1gtt*lOtOtt

Bearos

MODET,

Tlime:esi ons

Foundation
Begns

IN

Tai.rl s

13.33 c.yd
16.66
17.26

1.65

18.91
3l+.Oh

2.96

19.67
35.TP

o.76

l.3g
o'5o

SB

0.90

h.l7
36.32

Tests for cnrshing strength and elastic modulus of the $tt x 4tt
cylinders were carried. out:
l.
Imnediately prior to the re-lea,se of the beams fron the ca.sting
bed; i.e. at either one to two dqys.
2. At the time of testjlg the nodel decks concernede i.. at sl-](
rnonths, l! years and 2* year.
A colryuter programe, written in pDe FORIRAN, wa,s devdloped for naking
a gtatistical analysis of the results obtained fr"om these tests (refer
sec J.612; programne is listed in AppendJx {).
A sumary of the coqputed

results for the model concrete is given in Table 5.3 and illustrated in

Append:ix I t.

TABLE

5.3

PROPM,TTES OF CONCRETE

Crushi=frg gtrensbh

Age

AT

AT

Mean

RS,EAS&

TEST;

IN

day

2 days
7 daYs

28 days
6 urths
t| year
2$ year

utd..llec

371o +

13.66%

5225

12.36i[

13950

Ela,stic Modulus
Ueen.\l'.at _

3.9)

la

++

(4.3)

$.61
7.97E,

(5.41
5.82

7.24

(5.9)

varues for cmsrurng-strength

in lbs/sq.ln.
standard deviati.on is giv-n as
".ui"rp."ssed
a percentage of the mean.

++ 89 OVfr

$.5)

r0600
I lAoo

t32to

MODEtr.

79.

++ figures in brackets are estimated fr^om the cmstring strength usilg

Jensents fonnrla: refer sec. 5.612.
units for e.lastic modrrl.us are also lbs/sq.in.
5.312 Stee1

5.312.1 Prestressgd
ltre prestressing steel used for aLL bearos was O.zOOtt diarneter,
indented rrire. I?re rrire was supplied i.n a 5 fL d:lmeter rc[, qproximate{y
3O20 feet 6f it being used j.n the 4? model besns nade. As dissussed

prwiously in secs 5.ll+2

chosen becanse

and

J.1h3.l the single

O.2OOtr diameter

rrirc wa.s

the stressing facilities r,rere already avajl-able in the

J.aboratory.
The P.S.C. One l{ire

$;st.*38 ,r""u a light ueight Jack wtrich i-s

corpact and easily operated. the anchorage unit consists of a barrel and
slewe or wedge which locks on to the wj-re as it j-s dravrn into the barrel
by the tension in the wire.
For the transverse prestressi-ng of the model deck SB. O.2'l6tr dj-aneter
high tensile r.rj"re was threaded through each of the 14 ducts. Larger
bamel-s and wedges v,ere necessrrJr but the sane stressing sy.stenr was used,.
Tests on the O.2ggrr wire icere conducted, in the IOO ton Avery testing
machine using an Amsler exLensometer to record strain. Besults of these
tests areplotted in fig A11.3 of Appendix fl (which also shous results for
subsequent testsb on the e.Z7gn wire) and surmarised below:

(elastic

of H.T. steel)
U.T.S. (ultjmate tensile strength)
Eu

modulus

z&.l+

tO6

tUs/s([.in.

109.6 tonsr/sq.in.

5.312.2 Nonprestressed
Both the log and hollow cored units had a certain amount of
nonprestressed reinforcement provided. lhis usually took the form of
shear reinforcenent, although some nor4)restressed high tensile stee.l wa.s
provided in the hollow cored units to reinforce across the hexagonal cores
for the resistance of local vrheel load effects. Tab1e 5.4 gives a su@{rrlr
of the rei.nforceanent schedule for all steel used in the constnrcbion
of the nodel.
TABr,E

5.4

EETNTORCEMENT SCH@UI,E FOR MODU.

80.
TABLE

5.4

RETNTORCETIENT SCI{EDULE FOR MODE,

Ifue
PRESffiE.Sffi

Place

all

beans

deck
deck
Nq-IPNESTRESSU)

Iog

SB

SHC

beans

Use

longitudinaJ.
prestress
transverse
prestress
transverse
prestress

stirrups

spiral

deck slabs

fuacing

h4 tt

0.&0tt

6 rrrires/bean
&8 wires/bem

t70

Q.275n

t0

o.276t'

shear

.!lt
t?

625

o.o64tt

66

o.l04rt

27o

O.20grt

SB

to?5

o.l04tt

longrnsl
reinfhrt

t20

8tt

3h5

.Ltr

core
rei-nforcemen

reinflnt of
and

cap beans

Size

180

coi]s
holJ.ow-core stirnrps
bem,g

Quantity

stirrups

fitt

ccs.
single wire
af nidspan

3lt ccs.

2 cot)s/

bean.
5tt &

itt ccs.
2*" cw'

SA

2lt mesh
4 bars/bean

3lt ccs.

5.32 Constmction of Piers

The piers of the Slippery Creek Bridge were also rqrnoduced to scale in
the nodel. Three pier"s were constructed each using a Zlrn x lStr foundation
bean, three l2tt lengths of boi-Ler tube to rqrresent the three circuJ-ar pjf,es
of the bridge and a 9rr x 9tt rej-nforced cap beam. The overa]l length of the
foundation beams wa.s lOl{tt and the cap beans 9t-5firt. To satisf} seale
requi-rernents for the supporb of the c4 beams the boiler tube should have
been $tt in outside diarneter. This size wa,s not rea*ily arrailabJ.e and 6rt
i.d. tube was used r,rith a 7*tt diameter plate r.re.Lded to one end. To obtain
fi:ctty between c4 and pile the scaled equivalent reidorcenent was rseJ-ded
to this plate and buried in the cap bean in a manner silnilar to that used at
the site (ref. fig 5.2).
Wherea,s the clear cover to the reinforcing steel in the flrll scale
stmcture uas 3tr this reduced to ooly *r i:r the rnodel. Exbra care wLs
ther"efore needed to ensure the boxing and reinforcing stee.l were a.ssembled
to a higher degree of acsuracy than normally required for such uor{c.
Reduced aggregate sizes were agai-n necessarTr to provide adequate colryaction
and cover within this Ij-nited space,

gl.
Four 9r-6tt strips of Ztt x .ttt bright steel were cetnenNed to the tops of
the cap beans with Cjment Fondu to provide bearing pads for the rurltibean
decks. these strips were levelled and polished to provide a c.lean
horizontal surface whlch wa.s a sca.led equivalent of the beaz.ing area of the
neoprene parls and pinec used on the firIL scale structure. It rnay be
argued that a knife edge support r.rould have given better support conditions.
in that the actual span would have been knovrn enactly. Hower/er, la:ife edges
are never used in practice and it was felt that more profitable information
on the actual behaviour of rmrltibeam decks uou.Id be gained by using a bearing

pad3 for exarple, infonnation on the effective span length

rigid seating

and

tne effect of

on beam perfornance.
10r _0rl
9 r -5-9

"xt,"

7*"9 cover

teel pad
,
--2/8"/

rods

rt

*"fr stl

plate

olumn steel
welded

boiler
tube

24t'x 1B'r beam

noninal
relnforcenent
wlth raLlway
teee

Fig 5.2
Reinforcement

5.33

of Piers.

Bean Manufacture

5.331 Stressins and Casligg Bed

Both tlpes of beam were ca.st in unj-t routO38specifical.ly designed and
bui.lt for this work. Refer to figures J.)arbrc, and also Plates 6A, 68 and
74. In the unit rnould method the wires are tensioned against the ends of tbe
mould so that before the concrete is cast the wtrole prestressi:rg force is
carried by the nould which ha,s to be designed a,s a stnrt to resist thj.s
conqrression. An jrrverbed charueel was used for the stnrt which ca:rj-ed the
ti+o side fonners rnade or oregon ti:nber, strengthened with *tt brigtrt steel
strip and saturated jn oi1 to prevent warping during use.

plate

Each channel carried a fixed anchor plate and a fixed distributj-on

(a ana D in fig 5.3c) dri.lled in a pattern to allow the pa.ssa,ge of the

92.
o.zoOtt tendons. A moveable anchor plabe (4, in fig J.Jc) was provided at
one end of each channel against wtrich the One Wire Jack wa^: used and the
tendons anchored. 1\lo t$n dianeter bolts (B) separated these plates

(i.e.

D and

lt)

and these allowed

the gradual release of the prestress into

the beam when necess&rlfir Ttre distribution plate (O) was pr.ovided a.s a
safety measure to prwent the possible back la.sh of the tendons end anehor
plate (I2) should the bolts become dislodged (r*hich is possible if the order
of stressing be reversed).
Each bed wa,s bolted to the floor to prwent it lifting at its ends
under the action of the eccentric prestress forces; such forces tending to
bow the bed and distorb the bean section.
Arry lenglh of beam cou-Ld be made up to a maJcilrn:m e$lal to that of the
side forts by sr-nply adjusfi-ng the end blocks (C), tfrough for these nodel
units the lengths were 8sl l:,tt for the logs and 9r+rr for the hollow cored
units. Ttre difference in length wa^s due to the different end detail for
the tivo beams - the 1og beans had square ends; the hollow cored units nere
skevred to follow the J.ine of the piers ( 15 degrees) .
5.332 Proeedure
Tab1e 5.5 g"ives a sunmarTr
{ates and age at test.

of the units

made and

also their ralease

Table 5.5

Unit

Beam

LOG

5*rt

3let,

plus a ttt

x gr-l

HoLLOlfCORED

edges

2.

f8

Model

SA

r8

Mode1

SB

Ige et Age at
t cst
2 days 6nrths
I day l'A yrs

r.c'l elq o

Control

dagrs

2* y"s

Mode1

daUn

2L

lltt *
I

4rt 26 9r O*rr
hexagonal
cores and shear
keyways (2)
I

il

J.ess

There were ten basic steps

pretensioned prestressed beans :

l.

lErf

Used

niU

alon J-or+er

Nr:mber

Section

t0

jn the procedure for

SHC

yn

ca.sting these

side fortus were bolted in place, the noveable anchor plate affusted
and the bed oiled thorougfr-ly.
Ttre stressing tendons were threaded. into the bed and the transnissi-on
The

anchorages lncluded together with the end blocks and spacers - see
Plate 68. I?re bed wa,s stressed beginrring with the lorrcst wires to
presefle stability of the noveable anchorage plate.

2/tl"p ns shear
s

83.

l---r+8"

T
li+"

6/o.zoo"g tend

bregon ghutterg

Ftg 5.3a

STRESSING 3ED FOR IOC

BEAITIS

15nx4"x37r

Ftg 5'3b
STRESSIIO 3ED FOR EOITOW-CORED BEAIIS

beam ).ength
T

etresslng
Jack

Flg 5.3c
SIDE EI,EVATION OF TYPICAI., STRESSTilG

Flg. 5.3
Typtcal. Detatls of Streeolng Seds
used for the.nanufaeture of the nodeL
precastl preetressed concrete beams.

BED

84'
Each u-ire wa,s

initially

strai-ned

to

m average

of

t+36

x lO-5 a,s,

the

lQrt gauge length of the .0nsler exbensometer elipped

to the wire. sone difficulty wa.s had in carculatirrg the losses due
to anchorqge slip, bnrt subsequent testsb harre confimed the estjnate
made at the tjrae of lZJ x 1O-5. ltre net prestressing force per rrrirc
wa.s therefore of the order of 21800 lb
t 20o Ib. (Ttre aesired force per
r,rire to satisf! the scale factor relationship for prestress forces
measured over

was 2196O 1bs.)

3.

6.
'1.

Ihe polystyrene hercagonal cores were placed (hollow unj-ts only)

followed by the stirnrps and other nonprestressed reinforcenent
(plates 6A and fA).
The transverse rod.s whieh forrned the ducts for .Iater transver:se.
stressing roere oiled and placed.
The concrete wa^s nixed, placed and vibrated into the bed.; sfuc
8rt x 4tr blocks for strength control were also made.
ltre laboratory was c.leaned up and the bem covered r+ith wet hessian.
the transvere rods were withdralrn within 12 hourrs end the side forr,s

8.

removed and cleaned.

The prestress was relea.sed

l+.
,
5.

jnto the beans when at least three control

blocks exceeded a cn.sh-ing strength of 3ooo lbs/sq.in. wj-th the
jlclusion of calciurn chloride in the nix ttris occurred within 2l* hours.

effected by screruJlg the nroveabJ.e anchor plate toward,s its

fixed counterpa:t.
The now relaxed tendons were sut and the bean Lifted crear of the
9.
nould to be stored and covered with wet hessian for at lea,st ssven dryu.
lo. the mould was cleaned and prepared for the nenb beam.
5.34 Assenbly of ltuItibeam Decks
Relea.se wa,s

afber individual testing (sec !.Jl) a^ssembled

into three separate decks; designated SA, Se (for the tr.ro log bem decks)
and SHC (for the single hollow sored de"Q. plates BA, gB and 9A.
Vari.ation in elastic properties across the width of each deck were
eljnuinated as far a.s possible by staggerirrg the separate beams accordireg to
their a,ge. Ihe oldest and youngest bearns rrere tlms placed side by side at
one edge of the deck and the pattern contj-rmed as indi.cated in fig 5.1c.
Eleven series of tests r,rere then perfomred on these decks und.er
Ttre beans a^s ca,st vrere,

different conditions of depth, transverse prestresg

i-n Tab1e 1.5.

and xddth

4st,qiled.

85.
TABLE

Series

Unit

Model

LOG

IH::V

Depth

T\rne

SA

5.6

&,ri

in
place, I It
beans

nrIL

sJ-ab poured,

( t.o;

No ke;rs.

t0c

SB

beans in
p1ace,
no sJ-ab poured,

fuIt

3Lrr;

3*";

but keys fjlled

III
IV

SB

LOG

IOG

5B

3L";

a,s above

as above

SB

IOG

\*tr;

beams

in

none

Tests Conducted

elastic ultimate
fuIL
fUIL
set

set

ordlnarSr
rei.rrforced

set

flrIL

none

ful-L

24 ot
longrnl

f\rIL
set

none

( r.o1

prestress

fuIL

4t$ of
longrpl

fuIL

atterryt

flrIL

atterpt

r.o)

( r.o)

Transverse

Prestress

furt

presfress
l+l+16 ot
Ione!nI
pre$ores9

set

set

srau afilT&g, "

(l.o)

L'ti

o.3

sj-ngle
cable

nrll.

none

set

partial

none

poured

\rl

sHc

HOLLCff-

coRm

beams

place

in
and

keys poured.

\rlI

SHC

HOLLdil-

4tt; as above

0.3

none

UIII

SHC

HOLtCIilf-

Ltti as

0.5

single

fuIL

set

none

cable

O.5

none

parbial

none

1.0

single

coRm

IX

SHC

HOLLCfuL

Ittti

sHc

HOLLOIII-

l+t,i as

above

a,s above
above

CORED

XI

H0ILo[f-

SHC

htti

a.s above

l.o

ftrIL

cable

set

f'rlt

none

parbi4

none

set

CORED

5.31+l Deck
SERIES

SA

Coarnencing r,aith Deck SA, 18

of the Jog beam,s were laid side by

side to span between two of the three piers. Ttre Eey wrys
ttnrs formed between two adjacent beans were stuffed r+ith nelrsp4ler and the
reinforcernent J.aid (O.lO{Ott ms rrire at Zrt ccs) for the ltr thick deck slab.
No transverse bolts or prestressing tendons xrere threaded through the ducts
and ttr-is deck was tested right up to ultj-nate coll4se afler the d,eck slab
had been poured and matured.

96.

ft is jnterestjng to note at this point that a'l'l four corner.s of this

deck llfted off the steel bearing pad after the deck slab had been poured.
ltris wa,s thought to be due to the shrinkerge of the concrebe in the slab a,s
it seb; the gap remainlng between beam and bearing fn ad (abort l/$n max.)
was packed

with

Cjrnent Fondu.

5.31+2 Deck SB
SIRIES II
Ttre second span

tested jn four stages.

After the beam,s had been a.ssenbled side by side aIL fourteen
transverse stressing tendons (0.2?6tl) r^rere threaded into the deck. The key
walrs were then fi.Lled r,rith concrete and the first series of tests on ttr"is deck
carried out. Ttre deck was therefore transverse.ly reinforced but not
prestressed and orily 3Ln deqr.
SERIES III
The fourteen transverse tendons vrer now stressed by first
breaking the bond of the concrete at the keys and then
jacking with two PSC One Wire Jacks from both ends of each tendon to dlimi:rate
as far as possible friction il the dtrcts. A force of 6lOO lbs was jacked
into each tendon so that after losses by anchorage s'lip the net force in each
wire uould be of the orrler of 6OO0 lbs and the ratio of transverse to
longitudinal prestress rrculd be 0.218 or ffi.
Ttre deck was nor{ transverseJ;r
prestressed but sti-Il only 3*r deqr.
SmtES Mtre
stress in the transverse tendons wa,s now increa.sed to
give an overa]] transver"se prestress of O,t+35 or lrJ+fl of the longitud5-nal
prestress in the bearos. Agaln, bJr stressing from both ends to rrininise
friction losses, l2r8OO lbs was jacked jnto each of the 14 tendons. Tests at
this stage enabled the effect of a tthighrf percentage of transverse prestress
to be obsenred; deck depth wa.s sti.Il only 3!tt.
SER,IES V
Ttre reinforcernent was now laid for the e:rbra I tt deck s].ab
includ.ing the J.iftjng of the flattened spi,ral- shear coils
ca^gt into the top of each jldividual 1og bean. When this deck wap poured
the overal] depth wa.s increased to 4*tt ana transversely prestressed to W% ot
the longitudinal prestress. See Plates 88, IOB and llA.
5.31+3 Deck

of log

Uearn^s

(SB)

wa,s

SHC

third nodel span to be tested was the hoJ-low cored rnrltibeam deck.
ft'was a,sseurbled on the set of piers used for SB above afber both SA and SB
I?re

had been removed by a 5

ton for{<J-ift hoist.

I?ris span was alsg tested

ir

serreral (6) stages.

S@IE"S W With only three bem,s J.aid together the trlo intermediate
shear ke;rs were poured and the single n-ldSpan trsnsvele cable stressed

87.

(ryptied prestress
SERISS

SOOO

lbsi after

anchorage

slip:

75OO

lbs inltially).

WI StiIL with only three of the beanp placed the stress jn the

transverse cable was relea,sed and some of the Series. VI

tests rq:eated. This provided inforrnation on the action of the shear k,!rs
and a special anangement of dial garges was set up to record this behaviour.
(Refer fie 5.4).
SRIES VIII 1\lo ftrrbher beans were now added to the above three and the
transverse cable again stressed to provide an initial
75OO Ib force on thd deck. I?re er<bra two shear keJrs were poured and tests
.

conducted.
SERIO.S

l[

in

Series \IJI the transverse cable was now released and

tests for the action of the shear kqrs conducted on this a
As

five-bean deck.

final five beans were placed and the comesponding

shear keys poured. the transvere tendon was a,gain
stressed to 75OO lbs initial force and tests conducted wentually up to
u.ltjmete coJ-l4se (after Series JG had been conpleted). See Plates 9A and
SERIES

Ttre

98.

ffitES ltr

the transverae tendon wa.s released and again the agbion

of the shear keSr obsewed. ltre tendon was re-stressed prior
to the u].tirnate load tests of Series X above.

5.b

Agai.n

Instnrmentation
Ttre instrumentatj-on used

either for
5.1+l Strain

wss

measuring

for obsenrilg the beharriour of the model decks

strain or deflection.

In general strain gauging wa.s not a success, but nenrertheless an atteryt

was made to record deck and pier strains a,s described below. Plate 12
indicates the general set-up for recording the changes in strain in the nodel
during the $ltimate load tests.
5.1+ll Deck Strains
. Phitips electrical resistance gtrain gauges were mounted on'both the upper
and lower surfaces of deck SA. Orj-entated to mea,sure changes in longitudinal
strain the lO gauges were placed only on the nidspan centre ljne and a+, zrtn
ccs. Five of the gzuges were of 3tt gerge length and the reanailder of ltt gange
length (refer Table 5.7 for detei l-s of strain ganges and cements used).
SA

A check wa,s therefore made to find the correct gange length for use on
concrete with a nnaxi.mm .oggregate size of ftt. It was thus estblishedt

gg.
though from somewhat small erridence, that both the 3r and 1rr galges roere
equally effective and that for rea.sons of econon\y and ease of ryplication
the |tt gauges rmuld be used for future uork. This conc.lusion falls in ljne
rrith the generally accepted ruJ-e that the gauge length should not be Less
than four times the naxi-nurn aggregate size, to arroid. the locarised effesbs
of the eggregate itself.
TABTE

5,7

SIR,AIN GAI'GE DETAILS

g2t7

Gange 1}pe

PR.

Resistance, R
Gange Factor, k
Tffp. Coeff., {j
Backing Meteria-l
Caent

tb !

PR 98t0

66

2 0.5fi
2.12 + 1.rt

4n FoiJ2oo t e.25fr
2.21 y l.Jfi

-(3t + z1.to-6

-e5 ! 2).to-6

-lo.lo-o++

pqper

creso]-

PB gwo4

epo:y-eblylene

PH gzt+h/ol+

Araldite.

Pn 9u+tr/of

PR gz\t+/oj

Castfug Resin

lrl

l+tr

Manufacturer

3rl
p161iFs

p6i.'liFs

Sapnders-Roe

Used

MODU,

MODET SA
rrEfr IRAI\JSDUCEtrI

BRID@

Genrge

Length

On

2.21+

a.5%

1.5fi

Str.

S,IPPMT CREEK
DECKS

++ Units of Cj are ohm,/ohrn oC

Unforbunate-ly a corylete set of straj-n obser-yations was not made for al'l
load conditions on this span. It wa,s felt that for mlJ.tibean decks the
obsenration of deflection alone would give adeqrrate infonnation on the load
distribution characteri.stics and other prrcperbies of the decks. chservation
of strain gave Iittle return in terms of the infomation retrieved and the
rrcrik and cost involved. I?re dlrection of strain fgr instance, is knovm beforehand to be longitudinal for these articulated plate decks (refer sec 2.2) and
strain garging r,surrld give no nenr lnformation on this point.. Itre use of d.iaL
gauges alone to investigate the behaviour of mr1tibean decks is supported by
C\rsens in his orork4 (sec 2.l[) .
Strain ganging and strain obseryation w&s
ther.efore dj-scontinued for the other test series.
5.412 Pier Strains
As illustrated in fig J.2 and disqrssed in sec 5.32 each pler c4 was
supported on three 6n i.d. boiler tubes. These tubes were each strain gauged

with truo, PR 98lO rr.sog. on opposite generators. lhe tubes were c&librated

89.

ftg

5.4a

ilode1e SA &

(loe

SB

bean)

\F-

ModeL

SA

Model

SB

I'egencl:

flg 5.4t

r dla1 gauge
+ etraln gauge

![ode],
(

SHC

hollow-eore

tletall on A-A' see fL85,4c

Flg 5.4 DIAI AIID

STRAIN GAUGE DISTRIBUfION

IN

MODEI' DECKS

fLg 5.4c
I

Detall of cltal gauge arrangenent at ntdapan on the hollow-cored

1.e. seqtlon A-A ln flg 5.4b above.

cleeks

9a'

for load before burial in the foundatj-on

beans so

that the pier reactions

could be obsenred whilst the rnodel wa.s under test.

llowever, the boiler tube was 4;08 sq.i.n. in sross-sectional area and
r+ith a stiffness of l22.la lb/nicrostrain it was not sufficiently sensitive
to record the actual changes in pier reaction. These reactions nere of the
order of 700 lb and could not, therefore, be obbenred for rea.sons of

sensitivity and consequent accuracy. The sole strain gurge bridge avaiJ.able
at the time could only read to uithjrl l0 microstrain. I?re recording of pier
reactions wa^s to be only a rdnor consideration in this study and its Loss was
not felt to be significant.
5.1& Deflection
5.1,&t DiaI

with

Ga.rses

I\re1ve 2rt trarre-l Mercer (O.OOtt.; dial gauges were indented together
the corresponding na,gnetic ba^ses and claups for use in these nodel

studies. I\lo 3n a 1/n RSI steel frames were nade to stand under the mode.L,
to wtrich the dial gauges were held by their magnetic claqrs. Any position
could be ganged by this syst,e,m, but only the quarber (Q), three-quarter (3Q)
and ndd-span (H) deflections were obsenred,. Refer figs. 5.6 a and b for the
errmgement of the dia,l ganges under the nodel spans. A special arange,nent
wa.s used for SHC in r+hich gu.rges were placed on either side of each shear key
to obsenre shear key behaviour. see plates BB, I rB and 12.
5.\22 Precise Leve]-ling
Whj-Lst the dial gauges were adequate for load tests rrithjn the ela.stic
range they were not satj-sfactorXr for ulti-nate tests where there was the danger
the garges should be danaged if the deck suddenly collqpsed. In this case
deflections were noted by lweJ-ling the deck rdth e staff and an &te1 INA
automatic precise IerreI.

5.5

Test Prograrrne and Procedure

5.51 Tests on Individual Beeons
5.511 Tests for Stiffness an4 Ca.nber
AIL thirty-svIt 1og beans were individuatly tested within their ela.stic
rEurge (eIate 7n). A point load was applied at nddspan and deflections read
at the qnarber and rni-dspan point. the load was applled in three equal
incr"ements up to l0@ lbs and then jncrea,sed to just take out the canber in
each bean. Deflections noted for each of these load incre,rrents gave sufficient
ilformation to obtain the flerarral stiffnese of the 1og beg'ns and. also the
initial camber drre to prestress and dead load. No s.i,ni.t41. tests nere made
on the hollow cored units.

91.

of initiaL

these units was found to be a function

of .at least two time variabless age at release of prestress into the bean
and age at date of measuremen! of the carnber (r'efer Appendix I l).
.
For su(e'qrle, the average canber in those bem,s relea.sed after tr,lo dqps
ctrring wa^e O.4l!tt, w?r5lst the Everage for those reLea,sed at one dry was 5*afr
greater, i.e. 0,633tt. obher variables affecting canber inc.Lude nrix
pr"operbies, dead load and initial prestress.
5.512 Tests for Failure Ioad
A,s detailed in Table 5.5 one exLra J.og bean wa.s made and E load test to
destmction wa.e performed on it.
Results are surmarised below;
Cracking Ioad (first crack) : '52O lbs.
GoILpse Load
: 3250 lbs.
5.52 Test Prograrune for }lode]. D?cks
A.s can be seen fronr Tab1e J.6 of sec 5.333 the Test Pr"ogramte contained
eleven series of tests designated I to lC[. ltre pr"ogranner therefore,
ernbraced both ela^stic and gltimate load tests on three separate modejl decks.
Ioad testing corrnenced in Noven'fter 1964 and was finally completed in
December 1966. Ti-ne out r.ra.s taken during this trm year period to organise
and conduct the load tests on the f\rIL size bridge at SJippery Creek and also
to develop and test the Finite Element Theory for Sceued Anisotroplc Bnldge
Decirs wh:ich forms the ba,sis of the second volir.ne to this Thesis.
The anount

carnber

in

5.521 Su4rnarised Rrrpose

lhe eleven series of tests were conducted

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

7.

to establish:

the valj-d'ity of the proposed transfer matrix theory, and the usef\rlness
of other design methods;
the effect of transverse prestress;
the effect of the type of precast unit (so1id or hollow core);;
the effect of the span/wiath ratio;
the effest of the "ll degrees of sken;
the effect of the shqle of shear key, and
the 4proxi.urate uftinate load capacity of the decks.
Refer aLso to Table 5.6 of sec 5.3h and also Table J.8 beJow3
TABLE 5.8

Test

Rrrpose

for

Test Series

Theoretical Verification

of lbansfer Matrix
I
I

Theory

ITVTTWII & X

6.2

92.
Test for

Rrrpose

Test Series

lbansverse Prestress

Iogs vs Hollorcore

fuan/VdiOth Ratio
Eifteen (t5) Degrees

AII series
I-V&X
v:t, wII & x
of

Skew

ALl series

-E

Shear Key Shape

1':t

Ultimate Behaviour

Irrvr% & x

5.53 Test Procedure for

Results in
Seeti on:

6.3

6.h
6.,j
6.6
6.7
6.8

l.trrdel Decks

Single point loads were qpJ-ied to the deck and jn general deflections
read for each load 4plication. The scaled design wheel load wa.s l0O0 Ib
for the model but it wa,s found that deflections under th-is load were
negligible and that errors due to e:perSmentaL technique r,rould be significant
in proportion to the actual deflection of the deck. For this reapon the
applied load wa.s increa,sed to 4OOO lbs and a recormendation nade to the
Ministry of I'Iorks that the proposed load amangenents for the tests on the
fuIL scale bridge be a,lso increased to 54,OOO J.b. (ref secs &.13 and l+.31).
In general, therefore, for aJ-l tests except those under ulti-nate load,
the load was 4p1ied i:r tr.vo stages3 2OOO Ib and 4OOO Ib. Hence with
d.eflection read.ings at zero load and at each of these applied loads a check
on possihle eryerimental eruor wa.s rnaintained - the deflection at 40OO lb
should alwqrs have been twice that at 2OOO ].b. Constant zer"o checks
eli-urinated error due to short tenn creep and dial gauge nalfunction.
the loads were positioned over the centre of every bem at the qrrarber
(Q) r tf,ree-$arber (3Q) and nidspan (it) transverse profile.
Deflesbions
were read under the deck at simil4. positions, refer sec 5.lt2l and figs 5.4
a and b.
Dtri-ng test to destmction if,wa,s necessary to renove the five ton
proving ring (sec j.23) and repla"if ,*tn a AJ ton Tanrye Jack with pressure
gange. Ttri-s increa^sed the possible range of both 4plied load and
deflection. Deflections were noted here for eryety IOOO Ib increase in load
untj.l either collapse of the deck or the naxi-mrm cqacity of the J.oad syste,n
had been reached.

5.6

Deterxrination of.'Actual Scale Factors

5.61 Determination of K
From equations (5.2) (5.6) (5.4) ana (5.5) we have the scale factors

93.

for the nodel

E

K=Eg

$.61

$.21

2,= iu
-m

d=x?i,

and

Y = */2"

$.t+), (5.5)

I?tus l, t 4 as aLready noted'in eqrration !.8a and ideally K r l.

rt remains here to deterrnine wtrether K wa.s jl fact unity, i,e. to determine
K for the model in the tta,s buij-ttt condition.
lhis required the deterndnation of the e.lastic noduli of the concrete
used in the rnodel and in the f\IL scale bridge structure. Llthough a
simiJar nix had been used in both stnretures it cou"ld not be guaranteed that
these noduli wourd be eqrral (sec 5.131 (2)). consequentry, the three
remaining Itt x 4tt control blocks frpm each beam of each deck were tested for
E and f" (elastic modulus and cnrshing strength) at an age sirnilar to that at
which the respecti-ve decks were tested.
5.611 E Tbansducer Mk If
A transducer wa,s, therefore, derreloped to enable the determination of
E to be made quickry and with rea,sonabre acsuracy on the lJ6, gtt x 4n blocks
that r*ere arrailable. this transducer (ttre Mark II nodel) i-s shorm in
Appendix 12, where aII releuarrt di-mensions and strain gauge bridge circuits
are given. See P1ate lT.
5.612 Results from the E Transdrrcer

calibrated, the strain increment for a g ton jlcrea.se in load on

a 8ft x 4rt block wa,s noted in the transducer and this result fed into a
colryuter programle for statistical analysis (refer Appendi:r 4 and also sec
5.3u)
Such analysis by the 16?4 gave the mean and standard deviation for the
Once

raw data (E and f") and al,so mad.e a Ch:i-square test for Coodness of
betueen results obsenred and eode recormendations for g given f^,

Fit

following resuJ.ts nere obtai:red:

A
for the model:
(nean) i 7.?4 (std. d.w.)
Eo.
x
lg"
5.82
'
for Slippery Creek: Eu 3, 5.7O x lO'L (mean) , 3.7& (std. denr.)
I?re

(I?re Coodness

of Fit test jndlcated that Jensenrs forsnula:

g=

r-.0;921%o4
gave the best prediction for E gi-ven f"r refer

Append5x

(2.r0)

{.)

94r

I?rerreK'530-ffi

' o'98.

(5"tr1

Itd.s i.s Ter..y',e.jl,,ose to t"he dwtreA value o-f rarri,ty md becars:e thpg,e virhiee
for E are at bwtn onltr firet ryprorciantfow, it wes suff,Lcier&f,y a,ccnnsbe
nedk to asaume thet I wae
i
$'l$S+gtegd Scale Fac,t(;rp
the above rle b*trB !

irr t'hlt

5l@

11'

at,

ln f,ad,udty.
I

l r 2'#;

6t Y,

thc 1oad,Eqelg factor ' wao t/t6

,end tbe deftodton scale fac,.tor rtp l/h
llenqe

(r"ta

97.

CI{APTITI:

SIX

TITL:E:

RESU.LTS OF MODII,

AliD FTd,D TBSTS ON Tl{E SLIPPffiY CREEK MULITBEAI{

BRIDGES.
CO}ITE}TTS:

6.1
6.2

l.fodel CoJrclation.

VerificaLion of the Transfer l,iatrix Analysis I'fethod for Multibeam

Bridge

Decks

6.21 Transverse Deflection Profiles.

6.22 Theoretical Load Distribution Histograms,
6.221 Results
6.222 Compari-son wibh the Codes
6.222.1 MSIiO - ?th Ed. ( 1957)
6.222.2 ACI _ 7tt-5,g
6.222.3 Obhers
6.223 Verification of the Load Distribtition

'

6.23

I4ode1 Test.

Comparison

6.231
6.232

Histogram by

of the Transfer i'fatrix Analysis r.rith Obher Methods.

Comparison r,rith the Distribution Coefficient Method

Rowe, I"Iorice and Litt1e.
Comparison wilh the Rela:ration Method of \lorman and
Nathan.
Transverse Prestress and-Obher Reinforcernent

6.3

Effect of
6.31 Effect on the Behavj-our of the Iog Beam Deck.
6.32 Effect on the llehaviour of the HoJ-lovr-cored Beam Deck.

6.lt

The Relabive Behavioui.

Ir

The

6.41
6.lQ

Multibeam Decks

Conrparative Results.

6,1+3

Comparative Load Distrj-buting Properties and Bearn Qt5mization.

Model Tests on a l'Iodified Log Beam Deck.

6.Ll+

Advantages and Disadvantages

6.U+1

6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8

of the Loe and l-lolloia-cored

of

Advantages

6.1+L2 Disadvantages
'
the Effeqt of gpan Ti clth Ratio

of I ( DeArces of S<ew
The Effect of Shear Key Shape
The Effe.ct

Ultimate Load Behavi-our

of the Hollow-cored

Deck.

96'

6,.81

Ultj.rnate load Tests on lfode1 S!.

6.81t

Edge

loading.

6,812 Centra.l Load5ng.

6.8t3

6.82

Sqmary arid Saf,ety Facto n egalnst ColJ'apoe.

Ultlnate load Tests on Mode1 $8.

6,8?1 At 3gtt Depth.

6.822 At l$n Dqth.
6.,823 Srnunar5r and Saf,ety Factor against Collqree.
6183 Ultjarate load Tesits orr Model SHC.
6.S31 Ttre Load-DefLeetion Behaviour up to S0g of Ultimetre [oad.
Behaviour at ultirat'e Ioadl 1.r
6,.8e2

HftHl|il:'|*ffi*:

6.833
6.834

6.9
'
.

Shea,r Key' Damage.

Safet-y Factsrrs agei.nst Collryoe.

6.8h S'afety Fae$or Surynary - Both Deeks.
Misce.lleneous Resuats-

6.91 Pier Beacti"ons and Pier Deflections.

6.9A &qrerirnenta1- Ctreck on the $ti'ffness of e SirUl.Le, Flrll-&tzer
Itrollow-cored

6.93

Benrn,

Cheolc o:n Ery,enilnenta.l Techniqqe u81ng trnfluerrce

Llnes.

99
CHAPTER

SII
nSstILTS 0F

IU0DEI_

AliD FrTr,D 1ESTS ON TtiE SL,IppERy

CREEI( I,,IUITIBEAM BRIDGES

6.1

This chapter is a ioint presentetion of the results of testing both

the nod'cl and' full eos.le struoture and. it is necessar5r to first ilenonstrate
the velid.ity of the motle1 jl ord.er that prototype behaviour may be conficlently
preclicted' from nodel test results. These moclel-to-proto$rpe forecasts rere
often nad.e, either for confirrnation of protoQpe behaviour or for information
on parameters not investigated. on the brid"ge itself.
Such valiclity was proved by usilg the noclel to preclict cleflection
profiles for the ful-l scale brid.ge under sinil-ar loatl and. gauge positions.
Comparisons were then made between the pred.ictect arrct observeal profiles and.
it ras fountl that good correlation T\ras achievedl, after the necessary
adjustnents due to sca1jlg (equations 5.1e) fraa been nad.e. Such correlation
j"s illustrated in figs. 6.01 , 5 .O2, 6.OJ and 5.01+ where predi-ctecl transverse
cleflection profiles from the model are comperecl with those observect at
S1ippery Creek for the spaxs and l-oad positions as sulnmarised. in Table 5.1 .
TABLE 5.1
MODEI,

- FUlt

LOAD

SPAN

DECK
MODET,

TPE

SHC

HoLtotr-

SHC

BRIDGE

c0

8A

L,0e

]rI

VIII

SCAI,E BRIDEE CORREI,ATION

l,lAJ<l'llllvl DEFLECTI0N (INS)

0bserved

fr Di-ffce

Mociel Prct

Edge

o.222

o.23O

3.ffi

o.125

5.@

Centre

0.11

Edge

o.564

0.470

20.ert

Centre

0.4&o

o.379

'16.$"

Edge

o.382
o.26t
o.356
0.150

o.3w

12.t1%

o.262

O.t{o

Edee

gHc x

--

POSITION

Centre

CORED

Centre

o.155

o.118

0.158

'1 .1/6

REFER AISO

FIGIIRE

F, tliscrepancies up to zyft fiLI be notecl' intlicatj'ng

since
poorer noclellrototSrpe correlation than deslred. This ras accepted,
i-t rag oonsialerecl to be due to the poor seating of both the nodel and fu1I
keyo
scale decks (secs 6.Wr 6.Wi) ancl tbe clefective action of the ebear
(sec 6.7, also fig 5.oJ).

In

spans E an4

5.ol
5.04
6.o3

6.oz

100

Disregarcling these lesser witith spans the naxj-srum error was of the ozden
of 6fi antt thi-s tas consitlered to be satisfactory. The use of the nodel to
preclict at least the elastic behaviour of the futl scale, full wicLtb britlge
tlecks hail therefore been estabLished..

6.2 Verification of the Transfer Niatri-:c Analvsis

Method

for

Multibea^n Britiee Decks

Using the PDQ FORTRAI'I prograffne OPIJS TWO, developed. for the analysis of
nultibean britlge'd.eoks by the transfer matrix theory, both the log antl
hollow-cored nultibean decks were analysed for deflection ancl loed clistribution
(refer Chapter J, sec. J.l+; also Appendlix 5 for details of OPIIS ITfO).
Theee conputed results vrere then conpared rith the correspontling results
obtained. from the physical testing of both the nodel and fuJ.l scele gtrmotures.

6.21 Transverse Deflection Profiles

The sa.ne deflection profiles as used in sec.6.1 for nodel
correlation have again been chosen to illustrate the application and agreenent
attainabl-e with the natrix theory. The theory res therefore checketl agalnst
experinental results from four different d'ecks:
(fig 6.Ot)
an l8-beam, fog mul-tibeanr d,eck: spans C0 ancl SA
l.
2.
a lo-bearn, hollow-cored. multibeam d.eck3 spans D anci SHC (fig 5.Oe)
a 5-beanr hollow-cored. mul-tibea.n deck: spans E anct SitC (fig 6.O5)
,.
O J-bearn, holfow-cored multibearn clecks spans F anci SHG (fig 6.OL)
L.
Each cleok ras considered in two load conditions: the midspan etlge and
niclspan centre positions.
Confirnation of the transfer matrix theory was also provicletl by tbe
nocle1 results as plotted. in figs. 6.0l , 6.02, 5.O3 and 6.01F.
An exaninetion of these profiles rilI show that for both fulL ridth
apans of the. log and hollow-cored tlecks exceLlent agreement has been
obtained between observed., model pretlicted., and. theoretica-l- results. The
narcinum discrepancy between theory anil observed. behaviour is seen to be
of the order of 44; that is, the theory has over predicted the nexi-num
deflection of the deck by 1{o. This difference does howevert provicle a
narticulaten
safety rnargin ancl is due to the fact that the clecks were not as
etrengttr clue
as assumed. by the theory but stil-l- retained some transverse flexural
to ei-ther the reinforcecl cteck sl-ab or the slight transverse stressing.
The agreement is not so apparent for the cleoks of leeser riclth:
effects have becone evj'tlent
spo.ns E ancl T in figs 5.OJ ana 6.04. Hero other
(O'5 of tttu
besicle the oi-urpLe nechanism assur1ed i-n the snalysis. In span E
aifferential slip betreen acljaoent beang was observed es indicatetl

fuI1 ricitfr)

tot
by the steppetl transverse profile und"er the etlge loading. Tlis sllp ras
coneidereti to be ctue to a lack of sufficient transverse prestress to
naintain the satisfactory bction of the shear keys; such keys being eble
to open antl sll-ale uncler the influence of abnonnal veh:lcle load.s. gee
aLso secs.6.32 and' 6.7. Had this slip not occured., better agreenent
between theory and observed. behaviour may wel-I have been ind.icatecl. The
naxinu-m d'iflference reeord,ecl. cluring a nicl.span centre loacling condition vas 4#.
Agaln in span F (O.J ot the fi:].I ridth), a_lthough little
tlifferential slip occured., apparent egtreenent is masked by the poor model
correlation (refer sec. 5.1). The naximurn difference in profiles for the
centre loacling conclition was -$ and. for the etlge loading condition ras
either -4 o, -16 depend.ing on which set of obserrecl profiles ras assumed.
conrect. Such variation in observed behaviour Eas not tlpica1 of the
experinental resul-ts as a whole and ras perhaps tlue to the poor seating of
this deck on the pier caps; tiris beca.me evident orrly after completion of the

tests.
the figures 6.01 to 6.oh are reviewed and the extrene
difference between theoretical and observed behaviour noteil at 14 it is
evid.ent that the Transfer I'tatrix Analyois proceclure has been satisfactorily
d.enonstrated ancl that J-ts use for the analysis of nultibearn clecks has been
When

justifiedl.
6.22

Folloring the varification of the transfer matrix theory as in the

previous section, the theoretical load clistrj-bution histogra^rns wero calcuLatecl
using OPIJIT tTtO and. a thircl PDQ FORTRAN programme OPUS fifREE. OPUB $IRm
contained the facility for plotti-ng either the transverse d.eflection profile
or the loacL d.:istribution histogra.rn by the 1620 Console $lpevrriter. The actual
loacl carried per bean was cornputecl fron the djfference in shear foroes as,
indicated. by successive state vectors. Percentage &lstribution ooefficiente
were subsequently founcl.
6.221 Results
Figures 6.05, 5.06 ancl 6.07 shor the J.oacl distribution histotrans
for seLected loacl positions on spens C0, D, E an<[ F'
Exaolnation of these figures will shor that the rnarcinun loacl

oarried ln eny one 1og bean was 17.6flo of the total

appl5-ed'

Loacl'

The

102

figure for the hollow-cored cleck was 26.33/o. Therefone the

loatl oarried per foot width of d.eck was B.8r# for the 1og bea.ur tleck a^nil
7.t6 fi for the hollow-cored. cleck.
oorreltpondling

efficiently clistributecl amongst the

several beams of the hoLlow-cored cleak than in the 1og deck. As a resuLt it
would seem more pruclent to use several wicle units in a multibea.n deck rather
than a large number of narrow ones for the same d.epth. However, praotical
consiclerations clictate the most suitable width as tliecussed in a later section
(6.+l) which concerns the optimj-zation of the bean shape. Even fron a
theoretical- view point restrictions on nidth are desirable to linlt the trensThe load was therefore rnore

verse bencling and torsional stresses.

6.222 Conparison with the Cod.es
6.222.1 .[A.SHO StandarcL specifications

for Hiehway B-ti..{Fes - 7th Eatition 1917

The AA.SHO recomnenctation for live load clistribution in concrete slabs,
Gese C, spens over 12 feet, is basecl on the llestergaard Method - see also
sec. 2 .t22.
The

ridth of slab over which a wheel loacl is tlistributetl, is

by

))=

where N
anct 1[

is the mrnber of

is the wiclth of

given

-,tr-It
1Ol'I +

of traffic

on the britlge
roachvay between curbs on the bridge.

lanes

This recommendatlon (atso adoptecl in the Ministry of llorks Brictge Manual)

was usecl by the manufacturers of the hollor-cored units in their design for
spans D, E and n'.
For the Stippery Creek bridges: N = 5, V = 36ft and therefore
T!-

Thus i

O/o

of the applied. loacl is

ry-*rt.

considered

to be cListributed over a litlth

5.06 indicate that for the 1og and. hollor-corecl

d.ecks only /-+3.bary antr. 36.Wi of the applied loatl is i:r fact retainetl within
this area, the .balance is effectively ilistributed throughout the rF

of *tt

maiDder

Figs 5.05

of the

and"

cleok wi.clth,

Specification requires that the load

carriecl per foot ritlth shal1 be tOO/5.5 or 18.4 of the applied load. I't is
thus evicLent thet better load d'istributions (a'a$" and 7 '1@/o per foot ridth)

Alternatively this

AA,SHO

103

for these multibeam d.ecks than i-s il fact recommend.ed. by

AASHO for an isotropic slab of the same.dimengions. The fault
lies with
the AA'SH0 formula, which apparently contains a safety margin of at 1east '106.
have been obtainecl

6.222.2 Acr standard (Acr 711-58)

Section )A2 of this Standard. for Precast Floor ancl Roof Units
suggests that where heavy concentrated" loacis are to be expected, these may
be consiAerecl as uniformly d.istributed. over three units but not exceecling
a total ricLth of o.4 of the clear span d.istance - gee also sec 2.321 .
The governing; wid.th here, was the wicLth of three units for both d.eckg.
It was therefore implied that 1 OV/" ot the applied loacl was to be rvithstoocl. by
those three units imme&i-ateIy next to or uncler the wheel loacl. Again figlres
6.05 and 5.06 ind.icate that +6.9fr and.62.tflo of the appliecl loacl ras
sustainetl by these units. Agai-n there is overestimation by the code although
it is not so apparent if the d.istribution per foot wiclth is consitlered.. This
.ACI Specification rould. give !.116 per foot ritlth unjjormly clistributed over
the three units (tlft); the coresponding value obtainecl here for the sane
r.nrits recluoed. from 7 .1Q1 (nax) to t*.15 over the sa^ne wiclth.
6.222.J 9ti,e"g
A further recomend"ation reported by Roesli et aI in his paper on
that each bean or unit
the testing of the Center?ort Briclge 20
",rgU""ts
is to be designecl as though carying 86.ot the right or left wheel loadE
of an HzO - 516 truck. The maxirnun predicted. by figs 6.05 and. 5.06 ig
17.5ffi and.26J3fr depending on the witlth and type of the bea:n. The
conservative nature of the above recommend.atj-on is eviclent; a conclusion also
reachetl by Roesli who reports maximun loetl-per-bealu percentages fu the

range, 2O to 30ft.
Dj-stribution Histograrn by I'{oclel Test
During an ultimate load. test on the Mod.el Deck SA (series I, Table 5.6),
it was obserred that the first crack appeared. at a load. of 5t6OO lbs (see
sec. 6.8i1), Now a point load of lrlOO lbs on a single, &,! inctr tieep bean
woulcl just crack the gection. It nay therefore be i-urplied that the percentage
of load carried by the cracked beam j-n the notle1 d.eck was 1 ,100/51600 or
19.7ft of the applied. Load. This bea"n ras in fact the outside ed'ge bea'n of
the deck for which the transfer matrjx method pred:icted. a 1oad. tlistribution
percentage of 1 9.Of/o. Favourable agreeoent had thus been obtainetl'
6.225

Verification of the

6,25.

Comparison

Load.

of the Tbansfer lletrix llnafvsis Eith Other llethods

t05
6.251 Comoarison
ancl

with the Distribution Coefficient I'lethotl of

Rowe. Morice

lrittle

of analysis due to Rore, Morice antl Litt1e ras clescribeal

in sec. 2.12 of Chapter 2 and is known as the Method of Digtribution CoeffioientE
or the Guyon-l'{assonnet Methotl.
Figures 5.OBa anct 5.OBb are presented to illustrate the application
of this nethocl to the nultibeam log cleck, It was felt thet, if such a nethod
nas applicable, it would. be shown to its best advantage by comparison rith
the behavj.our of the 1og bearn decks, si-noe of the two tSpes considereclr thie
deck was the closer to the orthotropic plate assumed by the methocl.
In fig. 6.OBa the distribution coefficient profiles for two separete
1oa6 positions are comparecl. Since the cleck exhibitecl 15 degrees of sker
thbre ras a certain arnounl of difficulty in d.eternining the mean d'eflection
of the d.eck, lhich was necessary to fincl the clistribution coefficients'
This dlfficulty, already discussedl in sec . 2.122 and' noted by lvlorioe antl
Little 15, i" reflected in the tno curves for observed behaviour that are
pJ-otted for each loacl position. One curve &ssunes the skew span and rieht
witlth for oomputing the mean defleotion and the other assumes tbe right opan
possible but
and. skew width in this calculati-on. 0ther conbinations are
these tro present upper and lower boun<ls respectively to the nean tlefleotion
bountled by
ancl the true observe<l distributi-on coeffisient profile is thus
these lineg.
slab
The theoretical profiles were calculatecl aasuning a uniforn
* The value
(i = j) of the d.:irensions equal to those of tbe model d'eck SB'
the
of e was taken as O.53 (skew sPan and right wj-dth ad'oPted) and
1L.
bY Ror.
ooefficient values for KO anrl K. read fron the graPhs Publishetl
ONE' to accePt
Another PDQ FORIB'AI'I Prog?'amme ras written, OPUS
(g * g square arraYs). Silce the
matricee KO and-K., and calculate K4
The nethocl

the

was rritten Eo as
v&lue of the parameter d was rurknorn, the prograruBe

not

d'eternine

clePtb of
been analYsecl bY tltis nethocl e urrlforn
;ou1il have been
have been assuned and the value for @(

If the noclel cleok SA had'

s .ab cou].cl

to

as high aa 13.7.

106

for any clesired value for this parameter. In pariicular this value
coulcl be lncremented. in any dizeil step (usuarly O.1) frorn 0.0 up to 1.O or
alternatively any one value may be inserted if desired (see Appendix 2 for
prograrutre tlescription ancl listing) .
Figure 6.O8a shows a selection of theoretical profiles for the
following values of 0( : O.lrl O.5, 0.6, O.7, O.8, O.9 ancl 1.0, as oomputed
by OPUti ONE. It can be seen that no one parti-oular value of d will
satisfy the observed behaviour, neither for the edge nor for the centre lood
pooitions. Values of X less tha:r O.7 inclioate that uplift ghoulcl oocur
on the ed.ge remote fron the loacl. Thie ras never obsenred for it canaot
occur in an articulated. deck.
The d.istribution coefficient nethocl is thus shown to be
unsatisfactory for the analysis of thJ-s multibearn deck, for the reason that
it ras not possible to theoretically or ercperi-nentaIly preclict'the value of
necessary for the analysis to be completed'.
Figure 6.OBb presents the distribution coefficient profiles for
the moclel cleck sB when under the influence of tl+fr transverse prestress.
These profiles, when superimposed over figure 6'O8a, in&ieate a better
agreenent between the d.istribution coeffj-oient nethod- and- the observecl
behaviour.Thisisnotune4pecteclsincethetransverseprestresspronotes
isotropic slab action ( O( = 1) for which this methotl of anal-ysis raa

K6

developed.

of figures 6.o8a and 6.0l w'iII incl-icate the superiority

the
of the transfer natrix analysis methocl as proposecL in this thesis over
clistribution coefficient method. of Rowe, Morice ancl' Little'
n and Na
ion l{ethotl. of N
Rel
ith
6.212
(Sec 2.21)
fhe Rela:cation l,{ethod rvas also describecL in Chapter 2
profile of the hol-l-orvantl is used here to pre<}i-ct the transverge d-eflection
comparison

Figure 5'Ot presents the

cored nultibearn d.eck (span D) under edge loading.
matri-x
resufts of this analysis atong with that predictecl by the transfer
Slip.oery creek Briclge tests'
methocl and that actualry observed d.uring the

Table6.2liststhenecessarydatafortherela:cationprocess'
to the torgional
It will be notecl that the ratio of the bending stjffness
factor ig close to urity
stiffness is large ancl therefore the car4r-over
rras therefore very slor
(-o.15). The convergence of the relaxation procedure

107

to perforn by hand.. Thlrty cycles of relaxation sere required,

before the out of balance in holding forces was red.uced to lesg then fr of
and tedious

the epplied. loacl.

results, however, show good. agreement with those obgervetl an<l

compares favourably with the solution given by the transfer natrix nethotl.
This latter correl-ation wag to be expeotetl since indentical assumptions rere
made in the initial stages of these two very clifferent methocls of analysj-s.
It is considered, however, that the matrix nethott is superior, parbicularly
The

facilities, which need. not be extensive, are available. This

approaoh is ind.ependent of a convergence rate and gives an exact solution
i-n four second.s on an IBM 1 620 machine. Hancl calculation for a sinil'sr
problen takes just on one hour (see AppendSx 8) whereas the correspon<ling
time for the rela:ration method. is about 2! hours.
where oonputer

TABLE 5.2
RELA&LTION PI3AIIBTERS

NATHINTS N0TATIoN

VAJ,ITE FOR HOI,LoIT4ORED BSAII

PARAI,TElER

x rojf
x
54.91 1o56.lgi x toh
-55.tC6 x toL
O.5OO (aU t"arns ittentical)
o.01775 x tO-4
1.484

P-R+S
Q-R-S
Distribution Factors
Deflection raotors (f,)

4.95

Carry over 3acto" t$)

6.t

effect of both ord.inary ancl prestresse'l transverge reinforcenent

bridge (sec l+.52) and the notl'el
rcaS studieal i.n tests on both the ful1 slzed
and 6.13
The results are illustrated' in figs 5.10, 6.11, 6.12
( sec 5.,+).
for the log bea^lo cleck and fig 5'14 for the holfow-cored deck'
The

De

5.r1 Eff

It

that the effect of ordinar5r reinf oro enent

ileam.ns .bolts threaclecl transversel.Y through

can be geen at onee

(fron zero up to fifteeD,

1n

108

the deck) is very slight. Both figs. 5.10 anil 6.11 ind.icate .only small
variations in the transverse d.efrection profi.res over this range of
reinforcenent. The transverse distribution of load. has been virtually
unaffectecl. by tbe insertion of the bolts into the cleck (span A).
A sinilar conclusion can be reached concerning the effect of EnaIL
anounts of transverse prestress. The manimun app1j-erl at Slippery Creek
was only 4 of the longitucl-i-na.1 prestress in the beams and as can be seen
only a snall irnprovemgnt in the distribution of loacl. has been obtainecl.
In fact the d.lstribution when threatled. wittr 15 bolts is alnost identical
to that trangversely stres sed" to 4; the maximurn d"eflection being only
8.frt\ess j-n Row 5 ancl 14.4 less in Row 1 than when there are no bolts
In the deck at aIL.
It can thus be inferred, that neither the bolts nor the 4" of
prestress are sufficient to devel-op any appreciable d.egree of transverse
fJ"exural rigid.ity ancl that these d.ecks still behave as articulatecl plates.
It is worth noting, however, that the transverse distribution of loatl cllcl
inprove, albeit slight, as the amount of reinforcement was increagetl.
AIso plotted- figs 6.10 and 5.11 ig the moclel predietion for the
case where the transverse prestress is equal to ll$o of the longitucLinal
prestress, These figures are based on the results of test series V (nodeI SB).
Marked. improvement in the transverge dlistribution of loetl rag
ind.ioatecl particularly und.er a central load. This improvenent takes the
forn of a I$.\% recluction in the na:rimura deflecti.on of the tleck. It is
j.mmediately obvious that the cl.eck, under the influence of larger anounts
of trsnsverse prestress, to the extent of Wo of the longitutl'ina1, acted. as
thougb a fully isotropic s1ab. In such instances the classical theory for
the analysis of such slabs would. be applicable. Refer Chapter 2 antl also

figs 6.o8a and. 6.o8b.

It riIl be seen further, in figs

sec. 6.2J1,

of

5.12 and 6.13, thet the behavLour

the moclel deck was not significantly alteretl as the transverge prestress

of the longitutlinal prestress. In these

efue
fJ.gures comparetive behaviour is shorn for the mod'eI under centrel and
point loads when this aect (SB) was onJ-y }|il deep'
raa lncreaseal fron Z$ to

tala/"

109

It

1.

can therefore be sunrnarisect that:

4" of transverse prestress was not sufficient to cause edequate
and compression between ad.jacent units to prevent then seperating

friction
at their lower nibs anil the d.eve]opment of hinge action.
2.
24 of transverse prestress waa sufficient to develop suoh friction
end' conpressive stress as to promote ieotropi-c slab action. TUe aotuat
divicling line rithi-n this range (z - z4) between artj-culate and isotropi-c
behaviour, is not clear and. is difficul"t to preclict theoretically.
The effect of mild steel bolts as transverse reinforcenent lag
5.
negligble antl certainly not sufficient to warrant the expeffte or labour of
instal].ation.
5.J2 Effect on the Behqviellr of the Hollow-cored Bea.sr Deck
It has already been seen in fig 6.0, and d.iscusged. in seo 5.21
that the effect of transverse prestress on the behaviour on the hollor-cored
cleoks was to naintain satisfactory action of the shear keys. It couLd not
be proved. tluring the full scale tests that such was the cause of the
clifferential slip noticed in the cieflection profiles of fig 6.O5. To give
nore information on this problem the moclel studies were extenilecl to inolutle
a series of tests with no transverse prestress in the cleck whatsoever.
A typical set of resr.rlts under these conditions is glven in fig 6.14.
3or conparison both fuI1y stressed. ancl non-stresseal profiles are plotted,
although there were not a sufficient number of cLial gauges to obtain fuIl
prof il.es for the nonstressed. d.ecks. Neverthel,ess aclequate infor"mation was
obtainecl to recorcl the sarne stepped profiles and intlicate that slip past the
keys was occuring. The amount of slip shown in fig 6.14 for the motlel
deck was muoh 6reater than that obsenrecl on the fuJ-1 scale d.eck. The
naxinurn observed. in the field., where it is not known how much prestress rYas
lost out of the central cabIe, was 1\.Aft of the theoretical deflection for
that joint. However, the na:cimum slip"observed jl the moclel occurred
during a central load. and- was measured at 73.Yo of the observed' deflection
at the sa.rne joint after the fu1l prestress hed'-been applied'. The J'argest
sfip (27.M) obsenred- when the d.eck nas loaded on the Left hancl edge bea'n
occurred at the same joint as above.
f'lre question of shear key action ancl the nechanisn of sIiP is
further discussecl in sec 6.7 , but it is statecl here that the transverse

110

force of

JOrooo Ibs specified'

provid'ect that the losses

for the frr'l'l scale d.eck is ad.equate,to prevent

srip
are not. so great that all effective stress is
lost as must have unwittingly occurred in Span E of the Slippery Creek Brld.ge.
.

tive

6.1+

the
ancl Ho]-I
performance of these

Iilultib

relative
tro basic tlpes of nultibearn
d'ecks was stuaied with a vi-ew to recommend.ing the
log beqm stan6b.rcl cleslgn
be replaced' by either the ho1low-cored tleaign or a nodjfiecl. rog
trnit <lesi.gn.
The

5.41 qorparative R"sults

The basic clesiSn stresses, dimensions, trensverse tie an6 1ive

loadl d.istribution assumptions have al-ready been compared in Tab1e
4.j of
Chapter l+. Table 6.J reprod.uces gone of this information together rith

sunmary

of the

ma:cimum

deflection and strains

in the tro

observed.

deoks.

TABLE 5.J
COMPANATI\TE BEHAVIOI]R Or' LOG AIYD HOLLOIr-CORXD DECKS

PBOPEn.TT

I,OADING

POSITION

DECi(

DITFERH'ICEr

LOe

H4 - Loe /o

HOLLOW

Log

.2

C. S. Area
[{om.

Inertie

$ect.

Mot[u1us

Deflection
(tal.)
Strain
Deflection
(rnin)

28.6 Ton
641000 Ib

0utsi-tle

tr8r000

t'*rri*in

-53.3

51832

:,ezo6i*

-34.6

5l8

.,-?%**ifi

-26.2

o.Jlo

o.zto

Beam
j

21.4 ron

216

tl

*".

+r4.8
I

15o

10-6

175

to*

+r4.6

Centre
I

o.085

O.1

10 ins.

I
I

r29.4

Irane

:-b
I

in both d.eflection and strain rere observed

dluring an niclspan eclge, point loading test and one both seen to be ebout
54.7/4 greater in the hollow-cored decks than in the 1og bearn d.eckg. The
increage in the nmini-nun[ d.ef,lection'obsel:ved. can a]-so be seen to be 29.1&
of the log <Leck cleflection and occured. during a oentral lane LoaAing test.
The maxinum changes

111

results are to be e4pected. sinoe the hollow-cored d.eck was abottt jM

lighter ftneaght per foot ridth) and. 3ta14Iess rigicl tess rigicl (flexural
stiffness per foot width).
Figure S.1J presents comparati-ve cleflection e.ncl strain profiles
observed d-uring the full scale tests. Figure 6.16 compares the theoreticeL
loacl tlistribution curves for the two d.ecks. fn ord.er that thie conparieon
be vaLid the histograms of figs 5.05 and 6.06 are reclravm as smooth curyes
representing the loacl carried. per unit wiclth. Both the area,s under thege
curyes equal the total applied. load.
6.42 Comparative Loarl Distributine properties ancl Bean Optixnization
The hollow-cored rl.eclc has already been seen (sec 6.221 ancl tig 6.t6)
to d.istribute the load nrore efficiently than the 1og bea.n d.eck. The
appropriate fi-gures in terns of malcinum load. carried per foot riaith of dech
are 8.8!S for the 1og d.eck and / .16/o for the hollow-cored d.eck.
This inprovement in load {istribution l-eacis to the id.ea of
optinization, the purpose of which is to determine the most effieient bearn
section. This study requires first, the isolation of that pararneter which
relates beam properties to load tistribution and. seconilLy, the examjrtation
of this parameter and the nature of its relationship to the load itistrlbution
characteristics of the deck. It has, however, been outsitle the scope of
thia project to tlevelop thj-s concept much further, but the folloring is
suggested as a guide for future rork.
It appears from the analysio given in Chapter J that the loatl
carried per unit wid.th is a function of
Xf*:U ,
where X and Y are the flexural and torsional flexibil-ities of a single bea.ut
and. 2a is its rrid.th.
X and Y have been defined in sec 5.21A and are seen to be functions of the
d.imensions of the bean, its span and its naterial properties. Therefore,
for a given material, such as concrete, it should be possible to fincl a set
of climensions which wi-Il niniuiise -f for a given span' where . ]t is
These

Y = z;rl-tl

d.efined as:

(6.r

For tbe log and. hollow-cored beans exa.mi:recl above the velue "r-}
was 2.O2 x tOf ana 1J9 x 1OJ respecti-veIy which comesponds to the
per unit width' Thus
marcimum load'(tstributions of T'BM anct 7
"16ft
the lower value of Y tor the holLow-cored. beams does, ln thb instance
I

112

at least, correctly predict a better loacl clistribution characteristic for

this aleck.
Several practical consid.erations should, however, be borne in ninct
rhen proposlng optimization. These inclucLe:
1.
the total weight, which is of importance when tranoporting and
2.
3.
5.4J

placing the bearas,

the natural perj-od. of vibration, which affects ttre {yna.uic characteristics of the d.ec}: uncler the iurpact of healy treffic
antl
the stand.ard. of the factory control- on dimensional tolerenoee
and. concrete quality.
See also ssl g.\\2.

Tests on a I'lodjfied. Loe Bean Deck

At the conclusion of the first series of ultinate load. tests on
the Model SA it was felt that before prbceecling with a seconcl nod.el of the
sane dimensions it would be profitable to check the behaviour of a 1og bean
ileck rithout the in-situ reinforced. cleck sleb; i.. &t a clepth of orfly }}il.
Transverse shear connection was provi-ciecl by 14r non-stressed, H.T, O.276n ''
tlia.n. tendons threade<i through the tleck. The joints between the bea.urs
were fillecl with a sand-cenent grout antl tested. through an itlentical range
of loads as for the previous ltlodel' SA - except for the ultirnate l-oadl tests.
The results of these tests have already been presentetl in figs 6.12 and.
6.13, rhere a satisfactory perfor:nance is indicated. The tieflecti-on profiles
of this, a recluced. 1og beam deck were now of similar shape ancl nagnitude to
those of the node1, hollow-coretl deck as plottecl in fig 6.14.
A partial ultimate loacl test indicated. cracking loads of [r2!0 1bs
antl /r!OO lbs for the first and second cracks in the outsicle bearn rhich was
tlirectly untler the load.. (Sec 6.821) lt the time of these tests, the
d.eok hacl been stressed to M% of the longituclinal prestress but ras still
only ,*tt d.eep. The overload safety factor to the first crack wes therefore
\.25 artd, to the second crack, 7 .51 the tlesign load was taken as I ;OOO lbst
being 'th6tA of a 16 fip wheel load of the AA.9H0'IIZO S16 Y6 tnrck. Both
crackg closed on the release of the load antl the deck continued. to perforn
Mode1

elastically in

suboequent

tests.

This sinplifj-ecl 1og bearn deck ras therefore shown to be at least

as satletractory as both its parent cleck ancl the hollow-cored deck. Agein
practical d.etaiJ-e nust be renemberect and the clljficulty of applying 24
trarrsverse prestress or even just threading ttr transverse tie rods is

113

to be a hand.icap to the system - particularly in isolated. areea

rhere stressing techniques nay be unfryniliar or on
sites with tlifficuLt
access to the sides of the brid.ge.
considered

6.t&

6.441 Advantaees
The hoLlow-cored- deck is sLmpler to erect, contains
regs materiaLs
ancl requires r-ess labour than the correspond.i.ng
rog bean d.eck. rt

is

therefore consid'erabry cheaper and at present day (lgee/1967)

costs it ls
quoted' at 2J/- a square foot in place exclusive
of the founclation and.
substructure but inclusive of stresging, grouting and. transportation.
Thls
conpares favourably with the JJ/- square foot nonnally tend.erecl
for a cleck
of equivalent 1og beams and represents a reduction of about zC/" rn the totel
cost of any one structure. For a brictge the size of that at Slippery Creek
a saving of about gAtfro would. have been mad.e jf the hottow-cored. beams had
been used throughout.

Fron the structural poi-nt of vier of resisting and ttistributing

live loatlg rithout overstressing the several nembers, there appearE to be
no reason to prevent the use of hollow-cored. bea.rns in future gtructureso
As wil"L be seen in sec 5.Btt+ the safety factors against collapse for these
d'ecks, whilst less than those for the log bean ilecks, are reasonable bndl
adequate.

6;r)t^

Diead.vantaees

Being hollow, and therefore of a lighter weight, the bea^ms have

a lower natural period. of vibration and poorer characteristics und.er the
impact of hearryr fast moving traffic;
this behaviour may inpair the structural
advantages of the system.

to the possibility of incliviclual

beams twisting in a cork screTs manner along their length clue to poor quality
control cluring marrufacture. This nay result in the subsequent d"eterioration
of bond. and consequent non-uniform carnber. Such behaviour is djffiouJ.t to
contml even untler laboratory controllecl oonclitions sntl particularly so when
the beam wiclth io great. Ilhen seated. through neoprene pads on to pier cape
the ttistecL bea.n is able to rock about one eilge and. under abnormal- loarling
Reference. shoulcl also be made

the ad.jacent shear keys

may

be

clomated.

llh'
the pnoblem of differential

slip

whlch may ocsur betr+een adjacent beang

of this horlow-cored deck has prwiously been dissussed in sec 6.J2.
fufficieni transverse prestress shouLd be prrovided to prwent the keys sliding,
for if this is not checked, repeated loading under heavy traffic nay well
cause deterioration of the keys and eventua.l total failure.
Befer a,Iso sec
6.7 for the mechanics of shear key actj_on,

6.5
Ttre span/i'ridth

ratio

was studied both in the field and on the nodel brat

only for its effect on the behaviour of the horlor,rcored d.eelrs.
As eryected and seen in figs 5.02 e 6.03 and 6.04r the naxirrurn
deflection increases with an increa^se in span/raid.th ratio for the same load and
load position. Table 6.{ below sunmarises the range of values obsewed,
together rvith the naximrm theoreti-cal load camied per beam in each cssse
TABLE 5./+

SPAII

sPAr\I/
hIIDTH
RATTO

MA)C.

fncrease i-n Defln or Ioad

DEFLN
OB,SF:R\IFX)

Moc. Defln

or Ioad ln

I)

MTJ(. TOAD
CARRTED
PER, BEAI,T

IOAD
PEN BEAM
UNIFORM

DISTRTBN.

Defln.

Ioad
0.00

26.33%

10i6

9.58%

28,851[

a/f6

4l.ll,0,%

37.23fr

l.o

0.310

O.@

2.o
3.33

o.325
0.408

4.8hfi

31.6c,i6

33

3318

in the value of the ma,.clJnm sustained load and

deflection is obsewed a,s the span/width ratio exceeds 2.0. In fact the load
distributj-on in span F is almost perfect, that is, the load is almost shared
equally amongst the beans conprising the d.eck. Ttris is depicted in figs 6.O7a
and 6.17 but for convenience the relevant figures are listed be.Lor+l
A sharp increase

For an outsj-de edge bearn loading the distribution was: jT.Z3%r

33.Oh16 and 29.73ft.
Agaix for an inside beam loading the rtistribution was; 33.ot+fir.3i.g4 &d
33.04%.
Both sets were conputed using the transfer rnatrix analysis and opUS THREE.
It j-s therefore conc.luded. that. this d.eck ( Span F) cou.ld. r"re]-l be designed
as a sirryle bearn. Howwer, for Span E such a procedure r"lould lead to an over
estimation of 8.85F :.n ttre n&dmrn load camied. per beam. Th5.s represents
4J+.4
of the unifort 4plied load and this practice r.vould not be acceptable under these
conditions.

ll5.
It

6.6

mry therefore be genera]]tr' concluded, though on somewhat small

widence, that for span/wiAth ratios greater than or equal bo 3.j the deck
nay be designed as a silple bean r,uith a uniform di.stribution of load.
The Effect of f a Deerees.of Skew
As described in sec {.51+ of Chapter 4, tests rrere calried out on the
ftrll scale bridge to determine the effect of 15 degrees of skew on the
behaviour of the deeks.

It

that no rypreciable difference in deflection read.ings

could be obsenred for the trrlo different load cond.itions - the wheels of the
Conrpactor at right angles to the abutments and. the wheels paral].e]. to the
sides of the deck. It was therefore thought that the angle of skew wa^s so
small that its effect could not be seen jn these conparative deflection
profiles and the tests were discontinued.
Tt was not, therefore, until finat process5.ng of the de{5-ection profiles
that the effect shown in fig 5.18 was d.iscovered.. In this graph the transverse pr.ofiles are plotted for the quarber (e) and threegrra:$er (3q gae
Iines for Span D under both central and edge point loads of 641000 lbs.
was found

in Spans A and C and to a lesser extent j.n E and. F.

rf the bridge wa,s right, that is, of zer"o angle of skew, then these
,
profiles r,rculd be coincident for a particr.ilar load position. Ttre discrepancy
betrrteen the profiles is due entirely to the skewed. geometry of the deck and
can be shonn to be given by the following equation:
Simi-Lar profiJ-es were found

(6.21

where

re, r3e
c
d

represent the deflections at the co:responding quarber and

threequarLer points respectively,
is the quarter span length,
is the distance from the load to the point under conoideration,
nea.sured parallel to an abutment,
is arbitra.rXr constant - probable value is 2,

n
and
O i.s the angl-e of skew of the deck.
see also fig 6.18 for a sketch of a skewed deck and its
lfhen d 3 g equation 6.2 reduced tol

r-rrl3 =
L3c,
t

geometry.

(6.3)

l16.

that is, there should be no difference in deflection between the grarter and
threequarber poi.nts of the loaded beam. Exanination of fig 6.18 rrill not
, only show this to be tme hrt also thd fact that as d changes sign so the
profiles jnt,erseet (at d r 0) and wO also changes sign.
"3e
the rnaxinnur obserryed value of wQ - w3Q was about 3Gi[ ana occurred jn
te
the bearn flrrbhest from the 1oad, that is at mari-rn:m d. T?re maxi-m.m error,
therefore, in predicting deflection for a ll degree skew bnifue deck a,ssuming
it was a right deck - which is conrnon design practice for desks under

20 degrees of skew - would Ue ! ft%.

Although the equation (6.2) is neither proved nor rigorously d.efended,
further data, such a^s that point in the deck where the malcilrum euor in the
estimation r,rjll arise, nay be found by the partial differentiation of eqrration
(6.21 with respect to the independent variable d. A1so, the effect of the
span (4c) and greater angles of skew (O) may be deterrined.
It may, howwer, be generally concluded that the effect of skew on the
behaviour of any bridge deck is not i-nportant for angles less than say 15

or for large span/r,riAth ratios. In either ca,se the deck tend,s to span
paral] el to the free edges and a sufficiently accurate anal.ysi-s nay be nade by
assuning the deck to be right.
However, for angles of skew in excess of
l! degrees andr/or f6p spall- span/r,riath ratios such an 4proximation would not
degrees

6.'l

be va1id since the deck now tends to span in a d:irection perpendicu.lar to the
ab'utrnents, that is across the shorbest span. The angle of skew now a,ssumes
the greatest i-nrporbance and no approximation ba,sed on solutions Lo a rjht deck
wl.IJ. give design stresses of sufficient accuracyr
I?re Effect of Shear Kev Shane
The effect of the shape of the shear key beiween adjacent hollbvrcored
units on the behaviour pf the deck is now diserssed.
Figs 6.03 and 6.14 illustrate the difterential slip that nay be observed
in such a deck and an elplanation of this nechanism is made using fig 6.19.

ll7.

Fig.

6.19

Shear Key SIlp ln the Absence

of adeqr:ate trangveree prestrese

vertlcal

movement

AK

rl

l-

horizontal

movement

Consider the sectj-ona.l elevation of figure 6.19 nad.e thnough two adjacent
beams and shear key ABCDEFGFII(. It is postulated that, should there be 1ittle
or no transve::se force in the cable RST then, beam 2 is abJ.e to slide down the
inc'lined face !lG, ttms separabing fromthe key and its neighbouring beam at the
face KHGFES. Both horizontal an<l verbical rnovements are therefore proposed,
the verbi-cal movement being the differential slip obsenred in figs 6.03 and

6.14. On the release of the load the stored strain energy jn the deflected
beam is suffi-cient to return the beara up the face GH and the differential slip
is therefore recovered..
TLr:is idea'lj.zation, whilst si.nple in concept, satisfies the obsenre6 facts;
bnrt for confirrnation lt wa,s d.ecided to mea^sure the predicted horizontal movernent
(ir aro'1 during the comesponding nodel tests. using a t/loroooth dia]. gauger
such movement nas incleed recorded; r,rith a ma:cilrrun of 0,0o62rr being obsenred. at
an applied load of llooo Ibs. Itris i-s just ha.lf of the maxir/ufir vertical movenent
observed during the same test. No such lateral ercpansion was obsewed after the
deck had been stressed to 7500 1bs. This fixaf result again confi:med that the

slip

to a lack of sufficient transverse prestress.

A furbher disadvant'age of this type of key is its ability to shear off the
corner"s of q.ljacent beans. Itris is parbieularly liabl_e to ocsrr if the beans
are poorly seated as jx the nodel- and also at Slippery Creek. Gracking jn the
wa^s

due

lg.

upper surface suffounding these keys was obsewed and is described

in sec
6'833. 'Attention to seating details at pier caps is tlms indicated.
Changes in the shear key shape, such a,s lorvering
the i11clinatj-on of
the face HG (fig 6-19) until if was horizontal, r,,rouJ.d^ prwent the abovernentioned slip and ensure a positlve interlocking key.
.r.b woulci, howwer,
be diffictlLt to achieve in practice since the adeqr-rate corryaction
of the
concrete under such a surface during the pouring of the keys
coul6 not be
a,ssured. It r,rrouLd be far easier to ensure sufficient transverse prestress
and use the original, wedge-shaped desj_gn.
r\rrbher tests were conducted at a later date (sec l+.7l) on the
extensions to the Slippery Creek Bridges to investigate slip
irr a different
shaped key. Ttr-is key is sketched in fig
6.20 where it is seen to be
v-shaped and 'bherefore nmch more dqendent on sufficient transverre
prestress

for s atisfactory

performance.
A

chequered. eurfaec

F1g 6.20

Alternattve Shear

Key

The surfaces AC and BC of the respectj_ve beams are formed,

against
chequered steel plate to provide an interlocking surface
between beam and
key' contact along AC and. BC is maintained by the transverse prestress in
the single nridspan cable RST.

No 4preciable slip wa,s obserrued drrri-ng these field tests;

the naxirrurn
recorded under a 311000 Ib axle ].oad being O.@34r. At fir.st sight
these
keSrs seem as se:rriceabLe as the rvedge-shaped
keys discrrssed above _ even ltore
so, since the V-shaped keys are easier to pour. HoweVer, should the
transverse prestress be lost from the cable RST, as for exarnp]-e
in span E at

slippery Creek, then the deterioration in behaviour of this

deck would be far
greaterr since the V-shaped key in itself offers no resistance to applied
verbical loads. on the other hand, the wedge-shaped. key continues to

operate under such cond.itions,

ll9'
for

even though the kqrs may sliF,

the decks
wiIL still resist and satisfactorily distribute the 1ive load, for a Ljmited
period at lea.st, and faiture r,rould not be sudden b,ut gradual prrcviding
time
for rqrairs.

6.8 Ultimate Ioad Behaviour

Tests for riltimate load characteristics were carried out on a].l nodel
decks though, for rea,sons already erqplained in sec
5.llr3 concerning model

simiJitude, the results of these tests

quantitative.

r,vere

qualitative rather than

6.81 Ulti:nate Ioad Tests on Model SA

In sec 5.ll$ the calculation for uraintaining dead load equivalence wa.s
given and accordingly 5 tons of lead wa-s uniformly distributed over the surface
of the model (sA) before the conrnencement of the ultinate tests (see plate l2).

6.81|

Edge Ioading

Since the nid.span, edge

loading was the rnost severe cond:ition, the

firet test in thi-s series wa^s a point load 4pJ.ied in such a position. Ttre
Ioad wa.s increa,sed in 1000 1b. increments untir at a load of gooo lb. slow
yielding wa.s obsewed in the deflection of the beam directly under the'load.
The dia-l garges ltere removed and the behaviour under furbher
increases in ]"oad
obsenred by lweJ-ling the deck.
Fig 6.21 illustrates the obsenred toad deflectlon behariour for beams

l,

beann

9t

14 and 18 ix the deck. Beam 18 is the loaded. beam and the 1oaddeflection cul:ve for this bean shor,rls that a change jn fle:cural rig:idity
occtrred at 5600 lbs. Such a singular change indicated the formation of a

51

single srack in this

beam and

further

increa,ses

in load developed this

one

crack instead of forming se\teral others, $rch a relaiionship between the

various slopes of the load-deflection eur:ves for a prestressed concrete bean
arrd its crack pattern ha,s a,lso been noted by Jonesh; see a]-so fLg 6.22.
Itre formation of a single crack is genera'|]ts considered to be indicative of a

failure and such wa,s inferred here for thi-s beam. It fir-st qpeared at
a load of 5600 lb. vrhich, a^s shown earlier in sec 6.223, confirrned the
theoretical prediction of Szoo rb. (aistriuution coefficient of rg.o5f).
The maximum load 4p11ed was 9OOO lb. by whieh tjrne a horizontal shear
failure had ocsurred between the edge beam and the lrt deck slab, together with
a localised conpression failure in the slab itself.
Flrbher atteryts to
j-ncrea^se the load sqrarated tltls beam f\rrbher frrcm the remainder of the deck.
bond

ln.

the load continued to drop aw4r untii it wa,s only supporbed by the bean
itself. Large deflections in this beam were obtained, but even so, a load
of approximately 20OO lbsr w6s sustained, until at a central deflection of
9tt the bearn dropped off one pier and eoll4lsed to the floor. The ttcablett
action shown by this bearn in resistJ-ng the road wa.s a,ssisted by the
eccessively large amount of steel present jn the bean, whj.ch a.fter bond
fajJure and subsequent loss of prestress acted a.s an ord:inary, overreinforced bearn.
6.812 Central loadj:rg
At the loss of this outsj-de beam the model deck SA wa.s nolr only lf
beans wide bmt stil.l stmcturally sound, ft wa^s therefore decided to
carrJr out an ultjmate test for a central load at nridspan on beam 9.
Figure 6.22 illustrates the obsenred behaviour by showilg the load
deflection surves for beams 5t 9, 13 and l?. Once again these sur:ves
indicate crack deve.lopment jn beams gt 5 arfi. 13. At 23rooo Ib. three
cracks were evj-dent in bearn 9 but these closed on the reLease of the load
which represented the nalcirrum that could be appJ.ied by the tlydrauric s;rstem.
Consequently, a f'uIL test to failure couJ-d not be obtained. The Load ttms
far 4pplied (23rOO0 lb) had infticted no stnrctural damage to the deck
except for the cracks observed above, the effect of w?r.ich wss to lower the
flercural r:igldity of beam,s concemed..
6.813 Srrr,mrary and Safety Factor ednst Co[apse.

of a

An applled load equal Lo 23 times the design load (taken as l/l6th

16 Kip wheel load of the MSHor H20 St6 Tt5 tmek - fig 6.26) did not

pemanently

ttr-is deck when posj-tloned

""tt1psl-lJrr
However, 9 tirnes the design load 4pJjed in an outside lane cansed a
shear failure between deck slab and the outsj-de log bearn w'ith serious damage
evident.
It should be remembered that this model had no transverse reinforcement
at a]lr erccept that provided in the lfr deck slab, andunder such conditions
it is qui-te remarkable that its mini-mrm safety factor against colJ.q>se was
damage

4>proxirnatelJr 9.O.

6.82 Ultimate Ioad Tests

on Model

SB

6.821 At 3$n Depth

initial

cracking load onJYr ws

conducted on the model deck SB whilst 3*" deq but transveme\r prestressed
fo l&fr of the longltudilal prestress.
A prelSmi-nary

test, to find

the

'| 21

The loatl was applieci

to an outside ed.ge beam and incrementecl in loo J-b-steps:

the loacl-d.eflection curves are plotted in f ig 5.2j. The ma:cinur 1oacl ras
limited' here to Brooo Lbs to prevent pennanent darnage to the cleck rhich uight
have affected. further elastic tests yet to be conducted..
The initial cracking Ioad was founal to be approximatery tarzjo Lbs whilst
a secontl crack could. have occurrecl at TrooO lbs. Figure 6.23 Lnalcates the
not-very-clistinet changes in slope which were observed d.uring the tests and the
above loacls are therefore statect with some hesitanoy.
6.822 At 41il Depth
Further ultimate tests were made on this nod.el after the 1rf d.eck slab
had' been pourecl ancl the series of elastic tests hatl been completed. The 1oadileflection curve for tbe loaded ed.ge beam is aLso plotted. in fig 6.23, and.
j-nclicates the formation of the first crack at prloO tbs. Again sone hesitancy
is ercpreosed. regard-ilg these results because of the very linear nature of the
Ioad.-deflection

curqre

in 5OO Ib j-ncrements up to a maxi.roum dictatetl by

the size of the proving ring (sec !.2J) of 11r5O0 lbs. Even at this loaal no
sign of distress was evident in the cleck ind.icating an improved. behaviour
over that of the nodel SA, which, at a loatl of 9rO00 lbs, failecl in horizontal
ghear. Obviously the presence of trangverse prestress was responsible for this
irnprovement and it was felt that litt1e more infomation could be gailecl by
continuing these tests up to the naximum allorecl by the system of 2J,OOO Ibs.
ThesC tests were thus di-scontinued., a minirnun safety factor geinst collapse of
The loacl wag increased

11.5 having been inclicated.

5.823 Summary and Safetv Factor Aeainst Colfapse
Since the d.eacl load of this d.eck wag not equivalenoed, the behavj-our
given above is just a qualitative description and the cracking l-oads represent

of magnitude.
At a depth of Jtr, / times the design load. had not causecl any serious
da.nage whilst at a depth of |+tt , 11L times this load hatl likewise infLicted
d.anage to the d.eck.
onJ'y approximate orcl.ers

no

6-83 Ultimate Load Tests on LIod.eI SHC

The behaviour of the hoIlow-oored decks unclerultimate loatl was tletemined
after the nodel had. reachecl its full rrictth of ten units. The oingle point load
tests used in the earlier models was replaoecl, by a four point loacl, representing

122.

the scale equivalent of the four heaviest wheel 1oad.s of the

tnrck-trailer

H2o Sl

6 y6

combination.
The scaled' truck, il the form
an outsicle lane such that the line

of a steeL grillage, was positione4 in

of action of the centre of gravity of the
axle loads passed. through the mid.span centre ltne of the rnoclel tleok: refer
fig 6.26. The results of this test are given in fige 6.2L, 6.25, 6.26 and.

6.27

and,

12.
3.

d.iscussed below und.er three headings:

r,oact tleflection behaviour up to B$

of ultinate

Ioad.,

Collapse mechanism at ultimate Ioad,

and
Shear key darnage.
6.931
fl-ection
vrour
of ULtimat
This is shown in fig 6.24 and. wag observed. using d-ia1 gauges at the niclspan
transverse section. The curves show the Load-deflection behaviour for beans
1, 2, 5, 4, 5 a.ncl 8. Beams 1'r 2, and 5 actually camiecl the model tnrck
(tte 6.26) and thus show the greatest tleflection for the given loacl. Changes
ln slope of these lines again ind.icate the formation of cracks. The first
cracks appeared. i.rn beams 1 and2 at a load of 5'OOO 1us (tota-1 loa<f); theae
were fol1owed by cracks in bearn J at )rooo lbs and bearn 4 at 161025 rbs.
f,hen a loacl of 2Or1lO 1bs had. been reached. several shear keys explotl.ett
near the pier supports (sec 5.BJJ) anct this was reflected in the loattd.eflection behaviour by a rnarked. clrop in fLexura] rig"idity in all beans as seen
in fig 6.24. At a loacl of 2Jr1!O Ibs the ilemage to the shear keys was well
establisheil and. accompanied. by the opening of large tension cracks unrler the
cleck. Slow creep was observed in the d.eflection and. the d.ial gauges wer
removeil at this point for fear of sudden collapse ancl possible damage to the
Bauges. This loacl represented 86rt of the uJ-tirnate load ancl it was observed
that should the load. be releasecl at any time thus far, full recovery of
d.efleation was obtai:red.,
6.832 lhe Loatl-d.ef]-ectio4 Behavioula'L Ultimate Load i.e. Collapse Mechanism
Qnoe the loacl of 23r15O lbs was reached, and. the dial gauges renovetlr the
cleflection of beam I was recorded. for further increases in loacl by a J foot
ruler. 0bservations made using the ruler are plottecl in fj,9 6.25. Also
obsenrecl cluring this tbst were the chenges in trangverse prestress foroe as
the cteok collepsecl. The stressing iack was attachecl to the central cable antl

123,'

Fig.6,26

tn sofflt of the
hollow-cored. noilel cleck at eollapse.
TENSION CRACK PATIERN

Shear Key Fatlures are

not

sbown

ln thts plan

Vler

3a

esent

k loadtng

H20 ttur

lli.t:i*:i

vehtcle

clearance &/or
lane wldth

121

16K

15K

121+'

in cable tension observed.on the pressure gauge of the jack (pIate 148).
Infig 5.25t 0A is the load-d.eflection U.ne for bean 1 alreacly seen in
f Lg 6.21+. Fron A to B the Ioad has increased to Zgr55O lbs with a
correspond'ing increase in cleflection of l|il.
During this period the nain
changes

tension cracks ilevelope<lr some conpression-fajJ.ure zones became evlclent and

the shear keys continued to &isintegrate.
As the load of 2Br55O 1bs was reached. (point B) a 5tt block of concrete
forrning part of the lower soffit across one of the hollow cores of
.bea.n J,
droppecl out of the slab. ITith the comespontting release j-n straln enerry
the loacl irnned.iately fell off to 241650 lbs and. the d.eflection of bean 1
inoreased a further |il.
This is depicted. by the dotted line BC tn fig 6.25.
At thj.s stage the d.eck, particularry in the area of beams 1, z anrd, J
was badly cracked. in tension with both welL d.evelopecl (l/l6tn inch wicle)
and fine hair-line cracks. lailure in localised. compression zones hail
i:rcreased but there was little fr:rther damage to the shear keys.
Again the loatl was inereasecl, fron C to D in the figure, but at
D (25rTn lbs), when another 1;rr deflection hacl been observed, there ras
a sudden collapse of the ileck causeil by a compression faiJ-ure in beame 1, 2
antl J directJ.y uniler one ancle of the rnodel truck (fig 6 .26). The J-oacl ha<l
again ilroppetl. away d.uring this collapse and. was now only 1l+r875 1bs; another
*tt of deflection bei-ng record.ecl. The ciottecl line DE represents this final
cbllapse in fig 6.25. 0n rel-ease of the load. the recovery indlicateil by
EF was obtainetl.
The ohanges in transverse cable tension rere observed as belor. In fig
6.25, from 0 to A to B: TrrOO lbs force as specifieil for elastia testst
B to C: an increase to 81700 1bs,
from
from
C to D: a further increase to 9rBO0 Ibs,
fron D to E to F: a red"uction baclc to 81200 lbs.
The maximun increase in cable tension was therefote 31% of the normal working
force and was caused by the d.istorted. geonretry of the d.eck under the abnornal
Ioad. Such a possible increase is of importance in the design of transverse
tension in the nid.span cabIe. Sufficient overloatl allowance nust be rnade to
prevent the failure of this cable andl the associatetl complete collapse of the
d.eck. Such an allowance apirears to be in the orcler of 30 - 3fft'
This
The naxirun load. sustainecl by the cleck ras tberefole 281550 tbs.
ras the totat appliecl load,; tbe naxinum intlividual wheel loatt was TrlIO lbs'

125'-

rOii{-ii\ii.li

't\

ii f ci ci i:; Icioo(&)ori

zlt"

ftLg,6.27a

2*"

ro#

3#

l^

Flg.6,2'l

SHEAR

DAMAGE

ln ths hollor-cored

notlel

acl pads

T
l22n

Ead

ftg

6.27b

ttg

6.27d

Elevatlon on Beame llluetratlng imegular seatlng on pter

-much enlarged scale-

eap,

126.
The maximum cleflection observed was

of the ord.er of |*tt

ancl

the permanent

set at release of load., after eoll-apse, was 1#.

6.833 Shear Key Damase
As aJ.reaQr m.trntioned, in the above section, 6.831, the first pernanent darnage
to be sustaj-ned, by the model deck wag the fajJ.ure of tirose keys in the vicinity
of the load. This is d.epicteci in both figa 6 .26 and, 6.27 , where it can be seen
that a length of the key-ways between beams 1 and. 2, J anct 4, and. Ir antl !,
has faileti by shearing off the upper corners of the respective beans. Refer
particularJ-y to flgs 5.27a e^d.6.27c, and a].so Plates 15A, 1lB encl 16A.
The reason for this poor per:formance at the joints was tracetl to the
inadequate seating of the piers for beams which had twieted during nanufacture refer sec 6.\1&. All- the noclel- hollon-cored beams were observed. to show some
measure of twist due, as alreaQr suggested., to bond d-eterioration and. nonunijorrn camber. The beans would therefore have been able to rock at their
supports if they had. not been prevented. by the shear keys whi-ch Lockecl atljacent
beans. Under ultimate load.ing there was not sufficient strength in the joiJtt
to prevent the corners shearilg off, a mode of failure which progressecl down
the length of the beam until the whole beam cross-gection was able to rest on
the pier - see.fig 6.27d.. This type of fa-ilure was a-1so observecl in the hollowcored spans of the Slippery Creek Bridge, photogfaphs of which are ilcluclecl i-n
Plate IrB.
Since elirnination of the twist of these extra ritl.e units is difficul't in
practice, the rernedy for such a problem woul-d be to assenble the besmg on a
wet mortar patl insteacl of the conventional neoprene bearing pad. The beans
would then be fully supoorted- at the piers ancl the tendency for failure to
occure would thus be preventecl.
6.83t* Safety Factors Anainst Collapse
The indicated. saf,ety factor against collapse for these hollow-cored decks
is therefore 7.14. However, as already e:cpleined in the j'ntroduction to this
section (6.8) the deacl loads of this noclel cleck antl its prototlpe were not
equivalencetl antl therefore the above estinate is qualitatiqe only.
The safety factor against exceeding the elastic ]j-nit is also given here
at 5',.79 but the sane note of caution is made regard:ing its application.
Tforking values for these safety factors could be taken at 7 entt 5

respectively.

6.84 Safety Tector

Sr.rnnarrr

BorbLDecks

127

rn

Tabl,e

6.5 below the safety factors are

sunmarised.

for both log ancl

'

hollorv-cored d.ecks.
TA.BLE

6.5

SAFETY FACTOR SUMIiIARY

DECK

TTPE

SA3E:rY FACTORS

MODE[.,

u"l,TIl'rATE LOAD

IYORKING LOAD

CE,IlRE

EDGE

tOC (No Transv.

Reinforeenent)

SA

roc (urs T-Ps-J*r')

SB

)+

(4.t# rJs-4#t)

SB

r.,oe

HOLLOW-CORED

working Loacl safety Factor

rrltinate

Load.

is

safety Factor

is

ciefinecl

EDGE

CE}IlRE

8-9

25 (nin)

11* (nin)

,7

6'

sHc

I,OAD 1YFE

Poirtt
P0int
Point
Truck

as r-gg9-!g-ggg:9-llf:l-!:lgflg-9:995
Design J.oad

d.efine.t

as !ggt-lg-gggg9-89:9339*-*Htr
Design load

6.9 Miscellaneous Results

6.91 Pier Reactions and Pier Deflections
As describecl ln sec 5.412 an attenpt to obsenre pier strains on the model"
was maile, but with little success. The rnodel reactions had an average value
of 7OO l-bs whtch, due to the high stiffness of the moclel piers (6tt i.e. boiler
tube), causecl a change in strain of only 5 microstrain. The available
recording equipment was not sufficiently sensitive to observe these changes witb
eny d.egree of reliabiJ-ity and the observations were discontinuecl.
Pier cleflections were checked. with a dial gauge graduated to l/lOrOOOth
of an inch. No d.eflection was observed in the cap beams even during the uLtinate
foad tests. This was not an unexpected result since the cap beams were weIL
proportioned, heavily reinforced. and each monolithic with three pier colunns.
of these
. The assumption of a simple, rigiri. support, often mad.e d.urin6 the clesign
decks, is therefore sounil.
6.g2 Exoerinrental Check on the Stiffness of a SinFle. FufI Size Hollow-cored Beam
at
Ten of the urrused. hollorv-cored bea.urs in spans E anfl F of the briclges

129.

Slippery Creek were ind.ividually tested for stifftrssr The results of these
teste have e mean value for X (ttre flexibility of a single bearn - see seo 3.Ad)
of O.18J x lO-h irr"/tu. Since these tests were cond.uctetl on\r to oheck
uniformity, little attention was paid to supreme accuracy - a 3 foot nrler and
two, lsa ton concrete blocks were uged. for the tests, The agreenent to within
&$ was thus acceptable.
6.95 Check on Experimental Technique usins fnfluence Lines
As wil1 be noted. from sec 4.32, lane load tests were al,so conductecl on
the Slippery Creek Brid.ge spans. These tests were much fevrer in nunber than
those carri-etl out with the point loader, but the results obtainecl were useful in
checktng the data record.ed. and. the experimental technigue.
For example, using the d.eflection profiles obtained. whilst point loaclilg
on span D, influence lines of d.eflection were drawn for the ind.ivj-t[ua]- bea^us
in the deck as in fig 6.28. Using these lines preilictetl deflections were nade
for those lene Joad tests perfonned. on the sane span. These rere checked
against erperimental observationg ancl confirmati.on obtained as in Table 6.6
belor.
TASLE 5.5
SEE AI,SO

FIE 5.28

INFTTIENCE L]NE.PRIDICTION OF BEHAT.TOUR

,OAD

I,ANE

(r)

IN

DEFLN OF
BT,AM

NO.

(z)

IJ.H.

R.H.

WHEEL

(:)

FROM

IIHEET,

t-)

stnt

=(:) *(+)

DEF'I,ECTTON

PASDID

OBSER1ED

(r)

(5)

(z)
0.200
o.o77

0.1 50

O.l+1 7

0.120

o.208

o.156
o.o78

o.o55

o.188

0.071

o.o75

o.12t
o.1r1

o.156

o.287

0.108

o.109

0.082

o.ole

o,1 24

0.0h6

o.0L5

o.155

0.116

o.271

o.102

0.108

DEFIN

o.267
o.oB8

1
1

DET'LN FROM

O!' SPAN

129 INFIJTIEISCE

flOAD

IN

IIANE

Ln{E PRNDICTION OF BEITA\TIOUR OF

DEFI,}T OF

BE,AII NO.

(r)
7

Note: 1.

2.

DEFT,N !ts.oM

Ir.H.

WIIEEL

R.H.

SIHEET

8UM

DEFT,ETTION

=(l)*(+)

(z)

(:)

(+)

(E)

0.or5

o.101

0.o2h
o.069

o.o6o
0.170

All cleflections are expressed in

Colunn (6) = 0.375 x Cotumn (!)

SPTN D

IIED

o.o22
o.o6tr

inches.

Tbe erperinentel techniquel i.. the nethocl of obgerwing cleflectiona, loed.

aasessnent e.nd loatl posltioning, was thus ghorn to be appropriate anrl accuratc.

o.o2I
o.o5!

O,5

H
z
f'l
H
O
H
h
H

r4
o
()

U)
14

zo

Td

C)

H_
H

trl

z
o

&

()
f'l

Er

F?

Fr{

14

e
FTGURE

6.01

MULTTBEAM

SIIPPERY CREEK SRIDGE

TRANSVENSE DEFIECTION PROFIIES

for

64

lW'
-

' -tt

'0001b

point loacl in

18

r,oGS

SPAN

CO

AT MIDSPAN

1 ancl

Row 9

2,O

Model Pred.ictionl
Observed

Row

16.11 ,64

ln Field Test: 6.5,65

bY Transfer Matrix
20.10.55
Theory:

-ComPuted

H0ltow-coRE

FrounE 6.o2
SLIPPERY CRNBK

BRIDGE

tI

TRANSVERSE DEFLNCTION PROFILES

for

64,O0OLb

loBEAMS

SPAN D

AT

NITDSPAN

point load on beam 1 and' beam 5

IEGEND:

.- - e lUoclel Predietion
Observed in Field Test
Matrix Theory
---. -Computeil by Transfer

0'.

O,2

max.'s

ip,=o

i.e.

4,8y'" s

FIGUNE 6.03

Hol,to'lv-coRB

STIPPERY CRENK

BRIDGE

.I(

/ 5 BBArfs
SPAN

TRANSVERSE DBI'LECTION PROFILES AT MIDSPAN

for

54r0O0Lb

point load on beam 1 and. on beam l

IEGEND:

'rln^^al jlrediction
-?--luuul

nhcslysfl in Fiel-d Test

'Comprrted

by Tr:ansfer Matrix Theory

SIIPPERY CREEK

BRIDGE *

SPAI{

IRANSVERSE DEFtrECTTON PNOFTLES AT MIDSPAIT

for 54r000lbs on beams 1 and 2 (potnt load

LEGEND:

Motlel Precltctlon

ln Fleld fest
Conputed by Transfer [atrlx
Obeerved

fheory

FIGURE 6.05

'17.6.'

BEATTS

THEORETICAI, I,OAD DISIRIBUTION IIISTOGRAMS

FOR SIIPPERY CREEK

43.'66fi

LOe/18

SRIDGE *

SPAX CO

= 5*rt
Conputecl uslng Tranefer

lllatrlr

Thcory;

Coefflclent expressed as a percontage of total

appltetl load, (Rowe,1 anil 5)

FIGURE 6.05

HOLTOT-ConED/1 0

TEEORETICAI I,OAD DISIRI3UTIOil HISTOGRAItr'

FOR SIIPPERY CREEK

BRIDGE *

SPAN

I)

uslng Transfer Matrlx Theory;

Coefftctent expressed as a. percentage of total
Conputecl

appltetl load (Beans t end 5)

FIGUnX 5.o'l

n0olov-coRErD/5&38

IHEORETTCAI LOAD DISTRISUTION HISTOGNAMS

FOR SIIPPENY CNEEK

SNIDGE

SPANS

E&F

Conputed uelng Transfer

Matrlx theory
Coefflctent expressed ae a perceDtage of

total appl-ted load

(Beane

t and 5)

st

rrl

teat
ght wi

Obeenr

Span,

I ( rleht

wtdth)

/&=t

Fr]

il 2.r
\

a
aa?

-=1-t?

.O

-\i

el
,H

A
f'l

o
H

f4

h
f'f

ao
o<)
E{

D
frl
H
g
H

Q
H
trl

theo

tlcal

Rowe-Moriice-Lltt1

Diet butlon oefflcledt Profl] s for

lndlcalted.
valu
ofOGt

FIGURE 5.O8a

LOe

/ 18 3EAI1{S

QUARIER SCALE MoDEL $A

DISTRISUTIoN COEFFICIENI Pn0FII,ES At IIIDSPAI{

basecl on Method of Dlgtrlbutlon Coefflclente

as proposed by Rowe-Morlce-Ltttle;
WIIH EPENTMENTAI' COEFFICIEIITS
observecl on the rnultibea.ur notlel SA

COMPARED

fheoretical Profllee are gtven for tbe

followlng valuea of C : O.4rO.5r0.5rO.7r0'8r
0.9 and 1.0

130/9

rg Me
Tran

er

Ma

ix

Me

Expe

DISTR

FIGURE 6.09

H0 r.,10 i?- c C,RED

COI'TPARISON BETWEEN NAIHANI

}MTHOD

(a)

3Ms

REIJAXAITON

OI' ANAI,YSIS ANI)

EpERTImNTAL oBsEnvATroN oN sr,rppERy

CREEK

(b)

span

D: deflectlon proflle

AnAr,ysrs oF sAr[E spAtr:

clefLectlon proflle and Load c[strlbutlo

TRANSFER MATRTx

hletogran
IOAD: 64r000lb on bBa,urs 1 antl

Notc: Above reLixatlon

profileg were plotte

Qfi Transverse Prestress(0bservad in Test

4414 Transverse Prestregs ( Model Predlction)
No 3o1ts (trloael- predlction)
No Bolts (0bserved in Test
1! Bolts ( Obsenred)

/t

/
o.5

/t
/

/t

r
/,

e{

/
/

a
rl
!4
()
a
H

trl
H
c)
H

1rO

F
Fq

f']

o
c)
4
o
H

/
/

H
|-

pq

H
N
F
(n

H
H

C)

tr]

H
Fq

f'1

ll.

/:

,t

FTGURE 6.

ito

SIIPPERY CREEK

MUTTIBEAM

BRIDCE *

18 toGS

SPANS CO,C4i,A4

TRANSVERSE DEFLECTION

for 64,ooolb polnt

PROFTIES AT MIDSPAN
load ln Row 1.
2.O

TO DEMONSTRATE THE EFFECT OF ORDINARY

26 Trans.PS.
15 Bolts

o Bolts(Mo
No Solts

AND

PRESTRXSSED TRANSVERSE RE]NFORCEMENT.

inelud.ing nodel pred.ietion for 444 trans.

prestress.
I,EGEND

AS

SHOWN.

Rol,l/l 5

2y'o

\
\.. _l
-.-

Transverse Prestress (Observed.

Test

44fi lransverse Prestress (Uoaet Predietion

No Bolts ( Model Prediction)
No BoLts (0bserved in fest )
1

in

5 Bolts (Observe d)

,t

t7.

-1

H
zf'l
H
C)
H
F,r

(n

1, Bolts & 2y'" T.

c)
7.

No BoLts (Model
No Solts

f'l
E

14

N-

f-]
o
c)
a
o

H
g
If
tr
H
E
H
@
H

zo

H
H
()
f'l
'J
fzl

f'l
A

FTGURE

6,71

MUT8I3EAM

lgtoes

SIIPPERY CREEK BRIDGE If SPANS CO,C4,A4

TRANSVENSE DEFIECTION PROFITES AT MIDSPAN

for 64r00olb point load in

Row

,.

TO DEMONSTRATE fHE EI@C[ OF ONDINARY AND

?RESIRESSE|D REINF0RCEMENT ( rnnsSVnnsE) .
lncluding mod.e1 pred.ietion for 44fi trans.

pregtress,
IEGEND AS

SHOWN.

44fi trartgverse prestresie I

nodel tlepth:

4*".

l./'

tz

4/O.276"fr tendons, not stressed.

t +/o.275"fr tendons, stressed to 22/, of
1

the longltudinal prestress.

i 4/o.276"fr tendons, stressed to 4q* of
ong]-tud].na prestress.

-aIlata

of l*,u.

modeL tlepth

'7

MUrrrBEtM /1810G

FIGURX 9-,12
SLIPPERY CREEK

MODEI rr

SDAN

SB

SERIES

III

IV ancl V.
IRANSVERSE DEFLECTION PROFIIES

44y' Trans.P.S
22rt Trane.P. S
No Trans, P,

for
10

40001,b point loacl

in

AT MIDSPAN

Row 1.

DEMONSTRATE THE EFFECT OF PRESTRESSED

TRANSVERSE REINFORCUIENT AND DECK DEPTH

on rnodel span SB at O, 22 and, 44fi transverse

predress ancl at depths of 3* and 4* inches .

30/13

!4fi transverse pretress, nodel cl'epth: 4tn

|
'ttb

'

-l'._'

e--^1

,tll
/ 0.276"/ tend.ons, not stfessed.
4 / O.275nfr tendons, stressed. to p2fi of

14

longitudinal
14 / 0.276'fl tenilons, stressed to 44"i of the longitudinal
al-l atla model itepth of 3*u.
FIGi]RE 6. 1 3

t]ne

MUr,TrBEAyt

prso
prse

18 tocs

* SPAN 53 SERIES IIIJV&V.

SIIPPERY CREEK rylg
TRANSVERSE DEFIECTION PROFITES AT MIDSPAN
for 4000Lb polnt l-oad in Row 5.

TO DEMONSTRATE

ct)

f'l
H
H

C)

H
H
c)
rq

l-1

frl
trl

EFFECT OF PRESTRESSED
TRANSVERSE REINFORCEMENT AND DECK DEPTH
TTTE

on model span SB at O, 22 and, 44fi transv. presrtre

a.:ail at depths of 3* and 4* lnehes.
IEGEIID AS

SHO'lvN.

J,

a-

rtth prest c6.. '

*6rt{out
tsl

()

pr
stresg
-

7,
H

mum g1

zo

H
H
()

0. o1130'f ( e
0.01,80n ( ce

reI
oceur

Jotn

H0

Llolt-co

F]

r{
tr{

FI

tr|

rlth

)zt

4fi of
rne)23 5fr of heoret

l-oad.1

(a)

stre

FIGURX 6.14

nE

D/ I oBEAlIs

SIIPPERY CREEK ilIODEI I

SPAN SHC
TRANSVERSE DEFI,ECTION PR0FIIIES AT IIIDSPAIT
for 4000Ib polnt load or bearng 1 and5.
TO DEMONSIRATE TI1E EFFECT OF TBARSVEB8E

on etructural behavtour of
nultlbean deckg wltb ehear keya.
PRESTRESS

proflles were obeerved

when all
traneveree pretrese had. been releaeed.
fron the deck.
Above

STNAIN

10-6

tt\
GI
lF

130/15 R

CJ)

F'l

it

+t

tr{

.F{

o
o
E 4..

.0{

7,
H
tri

<t
o
ltP

o\

BqtE
trr:
od
oo
at1

E:{
\o4
o$

(\J Fl
a @o
e{

b4

q)

FI

fi

F]

A
F
o
.d|l'd
drld

f']

ooo oH
Htr}l
otr(u
trotr FIo

dd
lt\o}l
tr

o
H

-ta

t\

RJ

o
()
I
F

b4

c)
C5

\o
o
si
d

|l

tr
.rl

a
FI
rl
H

f4
o
pi

p{

a
o
FI
E{

()

f']

-f

tr{

tr]

qt

d
CdM

C)

f'l

tr('

FI
HO
o

.?1 O E!
or{
A
tr

Hr

orn'o

(ssscur) Norlcsrfrsc

z
(5

OP{
F?A
f'1

tr!*
E{

tr|r4
oct n
DMfr
or)pq
HF'lZ

o() F
Fl f'l o
rl
rl H
{.'

ol
@o
(\t tri

,FFGI
aata

o
H
|l
o
id

(,
o
H

tr

1r\
a

tO

frl

fr
tr

(5

tr{

#FHg
t'lFqH('2

PqtriC)
ov)
F'fC)F
HFf'l4
HOA{z}l|tHtj
F'1 Or:|Ff

EtrlcnFl

16

06
a--GG

.c
'-{
=
q-{

zO
H

+{

FI
H

rn
H

QI

3l

'i

5%

FIGURE

6.16

SLIPPERY CREEK

18 LOGS vs 10 HOLLOW-CORES

BRIDGE

ti

SPANS

A and

RELATI\TE BEHAVTOIIR OF LOG AND HO]-,LOW DECKS

being load Distributions per Uni.t Width.

LEGEND:

LOG beam deck

?-:

-- -,

HOLLOW-CORED

beam deek

130/17

llne
z
o
H

--

f3"a Dletrl tlon

epan/

dthr l

g
F
FC
H
G

butlo

--

FIGURE

6.17

HOITLoW-CoRE/1o 1513 BEAMS

STIPPERY CREEK SRIDCE

SPANS

D, E, and F

I,OAD DISTRIBUTTON HISTOGRAIIS FON VARIOUS

sPAN/WrDlE nATIOS

lndtcattng an approach to unlforn loarl

clletrtbutton wlth tncreage ln thts ratlo
IJEGERD

AS

SHOWN

130/18

L
\6%

T-

:r

z
H

Hi

FI

FI
Fq

tr:l

FIGI]RE 5.18
SI]PPERY CRI]EK

H0T.,L0W-CORE

BRI:DGE

SPAN

TRANSVERSE DEFLBCTION PROFILES

to

show

the effect of

15o

/ 10 BEAMS

of

AT QUARTER POINT

skew.

IEGEND:
?

- -

Profiles

und.er central- load

(n

130/19

E
t']

zl
sl

trl

conE

S
A

Fr
Z
g
D
O

pFi
o}l
o
Bo-t
OO+J
tlo(u
@ rS

H
El
E
IE

g
id
rq
Fq

d od
,q
B@.qF

H
() A
r'l

coo
rEoF,
c{.u dq
Esl
id.-tSo-

^F

\(.'
a
H
.

r'o
Fl
p{

D
C,
H
tr{

r.o sl
tr{l
trrl

Al

t^Fi

oP+{}d
'c)
.d
O

E
o
H

r(\l

5l

Fq

()

p 0)FIT{

tl

r''
85t;
F<
Rr{

tu r-]

c/)
[- 'O-trr

C)

dE

el'0

| 3
'dob"qb
E dit{.H
oqr}oFl

A H
O rl
rt p

o.C O
tlood

l'0

80'0

90'0

?0'0

Fl
<l
ot|l
|fl\/

ooo
ooo
ooo
G-G

Oo\@

aoooooo
9000000
ooooooo
--G.-D-

Frolnf.'.torF

13o/2o
U)

z
o

E
E

F'l

m
co
(5

o
tf
a
Ft

trl

o
o
E
N

$J
a

\o
f']
&
D
(J
H
trl

14

f{ F:
o k o.rl
B OJd
tr
oooo(s.!r
o
,(
H
od - t{ O
ood
t{
Sk
t?t
o po.ft o
.rl
El
FEI
t E$r o
B50h qt
zo
-Fl
cr\Fl
H
@otr.
g
d'rl (l)o
E
()a
(I'
{5
oodo
F]
.
rtO . PtDg
o k orn
tr{rl
FiFioor
f'l
oH${r{Fq
F'l
A
St r.r d
H
d.r{ 0) d
o{s !.-9
Ed
aH dd6OP
o tr o otr\
Orl
rl.rl+tPtrl
FIF

rg

t'o

iz'o

al'0

f0'0

^o
oo
ol
<lP-

Ol lf.+
rll

o
o
o

ooo
ooo
ooo

C\J

o@ro
(\IF!F

C\I

l-l

oo
oo
oo
a-

+(\l
ir

!-

o
ot
o

oo
oo
oo
ar

co

to

tf

o
o
o
I

trl

8e'ogl
tr
C)

F
u\

9l'o

Fq

H
H
C)
f'l

E{5
If,AE.

ng
(j<
o
F d
f'l

o
.c

3Sfls.9

{J
F ot{tr
Fg
o.F{ooo

pq

h
Eho
O.-GIFO
e{ F p.q.d

Ft
A
f.l A
iiO tjH o
OO
t-t r{O
'rl
H
'd'rl.t'
@ Fl s'rd
= b r4
(D.rl F

rrr f'l
rt H
a i4 H

\o A

{5

od(Hqto

fix5'-S
ooddF
trl
ci I b +lo o${
ii F &
'doq+{
g3
9*BBE
h A 7 etoorlo

fr

130/21

ee'o

zl

9l
erI

oz.o Bl
rll
FI
HI

gl'0
A

(n

rtl
H

9t'oEH

tl'0
al'o
ol'o
g0'0

90'0

?0'0

e0'0

trlo
<tp

olH
|ll \-/

o
.+

\-,/

;l:

r-l
oa
LC\
rO.rl
+;((s
OP+J
c\I (+l
-PO
cd

ul
I

|:

l--l

FI

afi

g.

trl

E
H r*"r
lrl m
/fF
On
F;r

H
h

pq

z
H
Er

+
c\l

Ff

^l
U-r

o
f
C$

-tl
c\l

.rr
I

$;
ol
r-'{

FI
r-,

\o
F']

tr
lf(5

F{

FI

tr

|d)o-P

.
r-l
0)

'd
q)

.-l

o./$

trfc)
g-r
q{ ei
.rlOO$+
{:.r1
6lFcS

a)

Er

o5

SPcr
.rl
O
dqC
(I)rs
Eoa)tr

tr '9
(d

C)

'rl

oge'0

>d^

oo+P
F

oq0
4tr
A
'rr

@tr
q0g
tra O
.-l
tsti
otr
.co
au

-(

0lz'0

>>
0)

jd

o
v)

002'0

.l
XI
ftl

Fi

091'0

0?

L'o

080'0

oto'o

ar)

ovoT,

130/23

f']
H

OH
c)

*Bl

FE
ob
|.]O

F{l

H
r-ll
o()
rdE
a!d

rtl
t4

a
oz
Eo

tr]

frl

:*
fri

5l
t'l I
rll
Fql
Hl

H
H

CJA

F.l
rn
Flo<
Reftl htt
\o
fil
Fg
f'l
l<

u)
tr]
FI
(J
.r1-2,
H

frE
D <g
Qrr
(,
H
OH
F.

Flb

.{a

o,

g.

OrF
.r{

oo
op
9{o+

(\l
d.
.F{ \O

o(r)

'{o
S{@

At
<lP-?

31

o
8

o
o
o

rn

$l

o
o
o
o
C\I

o
o
o

rn

o
o
o
o

o
o
o
r,.\

.,\

o
o

tn

tn

DEFI,ECf ION
U)

E
pc

o
F

\F{
R
o
()

t.

o
li
H
o
tr

z
VrO
o
HO

il

$J

\o
f']
E
D

(,

\o

tr{

-----r

o
P

rl
o
o
o
@

.+

-----

{J

.q
o0
'rl
q)

F
A

do

(ssgcNr

NOIECgTdgC

z
p{

HFA
(.)
H
f'l O
|lO

rn

\o

<5

tr{Otr]
A+
E
oF4

ho

MR
@

*
f'l

&

tr

Frl

Hrl

14

E orr\

r{ce{E
f'l H
c)z
Zr)
f'l
b
rlE
Fqfi
Z Ot'l

HF{tr|

f't

H
E
f'l

tr'
A{
H
lt(n

(Dr
Fto
.A,o

kd

oE{

R
x
o
tst6n

Oo
r\c|
tr

oo

O
'-l
{Jsl
CS

Eo
ho

.rl

(+{ O

oo
o5
h.s
oc

${.C
()

6(l)
o{J
o

l'-l
tqt

131.
0HAPIEBr

sEuE[\r

-*ggt

-CCIITENTs:
7.1

-,

Suma:nr and

'

Concfusions-

iJi -ilili--prototl?
.12
7.13
'l

e Go rrelailion.
Verlfi-catton of the Tranpfer l4cbrix Anel4pi-e Procedure.
lhe Ef,f,eet of ?r4rrsveree Frestrees.

.-

7.131 trog Beru Des.ks.

7.192 ltroIlsu-eored Eeoks.
[he &elabive tsehavio.ur of the 169 and Ho]Jorrcored Deqlks.
ltre Bffect of fraq/lr.ndth Ratlor
,

7.t,4
';i15
7.16 ltre Effect of lJ Degrees of Skew.
?.t7 l?re Dffect of Stlear Key Shape.
?.l8 lbe Behavlour of, th'ese Mfltobean. Dec,ks at Ultimate l,oad.
?.1,81 Xog Eeam Deelc$.

'l.l&2 Hollow-cored
12

Decks.

Recent, Develonnents and &regegtionF

7.2.1

for thture t{or*.

Becent Devel-opnente.

7.2"it [og tsean ]firltibean

7..n

Deck6.

7.21,2 Ho]jlow-oond Mul.tfbean Deeks.

fugg.ested futtrre lfcirk.

132.
CHAI{IER SEVEN

SIiMMARI. CoNCLUSIoNS .AND R.ECH{T DETIELOPMB{TS CONCERNINe

],1ULTIBEAT,1 BRIDGE DECIGg

7.1

Sutnnarrr and Conclusions

In the foJ*lowing sections the results of the model antl flelil tests

on

the S1ippery Creek Bridges as presentecl in the precetling Chapter are

suru[arised.
7

.11

Motlel

Prototype Correlation

correlation was achievecl between the quarter scale, direct notlel

(typ. I) and. its fulJ- scale prototype. Agreement to within S was obsenred.
in the full wiclth spans; but this deteriorated. as the span/rictttr ratio
increasecl clue to the greater influence'on deck behaviour of poor seating
and shear key action.
The nnoclel stuclies allored the behaviour of the ful} scal-e stnrcture to
be pred.icted for conclitions that were not possible to reproduce at the Jite.
For instanoe an investigatj-on into the effect of higher percentages of transverse
prestress, en investigation of the shear key neohanisn and. the deternlnatlon
of the safety factors against collapse have been nade.
The va-lue of the moclel studies has been demonstrated by intlicating the
manner in rhich they rnay be usefully enployed in the verification of ner analysis
procedures, the clevelopment of new antl improvecl britlge cleck tlryesr the
oranination of particular design parameters ancl the estimation of safety
factors against cracki-ng or ultimate collapse.
Proceclure
7 .12 Verification of the Tt'ansfer Matrix Analvsis
The transfer rnatrjx analysis procedure as developecl antl proposetl ln
Chapter J of this thesis for the solution of nultibeam brid.ge decks hes
been verified by the comparison of transverse d.eflection profiles with experimental observations rsa<le on both the nod.el and fulI scale slippery creek
Briclge. Sigs 6.01 , 6.02, 6-03 {Ld 5.04.
Further verification was provided by comparison with the expeni-uenta*l
This
work of Roesli et aI on the centerlort Briclge i.re the unitett Stateg'
Roesli, Spinc[e1t
bri6ge was elso used to oonpare the theoretical nethocls of
Goocl

Figs
cusens, Pama ancl Ahmed., which have been appliecl to this struoture'
been conpared rith the
J.8 and J.9. Again the transfer natri:r nethod has

133.

Digtribution Coefficient method. of Rsrs, Morice and. Little and. the Relaxation
nethod. of Noman and Nathan. Figs 6.08a, 5.o8u and. 5.09.
In alL cases the transfer matrix nethod. shows agreenent wlth the
e:q>erimental-Iy obsented. behaviour that is as good as, and often superior
tor the thooretical pred.ictione of the above authors. The aesunptions upon
rhioh the theory hae been found.ed are therefore reasonable and Justlflecl;
the nethocl has proved to be not only quick and. versatile but al-eo accurate
and reliabIe.
7.13 The Effect of Transverse Prestress
7.13'l Irog Bean Decks
The inclusions of I l+ or 15 transverse bolts into the 1og bean cLecks nad.e
no appreciable d.iflference to the behaviour of these clecks; nor clicl the
applioation of a nominal- {o trarrsverse prestress. The loacl distribution
oharaoterlstics were therefore unaffectecl ancl. two alternative cles5-gn
reconmend.,ations are oonclud.ed. which suggests i4iprovenents in the log bea.n
d,eck. These ere:
either (") to use the sane systen of 1og bea^ns and the [tr atltlitional
reirrforced. d.eck slab, but without any further- transverse
reinforoement in the forn of either niLd. steel bolts or

or

(t)

applied. prestress;

:;J:",::':"'::#:"::T"T:::'-::,:."::l'ffi'"H:"

a number of mild steel bolts or a uominal arnount of applietl

prestress.
This latter recommenclation j.s based. on the results of testing the noclel
SB whilst only 3|r deep but transversely reinforced with 1[ rods.
The effect of large amounts of transverse prestress was algo investigated
on thls model and it was found that a prestress, equal to 2{o of the
longitui1inal prestress, a significant improvement in behaviour had been
obtained. Turther increases in prestress - up to tla/o max. - 1n&d little
ailvance over that obsenred at z{fi and. it is concludett that for a given loatl
and 1oa6 position, there is a certain leveL of transver.se prestresg that
in6.tices sufficient friction (for twisting nonents) and compression (for
trasgverge bending nonents) betreen acliaoent beamo, for these ruultibean clecks
to behave as isotropic slabs. This crj-tical leveJ of prestress lay sonewhere

131+.

betreen 4 arrl 2$ rcr the 1og decks considererl in this work. Above thls
Ievel an j.sotropic theory for slabs rill be applicable, for exanple the
Distribution Coefficient methoct (see fig 6.OBb), uut belor the leveI, arti-oulatecl plate theory will govern ancl the transfer matrix theory nould be

suitable.

7.132

HolLow-cored Decks
The effect of transverse prestreos, provid.ed. by

the single mitlspan

cable of the hollow-cored. deck, is to ensure the satisfactory action of the
shear keys between ad-jacent beams. Evi-dence from the field tests suggestecl
a geries of tests on the mod.el SHC which examined the mechanisn of the ghear
keys and their reliance on transverse prestress for satisfactory petfo:mance.
Lack of sufficient prestress allows the wed.ge-shapeci keys to expancl the
deck laterally accompanied. by djfferential slipping across the keys. This
is evid.enced. by the stepped. profiles seen in the transverse deflection curves
of fi6 6.OJ and reproduced in the model as in fi.g 5.14.
7.14 The ReLative Behaviour of the Log and. Ho1low-cored Decks
The hol]ow-cored deck vras 3V/o tess stiff than the log bea,n deck antl for
the same load the former deflected. Jffi nore than the latter; simiLar
increases in the naximum strain were also observetl.
In general the hollow-cored deck &istributect the opptied load more
efficiently than the 1og beam ci.eck d.espite its comparative lack of transverse
rinterconnectionn and lower longitud.inal gtjjfness. The maxiroun loatling
in the former was 7 .16/o of the applied J-oad per foot wiclth of tleok and in
the latter 8.81a{o per foot wiclth. It was therefore concludetl that the
wider the inclivid.ual- beam the rnore econonic the d.eck, for the better will be
the loail distribution. However, practical considerations such as wej-ght,
d.imensionaL tolerancesr local wheel load effects and dlfnamio characteristics
will set a li.nit to the maximum deslrable wid'th'
present day estimates (1 g66/'1967) ind.icate that the hol-}or-coretl cleck
is approxinately 1O/- a square foot cheaper than the corresponding log
ctect (ttris figure is not jlclusj-ve of the substructure costg which are
of 1og bea'ms for a
comnon to both). The use of holfow-corecl units instead
saving
etructure the size of the Slippery Creek Briclges would' represent a
of approxinately &5r5OO or ZQ/o of the total cost. The e:rtra cost of the
log bea^m d.eck U-es ln the lar$e anount of in-situ wofk required for the

135.

placing the I/r additional deck slab.

to twist tluring
nanufactr:re and storage which results in poor seating at the pier caps antl
are nore d.epenclent on transverse prestress for satisfactory pedorrnanoe.
Their vibrational eharacteristicg may also be a clisad.vantage when subjectecl
to heavy traffic.
7.15 The Effect of Sr:an/tficlth Ratio
As the span/wiatn ratio increased - 1.O through 2.O to 5.5 - both the
The hollovr-cored beams, however, show greater tend.encies

d.eflection and the na:cimum load carzied by any one bearn

also increased., a result that was not entirely unexpected. 0f nore inportance,
however, was the approach to a uni-form distribtuion of loatl amongst the several
members of each d.eck as the ratio increaged.
The concLusion based. on this stuily is that for span/w'itlth ratios in
excess of J.0, a uniform d.istribution of 1oad. anongst the beems of the cleck
nay be agsumecl .
maximun record.ed.

15 Derrees of Skew
The transverse d.eflection profileg at the quarter and three quarber
lines, when drawn for a load in any midspan position, were not found to be
id.entical, as wouId, be expected. for a right d.eck. This d-iscrepanoy ras due
to the skewed. geonetry of the d.eck. At Slippery Creek the maximurn d'ifference
between tirese profiles vras observed at J@o of the quarter span dteflection

7.16 The Effect of

at the point considered.

The rnaxi-num error therefore in preclicting tleftection, strain or noment,
in a i ! clegree skevred. d.eck assuming lt were rigbt - which is common ttdsign
praotice for bricl.geg under 20 d"egrees of slcew - would be approxinateLy 15.
Equation 6.2 of the preceding chapter proposes a fornula for the preiliotion
of the above error at any other angle of skew, spanr or loed position'
Again, the effect of sken on <[eck behaviour has been noted to be depend'ent
prim&riJ-y on the span/wiath ratio; the greatest effect occurs for the
least reaf value of this pararneter.
7.17 The Effect of SLear Kev ShaPe
The shear keys used between the hollovt-cored units both in the fielcl
vertica-l
and in the uodel were wed.ge-shaped. Und'er the action of an appliecl
loacl, positioned anywhere on the deck, the keys tencted' to open the ioints
Iaterolly and intluce vertical slip under the nechanical advantage of the redge.

1j6.
Such movement coulcl be preventetl by

the application of sufficient transverge

prestress (refer gec. 7,132 above) or by a change of shape of key. Thlg
latter alternative is not d.esirable since the wed.ge allovrs good conpaction
of concrete in the key as it is poured.; the prrvision of ad.equate transverge
prestress j-s not considerecl to be too far outsiaie the capabilities of the
ord.inarXr brid.ge contractor.
The above shear keys were also able to burst off one corner of an
ad'jacent beam if this unit was not seatecl satisfactorily.
Alnost any abapetl
key will clo this ancl the best remetl.y is to seat the beams in a wet nortar
ancl thus prevent any rockin6 movernent.
7.18 lhg Behaviour of these ldultibearn Decks at llLtimate Load.
7.181 Los Bean Decks
Under the action of a point ed.ge load. the nocleL Sr\ coJ-lapsecl, first by
a horizontal shear fai-lure between the outside beem and the l tr aclclitional
'cleck slab, ancl then by the failure of this beem as it feIl off one pier
untler conditions of extreme geometrical distortion. This deck had no
traJxsverse reinforoement except that provided il the 1rf deok slab and its failure
at approximately ! times the d.esigned. J-oad, j-ndicates a remarkabLe reserve
of strength ancl adequate rlistribution of load.
Testg to destruction vrere not possible on the model SB which hacl been
trangversely stresseal to t$o of the J.ongitutlinal. prestress. The ultimate
load. capacity of thj-s d.eck exceecled. the rnaximun rated. capacity of the nodel

test facility.
7.182 Ho1low-coJedl Deok
For these tests the heaviest axles of a scalett II2O S15 fi5, A.A"SHO tmcktrailer combination were positioned in an outside lane over the niclspan
centre ].i:re.

first darnage to be sustained. by this d.eck occured at 5 tines the

d.esign loacl. Lt was the failure of shear keys between those beams
actually supporting the load, but only 1n a zone near the piers. This was
the effect of poor seating at these supports clue to the intlivitluaL beans having
tristeA during their period. of curi-ng and storage.
As the load was further increased both tension cracks and conpression
failure zoneE tlevelopetl; the deck failecl in compression tllrectly under one
axle at a load / times the design load. At this stage tbe tleck hatl cl'eflected
The

117.

a maximum of 4#t and on release, retainecl a pernanent 1i-tt; the bearns directly
uncler the loatl rere ba&Ly d-arnaged-, as.sere their shear keys, but' those bea.ms
renote from the loacl were not d:istressed i-n any noticeable fashion.
The tension in the mid.span transverse cable inorease by 5116 ciuring the
test incticating the importance of a sufficient overload allonance in the
ileoign transverse force to prevent catastrophi-c coJ.lapse of the tlcck ahouLdl

this cable fail.

7.2 Recent Developments

and Sugfiestions
7.?-1 Recent Develogqgnts
7 .211 Log Beam llultibean Dechs

for Future Work

the results of the fieLd tests at Slippery Creek antl the notlel
tests in the Structures Laboratory, the Ministry of llforks Design Heacl Office
amended. their Stanclard. Specifications for log bearn briclge decks anfl
introduced a reviseil stantlarcl in 0ctober 1965. This stand'ard for precast,
pretensionetl, hollow brid.ge units (UOW t1116) describes a 3 foot wid'e,
precast, tloub1e-U-shaped. unit, whioh when in place at the site, takes a
4tt d.eok slab reinforced. vrith iiJ diam rod at 8rf centres, i.e. as for the
original log beam decks. Only two central transverse tie rods are
specified. for the d.eck but it is felt that little saving in cost rrill be
achieved. because a large anount of in-situ work is stilL required'
Based. on

7.212

Hollow-cored. ldulllbeam Decks

Ihese have been further refinetl to inclutle a deeper shear key antl
circular cores rather than the hexa8onal type useci- in the slippery creek
this multibeaJtr
ancl motlel structures. As a result of the above tests,
ancl the
d.eck systen is now acceptable for use in Government contracts
proteotion
extensions marle to the Slippery Creek Brid-ges tn 1966 for flood
used these hollow-cored units but rith a V-shaped' key'
7.22 Sugsested Future iflork
listetl:
Several possible avenues of future research rrork are
loacl
Optimise the shape of precast bean to give the best
1.
clistribution per unit wid'th (see sec' 6'V)'

2.Inprovetheassumptionthathasbeenmadeinthetransfernatrjx
theoryregarilingtheshearforceclistributionattheshearkeys.
S.Investigateshearkeyactionri.thaviewtorecl.esignandthe
prevention of d'ifferential movenent'

158.
&.

5.
6.
7.

I,

rnveotlgatiron ultimate Load behsriogr by the use of nodteLr

alrynoprLate adjustments for dead loadt equiv,alerrce.
rnvestLgate vibratioa eheraote.ri-stics and. betravioun unilor
qynanio l,oacls of nu].t{Feau brid.ge d.eoks.

the couputen lrrorantre OFUll lttrO to incJ.uile aay IoBd

poti.tLon a,ndl. any numbcr of J.oedls.
Irnresti6ate nultibean floor systens.
E<lge Stiffening.
Erctend

rtth

l3g.
APPUUDICES

ONE

DigitaL Conputer FaciJities and the

OPUS

Progranme

Serj-es

I Facilities
Al.2 The OPUS Progranrne Series
TWO OPUS ONE: Determination of the Distribnrtion Coefficient Matrix,
42.0 Introduetj.on and Description
M.l Storage Required and Approxjmate Speed
M.2 Input - Ortput: Data required, Sense Switch Settings
42.3 l'low Chart
Al.

A2.l+ Progranune Listing

THR@

and Speci-rnen Result

OPUS TWO and OPUS THREE: Computer Programnes for the Trarrsfer Matrjx
Anafysis of ltultibean Stmctures
43.0 Introduction
A3.l Description
43.2 Stora,ge Required and Approximate Speed
IB.3 fnput and O.rtput; Data Required, Operation, Sense Switch Settings.

43.31 oRIS 1tr0

43.32 oPUS THREE

A3.h
8.5
FOJR
,
..

FIIE

SIX

0PUS

FIow Charbs
Programne

Listings and Specimen

Resu3-ts

FIVE: Statistical Analysis Programne for

Concrete

A4.O Introftrction
44.1 Description
M.2 Stora,ge Required and Approximate ftreed
M.3 Input and Ortput: Date Required and Sense Swj-tch Settings
44.4 Flow Charb
M.5 Progrmune Listing and Specimen Result
?ransfer Matrix Tlreory Applied to a Spring Mass Systen
L5.1 State Vectors
45.2 Transfer l,Iatrices
45.3 Use of Field and Point Transfer Matri.ces
A5.h Generalised Transfer Matrj:r Theory
An fuproxi.nrate Theoretical Justification for Singte Poi-nt Dj-stribrrtion
f Ioad at the Shear Keys of a multibeam Deck

A6.l Application to

a Beam Srpported

Elastically Along Both Free Edges.

SEUHI

To:reional rlnatfnsip of

UtWr $mical Gal fatlonp

Bitdge

'a $llply.

SrpBorted Bem

frsm the ?raru,fen Maf.rlx Analfists

Contract Plans of the Slippery Creek Brd,dge

ELgfU{

Matserj.a.l Fr.operties

lEi:netable aracl load {rrangernent used drning

iltpBery Creek Bridgs

the Eield Test5ry ,of the

of the Modeil

V,qfiation of O*nber, Oryshi4g Str,ength, and

Model Conaiete r+ith ttrne

Elastic ModrrJus of

Al1.2 Steel Propertli:s

TIr{ffiVE lbans.ducer for the Detemination of Elastis l4odr].lrs of
Af

2.

of a ltulJibem,

Deak

NINE
lE{

All.l

31"

Consrete Bloelcs

D-escrCptLon

L72.2 0irLibnation
Ali2"3 Strsin ,Garge Cirqrit,
Ale.4 Uge of the I?ansdreer

lro.
APPENDIX

Al.

CIIE

DIHTAL

CCIIPUIER,

FACILITIES AND THE OPUS PROcRA]4llm SERIES

I Facilities
di-gital conputer aveilable for the coryutational work jnvolved in
this thesis was an fBM 1620 maeh-ine with a 1622 Card Read Rrnch and a 1623
Storage Unit. Tttis contained a further 2grogg,storage positions giving the
sSrstern a total c4acity of lOrO0O locations.
An IlM 026 Card Rrnch, an g7o Off-tine prjnter and a card sorter corylete
the faci]iti-es available. I?rese are at present (961) being exbended to
The

'

incLude the IBM | 130 Conputlng Systern.

Al.2

I?re OPUS Prosrannne Series

In the course of this thesis project varj,ous programnes have been rrritten
and these have been grrcuped into seven different cla^ssqs according to their
l\rnction. Written in PDQ F'ORTRAN C2 with Fjxed. Format Srbrouti:res, these
seven forrned the ba^sis of what was cal-led the 0PUS (ObJective Pr"ogrames for
Understanding S1abs) Prograrnme Series, and were rn:mbered consecrrtively fron
one to seven as below;

Identification
F\rnction
ozus oNE
Distribnrtion coefficient Analysis of Bridge Decks
oPUs 11^10
lbansfer Matrix Analysis of Mul'bibeam Decks
OPUS THR@
Load Distribution in Multibeam Decks, using State Vectort
fron OPUS fifO; graph subroutine incllded.
OPUS FOUR
Graph Plotter for any specified variable; naxi:rnrm capacity,
fJ vaniables; includes sin 4O a,s a denonstration progra@e.
OPUS fltVE
Statistical Analysis Progrmne for Concrete; includes a
Goodness of Fit test for E and f".
OPUS SJX
Finite fiLement lnalysis of Skerred Arristropic Bridge Decks;
in five parbs: 6/1, 6/2, 6/j, 6/trL ana 6fi+8.
OPUS SEVE\I
Matrix fnversion prrcgramnes.
Set/eral of these prtgrunnes wiIL be found jl the foJlowing three qpendices
of this vohne, b'ut OPUS SIK and SEVHI are not included until q>pendices 13 and
14 of volume II.
OPUS Nunber
lppendix
oN8

11f0 and THRXE

OptIS

ltunber

Fq'B

Appendix

Not included, but the grqh sub:routlne has been Llsted

Appendia

HTVE

$IK and SUAI

as

part of

OITIJS

tIfrEE.

h
Bef,er $pendices 13 and 14

of

Vo}rme

I[.

ln

lh3'
APPuuDrx

rWo:

@!..,Q$:

DETMMINATION OF THE DISIRTBUTTON COEFTTCTENT

MAIRIX.

A2.O Introduction and Descriotion

Ttris progrurne was vrritten
argr

value of

.4

accord:Lng

to the

in

FORffi.A{

to

calsuJ.ate

Kg

fr.on KO and

K, for

e:cpression

U r ro+(K,-no).
KO and

K, are rnatrices describing the theoretical distribution coefficients for

a bridge deck with zer^o and f\rIL torsional stiffnesses respectively ( C r O and
4 r l). Kq is that matrix of coefficj-ents for a bnidge deck where 0( is
given by
. (b-!fo}i see also sec 2.tZ of chapter 2.

-G2E

ij

the Method of &istribution Coefficients

due to Gryon and Massonnet and later Rowe, Morice and Little - the nethod is
described in the above-named section in some detail.
the corputer was therefore used to find the distribution coefficients
for the Slippery Creek Bridge, since it wa^s not possible to fi.lrd A theoretical]y. Using a trial and fit appraach, sets of K4 were found to best suit the
The pr"ogranne was ttms based on

A2.l

obse::ved data.
Storaee Required and Approxinate Speed

occupies l5J3O storage locations ercclusive of subnoutiles and

takes approxirnately three seconds to calculate K1, for one parbicular value of
About si-xby seconds are required to list the flexlbility. natrix (KC )
and the ].oad transfer matrix.
42.2 Input - Output: Data Required, Sense Switch Settings
OPUS OI'IE

x.

The sequence
Card

Descriptipn

Co1unn Nurnbers

t-3
I+-6

t-2
3

of data cards as required by the prograrme is

t-6

No. of equivalent wheel loads

Actual No. of wheels on deck
Increment on C , if 4 is not
to be specified
Equivalent Ioad Matrix

3+

t-o

uo,

Coefficient Matrix Eleolent

a's folJ.ousl

Fgrrrat SpecificatS-on
13
13

12

,t..,

F6.3

lw.
Colurun Numbers

Description

7-tz

K,t, Coefficient Matrix Elsnent

Format Specification
F6.3

If K{ is to be corryuted for a partiorlar value of I ,

rust

be

3++

-ON, and

the value entered blr card:

,-u

then sense switch I

,.,.,

If sense switch I is OFF the prograrmre r+il-L enter a DO J.oop and calctLate l(1
for a range of values forfi from O.O up to l.O according to the size of
speci-fied on the second data card abo\le.
The prcgranmre ].i_sts Kf, under the heading nFlexib.itity Matrixn together
with a sunnation of the coLurnns of K[ accord:ing to the actual nagnitude and
i-:ocre'rnent

position of the applled loads; this last row is listed under the heading of

42.3

tqload Transfer Matrixrr.

Flow Charb
A

sirrybfied, schenatic flow charb for the pFograrme is given in

Fig .42.l.

42.4

Prpgranrme

tisting

and Specjrnen Result

listing of OPUS OrlE is included in this qppendix to give

statqrents and their addresses together r*lth the s;rmbol table

A PDQ fCIRmAl\l

the source
locations.

A speci-nen set of resuJ.ts a,s calsulated for the nodel, urltibean deck of
Chapter 5 is included afber the progrmne listing.

START

Print Headlng
Reacl: NrldrLr

Read Load lJlatrLx.P

Reacl: KOrKl

OFF

Read:

Conpute

oC

Koc

for
(t=

Or 1 rL

Conpute
Y = P.K
Sum columns of Y
D = sum/M

Prlnt ! ocr& rD

Ftg,

A2,1

FLor Chart

of

0PUS OI{E

lf .l=t.g _=,=--=..- --=-l=-= =-_.=:=:---+6Q99-r- - 4 [rnq-io,f it ,J]- -. - -.- --- - _=-- --=, --==-.:-.-. '=.1-. :-.
-+6684 ---1

DO

+9Q5?

Do

+qqzq
+bU,/b

2 J-JC.9
Do
DO Z
J-JC,9

+7119

Do

q l=1,9-

._+9668_ _

Do

it

2 r=i,9
t--.+6864--JC=.
:'
-

_+6888__-2_ READ j,A( i,.t),8{ t,J)

'=

+q799

il

t<:l

.N_

o(J)=c(.r)iv(K,J)

+9084

PRINT 13
R t N T-l 4'Ate+l
-+p ! Q-_==_-- = pRtNT
0

+9120

15-

r - -_.-.

r.ol?2
+9h32

'---+

vo-v/r t,9)
ol
X9=X(

P.t4[

+9468 - r B PR NT 6, X 1 ,X?, X3 , Xl{ ,X5 ,X6, X7, Xg, Xg

+962 tl
PR NT 19
pRtNT 2l , N, D( 1 ),D(2)
+963.6
+97Q9
22,17'
tF (SENSE Sl^J]TCH l) ,Q(j),D(t{),0(5)_D(6),D(_il'D(B},0(g)_
1

+9788

+982\

17

C0NTINUE
PAI'S E
Go To 22

-+9835
+98&!
I FORI{AT (42U IIN DISTRIBUTION COEFFICIENT DETERMINATION)
+9952 3 F0R|4AT (F6.3,F6.3)
+gg80 20 FoRf4AT ( 16.3 )
-Jo0o2 217 FoRt,tAT ((13,t3)
J0030
FoRttAT l3 ,r7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 ,3,F7 .3 ,F7 ,3 ,F7 .3)
JOO98 I9 FORMAT (/ /IN
P,5X21fi LOAD TRANSFER-MATRiX)
l6 F0RMAT (F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 ,3 ,F7 .3 ,F7 .3-,F7 .3 ,F7 .3)
J0! 94
-J0256l5FoRt4AT(1gHrlrxtgtt.trfllatn|i)'.--'-J03tB ltr FoRi'lAT (El4.B)
Jo3qo 13 FORMAT (/ / / /6H ALPHA)
Jo396 25 F0RMAT (F6.3)
Jo39o
27 ronuRr (tz1
J0q40cPR0Gsh|oNToREAD|NAPART|cULARVALUE0FALPHA

Jo4Jti
JO,i

40

tN
-19959 EXP

E ND

19999

19919

SQRT

L9gB9
19949
Lgggg
19q69

tNF
EXPF
S

SQRTF

t.9g7g cos
L9939 LOG
L9Bg9 ABS

:_

19969 c0sF
L9929 LOGF-.

ArAN -]
rget g ATANF
sN 0007
lgeog
L9779 L
Lg76g A
38969=
B
x
L733s p
L6i2i v
36539
tsiig
L5719 c
35639 L5629 D
355\9 L5539 SN 0004
L5529
15519 .J
15509 sN 0020
LSL|99 SN 0002
15489 Jc
ooq3
L5\79
L'q
SN UUU'
L5t+69 SN 0006
/9 5N
L5\59 ooo
L5\39 Sl.l 0024
L5\29 sN OO23 L5A r g sN OOt 7
LSqOg tLpHA
: L5399 ALPHA ^ _
L53Bg 5l I o00o0oo L5379 o0l
- L5369 52 | 0000000 L5359 SN 0026
L53\g SN oO25
L5339 BETA
L5329 SN 0009
15319 sN 0010 15309 0000000000 L5299 K
-y5z}9
00ll
-- Ltz\t sN
L5?79 sN 0012
L5269 Ar4
00lq
Lt2t9 sN 0013
sn
t-19Q79 DRH
onur
198.39 sN o00l
L9B?:9 SN ao22
L9799 t,1
19789 SN oa27
LB95e
r-81!g
38159
373\9

wA59
r98i g

1_9889 ABSF
N

L5239 sN 00t5
L5199 X3

L5229

L5l 89

sN ool8

X4

-15159X7001
g
L5il9SN 00rg
L5l0gsN 0021
-,-1-5149X8--

Lt219

L5179

Xl
X5

L5l39x9_---

Lizog xz
1-5169 X6

L5|29JN 0015-

l
-l
l

--l

p.148

DISTRI BUTION COEFFICIENT DETERMINATION

PI-IA

)o0oo0oE-50

:XIBILITY

MATRIX

;000 3:550 2-.27O

:550 2:85o 2Zo7o
:270 2'.o7a l;B2n
l'.47o
;3oo l:380
-.75o

1:300 :510 -;0$0 -'.53O -'.911 -l'.3On

l:380-- 1750 - -.?60--: 130 ---iJ21---;900 ri-lit+7o 1:0lo is?-o z21o -:l9o -'.i21
-.270---16rl;4tr9 lz7-6o :930 -.620 ' ..7

l'.260- l: 4oo liz4o t: o lo

\n i'flo
;510 -.260 l:010
-.52o
;050
:9f10 tz24o t-.44Q tz47o--1:36o-t:3tto:
;530 -: l8o '.21o '.620- l; 010='l7..t+7o l:320 2zogc 2:27 o
;9f 0 -'.52O -: 190
i27o i7 40 i36o '2'.O9o-1:851- 3-;55
,300 -.900 -.SZo -.050 .47r1 1,300 z.z7o 3.SSlt 5.ono

. LOAI.T..TRANSFER MATRI X
.000 ,0oo .000 ,000

.000

,000

.000

,0o0

,000

)l.|A

)000000E 00

:XIBILITY I.,IATRI X

,oB3 22326 l: 658 1-.151 -.7 So

,3?6 l: g8o l'. 582 l;2lo i?,63
,658 l;582 1: 466 l'.264 l-.OO2
l'.256 l: 146
, 151 7'.21o li 264

-.441+

i57B '.7 39
i955

-.z1s
'.371
'.556
i76B

,75O '.SIB
iB63 l-. oo2 l'.146 12216 1;133- lzoo2

,rrz

izql

i36l

;533
i853

,444
i 739 -.768
i965 lzt33 l-.256 lZ25O l; l90
lioo?
lz25o 12466 1;595
,205
i371
i
556
..853 l:190 1i595 ligl]0
,O23 - ;2Ol '. 361
:5BB
,147 . o1g 20t .1t34 .7l7 l.f5l 1.661 2.312
MATR{X .
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000
LOAD-TRANSFER

.000

-..

lr-17

illg

i2't1

it+3tr
'.717
1115r
1:661

2i312
3.r'.83

J'

,000

,oo0

,HA

t0 00000E 0l
:X IBI LI TY }'IATRI X

290 1: B 2o 1it+2o r: ogo

,nfi
820 7'.620 1:3flo l: | 40 ,rU,
'.91o i7 10
42o t:380 t;3Zo t: l8o l:000 ig3a
090 l; llr0 l:180 l:180 l:100 i96o
850 ;91 o t: ooo l; 100 l; llro l;090
650 1710 :830 '.96a- 1'.09n l: 190
l; 160
5 l0
;500 iTao '.7
:330 l;000
rrl0 --;500
20 : goo l'.l2o
ZSgo
33O .400 .500 _ ._6lro ,B2o l. 090
-

I T1f,I]:TDiNqEED

'.51O it+|1 i33O

iSno-i5r)(l--;1en1
'.7 'T
'.59) i 51O
-.i3o -.7 zo - i$tfi
l;000 ign? ;920
12160 'l:l2o - l:-n9l
l',32o l;390 l: rrl o
l'.390 l'.621, l;9on
|,410 I,Soo 2.29'l

lto

150.

TI{REE

APPENDIJ(

OPUS T1I0 AIrID OPLS THREE:

COMHJTER PRoGRAl,ll'IEq FOR THE ffi,AIIISTER,

MJLTIBEA},I

I'{AmlJ( ANALTSIS

OF

S1RU CIURES

A3.O Introduction
These progranrnes,

A3.l

r,ritten in

pDe F0RTRAN, were

der/eloped.specifically
for the analysis of mrltibean br5-dge and floor deck systerns, uslng the transfer
matrjx method t^e prpposed in Ghryter J. I'his Append:ix presents details of the
prrcgranmes and includes programne listings, storage requirements and data
format.
Description

theoretical ba,sis for the nrethod has been given in Chapter 3 and
the progrannes have been organised to analyse either bridge decks or floor
systems of any uidth and span for any load 4pIied along the rnidspan centreline. Deflection and shea::s are calclllated for all joints and these are used
to firrd the actual Load caruied per beam and a percentage load distribution
eoefficient.
The

43.2 Storage Required

and Approximate Speed

rb39 storage locations ercclusive of subroutines and

tahes four seconds to calculate d.eflections and shears in a ten-beam deck for
a single load condition; a furLher 90 seconds is required to list these
oPUs ThIO occtrpies

19

results.
storage locati-ons which i-s again e:rclusive of
subroutines, and for ten-bearn deck takes just ljJ seconds to coryute and list
the load camied by each beam and the respective distribnrtion coefficients
(e:cpressed as a percentage of the total 4rplied load) .
ff either the
deflection profile or the load distribution curye is required these may be
plotted by sense switch control on the 162O Console Tlrpew:r"iter. I?re tj-ure
taken to plot one graph inaluding axes and axis va.lues is about 3 minutes.
43.3 Input and Ortput: Data Required. Operation and Sense Switch Settingg
OPUS THREE

occupies

19 rl+2-O

18.31 oPUS T11I0

The sequence

0ard

of data cards and operations fotr OPUS tWO is

Colurnn Nunber"s

t-t0
lt-t5
16-20

2t-23

Data Deacription

a.s foJ.lowst

Forrnat Specification

Narne

of Stnrcture

A5A5

Bean

ffpe

A5

Identification
No. of Bems in the Deck
Span

A5

t3

l5l.
After reading this card, the page is headed. and the progrannes stop to
the date thr"ough the Console e.per,,rriter.
2
t-to
Modulus of Blasticity, E
810.4
lf - 20
Modulus of Rigidityr G
Eto.4

2t-26

Span Length

t-6
7-tz
t3-t5

Bearrr

u-27
28-29

t-5

F6.3

Width (Risht Tfidth)

F6.3

Beam Depth

F5.3

of Skew
Breadth of fnternal Core
Depth of fnter:ral Core
Number of Intertral Cores

F3.0

Ang1e

t6-21

Applied Ioad
card, a data check is

flexibitity

F6.3
F6.3

F2.o
F6. I

After reading this

debrugging and identification.

mad.e and

listed for

pr^ograune

torsion prrameter.s, X and I, are calculated

Listed forlorsed by the fonnation of the field transfer natrices.
5+
Nunber of beanr,s to
r'u the
t'rls 'Lrtr
leftu ul
of
The beam

ACCEpT

and

and

the ]-oad

lt3

I+-6

Number

l-10

Shear Force

of beam,s to the right of

the load
I tl
There are a.s nany of these load-position cards a.s there are positions to be
analysed, with a mrxi-nun eEral to the nurnber of beam,s in the deck.
'The sequence of result cards from OpUS IWO, which are a]so the
data oards for OPUS THREE, is as follows:
I
t-t4
Ioad fuplied
Ellr.8
t5-t9
No. of Bearns in the Deck
ll+
No. of Bem,s to the right of the
a:-23
load
t4
2
| -8
Deflection at joint O
Fg'5
t-to
Shear Force at joint 0
3
F|0.2
| -8
4
Deflecti-on at joint I
F8.5

at joint

Flo.2

152.

total

of these cards again depends on the runber of beo,g in the

deck and the rnrmber of load positio.ns to be analysed.
The following use ha.s been made of the sense switch settings in
I?re

rnrmber

OPUS I'IilO

Sense

Sritch

use (opus tl'Io)

Number

For the analysis of floor systems this slritch j.s

turned 0'I b'ut for bridge decks it umst be OFF.
On the control of this switch aIL deflectiops and
shear forces are listed if 0N, brrt only selected
values are listed if turned OFF.
If the J.oad lies above a beam centreline, this
stritch mrst be CItl, but if 4pJ.ied to a joint then
it must be OFF.
To trace all arithraetic jnstnretions uslng the

Floating Point Accurmr"lator (fAQ, sense srdtch 4

is turrled CN.
43.32

OPUS nIREE

uses the above output a^s data and lists deflections

d:lstribnrtion a.s indicated. in the sense switch settings below.
Sense Sr'rltch Irlurnber
Use (orus rrtRtr)
OPUS ITIR@

l+

or

Load.

For the insertion of new axis values. for the grph

plottilg subroutixe, sense srritch I is tunled OrI.
ff the graphs are to be plotted a.rtonaticalJy
switch 2 is turned OFF.
If the deflection values are to be plotted and
listed this switch is turned OFF, but iJ it is ON

the Load carried per beam and the percentage

coefficients are listed and, i-f required, plotted.
the plotting of resuLts is supressed if thi-s switch
is OFF and the progranne antomatj.cally returns for
new data. The trace feature i-e not iacluded in

this

progrulne.

43.4 Flow Charbs

schematic ELow charts

43.2 respectivaly.

for the programres are glven in

TabLe A3. I and

153.

A3r5

Listines and Specfuren Besults

Prrcgramne Listings for both OPUS lUO.and OI{IS TI{Rffi are given here, including
source statment addressed and slmbo1 table.
the set of specirnen results included fur this lppendi:c rrere calsul,ated
for a ten-bean deck - span D of the silipperlr creek Bnidges. ortput rretingg
are g:iven for the deflections and sheans from OPTJS ltfo and the load
distribution and coefficient^s frrcn OPUS TIIREE. A typicbl graph is also
ProeEamne

lncLlrded,

154'.
START

Readr ErGrS

Read,: RBTDTSTBI TDITPH

Cornpute
BMI
Compute

Cornpute

Conpute
p, Cp

FrCF

(polnt

beAn P)

P)

zA = B/D; flnd
Read:

NI.I'NR

Puneh:PrNB'ITrNR

Compute

Cornpute

n=rltryy=rflRrv=F,rv
A-DVrB=DC

Conpute

zt*1 = F1'Zl

Conpute

Connute

?O

- *{++}

floors

Prlnt

& Punch

ZL*1

Flg.

43.1

Prtnt

6
*fa++

triaeeg

&

Flow Chart

of

OPUS TII0

155.

Read.:

PTNBWTNR

Read,

ZL

Cornpute
Dr,(

r)

, PDr,( r)
SDI

Prtnt:

Prlnt

P'NB

Plot: DI,(I)

Plot:

Deflln

ualng

uelng

SS1&2

SS1&2

Prlnt:

DI,(

I ) ,PDU

I)

Flg.

r P,NB

Prlnt: Deflectton

L3.2

Flow Chart

of

OPUS THREE

+6500
+6500
+6ti00
+6500
+6600
r-6600
+6600
+6600
+6600

p'

156

Tl^/0

TO DETERI,IINE LOAD TRANSFER I N MULT I BEAM-BR IDCE DECKS

NG TRANSFER I4ATR ICES.

PROGRAI"II"IE
US I

c
D

n4ENS

+6950
+7008
'+7138

2a\

+7162- 206
+71 84

+7196

+72\\

207

+7360

208

+7276
+7408

+7\32 22
+v\5q -.

lot't r(g),R(g)

TRACE
READ 201. ,Hl , H2
BEG I

+6672 2o1
+67t4
+6726 202
+682 0
+6856 203

+6936
+6948

0PUS

,l{3 , Hlr , NB
FoRt4AT (45,45,A5,A5, |3)
PR I NT 2O2
F0Rl,lAT (3SHtCq TRANSFER MATRTX ANALYSts oF THE).-TypE ZO3,t11 ,Hz
FoRI4AT (2X rA5 ,A5 ,2 X, I 5H14ULT I BEAM BR I DGE )
CONTROL 102
CONTROL 102
PR I NT 20\ ,H3 , NB, t{t{
F0R|4AT (l IHBEAM TYPE* , A$ ,12y1 NO I N DECK*, | 3 ,7H SPAN* A5
,
,5H DATE )
ACCEPT 206,DATE
FORMAT(rB.Z I
CONTROL 1 02
READ 2O7 ,E,c ,S
FORMAT (EI O. 4,E19.4,F6.31
READ 20B,RB, DD,-THETA,BI,DI,PH
FoRt4AT (F6.3 ,F6.3 ,F3.O rF6.3 ,F6 .3,F2.O)
RE/ID 22,P
F0RMI\T ( F5. I )
NRI NT 22O
FoRI.IAT ( t 2soRrA CHECK,I )
20s-E-G-s-RB-DD
TypE
TI{ETA, B | , D I , pH, p
IIIF. .2_o2
rF rG, s, Bq, pD, rl{F'
j,ri.lirli'1,Ft.0,F6.3,F6.3,F3.0,F8.1

2?0
+751\
r7r1\
i6\6 20s lg$frAl (ito,4,tro:t{;ie.
v5714
T(1)=O.O
+1499

b77?6
l]738

17750
fi7621777\
17786 "

17822
r7B3\
178\6
r7B5BqBTO qBTO
v7882
17894

r/)a6

-7918

v7939
-7978
-801 4

'qI59
-Bzs\

R( 1 )=0.0
T(2)=1.0

R(2 )=0.141

T (3)-2 .o
R(3)=0.22J

(4 )=3. o

R(5)={).281

(6)=6. o
R(6)=o.299
-T(7)=B.o
T

R(7)=O,307
T(B)=10.0
R(B)=0.313
- T (g ) =1 O0. O ---

---

R(9)=o.333
H=T[{ETA*3 ,t\15927 /180.

BB=RB/C oS ( H )
t= ( DD't't3*pB_D l**3*B lr.pH ) /
X= ( 5**3 | / U+8. *E*BMI )

Bf4

zA=BB

lbb

l2 ,

-?,29o
-B3oz
1,3b?-

-B rr22
-g 478

lo2

-857 a

105

-Bsltr

{t65

n0 l0 I

rF (aa) loo, lo3, lo2

F ( RR) l0 l, 101r, I 05

l0l

CONT I NUE

TZ=T (.r+l )-T(J)

TF=R (.t+t )-R (J)
FA=R (J )+QQ* FF lT7.)

-e738

482?_
19830

-3365

-.987 t*

-fl910
-8910

103
104

-$ 970

-9102

-9234
-9246
-9300

-93 1z
-9458
-957 6

FA=R ( .1+ 1 )
CONTINUE
BTJ= f1f);r*l * S $".. FAY= ( BB*BB''S) / ( 15.'.BTJ-G)

CONTROL 1O?.
CONTROL 112

-90 g0

-91 l lr

c0 T0 l0g
FA=R (.J)
G0 T0 10ff

IOB

-9078

210

212
21tt

FORI.IAT (48HBEA}4 FLEX I BI LI TY AN r TORS ION PARA}'IETERS

w PE 212-

FOP.IIAT ( ISH (S INGLE

PRINT log

109

FoRl4AT (3XZHn86X

ll0

110, RB, BB; l-)t),

F0RI.1AT (F7 .3, F7 .3 , F7
PR f

rF

'

6X IHFT X3HB$4 I 6X3HRTJ6XIHX 13X IHY

'
FA, BM I. BTJ, X. Y-

.3,

F6.3, F10.2 F10,2

s toN A(2, ?-),

(srrNSE SWTTCH 3) 95,86

I,

=li

F(2; 1)'

(2,

I )=P

G0 T0 215

B5

J0 i $11

J0190

F(1, l)=FR(1, l)
F (2, l)=-FR (2, l)
F (1,2)=FR( l, 2)
F (2,2) =-FR (2.2)
C

2r5

l;

I )=-2.st[:kYtrP

C(2, 1)='{t'P1(X-v)

/ (X-y )

C0l'lTR0L 102
CONTROL IO2
PR

25

I HBSX l Hn

lI'IENS

B6 F(

Joo36
J009lr
J0106
JO142

FR(2, I )=1 ./ (X_Y )

FR(1,2 ) = (l+. :?[1.r] ) / (X-Y )
FR(2,2 )=FR( l. I )
FL( I, I )=FR( l: I )
Ft.(2, 1 )=-FR (2, 1)
FL{I, 2 )=-FR( l:2)

t1

J0r:05
.l0l+lB
J0430
Joq l0

INT)

X AN'

llr,9 E llr.g )

B ( 2, 2) , c(2, 1), n ( 2. 2) FL(2, z) FR(2 2) V(2 2\'

v(?,2),w(2,2),Q
(2, 2),7.(2, 1) ZNR (2 t) 7NL(2 r) F(2 2T
!ory
FR(1, I )=(x+Y)/(x:-Y)

JOO.o2

JO39t1

PO

FL(2,2 )=FR (2,2,

J0002
J001/r
J0026

lo

NT

N IT1EN

-987 4

-9886
-e922
-9958
-9970
-ggg0

Jo3

IrT 2o9

PR f

2n.9

-9614 c
-9634
-9634
-9634
-9713
-s766
-s362

J0o7

L._1_77

J--1,7
QQ=ZA-T ( J)
RR-T (.J+l )-ZA

100

tNT

25

FOR}{AT (28H]]EFLECT IONS ANT- SHEAR FORCES)

31IEAU

46_ NL_XR

J05BZ

NBlv=pqa61*1
'at:p.
- - - PUNCH
illi'rcii 62 .P. NBly.
nst,l. run

-lo6jo
JO630

J0678

62

FoRl,tAT ( Et 4. 8. i 4. tlt )

JQ71o--

r(

sENsE-sFriTH-3 ):82;88

-JO766--- 87'A(1,1)=1 . '-'"'

ro77g

A(1;21=o.

JoB25

B(l;2)=0.

Jou6z
Jq9?9

1!

iJl

zgt+

:-

I F-( NL-t ) 32 ,i3;3;3

t 0 l-=l ,l,ll _
Do
33

_.__:_rJ 9 -AI_I;J
B==::4
7.\rrvt-v

3 :.

==a=

NR

coNT I

s(-i;a}::
]:' =-===-==
\rrvt_

=
NUE

J?lgq

,:frrr
J21

36 Do il L=!,NR
B:=:-r-( g; pp )' \T 'fif,-n
tz

86

r?Ige
J221O

J?79?
J?97\

\j'

Do

;q-iz

t=t .2-

.i=i:z
lv( t,J)=0.
Do to- r=1;2

35 Do t{5 t=l ,?

Do lj J=1-.2
9226 -=-=--V(
J3238f, J)=0.
J3310
Do 13 tGt.z
-y(r,i)=vti,o*r(

Jli_4? t3
$73A-:D0__l q-J=1;2-Jiit+z _ U(t,J)=0.[r I jt=o- '
$7\2
J3814
14
Do

K=l ,2

r;K)*t,'(K,J)

- -

iazjo
i'r=i .z
-=- - tQ6d'i
( ;
i ; rl+o r ; 6;*s K;r) -----:
jl;il--sE i[nll6ti:'i],li5i' i't 5-\ '53

urr 2 82

11

=q 1

J4602
ZNR(I,1)-XttR
t_=:=:=Z NR( 2; t ) =0
co To-59
J\626

=Jq6 I

J!ql!
J4706

t\l30

54 FNR=-q(!,1)NF,2r

55

il'tr

25, ZNR( l . l )
PUNCH'23,ZNR(t:t )
PR I Nr ?7 , ZNR (? ; t )
PR

J\75\_ =_ i!.in:! ,-fi)zg,i_e,

id!6l
-J4870-39-oo"l
--'rF L=l

NR

.
(l--Hn) lg,7g,1
J4882
tF
li
n-==--:-==:?ti.i= fl-=t.- :r-r - ?
- -+=-

li-=l

{|i t.

Fi

---1

1'(r )t
1:rt527\

aJfi 82-

--

__=_

_ -___-

i=iti, t )*rn( | ,K)*zNR(K

,zNR( t.- | )=Z( t.1

-Pur.'lc-H Z 3 ;z NR ( |
PUNCH 27-.Znn(2

',5_1

1J5406
O-:----fF-(
E- SlAr-t-T6F
:T5
=_.
pRt
26.
8t
NT
ZNR( l t
lJ5lr5o
J5\7\-- --PR I NT 2Z,Znn(z ;, I )rlr 3

SENS

I CONT| NUE
J5498
4-=733-|FTS
51
'-ti
ffi
J555\ a _rg PRTNT 28
15566-pR I NT go, NB
J559q
Go ro 89

E l,t

ll5598:--9u?R1
:- J5510

7t$\'=:Bf
.ts646

g(I -

NT=g

g1 g2 . NL
oo s I=t ,
zNL( r ,1)=0.
PR;

__
5,ZNL( r,r )=ZNL( t,1
B-- - -JR I NT-? 6, ZN[rfJ
J6o\2
PUNct{ 23:ZNL(I.l
il'iNrz'r'iiffit":i
J6o9o
PUNcH 27 ,zut(2-,1
J6111- ----- tF (m-t ) 40,11;
.16182 41 Oo 5 L=l .NL

J56g\
J5ol

6 i ;!- --=:-+iiu:11- J1;t

J6262
1 D0 8 l=l ,2

J6274
J63to

i6iit-

Z(

t;r

-,

t-

)=-o:-

oo B K=l ,2

i);2fl ,r-)+ntr -K)-"zilrfK;

J6SIU
DO 52 t=\ .2
J6586 52 zNL( I,I )=7_( r, r )
J56g\
PUt'tcH' 23 ,ZNL( I . I )
J67lB
Puhtct{ 27:ZHL(2:l)
- s$1112
tF (SENSE svrirur 2) 82;6
pRil,tT
25,ZNL(l.l )
J6762 Bz
J6786
PR INT 27',ZNL(2|1)
J6B1O 6 CONTINI,'E
-;6846
40- coNTtNtJE
| F ( srrusE Sl,r I TCH 2 ) 83 ,3 t
_ .l68tr6
J6866 83 PAUSE
J6B7B
To 3l
-'!qBBq-- !5 Go
F0RI4AT ( 11, 13)
J591q 23 FoRl,lAT (r0.5

26 Foriirnr i'Fb.s)
F'oRt'lAT ( rt o.z
J6964-27
J6gee 28 F0R|4AT- (ltzn LoADED Urutr)
J70l{0 B0 F0RI4AT (gtt BEAI4 No.. t3)
1

J7144

J7l

B8

t BS
J71 BB

.17

J7r

BB
J71 BB

gr

19989 S INF
l_99\9 EXP F
Lggog sqRTF -

198,59 DRHF

'+LJ))J

0000000000 L93Bg
5022900000 Lg3hg

00000
- 50281
5a30700000-5o333ooooo

531 8000000
001

52q8000000 sN 0r 0t

L9079
Lg039 sN 0l 03
18999 T7
18959 BT'
1891 9 srl 021 0
r_8879 SN

L8769 D
LB5o9 \t
18469 ZNR-

0l

TRACE

END

LJJ),'

19199
Lgl 59
19119

CL.:

T
39759 L97\9
19639
tl2
L9629
L
I i ocoo -Sl't a2o2- 19589
I I OtrCO DA.TE
L95h9
Lgst g s
r.9509
L9\79 THETA
L9\69
'L9\39
St't 0022
Lg\29
L9279
L9239

L983 9

L931 9

-T--=--

(/13H L0ADED-lolrur)

FoRMAT

sQRr

--

e4 F0RMAT (ZH
PROG SIT
ON TO ANALYSE FLOOR SYSTEMS BUT-OFF-FOR BRIDGE-DECKS-=.
'c
PROG Sh 2 ON TO PR I NT AND PUNCH OUT BUT OFF TO PUNCH OUT ONLY :-PROG Stv 3 ON FOR LOAD ON UNIT CL.,BUT OFF FOR LOAD ON JOINT
v_
TRACE
_c __ PRoG Slv 4 0N FoR TRACE BUT oFF FoR N0_--END

J7r B8
L9999 srN
L9959 EXP
19919
L9879 DRI{

L9399
L9359

p-'-*6O

r6s36

J70BB

--=

38739

39569

SN
SN
SN

0203
o2o7
O2 OB

BI
P

5't r 0000000
5 I 30000000

60000000
52 1 0000000
L9zz9 H
1gl 89 BB
19309
Lg26g

L91lt9

r-91

5r

002

09-003

Lgo6g J
t.9029 SN 0102
13989 TF LBgl{g Y' L8gog_ sN_0212

A
38839
L8729-FL- 38699
LB55g 1^,
38539
LBB69

10

38579
38459 _

H3

L84q9.ZNL 38\39

L9979 cos
L9969 C0SF
L9939 LOG
L9929
LOGF
_.---=-=-L9Bg9_ABSI
19899 ABS_--.
L9859 ATAN
L98lt9 ATANF
L9659 sN 0201
19549 Hl
L961 9 H4

L9609
L9569
L9529

NB

sN-o206' =
L9579
G
L9539 E
L9I{ 89-Dil
L9\99 RB
L9\59 DI
L9\\9 NH
0220
st{=- 02 05
19419 s N
lr
I
00000
-Lg4ogLg36g 5l 2 o0oooo0
L9379 5Ol
L9339 5026700000L%29 5r 40000000
L9299 5029900000 Lgzgg 5180000000
Lg?-59 50313 00000- Lgz \g-53r 0000000sN

o20\

513t\tSgzt L92o9 000

L9179 BMI
v9169 0003
Lgtzg x
t.9139 5212000000
- - 19089
SN
19099 7A
-0100---l
19049 RR
19059 Q0
Lg00g sN-0105
LgOl g sN 0l 04
t9g79 FA
LBg69 SN ol 08
o2og
r8939 52 f5O00000
LB88g sN 01 og
LBB99 sN o2t\
--LB92g--sr.lr_8829 B
38799-LB7B9-c- ZStlg
u
l8589 FR - 38659-'r-B4Bf
LBSI{$ -r-:
3B6t 9
L8529 q
38\79'3BU9i9-LB\z9 F _ 38399- __L83t9lN:_qq_85_
Lgzlg

p.161

-Ls37t

sH

-0086

_ LB33g SN _0046
L8299 NBh

L8329
18289
L8249

NL

LB3l9

NR

18309.

0001

sN 0062- - 18279 sN 0087 L8269 sr''r 00BB

SN__o03?_
sN 0033 LB23g SI\r 0010 L8229 L
_Lg25g
--0ot{2
- LA? l9- sN
---Lg2o9-stt-- 0009:-LBl99-tL8l6g SN 0034 _ LBl59 Sr{ 0044 _!' L8t4g SN- 0035
18179 SN 0049
- L8139
SN 0036 L8l zg SN 001 I
181 t g SN 001{3
--1-SrB9--lC--:===
LBr og-SN 00r 2 18089 sl,l ao37
18079 SN 00115 ;8069 SN 0013
:Lt=9099_srtr_oo5_o
g805 9-s -i0 I I{:L
03 9
029:=sm=}O5t-B0 l{ g05 4-T8
L 801{
803
N-T 0 I 5
9- s N-To
---L
--=L
XNR
18009
sN
SN 0026
L7999
,.
FNR
FNR
=.L8ol9
-L7999
Lzq6q
sN-0055
oo27
| 7q6s SN
sN oo93 =-L-7989
L7979 SN oo23
L7969 SN
L7959
L79\9 SN- oo39
7 0001
oaTg L7glg SN 0004 LTgag SN 0051
_L7g3g_SN_=-'t-7899 sN oo8l _L7gzg_SN_
J7B5g_ SN 0080
L7B4g SN - 00Bg
L7839 SN 00gl_-__==17829_SN__0092 _jL7Bl9 SN 0005
17809 SN 0040
L7789 SN ooob
L7799 SN o04l
I Tzqq sN ooqz
000
L77\9 SN 0082
177 79-SX-opo7.

S nr

_.

r=L7i39 SN- oo83=_--

-5CrO0

-6600
-6600
-6600
-6600
-6600
<1612
- -5700
-()712
-o33tt
-6846
-596ry

54
55

n 144

62

176

-7 378
-7 troo
-7 453
-7 430

-7 62rt
-76ro
-77 80

-7816

-788 4
-7 8g6

-8040
-Bo4o
-8076
-3088
-8220
-8232
42t+!t
'-o'3t16
_3352
-B /r1$
-B tr6B

-Btr3o
--8552
-.'ls gg
-87 )6

ISTRI BUTI ON

tNT

5l

l9),

DETERM INAT

cF(

ION

ANN

GRAPH PLOTTER

t9), nL( t3 ), c(73), PnL(t9)

(l

F0RMAT
127 HSET SENSE St{ | TCHES AS BELOV')
PRINT Stt
FOR}4AT (trgHSW 2.TO INSERT NEW AXtS VALUES/AUTot4ATt c PLoITt Nc
PR tNT 55
F0RI'1AT (tr7]lSW 3,LOAD DISTRI BUTt ON CIJRVES/NE'FLECTI ON CURvFS
PR

INT 5I

F0R}'1AT (E llr.B, | 1r,

l0

Bl^tO=NBll+

D0

SUPPRESS

PLOTTING RESULTS/GRAPHS PLOTTF'

l4)

l=l,NBVr0

READ 2, CD({ )

FoRltAT (r8.5)
REAn 3, CF( t)
FoRl'tAT (rlo.2)

I
3

F (NR-l) 30, tg, tg

D0

19

l/t l=l,NR

r4

nL(l)=CF(l+t)-CF(t)

3o

| =NR+ I
DL( | )=P-cF( l+1

)-cF ( | )

l=l+l
f F ( t-Nevl) 15, 15,36

D0 17 L=l,NBll
nL(L)=cF (L)-cr (l+t

l5
r7
36

CONT I N UE
N

B=l{ Btv+lR

n0 35 l=l,l{B}'/

Pf)L ( | ) =l oit.r.DL

35

SrtL-nL( 1)
D0 26 l=2, IlBl'l

(t) /p

SDL=nL( | )+SDL
n0 3l- | =1.7 3

26

G(l)=-1.

32

lF (sENsE sV,ll TcH 3 ) I l; ilt

INT 12
12 FORI'IAT (zgHTRANsvERsE DEFLEcTt0N
1B

t3

PR

pROFtLE)-

PRINT I3, P,}IB

F0Rt1AT(3HF0R2()X6HtJ..||]ERFl0.2:5H-LaAr3H0N2HBl3}-.-l-= I

D0 22 l=1, N BWo
c(u)=cn( t)

l3
-9730
-''97

-3Boz
-3839
-837 t1
-88 94
-8 906
-99 18

F0RllAT (trBllSlr 4.T0

REAn 6?-, P, NRl/t, FIR

-7 21?-7 ?24

-izii
-7 294

PR

5l

6l

-7

LOAD

Dll'tENs t0N cD(

-6gto

-7 096

p.152

OPUS THREE

c
c
c
c

L-L+f+

22

CONTI NUE

tF

(SENSE swf

4t+

EXE

CIJTE

4342

TcH t+) It3,

PR 0cEnuRE

:)97 g

t+Il

PR INT II2
F0RI{AT ( Z6HnrrtEcT I 0N VALUES ( tN CHES ) )

_:-

'
-

-tlgg4

CONTROL IO2

D0 74 f =1,'NBtfg
TYPE +1, Cn{ | )
F0RI{AT (r9.5)
t F ( t-7 ) .7 4,71,7 3
f F(l-llr) 7t+,7-1,12

-9006

-golB

-9056

41

-9OBB

'

-9156 73
-9224 72
7r
-9292
- -930 t+ 74
4o
- -93
-9352--9364
-9376
-9388

F(t-2r)

f
74;7r,74
CONTROL 1A2

CONT I N UE

CONTROL 102

C0NTR0L 102c0t'tTRoL 102

CONTROL IO2
CONTROL IO2

cONTROL 102----.--._
CONTROL IO2

-_9400

-9412

G0 T0 l0

-94Ztr

-91t32
-

--

-941r4

16

-9536

-957 2

-9584

PR

INT I6

FORMAT (34HTRANSVERSE LoArr

PRINT 13. P, NB
L=3
flO 33 l=1.NBW

c(u)=DL(l)

'9596

- -9663

L=l+11

-9740
:-e760

23

EXECUTE PROCEDURE

-977 2

ZIv

PR

-97olr 33

-9784 34
-9902
'- -gg | ,+
-9926
J0010 -21
J0038

--J0106
J017 4
'-Jo242
Jo3 lo
'Jo37B
J0lr116

B2

83
B5
B6

87

CONT I NUE

F (SENSE SW|TCH 4)

CONTROL IO2

D084 l=l,NBw -.
2l-nL({)-Pnr(t)
TYPE 2I,DL({),
PNr(I)
FoRllAT (Flo.2,Fg.4)

F (l-12) 84,81,86
F (t-15) 84;Bt,87
84:Bt.87
F ( t-tA) 84,8l;8fl
F ( l -21) 8tr, B t, 84

BI

CONTROL

J0526
Jos62
- J05tl5
J0658
J0680
J0692

84

CONTI NUE

I('2

28
27

LOANS =F

CONTROL IO2
C0NTR0L

10r-- -

__

---

(f-3) 84.81.82
lF
F (l-3)
s4;si,sz
F (t-e) Btr,Bt;83 F (l-9) 84,81,85

- Josl4

.rw01

F---r.

INT 34
F0R}4AT- (rtHLoAD DtsrRlBUTf oN ANr ntsrRrBun 0N coFFFIclrHf*I_.:-_-

8B

24,23

9979-

l'};2l

-6600
-5600
-6600

c
c
c

Jo7 12
Jo7 40

Jo752
Jo7 64
Jo77 6
Jo77 6

J0796 9914
JoSoB gg16
J091tr

p.154
GRAPH PLOTTER

BEGIN PROCEDURE 9979

c0l'lTRoL lo2
CONTROL IO2
CONTROL IO2

l0N .JAK (73 )

(SENSE
IF
SV,, I TcH 2)ggt4, 9gt7
PR INT 9916
FORMAT (rr lH I cBl JTB GRAPH PL'TTER su BRou r wE
D

ti,lENS

PR I NT993O

Jo926 gg8o F0RI'1AT(gHI-OW X vAL)

J0g5B
J0g6B
AccEPT gg3
993 t, xLL
,toggz gg8 I F0RilAT (r5 3 )'
r r 6i
t'
nlff i_itl
Jlq26 9982 F0RI'1AT
( I rrHX DIV ( 1.3

| NS

:.:.,

ou rOu-t

))

Jlo73
AccEPT gg3l,xtNT
Jll02
PRtftT 9933
Jtl l4 9983 F0RMAT'(qHL0W Y vAL)
J I 156
AccEPT 999 l. yLL
J I t]0
PFI tN T ,)99 !r
gggtr
Jll92
FOP.llt\T(lrrHy nl\/(1,9 tNS))
J12!+Lr 4!q.tlr 9gg l. Y I N T
J1263
PR tNT e9it5
J I 2.1q gg85 F0R}{AT (3 ZHSET TABS AT 2q, 32 t+4 56. 6g go 92)
J 1363
PR tNT 9936

-;-

.l17sq ee36 FoRIlAriisisrr MARGTN Ar 9)

J143t! 9gg0 PR tr.tT ggST
J!r1t15 9gB7 F0R}4AT(43HSW I 0N FoR MARGTNS ANn VALUES
.IJ1556
I SS6
PAUSE
J 1563 gg17 D0 gggl t=1,73

J!580
JAK(t)=(G(t)-yLL)r,6./ytNT +0,5
12 gggl coNTtNUE
J 174B
coilTROL 102
J 1760
JAKZ=I+2
- J1772
EXECUTE PR0CEDURE 9960
J 173 4
D0 9996 tltJLTy= l, 6
tllgQ
D0 9995 t"tULTX= 1, 5
JIB0B
KLI!(Z-l
JlB20
JA67=t12-6't(MULTY-l )+4ULTX
Jl90!
EXECTJTE PROCEDURE 99rro
Jlgl6 9gg5 coHTtNUE
J1952
t(LlK7-=2
Jt96+
tF(SE]'|SE SI^ttrCH l)ggg2.gggT
J I lErr ggg2 Y0RD=.lAl<7-/6
J2o32
Y0RD=Y0Rnt'rY INT+YLL
J2OSO
TYPE 99q7;YORN
J2lolr 9997 F0RIIAT ( Fg. r+)

PRESS START)

Jl7

J2126 gggS

JAt(

J2lg3 9996

c0NTtNUE

J2136

z=lr2-6r'M ULTY

----

--

Pd6+:---n0 9998 I'IULTX= l, 5

\J2216 - KL ll'iZ=
-=-=
J2?58
JAI"Z=6+IULTX
- J?-29)
,- : '
gg4o
l
EXECT'TE PR0GEDURE
_'j__
- g3\2
Jrt66 999s dor'rfrnfie '
r F_(SENSE SWt TcH I )9994, '9973
---TYPE 9s97. yLL -' ---'-'
-- J23(>2 9994,:=_-=,_-f==_:=.-_,.-i,:-r--E-1=-3-_-=;E
,J.?189. gg73 JAF.Z=o--- 122

J2398
EXECUTE PR0CEDURE'gg6o-J2lrl0
I F(SENSE SvrtrCH t)tglg,99nB
JzI+trQ 99lB XXX I=XLL+X INT - - r ----

J253fl

_=

XXX'}=XXX3+X tNT

-- coNTRoL ro2'
Jtl66
Col'fTROL loz
I
r F (SENSE st^tt rcH z) gg3g. 9913-:=
l-'-.1471"
't J2798 ggSg PR rNTggoT
i--. J275\- - --

". J2966
; ,. J 299tt
'"
8aa6

J3o lB
-J3030

_.Ilo 9921 | L=l i-12 -tF (SENSE SlrrrcH--r) g%3.9

.= 'J3o42

:-=-J3090

,
_
--

J3ll0

-J3178
J127 o

J3333
J3350

- - J?t376
:- = J3338
13396
J3 ,|C)3

- J3434

J3\46
-' J3lt
Jj454
Jjtr
lrA
la c
J3546

9933
9928
993a
994tt

99IQ

I F - (Nu"lB-l ) _ gg2g, 9928, gg2g

I F(.fAK (Ntl.tB)-JAKZ)-9930. cq

FOR}4AT (1HI )
MARt<S=l L

G0 T0 9921

99tr3
99+5

gg29

oo?7
9927

WPE 99tt5-=

FoRMAT (tH-)
HART.S=IL -::
c0 T0 9921
-

I F(.IAK(NTHB}-JAKZ
MARKE
I L{'IARKS-I

J35g4
| F(I{ARKE) gs 22, gg22, gg26- J3650
9926 nO 9923 J0XX=I,MARKE
, ----::-:
J3652gg23 C0NTROL t01
-- J357
4
CoNTtt'tUE'
- ss2tr= - '-.-'- - ' Jli\o
5gz2 ExEcurE pRocEDuRE
J3722
l.lARr(S= | L
-- - J3734 9921- C0NTINUE
--J3779
tF(MARKS-I!) ggl0,ggll,gg2o .- .:_:- 1=
J3S3B 99to C0NTR0L lo8
J3850
G0 T0 9920
J3B5B 9g1t C0NTR0L to t- - - - J3s7o 9920 coNTtNuE

J.?eQF
J397t.r

993t!
9936
?Z?9

!+:ss3sF(.'At( (73 )-JAKZ) lgl

I!t(:l4K(Z3J-JAKz)
sg35- 9937r:
993tt:
|
|tF(SENSE
F(sENsE SWtTcH
sv,t TcH t) gg16
9936
9937
993',
F(KL IKz-l
tKZ-l )- qel6;
egt6; qqk6;-eqh799t6;
Sg469frt7-:
!| F(KLIKZ-l)L[(KL

t)
ee469vlrt7::.;1;=-1

,. J4062 9946 TYPE9942

TYPEgg4z
-J399Ir
-4?22T
- --=--:
-r-:-------Jt+074
coIlTROL lnzc0|\trhoL
102- -:--:-'
-:
JI035
RETURN gglro

-ee47 IMg^?pI'l_
--lif?}
-" Jrrlo6
col{TRi)L 1oz ---.--=:
-- Jlrl I []
RET1;RN g9 Kf
J4126 9937 coNTRoL-io2
f

-:: =

-=---'

- --:
.-

--i-jj------=

- J4 t38

ttzs EISgIIE
fRqcEnuRE ee2) .
--{11!f
Jlrl53 '
C0NTR0L 102
Jlrl70

=_==-

END PRocErtuRE ggho

=:J4173 -

: J4206
J42lE: tsJ,.

J4233

,=--J425O

9959

: -- .l +262

'='-Jtr3lo

J\tp?

:-Jt/r14

9951

I F( JAK (ttr${B)-JAKZ)' gg5ffiq51;

EXECUTE PR0CEDURE 9921t

-G0 T0 9g7a
?2:? l5
!I 4 p:l es53, sssr.l:ss
='-itl4to
ini'El5sd
s'{si,
=1ilr7?
J45o2 9956 FoRllAT ( 1t-r'.)
; J4523
c0 T0 9970---

r = -._.__' _i=

: ...t{}539
995tr r r(Uul.4ii-il) 9957,9958,_,gs57
4$ot\
TypE

99Ss
-J Jr!6t5 9958
9955 FoRtlAT ( lHl )
-- Jt+6t+2 cO.To 9970------

9e57 ! F(!U4 B-37 ) gps9, 9961, 995

K5!
tB 9961 WPE 9955
JrrT 3o
c0 T0 ggTo .-qe62.qq63,-qq6
J4733
8-551 e96 ?,T 9633l9i62F(Nt$tB-55)
eere !| t{t!r$t
+737 9959
.ttrflo6
9963 TYPE 9955
- JtrSlll
c0 T0 9970J tr.926
W PE
___.f

J47

9962

9964
--J+933
Jh$64 gglo

:utrg3f

J5004

9e64

F0RMAT

(1tt.I-

coNTtNUE

-,=r__ _:.
--=
996-5-'=_-:==:=:-

_- | F (JAK (23)-JAK il-gg6s:9-966

9966 ExEcuTE pRocEnuRF'9g24

16
r:)23

col'lrRoL

J5 o
.l5

RETURN

-T.T67-

loz

t5036 9965 rYPE99569960

orr8
oEq
{5

conrnbl

.r5

.I5gQB 9971

.lsqqa
.15

qq.l

lo

RETURN 99(ro
EXECUTE PNOCENURE 9940
ENn PR0CEDURE 9960 '
BE G tN PRocE nunE"

.992t+--

-:.*--

J5 116 990
fiPE 9903
rrr/-i.t
J5
yyrtJ
( l lt+)
1
(lll+,
F0Rt'rAT
frrKllAt
99o3
END PRocrnuRr 99zrt

28
1515\
J5162

L9999
19959

!9?le

leqze

Lg;139

llry
EIP

END

SQRT

DBH
RAND

stNF
!9999

lgllrrg EXPF
lelq)e sQnrr

Lestg

cos

19939 Loc

Lqis6

Arts-

res6q cosr

L0rr

Lec,29

Lejqe

usttzg
1.2zrit

nriHr
t4qig aiar,r
ArANr
" 3s63g Ls?,re
nArunr
;i
j<)...,e
cF
iesis
iilie
prL
3g13g
13529
-[j3',e
sN-., I
3s35g! nnii--_

r$or+.)

sl{-

!.Elqb

ABsF

3gz(tq
12\29 .:N
!L 00511
Lql3e
rlii.e ir.t- .n|t',--i4ie4
!ll?i
Lljoe ;;i ^^i; ll.
unw
l?zee P
t:Lie
-:
Nii
sN-- -r1H29.1
"non
r
.mDr
&?5e NBt'ro
tii?,t
Llzlr' ;;ii
!-q?4b
l: .
\8219 !
!9 ?qlr st't 0002 Iq r 9i sN "1003 - rc! rle- ii,i- --3i
oo r ri
t.? iii aN oo ts
!Q !Z e 9l! 00 I ?
!! I!6b sr,r
L,l I 're sN - "3,o
Lg 139 sN ootT
L
t-7
t1o
NB
__
!l ?9
Lq l0 9 sN =-- 115r.---=LfJ09953loo0!99!t.1os9snLLidi9;Nnn2QLq155sNll32

!q059 5 il0000000
oo.|7

00il

liws ir.i ooii

r. 12
' - ii;;d !N- .r,r'r3

r-nogli sN oo22
fqOlg !N
:Jsgg ooorr
L7979sN00,t/t!.Z9q9lI2?7?-.t-igsgsNgg7g

--doci''
17e39 sN 0074 !Zg?9 sr'r iiir'ri
ltli;
'oo7z
LTsee sN oo73 lzlqt ootr,
lH qo33
l.t.r)v rN
0016
L7g4g 0003
0003
.'-oa3_,, liijg
!-2q59
!N rrrrrb
L7339 ir,r ooia
[;siq
oo?2
00rf t

!,ll,rg

SN

L7979

r_zsng

sN

ii,i .tii

Lt36sqN
002t |L7q20
7q?o SN q^?]L
1q2'r

,,

t-?lqg lN
'-'
liile sN--'rn zr=.
!77ee sN
-'oo,ronorlirsH
ooiz
tii;s
Iii,;6 iii o"it
lZZgg
[i7 re sH ro3o-117,22 ll?P
!-27?? l!! 9ry5 Liils oo i
trqi6
;;if
;il ;;i;
iied;
ll2?2 SN
ligpi lI lqii
17659
oo28
"9nll^,'o
L6Bee sN eetl .
ggj
!4apg ll ggie
l-gjit
lry _ssin L66,6e sN qq13
L5Bse XLL
rqvs
isq/
rinr-''
1632q
sN
!61,*9
!ry
L6Bf e
LsBf
qqgrr
YLL
9 yLL
t-68oti Slt
IL(,i;s
f.7oo \,rNT
I A-ret\ ..*
t-,^.?
Lesob
Vii,ii
igsn
iil
L6iee
ll!
;;i;
sN
sr,r.-gigo
l9l7_e
,ees6 l_gZ6s
L6i;6 "sN, eseT--.-1671e-sN.-r*-r00.l
rorioriooon
19239
-''
L6i1g
$Z?i
_s
insdiirnon L67as
-et60
L66gg ootr?LQQre sN ee6c
lgrt?g
- -1665e-sN
l[
esq6
l99le MuLry
L66ig riur-ri '!gq,'g llt 6,ti;
L662s
"
no',z
1991? lt,| ee4!
--- L65ee
iq6qg qry_ sst,o
r5see sN-lsez'isgz
yonn
L6;;s sH"
t6;,;e sN seqj
!-g:4? :ll ??t;
lgrge
yqizl sr ss73 i6;iij -inob':t'
!-ql3e !N rb1
iEir.i ;;i ;;ji -'1
L6rr99 sN ee0B le4ng xxxt
16,,5e
iilu1-"',
lqlis 1xxz"
L645s xXXrr
L6,,2s sN ssrq --,
!-g!,,g lltr ggoO t|,iiri s^tri" e905
15.!
? :ry_ eese l-6.!qi l[_ ..t6!i $1ss $N _-eqoz 1633c, sN eqz)
t-917e
ryrARKs l6rzi sH
L6i;s i[ -''.'::':-'Lfirnil'u,rB "--' - -l
lll- biai
r633e sN ee33 !Q2Qs
ssii t6i16 iil

!Z9le
I!'!
L777 e sN

rAr( ?

rr

L|

,(

ee2e

L6i;e bnr ee3"

ss?? Iq?ge :lt ??13 W4ts sry ss43- =-=' .rillll-- eelz- -llt
eel:2
Nanrr- L6zzg sH
ll!
1944e llt eezz

Iq?ee
l9?2? sN
L5zre
ee?2
.19!l?

iqii6
ss26
-igii6
.roxx""
-:
-idir'6
eez,+$5g2,*---=
,t'gn
[6iie
ii,i
:l!
22?1
!-gr?e :lt 2s26
L5t.rs sir ssl6
L6099sN99\7!.q0l9ll!si6g-iqnzg5i.i,gi\t6;eg5i'i-.iiz
-!-qpe

iEliiiiliiii
s!- ee55

!'l?29

_Q055
-ee6s

Flplg
158e9 sN

snr

_lreqe
iteSe ili gssg L5e',e sN se6l
-lszZg -oosl
ssgTl5ssg llf
sr,r ggea l;i1fii,i-..tj6i:uid.,i-ii.i-s;e
L56ie sii g'gAi G4e6 sN eqq3
,,

p.159

TRAI,ISFER MATRIX AI..IALYSIS

$,1 Ty

OF

pE't H;'C N0 lN DECI(,k l0

TIIE
S pAN

SLIPPRY CY, }4ULTIBEAI-I BRI TGE

- D

rATF S. Z6lkS

r
r
jrrr.500
l6.0rrn 15. 6.751 7 .51" 3.'5':1.-J,'
rA cilEcKr' .58ooE 07 .2lr00E n7 t1$!.o00
_

$1 FLEXIBtLITY AND T0RStofr PARAIIETEP.S, X Attr

RB
r.!00

-B

116.069

-N

gc
.1612.52

BTJ .

EF1I

FORCES

-.02g37

'.03557

,00

, no

.00

,o27

(StNGLE P0INT\

JY

16,000 .262 14477.41 trg5l?,.34 .l(>351/irrE'-'1'r .'t55',1231r;'5

ILECTIONS ANI} SHEAR

,o26Lt3

. F

oo
-1791.63

, 03 l

,03?47
.03603
3L1AL1.ZO 37?,2.t+2

55
-2169.qq

.a37

.At$J?t
fr51}0,.!g

'.n'tsl

'.n6t,g6

-..6",
7a,.',rT ____j-___:__
-?-7q9.2]_ _-?7
. -7 Lt11
.t5'o17

.1rt327

5131.32

71'19.93-

'.A5tr7n
'.i\7034
ol+065
.o\517
.'-937\
6193.41
5rI 4.1O
7500,fJ5
96tr1.66 120,53.7
05334
.09227
.12311
.05927
.07173
3363 .32
19275 .551121;!+ .le
1tt465 .23
929?.53
,07196
.16595
.O7gg(,
.096Slh
.72'rtt3
lZoS | .7 t+
z)qgj . 07
ll4/t; .119
16257 .91
U q6q . |
09853
.17052 LoArEr UNIT
,1095*r
.13766
29651.10 BfA|4 N0, 517142.51
23o67 .gB
\gor+i .B
13615
Lor\rEr UNI T -- .167'12--.151?-g
.13jzz
lJrloT.f]g
2'oJ36.tg
BEAM No, lr _ 262tfl .6o
3ztrt.1 .ol
lflBEs
LoArEn uN I T
. 127 51
.1756a
.20933
i37 51 .79
BEAl"i
N0.
17'193.\- - -- 2!1f'77
3
37501 .77
.69
2625-JL0ADEllUNtT.|94?.?-.1,rQ27_-,l1l9?
17 145.67
BEAI'I 1.t0. 2
20359.27 1't7rtt".6j 11613.1'l
AnEnUNIT .?-3179
.16689
,12't54 - .1175q
'5.61
6965 .37
AM N0. 1
13393.99
96t$ .9,'t
.7 6
12973o547
.21959
Jlt:?-T
- 153 1l
0'l
,

.00

,00

,11

-r

LOA

'ATA

,l.ro t ttsERT tEtr Axts \/ALUE'/Aur.frAT tc PLOTTI NG

sl,r 3-.L0Atr DIsTR I BUTI 0N cURVES/nertectt or't CURVES
STV 4.TO SUPPRESS PLOTTII'IG RESUI.TS/GRAPHS PLOTTE N
shr

TRANSVERSE LOAN DISTRI BUTION CURVE

FOR SIJIPPERY CREEK 'rDfr UNDER 611000,00 L0An 0N
LOAD DISTRIBUTION ANN NISTRIBUTI OH COEFFICIENTS

2-.7 gg5 2169-.90

!2
ll 18;
.s:3 00 5o60;71
964J .Be 15 . o68S t33g3-.e,9
1635 t1.33 25.3348
SUM OF DISTRIBUTED LOADS = 64OO0,OO

1612-.52 2-.5195 lTgt-.69

q ?!9-.22 IrJSB 1
6g6St3B 1o:8834

FOR
17 91-.63 2'.7 ggs
3oggi 12

77

39227

4-.BtQ3
12zoct26

13393.89 20.9279

nER

llgo'.7 17,

1_

3;39olr
71917 t+

TRANSVERSE LOAN DISTRIBUTION CURVE

l.Jt{
511000. 00 LOAI 0N
LOAD DISTRIBUT{ON ANT) DISTRIBUTIOH COEFFI CIENTS

p. 1?0

20.927 g

3;1105 2t'1|rtigg 3-.767

4131i56 6-.'t555 5623-.1t.r i:7i6q

107 15 .37 16 .7 427 I 3 | 0 4 .3t+ -'20 . 'i 5g

SUM OF DISTRIBUTED LOADS

64ooo,OO

ISTRI BUTI ON CIJRVE

UN f
6lrooo. oo l-0A n 0N
3
LOAN DISTRIBUTTON ANN DISTRI TiUTI OI{ COEFFI CI ENTS
2159'.90 3'.39Ott 24lo'.99 3;7 67
291g:
4',S62tr
37 53-.33 5-.8(t'15
5oo3i7
7'.8113 591o;o7 loz64't7
11199.72 17.t+gg5 lo7 15.37 16.7427
937 3'.03 1tr.6453
TRANSVERSE LOAN

ER

FOR

9543.39

q6

15.0685

sul'l 0F D tsTR I BUTE rr LoADS =

TRAI'ISVERSE LOAD

63g99

.gg

ISTRI BUTI OI.I CURVE

FOR

UNDER 64ooo.00 LoAr) oN

LOAD DISTRIBUTTON AND NISTRI BUT! OH COEFFI CI ENTS

tr?,423 37 S3i
1824-.57 7-.5383 1og9-.11
6431-.84
37 53;7 3
lozT o-.51 16-.ot+76
I l+. 5lr5
937 3
77 39 .28

696s.37

SUM

0F

loior'9T
3
.04

lo.8833

DISTRIBUTED LOADS =

jll

4ooo. oo

TRANSVERSE LOAD T,ISTRIBUTION CURVE

FOR
UNDER 6400,].00 LOAN ON
LOAD DISTRI BUTI ON ANN NISTRTBUTIOI.I COEFFI C IENTS
3718242 5;Bl0o
6431'.BLr lliot+9J

4131256 6;r+555 Soo3i73 I21113

tr.56 13-.3977 939?--.29-152\567--l
68to,o7 1or6\oJ _ _5523.04 $,7q60 _
857

8753'.7
t3-.6777
5050 .7
7 .907 t+
SUM OF T)ISTRIBUTED LOADS

64OO0.

OO

TRAI'lsvERsE nEFLEcT!
'ffrbX 0l!
rp,,PR0FI

F'dfl'-sriirfenf

LE-- -.

161IER

64Ooo. 00 LOAD ON

Da,ge171---lB

I GB/JTB GRAPH PLoTTER SUBR0UT|NE..,,AUG65

LOW X VAL

0.

x-r,iv(l.8 tNs)
4. $5
LOW Y VAL
cRs

0. 2[X5 Y DtV(1.0 lNs)

--_--=_

-0.01S
sET TABS AT 20,32,44,56,68;B0
SET MARGIN AT 9

SW-l ON FOR MAiiGINS

'--:-_'l

:-;:" --.

- --

-.

a92 -

ANN VALUES,- PRESS START

I
I

,0800
__ _ -|
,: :---,.l2oo

|
|
I
I

t
I

+.

-TRANSVERSE DEFLECTIOII

FoI_ grrppEny

oREEK

PROFI

nD"t'NnER 64000,00 LoAn 0N B

age:1j12q:=:

l''r_ . _,._ _ .

-_

- r---..

,!
I
I

.l

,0400
:

--+

-l
I

,0800
+
I

-+

I
l 600

-+-

t-

I
:

'tnnn

I
I
I
I

-:
2400

;
I
I

2800 *r.--re---t
.

oo

?n--------------

-4.50

.'-:-''--.ot+547
'.qt!547 io456l
i}466t t050q9
i05009
:05610 -.o6\e2 iolloq -- i09295
- ; 11357 - i13990 "--:1396?'-- '.1127 4-- ".o9153--;q7
074e1
491
io91'3- -:;o749
)6205
__.05232 . q!5et ___.o4a37 .o3756 ,W66!:_= -. :

TEFLECTf0NVAL|'ES
(lHcHES)
LECT|0N VALUES (INCHES)

173.
APPENDIX

FffjR

OPUS

tTIIEs

STATTSTICAL AI{AIYSIS

PROC.RAMI,IE F.OR

mNCnEf_g

A,l+.0 fntr.oduction

nrj-tten in PDQ FORIRANT us used for the

statistical analysis of the crustring strength and elastic nodulus obsenred
from tests on large numbert of Itt x [rr tr."t cylinder^s. These tests have
been prwiously *iscussed in secs 5.31t and 5.612.
I?r-is progranrner also

44.l

DsscripLion
The programre reads each block identification number, the crushlng load
obsenred for the 8rt x 4tr block and the strain increment jn the block for a
29 ton change il foad. The corresponding cnrshing strength and ela^stie
modulus for each block is cornputed and listed.
These are followed by the
mean and' standard deviation for both quantities; the standard dwiation
being e4ressed as a percentage of the fi.rnr
rf desired, (sense switch t, ff) the estinated value for e.la.gtic
nodulus is conputed and. listed for each obserrred crlsh5ng strength, ba.sed on
the foJ-lowing four formrJ.ae:

l.

E r 1.8+0.46.-L

t00;

2.
3.

E t 1.8+0.50.5
t000
t"
E=

due

to

Hognestad

due

to

PCI

due

to

ACI

due

to

Jensen

t000

l+.

6.o

, . eooo
f
c

where E

is the ela^stic modulus and f" is the cnrshing strength; both have

uni-ts of Ibs/sq.in.
In addition a Chi-Square Coodness of l-it test is applied to find which
of the above fornnrLae best describes the obsenred data. Orce the goodness
of fit of one of the above fonnulae ha^s been established for a particular
sanple of concrete then estjmation of the elastic modulus at other knovrn
cmshing strengths is possible. Ttre goodness of fit test nay be for.rnd in
any texb on statistical methods, e.g. Hoel4l.
Al+.2 Storaee Required and Aoproxirnate Speed
the corplete progrsme occupies 33r66/a storage locatj.ons which does not
inqlude the subroutiles. The ralatively low speed of the typenriter in

171+.

Iisting the indj-vidual values makes the progranrne slow to nrn; the total
tjme is dependent on N, the nr.rmber of brocks to be analysed.
IJ+.3 Input and Ortput: Data Required and'Sense Switch Settjngs
The seqrrence of data cards is as foJ-lorvs:
Colunn Nunber"s

Card

Data Description

t-3

of blocks
considered (N)

Number

h-9

to

be

.t3

!f critical point tor J(1

t-3
I+-9
lo
l2

F6.o

Strain incre,nent

tr:o

F3.o

aa

is lis.ted as described in sec Al+. I

J-lsting gj.ven in sec Al.5 below.

The Ortput

above and

I?re following use ha.s been made of the sense switch

Sense Sr+itch Nuinber
Use (opus mw)
I

and3
h

F6.3

Block number
Cmshing l-oad

specimen

Format Specifi-cation

illustrated in the

settings in

OI{IS EIVE.

If this swj-tch i-s tur.rned OFF the formrlae predictions

for E given the obsenred f" are supressed.
Not used
To

trace aIL arithnebic instnrctions ttr:is switch is

turned

CI'I.

44.4

Flow Chart
A schematic f]-ow charb for OpUS EIIE
Ah.5 Progranrne Listing and Specimen Result
The source statements

is

given

in Fie A[.1.

for the progratmle are listed in this

Appendix;

listing includes the statement addresses and synbol table locations.

A set of results for sorne of the eoncrete salryIed from the model SA js
included below. The nr:mber of obseryations (N) was 3l and aLtws l+3.'1.
As jldicated in sec 1.612 of Chqter J, Jensents formrJ.ae is shown to
give the best predtction of eila^stic modurus, at lea,st to a JS 1weI of
such

significance.

175.
START

Print:

Reacl: NrX2N

verage & stil, dev.

Computc
sl, su

Cornpare

E(I) v.E1(I)
React:

BNO(

I) rP( I) rAI(I)

Accept

/ nepe

llognestacl
Cornpute

Fc(r),E(r)
Cornpare

E(I) v.E2(I
Cornpute

verage FC &

Aecept

nelec

PCr
Compute

etd.d.ev.FC &

Compare

E(I) v.E3(I)
Compute

1(r),82( r),83( r),E4( r)

Accept

Retec

ACI
ON

OFF

Conpare

Print:

all
E1

FCrE,

,E2 rE3,84

Print

E(I) v.E4(I)

only

Fc(r),n(r)

Accept

Reiec

Jensen

Ftg. L4,1 Flow Chart of

OPUS

FM

FC ,

c-

-6600
-6600
-6600
-660o
-6600

c
c
c

-660 o
-6600

--T;T76-

OPT'S F IVE

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF

Dtl.lENst0N BNo(150), p(t50). At(151) xnF(150) x(t5'r) Fcf

(
(
(
(
D IMENS | 0N xDFz_(
! [0), E I | 50 ]-E z ISo )_ E3 | So-]-E'r f 5n
ntuENs t!lN..q ( lso)
--READ 1,N,X2N r

23
1

(t3, F6.3).

FoRllATSL=07

'6700
-673(,

SU=l. l*X2N
D0 2- l=1, N
READ 3, BNo{ | ), P{ | ). A{ (t

48

-6904
-6916
-6g4tl
.7068
.7oso
.7 20a
,7236
,7 2Il1

'7 260

E(t)=2350;olAt(t)__
BN=N
SFC=FC(1) :

B--.--

SFFSFC+FC( | )

n0 7 l=1. N

n0 B l=2,

-- -.-:-

SE=E(l)
n0 9 l=2,N
SE=SE+E ( | )
AE=SE/BN
XBAR=AFC

l0

77 04
.77 t6

2E lt

'7836
'78liB

D0

l0

l=1, N

X(l)=Fc(l)

EXECI'TE

20

PROCEDURE

SIIVFC=Z
XBAR-AE

D0

ll l=t,N

x(l)=E(f)

EXECUTE PROCEDURE 20
S

.7860
,787 2
.7980
'Bofl8

DVE=Z

D0 12

*l,N-

| ( | )= l:Biq; t(>"*FC(t) | 100n. o

E2( I )= 1.3+0.5*Fc{ | ) /l ooo,
ooo. o
E

8172

E3(l )=Fc(l)l1ooo,o

'

94

(1 .o+2o1n.CIlFc(ll)
ol(1.o+2o1n.o/Fc(
E,r( |l)=6.
) =6. o|
rK IHT
PR
I t{ | :r.t
94
FORI.IAT (I6HCOI'IPVE STRENGTH ELASTI C-MOFULU9

95

RECOT'II'{ENTAT |

12

16

,8328
8!n4
'flrr35
8526
Esls
'8562
8646

Fc(l)=P(ir112.566358

592- -

855 0

AFC=SFC/BN

.74ott
7 416
'7 512
.7548
.7 560
'7572
'7580

83

4l=l,N

'7 356
,7 392

,77

DO

--

9r'X2N

-6661r

,7

t5r) E l5'1'

f-=l-__--

-6600
-6500
-6636

-67

CONCRETE

-t3-

.t.a,-a

PR INT 95
F0R}4AT (33HC0DE
CONTROL IO2
C0NTR0L 102---

TYPE

I3-(7

BtK N 0 ;,
rF _(!EN!F: lwrI_cLr

OR.}4AT-

3X,

.zHF

!I re gq

:t

ANr-\:

0NS-F0R-CoNCR

rX- 7 HE- ( EX

P)-i==--

:___ .__ _

'8666

a67B
.8778
.8790

1g

lB
go

D0

'B802

,8922
'B95tr

,Bg7 rt
'913 o

.9168
'9?-16

15
(,
5

14

'95

t6

33

.9529

.g596

26

l4 l=l,N

TYPE 15, BNo(t ), rC( f );E (t )

FORI"IAT (F7 .O, Ffl, l, FB. rr)
I F (SENSE SVrtrcH l) 5, 1t+
TYPE 5, El (t ), r2{\l),E3il ), Efr(f )
F0RtlAT (F8.ll, FB. h, F8,4;Fg,4)
CONTROL IO2

AE

}IT

15, AFC,
F0R}4AT (/7HAVE vAL. F8,
PR I

'9252 t6
'9306
.9342 17
'9396 c
-9396 c
,9396 c

-9396
,9403

fiPE IB
F0RI'1AT (2X, 4HH0Gr), 5X, 3HpCf , 5X, 3HACl, 5X. SHJEN)
CONTROL IO2

I. Fg,4)
PRfNT 17,SD\IFC-SD\rE '-FoRI{AT (/ZHSrn nEV. F3. 4 F9.41
GOONNESS

OF FIT TEST

n0 33 l=l.N

x(l)=El(l)
EXECUTE PR0CEDURE 25
I F (SL-S ) -26, 27 : 27 ---- -'
I

F (sf,,-s)

-- -

el ,2q. 29

.g66r+ ,27
'9676 30

FOR,}{AT (zzHACCEPT HYPOTHE^SI

'97t+4
.:)7

F0RF1AT

56

'9346

35

.9370 36
,9962
.9970 7-8
'999rt 31
loo64
tooT

to236

ro24B
t0356

56

3I,S

37

42

'A6\2 lr0
10666 - ttr
lo7 24
07 32

PRINT

f(rilEzril"
x(l)=E2(l)

to61o
to634

Irl
45-_

.a

FORI.,IAT (zOHRE.JECT HOGNESTAN.

C0l'lTR0L 102

r05l6

THAT)

G0 T0 3tl

3t+

to]+36 38
ro5ol+ 39

(llHE rS GIVEN BY HOGNESTAN S FORMULA)

PRINT 36, S
-=F0Rt'lAT (ltHaf S LEVEL 0F slGNl FlcANcE l= Fg,3)

G0 T0 34
PRf NT 37-,5

ta3(>B

tosz?

PRINT 35

29

too96 32
IOZZh

PRlilT 3n

--- l --- :r----- -------rloUBTn,L

,r Fq,3_-'- ''
fomtlr-(lrgHAccePTANcE 0R REJEcTtON OF HoGNSn lS

--

no 37 l=l,N

EXECI'TE PR,OCENURE 25
I F (sL-s) 38, 39,39
I F (su-s
40, lro, lrl
PR IHT 30
PRlt'tT 42
FoRr.lAT (29HE -rS GIVEN BY THE

PR ll.tT 36,
G0 T0 43
PR I

llT 4rr, S

FOR}{AT ( 1I+HREJECT
G0 T0 43

PRll,fT

irs,S

PCt,

7= Ft3

------.-

F0R}4AT(46HAccrPTANcE0RRE.'EcT|0N0EPc|-|5.-r0UETfUL'.]=.'E?.l

,oB7fi
f 0B90
10902

llo

10

t1022

r1090

llt5B
lt

170

n 182

1126r+

n 28B

n296

t1320
t1378

4g
53

n3s6--5

,l4lo

t1532
115t14

r556
1564
1676
17 t4,

19t2

l92tt

Stt
52
55

56

57

1336
I l g2il
11944

5o

t1952
t1976

SB
-62

l20t+0
t201}3
t207 2
t?-20a

t2212

6l

t2248
t2260
lZSLILt
l2l+{}B

12500

t2512
1250f!

t2644
2692
'27 O0

tll 28

tn

S
53,rrHREJEcf

F0RllAT (i
c0 To 5z
PRINT
r f\rr'r l J-?,
54,

3Ag6-

--

AgE-7;,

F,9

'
.

S
r,

FoRltAT- (l+6nAcCEPTANCE 0R REJECTI0N 0F

-:
cOhfTR0L

102

ACf lS T0UBTFUI=-E=F3.3 -:=---

n0 55 | = l,N
X(l)=Etr(l)-EXECUTE PRoCEnURE 25
f F (sL - s) 56,51,57

lF (su - s)

==- PR IT.IT

PRINT
FORI.IAT

3o

FORI.IAT
TO

5$,5f1,59

6cr

(lour IS

II'IT 35,
GO TO 61
PR INT

GIVEN BY JENSEN

S FORMULA)

1?'iin*urrr,

-----:-

.rENsEN,

cotfTRol lo2
G0 T0 23
BEGIN

PROCEDIJRE

n0 2l l=1. N
XDF( l)=X(i )-xBAR- -

xnF2( t )=Xnr( | )*'XnF ( | )

SXDF2=XllrF2(l)
D0 22 l=2,N
sxt-rF2=sxnF2+xnF2 ( | ) -- - -

ZZ=SXDF?-/BN
7= (SQRT (7.2) lXBAR)*100.0-==_==END PROCENLRE 20
BEGTN PRoCEDURE- 25

S=0.

EN

ITTRACE-

ENN

--

61

PR lltT 63, S
FORI'|AT (tTgHACCgPTANCE 0R REJECTI0N'0F JENSEN lS TOUBTFUL.

t27 52
i2gg2
30as

3095

ll'lT

GO

t2?-20

27

PR

PR

59
63

-'--

G0 T0 52

l=-F3.31

-F;179
-9999 s lN
-9959 EXP
-9919 SQRT
.9879 DRH
-9839 BNo 393t+g
32349
-3839 x
26349
i7839 El
20349
t1$39 c
(o3og X2N
(0269 SU
(0229 SN 0003

(0139 54235ooooo
(01 49 AFC
(0log XBAR
(0059 S rlvFc
(oo2g SN 0012

J9939 5050000003
J99tr9 oo I

SN 0ol9
SN 0015
J95|29 SN 0017
)9789 S
J97lrg SN 002-9
J9709 sN 00311
J9659 SN oo3fl
J9629 SN oo42
.Je58g SN 00!16
J951r9 St't oo5o
J9509 sN 0054
J9469 SN oo58
J9rl2g SN A062
19389 SN oo22
Jggcg
J9369

lrg34g sN
I

oo24

19939 S tNF
L9949 EXPF
19909 SQRTF
Lq36g nRHF
1333 9

L2339

1.,6339

Le97 9

L9939
Leq99
1995 9

P
368t,9 L633e
FC 309trg-- Ln93g
Ez - 2trS49' r4339

sl.t oo23
K0259 5lllo00o0o

t<o339

Ko2gg sL

Kn329
Ko29g
K.0249

19 SN o0O!+- K0209
K0l6e
K0179 BN
K02-

Kol3g

SE

K00gg sN
K005q 7

o0l0

K0olg 5ll3o0o0'10
.t9g7g 5 160000 mo
.J9939 SN 009rr
J93gg SN 00c,rJ --.
.,9359
J93l g
.t9779
39
J9699
.t9659
J97

.J9f)

l9

J957 9

r9539
J9lr99
19459
J941 9

J9379

sN 0006
sN 0033
SN 0026
sN 003 0
sN oo3 I
sN O03g
sN o0tr3
SN o0r+7
sN 005 | sN oo55
sN 0059
SN 0053
Zz

19339 003

t..0129
Kongg
F.00'r9
K0009
J9969

.t9929
Jg33g
JsSlrs

.lg'109
-), \.
\' t97
69-t
.tg7 29
.,e689
.t16'+9
.J9509
.,9569
J9529

JglBg
J9449

.194Q9

J9369

cos

--

L9969-cosr
L9929 LocF

LoG
- --L9']i9 ABSF
ADS
L99'I9 ATANF
ATAN
Af
353ttg_ L5339 XrF---331,is-F. - 29349 Y,9339 XrF2 271',t9 -ZSjtrg- t!.3339 rtr--211ig
Ej
ra'I
K'3 lg N
sN
,{
427 g nlo
1n^2
sN
K'12-39
1-'7
521256516q-- \.'.t I qg - sN '''
?
sFc
K.ql'g sN
r{
r
I
AF
19
sN ^']1g
sN n020 ,:1^79 SN rrlr
sN 0r ll
K1^39 srvF
5',11-"11'1'1-r
51tr5Ono tol,99?g
''
5llnol t]fic- --,q959 5lr2r.
T
sN 13
sN_ 1095
g SN -----"!'t | ,r--'q919
SN 0'r l q_rgq7
19q39 sN ''''16
sN o0o5

5090'rn1T00-

SN cq25
t9759 SN "121
SN nt27
J97l9 SN - 1'136 -- "SN 0035
sN oo3z - J9679 SN rrl'rl
',1'.137
.19639 SN
SN 00tr0
.f9599 SN ''t1't5
SN Oohlr
J9559. SN nil'+g
sN 00tr8 --

sN oo52
sN oo56
sN 0060
sN 0021- -

J9519 sN '1053
,t9tt79 SN n\57-J9tr39 SN no6 |
-J9399 SXrF2'

53lOOm00o J9359 ocooool'rt

p.180
COMPVE STRENGTH, ELASTIC I.IODULUS ANN
CODE RECOI'II"IENNATIONS FOR CONCRETE

BLK NO:
FC73'. 15010; I
7 5-. 13869'.5
BI: 14175'.1
B3: 1 3Bo0:3
9li 13204'.2
93i l2B7 l'.6

:i

1t+4:
l116;
152-.

12433-.3
13564-.7
11619-.5
12927-.3
l39Bo: I
13037 -.9
'12067-.9
11762-.3

1455O-.7

175-. 12344-.8
186'. 127 6l-.O

l9l:

133ltr.g

13776'.tr
l95'. 12483-.3
2Q 1-. 11513-.2
204-. 12344-.8
2o5. 11651.7
193'.

9".0753 1tr5507

5'.8750 izt+933 9i07 53 lrr;5507

6'.1197 9-.t+325 g'.Oog3 I'r: ll116
5-.Lr77B 72797 tr 931q9 13-.0379
621(>79 B;g2go 9'.trt+o2 15:.2804
5-.5tr21 726700 3; 1305 t2-.7 6to
6'.0567 7-.287 1 7'.76r+3 | 1-.9286
5-.269o 7;tfl86 7-.97 2t+ l2i3tgrq
9: t9o5 1217610
5-.6763 7i57m
-.92tr9
3-.457 4 l3-.31'+9
5-.77 39 7
6'.o1Q2 728611 8:3832 132176tr
5i3167 7ZSrr23 B;gt1l6 l1it1p'33
5:'!096 7z0g6r tiSS66 rl:St3z
5'.6354 7-.4786 7'.9724 121jt!"9
5.41tfl 7 .1597 7 .6258 11.6517

AvE vAL !317 o .7

sTD DEV B.t2g6

7.4573

ACCEPT HYPOTHESIS THAT

E IS GIVEN

AT

Acl

5-.1?,91 BZ 148I 9-.7 qol 13i3003

52452!+ 7-.9739 8it+t21 l3i2o,*2
5-.4524 7-.V 209 3223s3 12a97 16

6:268s 9:tD33

1t$50'.7

l4tr 1B;6
lSIr-. 13037 -.9
162-. 15280: h
164'. 127 61-.O
17 1; I I g28'.6

HoGn Pcr

ACCE

BY HOGNESTAD S FORMULA
LEVEL 0F SIcNIFICANCE, L= l7.3qq

PT

I-IY

POTHES I S THAT

E IS GIVEN BY THE PCI FOR}'IULA

l=

25.375

ACCEPT HY POT}{ES IS THAT

-E
IS'G!VEN BY JENSEN S FOP}IULA
AT 5 LEVEL oF StcNtFtcANcE, t=

3'.O14

AT 5 LE\|EL 0F

S tGN I F I

ACl, L=

l2-B.5tp1

REJECT

CEN

626197 g'.1646 9:905o l6:olrl 5'.3337

6'.7 335 Bzl7gg B-.7 3tfl t3i96g5 5iZ\j9
6; Otr I I Bl3ZO5 3;837 5 ltt..71 57 5i2591

6Z01o2 7 i5r+23 B; Otr l6 | 2'.,1933

102-.
6;0880 8zo3g7 8;5823 13:,56,i
| 04:
Szrll:t3 721726 7;5397 11-.6795
9-.2636 t?_-.927 3
113-.
5'.2338 7zl 4As q:7900
115i
B'.23o8
l9
| 3: g9O I
5;58
122-.
5: l5l3 7'.7974 8:3lUg l3:q379
124-.
5'.0755 7i3512 t:3339 12..067g
725'.
1li7(r23
5:7881 7'.2106 li6B1l
l3l'. 133ltr.g 6ZO102 7z92tr8 1'.tgJ tt, 13i3lr.4
135_. 13425'.5
6'.tfi32 7'.g757 q25127 l3:'t255
95i

-:
-

E (EXP)

CANCE,

5i2'rO5

5'.21"t7

5'.1930

5i 171'r
5i229r)
5i tzTl
5i 1e6l
5i?'+9q
5-.2q2')

5i ltr69
5:121q
52216'r
5'.2221
5:27 rr9
5i27 t$,
5i 269r
5'.2n2n
5'.3155
5i r37o

5:13?4

5z216Lt

5i2093
5:17 ltt
5i 11 19

5ir634
5.l21g -

182.
TRAr{SFEI l4ATRr} 'lr{EORy APPLIED

APPEVDIX FIVE

T0 A

SPRING MASS SrSlU4

A5.l State Vectors

In the sirqrle ca,se of a spring ma.ss system fig A5. I the displacement
the point i is the linear displacement xir and the comespondi-ng jrterna.l
force is the direct force Ni fu the spring, For th-ls ca.se then the state
vector, Zrr is given by:
z.

(A5. t)

[:]
,L
o!-j

kt-r

oR
oL-1

I,

oL
"l-+1

?i

1-1

iY.

kl*1

oR

1t+t

1+1

t-;

*1-1

Fig.

AJ. I

L5.2 Transfer i.tatrices

In Fig 45.1, the ma^sses *i-l and n, are con:eected by a ma.ssless spring
of stiffness kr. Ttre state vector just to the right of ma,ss m. is denoted
P
T.
bv
-l- t." and that to the left is denoted by q-.
*1-1
N1-1

*i
N.

l-

-l
nt
-r-T-

'ff*l
Fig

F:.g AJ.Za

A consideration of the eqtrilibriun of

from its neighbouring masses gives:

spring

AJ.2b

k, (tie l5.ea) isolated

183.

q ={-, -

ni(*i-*:.-r)

(tj.z)

using the stiffness properLy of the spr5ng.

lhis la.st eqrration can be rewritten

x-'E*i-r*tl-,
r- r-r r
E_

(A5.3a)

*R
r-=o

(A5.3b)

+ \*-r

which can be ercpressed jl matrj:c fonn:

(A5,4a)

t"l'=
Ji []T'll-*'l
Lo tJpi-r-l
4 ! tr.4_,

Lu

or

(A5.4b)

of the matrjx F, the state vectors

4 *o 4-_, are related.
the matrix F* is i<noun a^s the field trqrrsfer matrjx or field matrjx.
I
Hence by rreans

matrix re.lationsn:ip Uetw"en the state vectors to the ].efb and right
m, is found by considering the forces acting on the nass (fig A5,zb).

Ttre

of mass

In addition to the spring lorces rvl

acting on \,

From consideration

.R

"no

llf tnu"" is

an exbernal force

of the eq'iJ-ibrium of mr:

fl..-X.

(A5.5a)

aL

and
Revrriting

Nl =

ru!

wi

(A5.5t)

in nratrjx forr:

l-t n-l l-*'] L "Hl

A
L;J, L; L;.J ,
,
[,.l

or
The

RT
t"=
P, . t: +
r-aal_

matrix P, is known

a,s

C.

(a5.6a)

(AI.6b)

the poj_nt transfer matrix or.Ei$ $3@,

L5.3

the'use of the
again refemj-rag to

field

and

fig A5.l.

point transfer matrices can be jJlustrated ry

lg4.
Consider the

ma,ss

mi*l
I+

J,
'i+l ' -i+l

then

oi+l

but

Ir
.Ti
'i+t
"L
'i+l
*L 8P.. l_
Lr+r
*l_ =Ir 'i ' -i-1
-R
+
rP oi-l
i-1 ' -i-l

but
but
but

**c.

- using

alternate.ly
equations A5.4 & A5.6

therefore by substitutiou
RT.
(A5'7)
Ti*t 3 Pi*rFinrPi F:- Pi-td + Pi*tFi*?i
Thus the state vectors to the exLreme lefb and right of the spring system are
ralated through the successive matrix multipli-catj-on of the field and point
j.s known fron the boundarXr
matrices. ft can be seen, therefore, that, if
4*f
conditions of the s;rstern, then
4*f *"y be detend-ned.; intermediate state

vectors being given

a.s

the calculation proceeds.

In the example chosen (tig l5.t; if Wi wa,s the inerbia force acting on
the na.ss nrr vibrating r,aith circular frequency, {c, then
2x.
l,i.
n.
cp
=
at-t_

(15.e)

AJ.f, after absorbing \ into the poi-nt.matrix Prr uould give the
necessarTr elpression for the natural period of vibrati.on of the s;rstem.
Vibration analysis of e1a^stic systems is the nrain field. of application of
transfer matrix theory a'lrthough it is suitable in many other situations,
and equation

arbicularly stmctural mecharrics.

45.4 Genera-Lj.sed Transfer Matrix Theorv
p

of

The foregoing discussion can now be generalised and a corsid.erabion made

any system (fig A!.1), composed of discrete ele,ments or fields which are

interconnected at defined nodes or Doints.

node nunber
Fig. 45.3

dLscrete elenent
node

or Jolnt

185.

the state vectors for the

J.eft node usualJy determined by

bounda^rXr conditionse it is possible to tttransfern across the system and
detetmine successive, interrnediate state vectorrs by the mrltiplicatl-on of
alternate field and point, matrices. Ttrus wtren the applied loading is knoffir
all displacements and irrternal forces acting at the nodal points nay be
colputed for the s;rste,m.
The size of the state vectors and tran^sfer matrices need not necessariJ.y
be restricted to 2 x 2 columns and 2 x 2 squares a^s above. In more conplerc
systerns rhere each node mry have six degrees of freedom and the associaf,ed sjx
generalised fonces, these vectors and matrices may then be of the order of
Knowing

12

xI

exbreme

oo}:mrs and 12 x 12 squares.

l&7.
APP_rypIX

SIX

nti APPROnMA'rEJHEoRITrCAL JUSTIFTCSITON FoR SINC.LE

POINT

DISTRTBUI]ON OF LOAD AT TIIE SI{EAII, KEYS OF A MULTTBEAI,I DECI(

to a Clarnped lla1f-P1ane
Consider a clamped half-plane of fJ.exral rigidityr Dr 3e in Fig A5.1,
loaded by a single point load, P, at (arQ).

A6.1 I?reoretical

So4utj-on

(x'v)

'zP
X

the classical theory of elasticity the deflection w at

in the half-plane is given by:
Fbom

w-

f ' 2'rog rt 2 - rt
2
,- 4-- 4) - (rl
Log ?2
-ll6nD L,",

Fig A6.1.
any

point (xry)

"r\]

differentiation and substitution gives the distribution of

force (S*) along the edge OI a,s:
$rbsequent

s_=-zPs
x-W

(A6. f )

shear

(46.e1

Ttris distribution ha.s been plotted in Fig A5.2 where it can be seen tnaf I+5% of
the J.oad is camied over a length equal to 1.35a along the axis CII. Therefore,
9Ofi of the J.oad is supported symnetrically about the origin over a total length
of 2.70a.
A6.2 Application to a Beam Supported Blasticall.''r Along Both Free Edges
There are several dissimilarities between the above tgpothetical elastic
system and the ca,se of a loaded bearn of finite length and rddth. Horrever, the
distri-bution of shear along the elastically supporbed free edges of the beam
lrjll. be of the sarne fom a.s that depicted in Fig A,6.2, and it would be fair to
assume that the same distribrrtion is applicable. That is, 9096 of the 4plied
load may be a.ssumed to be supported over a length of 2.7a of shear key about
the ruidspan centre line. For beams r,rith a span/wiath ratio of about tO, the
length 2.7a tpresents B*% of the span. It is therefore a rea,sonable
assunption that this distribution of reaction crn be replaced by a singJ-e
concentrated J.oad at midspan, as i-llustrated in Fig A6.3.

p.188.

tn
!.1
a

d
o
t{
d

o
q)

+t

-F'rl

F
'd

)-t

o
(}
z
O

{ _l{
E
t"l

dl *

o..

l*x
l-

E
h
o
h
.1

($

{J

o
H

IAJ

C\rl

lgg.

Nt-'t

2'7a

Fig 45.3.

Equlvalent Concentrated
Iroadr Nt

tgt,'
APPmrprx

sJ$mi

rcRsroNAt grtAtrsrs oF A sntrPl,y- qi,ppoRTEp

si:ryIy supported bem of .span L,

torque T, ryplied at nridspan as in Rig Af.la.
Consj.der a

BEA]4

and subjected

to

Fig A7.la
Fig Af.lb
Under the action of the torque T, the beam wiIL twist through an angle g,
and thereby induce both torsional and flexual stresses in the beam. It
is norual to neglect the flerual. stiffness of the beam j:r an analysis of
this typer but sush an assurrytion j-s not sound for r^ride rectarrgular beam,s

or l-shaped sectiorcr s r,rill be shown below.

theoretical analysis gives the torque d.eveloped by the transverse
shears, such as that acting on the e-leurent dy in fig 7.1b, a,s
A

nr'fdb

'noi

is the moment of i:rerbia about the 0Y axis and E i-s the e1a^stic
modulus. Tltj.s is the torque that is resisted by the flermral stiffness of
where I--

the bean.
F\rrther analysis, using the conventional 4proach, gives the torque
resisted by the tor"sional. stiffness of the section a,s

r**,
J i-s the torsional moment of inerbia
and G j.s the modu}rs of rigidify.

where

The

total torsion resisted by the beam section is therefore

)?
.la
-E[-.. a-.g[f, + JG.Y .
ox
u
12

62s.3

192.

thi-s rnrst eqrral the qpplied torque T, and since

Iengt'h of the U""n,
r O.

this is constant over the

ff

Therefore:

rlz dh

-rr; I.__rjilb.

(A7.

JG.^d3

.2
ctx

o:cA

t)

Ttris governjrg differenti,al eqrration has a solution of the forn:

or

Asinhf;

+ Bcoshfr +

+D

Cx

(L7.2)

where:

$rbstitution of the

boundar;r conditions gives:

e!#FF*e ,*,*.cosrrfr

f;

*J#

therefore the rotation at nidspan (x r g; is

LLT
cosn

o =-.L. i
2JG
Therefore,
then

rr

Now

if

2ft.

if
2

#*'
t"

Now

fi' -

ffi

co"n

2fu

(a.?4)

-r

large (i. e.

_L
2fr - ^tlgl
fl

gl.sinh

r . (Ni 3 Ni*t) a,s in equation 3.llb,

LLL
z eosh zr --'"t n Ta

T.

in this

cosh

*.

and
Y

Vfr

e-o()

.t,

ti-* . (t' - zd

(A7.5)

is frequently greater than 5 (for the bealos considered

l;c

J.ay i:r the range 8.4 to 18.6) and therefore the latter
-!26.
e:pression for Y (eqrration Af.5) is usuaLly sufficient.
Howerrer, should L be mrch greater thaul. 2Q then equation A7.l redrces to:

work

13

-2
de

(A7.5)

in equation 3.llb. therefore equation A7.6 gives a firet

4prroxination whi.ch, for bems considered in this work, was sufficientJy
acc'urate. Howwer, for units of greater width, and therefore of a higher 00 t
bhe expression given

lg3.
T.

t"hefi ratio is snal]er

of the parameter r.

and some care

rn parbiarlar

if

is then required in the calculation

the ratio

;7fu is less than or

if r'rc

eqlral

to 6,

equatj-on A?.4 nust be used

for

Y.

APPENDIX ETC*IT

IYPICAL

CALSIJLATTONS FROI'{

TI{E M,fi{STER, I4AInIX ANALYSIS

OF A MULTTBEIIM BETDGE DECK

that for
made

for

exqtle

chosen here to illustrate the transfer natrix nethod, is

a ten-beam bridge deck and in fact wa.s taken frcn the calculatione
the holLor,r-cored span of the slippery creek Bridges (span D).

The

the tabulations ntrich follon have been drawn up specificalJy for

carculation and show the ease with wh:ich the state vectors (fr to zro)

hand
'are

obtained. Ihe deflections and shear forces at all joints ln the deck ere
.;r:s found for the eFplied load of 6l+rooo lb at midspanr. on beaun.rnrnbqq (.,
be-

uruits are ei-ther inches, pounds, or rbs per sg. 5n., as the case may
serreral notes on the calc'lation are also included.

the state vectors have been found the shears et tro consesutive
ioints nry be Eubtrasted to find the load caFied by the intemediate bean.
Once

195.
oALCIJI,ATIOI.Irt

Ilearn

ron Tliu

I'oslfn

Ingide

Xeam li'ldth 2r
Rcarn Depth d
neam Span J

IiLastlc

tihear

TRANSFnR

5.8 x
2.1 x

7{t\,^,," 1.1) 0.262

1.82x1o)
ro'u'

tr

106

r.=za.a3/lz

106

J=

Xl X-=13rl4gp1 t .685x1o-5
Y rxi=7s2141s ).O455x1O-l

X-Y

X+Y

T:T
1

| . ?30x1
|

O-5

.540x10-5

!3
LaZ

d3

,477

49 1518

5,8Ox106
2.16x1O5

.O55

-1 ,872xJ O-5

Er

^I,
Ir
.R

-6.0ggx104 1 ,o55

1,O55

1,8?2x10-6

5.099x104 1 ,05,

Fut
5. O991104

XY

f .66x1O-12

gir

t.8?2xt0-6

X-Y

).936x10-5

I:Y

f.2a.

1.Or5

x-Y
x-Y
2){l

IIdgo

2.89

FJ.cx.ltlg. [] 8.39*'t01o
Tors.Flg. JC 1 .19x1011

X+Y

Inslde

Bdge

44.5
16.0
408.o

l.1od I
iJod (

ilATnIX AtrAI,y$IS OFs S.Ck,BrldgerSpanD

,028

Fnn

1,O55

1.8?2x10-5

Fw

-5.099x104 -1,o55

n'!-:"AnKS

rn these calcg, the eff ecl

of ekew anil the ho].lowed sectlon
hae been inclucled ln the cleter"mincF&cP
ation of both I and J.
The slgns have been reversed in Fr. and Fo for eaeler arlthmetlc tn-the matrlx nuJ.tlpllcatlon
over - aee note 3, page 198.

-5.991xl0-z
55, ?80

0.0
54,O00

195.
TRANSFER

SRIDGE:

MAIRIX ANAI,YSIS OF
SPAN

rl)f -

W=64

THE

HoLIoW C0RED,

SIIPPENY CREEK

10

0.0510

BEAMS.

0.0

rOOolbs.

(rr)
0
START

1.O55

1.872x10

o.0644

6.oggx1o4 1.o55

3r7ZO

(r)

1,055

1.872x10
t

S.Qgtx1O'

1.055

1.228

(12)
0.0749

3.952x10

1.288x105 1.228

(z)

1.055

1.8?2x10:
1.8?2x10

6.099x'lo4 1,or5

1.538

O'.09l7

6.472x1Q

2.108x105

'850
( 13)

12,8oo

1.538

(3)

1.055

1.872x10

6.099x104 1.o55

2.018

( 14)

0.123

9. ?10x1o

3.153x105

19,300

2.018

(15)

(a)

1.055

1.8?2x10

6.0ggx104 1.o55

2.722

0.155

14.O27x1O

4.5?0x10'

27r900

2.722

(re)

(5)

1.O55

1.872x10-

.099x1o4 -'1.o55

3.729

19.903x10

.484x105 -3.72g
(5)

.2273

-0.

oSgg

39,530 65,780
( 1?)

0.167(4)
26 t25O
( 1B)

0.128
17 1500

1,O55 -1.872x10
.099x104 1,o55
-------

"6
z7

0.102
10r700

-----

- L2g) -

contlnud.

z8

..

197,

contlnuccl from page 195...

--II---

'l.or5

-1.872x10-6

-5.099x104

1.o55

i.oij

-1 .872x10-6

-5.099x104 1.0I5

2.018

-3.163x105

3.729
-6 . 484xl

2.O

18

-g ,71Oxl O-5

3.153x105

( 1o)

13.82

19.903x10-6

05

12:'1!l'1oa
v = - -24.4e*i65

rq^

gfg

0.0830

0.0

2.018

-3,729

76.3?1x10-6

24.880x105 -13.821

2.018

-9.?10x10-6

10

-5.991x10
65,780

-o.7596
15,17x1O4

for brldge decke (see f1g 3.3'p45)

198.

Boant<s:

l.

the sequence of operations

I to
2.
3.

22.

Three

nrle

figure accuracy has been maintained

a.s

far

as

possible, a slide

bei.:ng used throughout.

is greater than N" the beu,s and joints have been runbered
fron the right and the calculation ha.s proeeeded frrcn thie side.
I?tls is contra4r to the formulation in Chqter 3 and requires a
reversal of sign in the field matrices F, and F". Howwer, the
change enables
4 t" be written down irrnedlately fron { lrlthout
Since

NO

f\rrther calctrJ-ation.

I+.

is indicated W corneetrtive nunbering fron

See

also sec J.)ZJ.

results nry be coryared with the profi-les plotted in fig

which were obtained by coryutation using the IBD{ 162O Coryuter
These

oPUS TWO.

5.Oa
and

2oo.

APPENDIIT

NINE

CONM,ACT PLANS OF TI{E

StIPPffiY CRMK BRIDGE

Four reduced photostats of the plans for the SLippery Creek Bridge
are included. I?re set j-s not conplete, for it does not contain the
anendrnents shor,ring the hollopcored units used jn the western bridge nor
the revised, double-width 1og unit used il the eastern bridge. It doest
hower/er, give the djrnensi.ons, loc:rl5-ty planr details of substmcture and

guardaail layout for the bridges.

Since conpletion in 1964 flood. damage to the southern abrutnent
necessitated the exLension in 1966 of each bridge to a totaL length of
five spans. Testing, honerler, took plece drrring the intenrening year
whjJ-st the bridge was still itre original lengthr s tu the follovdng
photostats.

rib

LES
iF,:

PEDUCED ACCOROINGLY
INCHES

SA{LE OF

r rO

l4

li

:\

;b

lr

rS

l\

j"

lo
l(\

I-

l$

vl
'*f
.i
"\
.$l l

\r{
\r ;

f!

l*

IR
CrJ

L"

\\.

t*l b
,ll
$r i.

\.\

i5

isr
,-o

.1

;,

l.

{;-e't9

ll

l^o

:li
I

,ft

l-

lr: dl

\
\
\

't

I
i

\
t
\

i.

ci

t.

li

t
t

i{

-\

o
(.
o

$
$
'I

I
t'

ri

., {,/1"

Ib

LAN
CALES FEDUCED

SCALE OF

rrt.9
t

ACCORDINOL

INCHES

'.
I

__

$t

iii

I
I

J
I

I
I

-t
I

1, -E *t:4'

t
!
I

*t iii$

*{

I
I

}tr$

I.n

tr

\i

l
t

t {I

.h
t{
\t

t$

$$

iJi

$'

FtEt*,

\:t

.c

f '-i

;|l

rl

Fi Nit

I'

l,+ xt$i

t.-*-l

[':f+]
,t

t-

--r

I
a

i;tr i{

l-. ,,-"J'

.l

*l
al

"u

[r

rl$
''

lt

\
F

E
fg

f',+
I

T,

I
I

l-i
ii

6fiu

li
1,4.

t,

rp

i
\:

t
t+

rl
$t

lr

!i

iIr
l>+

.lt -

tti

\$
I

,t

i\"l
t1
ilt
!,.\
-t

llr
q
lir i
il [+
'li
,:

ls
t*

l;

i..{'

IF
l5
t.

ll.

Iti

t\
i:

;t+

o
({,
o

N ..+$
t

lr
t.'

ill

It Fi
il

\.'

t;

h
t\

iir

t-

I -r

liF-+
't li'--r

't

.t'

li'l
l,r

ll

ilil*N

ll

'il

i I \* ii
\
t

le

{ t-t i-.+
I

:i;

Ir-

,l'-

I bS
l

+.r
-1,

; $ l{3\

r+

^t

\l

I 'l -\
\ \

r
_l-

l/l

'

l-lil lt i,

L
F

t' -l

\sb

li
Ii

ttz-!;'

Ir
l:

:
li

r'{

tI

rit

l'd

.i

ri
i.\
'$

i lt[

tl.

e\

-r,

tt
l!

*r

l\'

rl
ls

i,

f{
i$
,>

ffiF

*x

ir! tl
,S

ii

It;

R
;l b
$\

ALES FEDUCED ACCORDINGL

SCALE OF INCHES
|

/ r r rO

s
({,

o
$

,q

qf'

,$

E
er

l*
lc

L
i

t$

nl.
I

l!IF

l$

ls

tfl

il

$:

lx

\$

li

l]l>

l*

ilf.r

l"

l*

{R

{r

(-

l$

\
t;
{

il\r

ln
l.-

$ri

lo

,tt$

/h'l['

t\

ii

lt

I
?

,r

t.

.t

bi

lr

IT'

b
t

t(,
L

t
,q

a-

at

IF

lI
tl

l"
i\

\t

ti

xF
or

q
R
b
}.|

>
r--

il:

|i

lrF

ll:
.l

IF

$
d

'l

N
G

SC^LE OF

INCHES

s
s
(t

o
\s

s\

r tt li
: ii$

ii \:ii
"i;
ii

(.!

ii

NI
It
I'

iti:

i:

lIb

liii
'.:. 'IIii
":!

lr

ER

$I$$r E:

iOJ

.tt

t\
s\
1r

t$!
F.

til:
It!

-rsr$liriR i{l$

JI

$ir i
$$iliiH
{19.t. r
$

RI
li(

(!

l.r

srt$lll

Ir$\

-$

$\$$r Iri;,r

lBl
rilt

(t'

-r(t

lIa
IS:

llxl $"r,,$
itlrsrt

.it

t,i

\ tttt$

rt' T{

.,d
.:I

rI
t--

It

d'

l.i

ii
rt
\i

t
t \t

'li

aqc

rl
ir'

-h
Sltn

t.!

l
t

\{

trb,

IB

f
t

t'>
.l

ti
l

I
:

ilI F
U!It
"s

xi'---- -1

-T
Y

t\
rl

tFl
-t

'i- !

td!
tc

r.

!(
lr

!'

FF

*F

F
I

tq

fr

{?

,l!.i
(\'

rl
li

(
l

\
t

16

IB
-F

'Vr'

hq

la

r'

ts

itla If;
.lr F

r!

t\ F

:{
lr

orl

i l{

tf;

*F

rli l +*u

iY
\ /\
ft[[--;q
t.l

ilxi .t

i!tii

l'i:$
r !ti
Irs
.dI

r'{

.i:

i\lo
i'
it
rI
t{
sl
i{

l/l

qr

N,,

trt

|Fi-

rl

It
|e

*z"Lz'J-4'

\
I

t
s

s
d'

>i.
-1t

I
I

it'

*!.

>-t 5s

i$

-g'

+t
-f

$$

tt
I

s
{x

I
u

2e2.

APPBIDUI lET{

DURING 1!{E ruED

TIIIETABIE AND LOAD AIIRANGN4ENT USM
IESTTNG OF

proposed testing tlmetable and

Tire following naierial describes the
included are copies of
al-so the load. positions to be investigated. '0Jso
used' during the f,ieLd tests'
the strain and deflection recording sheet's

Ttreti.netablesufferedinmalrywaygbutitsinclrrsl.onheremry
ser:ve in the planrring of firture projects'

--nLo'
M,O.W

LOE 8EAM9,
tc SEAMS/ SPAN

Ter.lr,.Al,A2,N,N

*n,

lpon 8.
E+lrolr

C.

ct,c2.cs,C..

Nau<-AucluAo
CEfiN&

9Ft D

co{cnEfE

xa.Lw-ffiJ

t0

bent

L-----'\
Wtt

'SAM3

no6r ofrR e-PFfjRf catlK

o
^uAt
TECTINO SCHTOULE A - OVENALL

A; ff
FBl, PLATJ
TAELE.I

At

Ct

A1

AT

ct

to

il

taF

c,

A1

,'{4a(

A'
c,

ut

rJ

tSrf

c.

OAY

ft87
NJilRI
0Ar

ftSf

ct
ll

tt

JWx l.
.

rl

t1

wtts

l.

c1

A1

a.

la

tl

rO

tt

,o

tl
J*tet

Pe'a13

AIKLAIO -HAFllLToiJ

Mg@Ar-l8lgeg.
BLIPPIRY CNgfi
loro.rtro 789T5.

$t
\$l c
z
*l
9l
t:l
e

rl
sl

rl
rl
f*

F
$

ts

\
\
s
\a

$\
ol
ftr

l"
t{

lr

Ir
ll

1ni

Itu

ld

IF

II
1i
IN

ls
Ir

_._94e14

t5_t

;i.Mrrrltt Y oF '.
wJl f,5
C W O Ttrt.
rdlrt rl' !4

-.Gl
!fract'r'

lr

0li7

ulo f u-cr

xrnat-ruru

--rAA!
'rr
gRlrcE.
' MoToRl4Av

9LPPERY

fiilttt{t" .

-, -,
:

lT;-J.,*,

CREEK iPwo.
Stwr rf

? ol 7

r|nclr

ts

art,.

FI

iliiiil

tr {g
s_s

itti*r

isi$t

rli tt I

15

R
b

lii I

Gl

liomr

-._r
iltt la kqc

ir.j" :-!f,

a'|"*ai
D

0rld

-I

iii

'

l.16l u,nota, o,
rvJprr
-1I i W O lta*a

'thld

rrg.J'

t$lt

'f

tqulra rt
tatra
-,r

_lot-*.1-.'tt'

-,

rdr.,-{ru
D
iPw
sr.att9 clTth.lr

4-6" =36Ld------------

O,

'r

of lnd

2\3'mu.

Ir 2 3 4 s

36'' 6"
ovr'roll rigV width
-

gP$vg
FlGz. NM, sNoLE, rcIyT LIAD reffDNs Fffi
A&c. .
c

*tp av

w,

dth

-''t 5t 6"j2'
L----15l
/-0" to C.
of wlrcl.

tcsd f hme prwfs

FlG,3. LA tE Pogrw,ta FoR sn.ANg A;c.D.

NOTE Luns 3,4,5

itt

mfu be

lr
G.l

\o

_l

\o
ra

\Cantpoctar
axlc ond whccls

Etu.

TEST FOR SKEW-

FtG.

5,

TEjT FM EKEW-z.

5cole

tih
,s66a

o-,

FIoFre

PWD
5;1t tb 4 cl Z ti..lr

,
|lr\

Danl in'as

of

eoch

fio of road,,
lLtl+'

ovarall

il -wat
ban

right widlh

rcgffDNs
FlG. 6 TEN, stNGLE
, PIINT LIAD

FoR

SPAN D

tttl - 2''3'dgo cleconce for 4&0' lrabrd

-i hfhor gonl lads q calns of hanc
I

-l

FIG 7 b) FtvE, ENaLE PaNT L0A0 P^stTlaNg

THREE

f_-

6'' 5" Folcon cotnPcfr b)

tt

J.'.rf.

-le-"rF

#r+iil
rl
t-

ll'-

2'

LNE LOAO POSITION, NR gAN E.

2''J'odgt c/rortro lU h?-d habr (al
other P*nl /ad t gr ctnlro ol llam 2'

-1

ElgE bt THREE SIVOLE P1|NT

L1AD P1gff@'tg

,D WE LANE LOAO POSINON FOR 9PIru E

O, Quorhn
EQt TAaca Quc,'*c,z

ObanYen

&/a
/,e/ AF/d

A BC D E F
Tncronoc T" Co,dhin t a a + WtS9.
AgT

/ e a'
WEff

Ab/ Ocugc lhcCir,tt,

'LAND-HAM/LT*V

Scole:

flL:

-l

ffit

cJi,n-.I

1LlP,qBr/ A(FEK

4-aGLlEl

3h..f

b e I Z*ti

lr
q

$l$$
$l '$l

;lrt$l

Jjl
ANbHAU/L7AV
!

.t4il44_

rc!rllU

itOTWVAr

&P/DGE.

SL/PPEPT CPEEK
/a1a,v6 7fs7a.

C3-tc-ru
th-lt7ol

7:Lrlr

2{,b.
APPNDIX U,EIIEN
Al

MAIERIAL PROPffi,ITES OF TT{E MODU,

l.l
usb-ui4e.

'

j'n t'he
section 5.31 of chapter J describes the naterials used
during
constmction of the nodel. A certail arnount' of data wa'5 collected'
its constnrction and testingr with regard to the properties of the concrete
graphically in
and their variation with tjme. Ttris d.ata is presented
figs Al l. I and Al1.2, where plots of cnrstring strength, ela'stic modrrl:rs and

bem canber are ghown.

Al l ' I were
The cll.shing strenglh and ala.stic modulus variations in fig
plotted fron Tabl e J.) of Chapter f . The canrber variation was obserrred
fron the
ovbr a for'fy 4ay period. for those log bearns relea.sed' at troo days
stressing bed.. The average earrber during this tjrne wa.s o.lrl5tl btrt
general trend wa's
considerable variation about the mean was obbenred. The
for the camber to fal'l away with time a,s indicated in fig' Al | '2'

All.2 Steel

ProPerbies

used in the nodel

Tests on both the 0'20ott
have been mentioned in sec 5.312.1 of Chapter !'
jn the tOO ton Avery testing machine
and 0.275tt diameter wire were condtrcted
using an Ans1er exLenSoneler on a lOtr gange length to record e:rbension'
TTre results are plotted in fig All.3 and give:
Loa.d.-exbension

tests on the high tensile sleel v'ire

28.L x lO" Ibs Per s{

an.elastic nodulus of
sq in.
and ultimate tensj-Ie strenglh of 109.6 tons Per

iJ}o

,o
'f-\O

(,

${

a
f"]

H
El
&

F'l

P{

o
H

P{
Frl

Fq

o
z
o
(J

f']
E

tr
('

F{

,FcF\o

g
C5

z
F*l
Fr
fr.
6
e{
Fl
az
F

6f{ ^
.tifl h

zc)
Htr!q{

SP

aa

\o
rn

C\I

eil(t

h0

{5

|./)9{
C\.
Fi
HD
He'r1
H=a

&P

E{O
Fq(nh d
o{ H

f'l
td
o{{J

6 {l)
db

aa

Hql
C5H
H
tri
(DHs
trF
fro
()r.o
frl
zh
HrQ

ot{
h(6

'tirfn.
,F rn:X

ZD
O H
a

p.20,

rD

lD
tr5
O t-l
..F|t

o{J4
t{AO
OE
${ q0
oFlo
.rl
t{

.l-l

o..c P
.401
a
Paqt
h11

r{o () F'f
,doo
oq0q0
E(dd
hh
gooo
P
t{

tr{

t{
@F
N

Fr

Io,
ut

,q
{J

:.8

)
)
GC)

t
'

+{

r'r

I(\l
XF

\o

\o

o
o

\o

rn

.f

,n

o
a

(\l

o
I

HI

p. 206
E

AA

u}

.rt d

oo

vv

6(.'1
d<l

gx

Fq

Eg

E
F'l
tr

&
f'l
E

O..

,c
(,)

FtE
F'l
A
f'l(!
o
trl
E

$J
I

lrl

&
C5

H
tr{

'O ! req

a
t=l
o
A
H

Hlo

O
gl
<lo Y

Fll

q)l

a!tr
AH
(nB
A
'HTD
EE
tr{ f'l
OF
E(5
oo
H|l
H
H

&aF']

tr\\o
$] trnt

o oo

Fi
.r{

tf\

"
Gt

r+ot{
ool
op o
o
F{o
)t
pi
Eql
d
C)

${
oo
q0
do
q0
Fr
otr
tr6t{
qt

F) Frl

;
o

o
I

+r

t"l

E<5
OE

hH (n

.Y)
o

-h

o
r+

s+to

o
o
F
o

trl

E
D
c'
H

]s.

EZ
H14
a)
E{
H

OH
FI Fq

c)
nt

Fc\t

(n

F
rt

Fl
<l
ol
rrl

o
o
oN

o
o
o
o

o
o
o

o
o
o

\o

oo'+'

l.

@i-

tl

{t
at
.r
F{

a(n
F'l Fq rfB
..lS
HE-{ \oa
E)a
oc
c)
rC
F']
A
Z|t
HH
x

F
o

\o

\o
o\

o
o
o(\l

tn

rf

@(
(\l $.

Il
f'l

7l

fll
or,l
F

2f,.9.
APPENDIX

TWU,VE

IRJU{SDUCER FOE

Ti{E DETERMINATTCI{ OF EI'ASTTC MODUI;US

OF

CONCREIE BLOCKS

Al2.l

Descript'ion
Thj.s transducer was d.esigned and

ela,stic modulus of 8ft x

[tt

concrete

bui-It for the Pulpose of measuring the

test cylinders.

It wa,s essentially a set of four steel arcs which liriked together a

test
pair of steel collars. These were clarryed to the Srt x.lrtt block under
strain guges on
and ,strai:r in the block detected by electrical resistance
the four steel !rcs. Refer fig. Al2.l and Plate 17.
L12.2 Galibration

Calibration of the transducer wa^s necessaJTr and' ttr-is wa,s done by

tests with the
a stand,ard, calibrated, 4tt steel tubet and nrnni-ng colparative

L12.3

usi-ng

transducer clanPed to it.

which mearrt
such tests gave a calibration factor of 2350 lbs per sq in.,
lbs per sQeiDel
that the elastic nodufus of a block under test was given by ff
j:rcrement, for a 20 ton increase in
where AI represented the arrerage strain
brifue
Ioad, a,s obsewed from the transducer when corurected to a direct reading
as described in the following section'

Strain Gauee Cirsuit

Eight,PngSlostraingzugeswereusedonthefoursteelarcsandwere
tfheatstone Bridge
connected in pairs to form the four arms of a ftrILy active
Circrrit.Thep.aj.rswerechosenfromoppositedianeber"sarrdrriredinseries
use of a
to eljrruinate bendj-ng strains due to possible eccentrj-c loa'ding' The
wlth regard
ful-Iy active bridge gave maxi-uu.rm sensitivity and self coryensation
j-rn
of
to terrperature. Detaj'ls of the galges have been given Table 5'7
Phi-Lips Direet
Chapter !; the system being partiarlarly suitable for the
Reading Bridge. See also the wiring d'iagran fig Al2'2'

L12.4 Use

of the Transducer

strain
the gauge leads have been conneeted to the ternrinals of the
to the niddle half of
gange brid.ge, the transducer is clanped (finger tight)
is then pLaced in
the block leaving a 2tr qlearance top and bottom. The block
to ssIE several
the testi-ng machjlle and the load. cycled up to 2J tons and back
it also
tj-mes. This allor.rs the transducer to settJe on its contact pads and
the obsenred elastic
puts the block through its first half-dozen load cycles once

2lo.

is higher

drrring the initial load cycles but it fal]s away to.a Inore
or less constant value very quickly.
The strain increment for a 20 ton change in load is then recorded and
another bLock chosen for test.
Ttds increnrent is then punched on to a card together r,rith the block

modulus

identification number and its crustr-ing s trength and later fed into a corryuter
progranme (OpUS mVE) for statistica-l analysis - see Appendix /s.
Ttre transducer was found to be cmicl< and reliable.

_l_

$11$rt

straln gauge
(eee ta6le 5.7)

eteel arc
I
I

Flg. A12,1 -above' EI TRANSDUCER - DIMENSIONS

D

compresslon

Fig. A12.2
IEI TRANSDUCER
STRAIN GAUGE
WIRING DIAGRAM

3r1dge isFour-arm&Fully Act lve

Aboveletterlng correcponds to

termtnalE of "Edlc" (PtrtttPs)

Dlrect Readlng Straln Brtdge

211

BIBLIOGRAPTIT=

VOLUI'E

1_3

General

Orbhotropic Plate Theory and Related AnalYsls

Artisulated Plate Theory

Transfer Matrices
Miscellaneous

and

Related

AnaIYsJ-s

Methods 4-25
Methods 26-3b
35

36-l+r

212.
BIBL]O@API{T

HoILand,

A.D.

rtPrestressed Units for Short-fuan Highway Bridge'sn

pr|oc. fnstitution of civi-I slgi-neers, vol.[, Parb 2t
p22l+'20? (includes discussion), June 1955'

Berson,

G.L.

of a Short-Span Economical Bridgetr

Journal Prestressed concrete Institute, voI.ll, No.l,
P95 - 99, Febmary 1966.

C4omanesl

N.V.

of the A and P Food Processing Facili-tyrt

Journal of Prestressed Concrete Institute, Vol.lQe

ttDetai-l-s

rlDesign

pf9 - 45, June

Boussilesqt

J.

liuber,

M.

lhrber,

M.T.

T.

tlTeorya

Y.

J,

VoL.J2 1879'

P\r|tt Lvov, 1922.

[proble,ne der Statik technj-sch rrichtiger orbhotroper

Plattentt
Gryont

1965.

Journal of Mathematics, srr

No'3r

W63saw, 1929.

rca.lqrl des ponts larges a poutres multiples solidarisees

par des entretoj-ses.lf
Arurales des Ponts et Chausseesr No. 24,
p553 - 6t2, Septernber-October, 1916'

Gryont

I.

Ma^ssonnett

C.

tr0alcul- des ponts dallesrt

Annares des Ponts et chanssees'

vol'llt' No'2ft
p555 - 58O and No.36r p683 ' 7l8r 1949'

of calcul-ation of bridges with set/eral

Iongitudinal beanrs taki:rg into consideration their
rMethod

tor"sional resistancert
International Association for Bridge and Strlcbural
ftrgineering, Brrich, Rrblications Vol' lOe

plfl - l82t 1950.

ztj,
to

Li-ttle,

tl

P.B.

Moricet
and

'

Morice,

Littlet

l2

G.

and

Morice,

Little,

and
Rorre,

P.B.
G.

P.8.1
G"
R.E.

rlload Distributi_on

R.E.

Bowet

Prestressed concrete Bridge

$pternstt
Ttre Stmctural &rgineer, VoL.3Zt Nor3r
p83 - fll, March 195h.

rfAnalysis

of Right Bridge

Decks $rbjected

for the Effects of

trDesign Grnres

concentrated Ioadg

on Bridge Decksr
Cement and concrete Association, Iondon, Db

load distribution theory for bridge slabs aLlowtng

for the effect of Poissonts ration
nA

ll+

Bowet

R.E.

tr0oncrete Bridge Designrr

Iondon, C.B. Books r 1962.

r5

Moricet

P.B.

trIoad Tests on a
Bridgen

G.

llat

1956.

of Concrete Research, VoI'f'

p69 - 78' JulY 1955.

and

.AbnoraaL

CsnentandConcreteAssociationrlondonrDbllt
P43r JuIY 1956.

Magazine

Littlet

to

Ioadingtt

p2[, July

l3

in

No'2O'

snall Prestressed concrete Highw4y

Proc.oftheConferenceontheCorrelatj.onbetween

Calcrrlated and Obserred Stresses and Displacements ln

stnrctures, Institution of civjt &rgineers septenber 1955.

p2lala' 26t+: Prelirninary Vohune

Discusslon bY Hendry and Jaeger
p46or
Reply in ninal Vo}rme.
PMlt

l5

R.E.

Rowe,

qload.ing Tests on
Bridgestr

I\p

Prestressed Concrete

H:ighway

Proc. Institution of Civil &lgineers, Vol'l3e

pt+77 - 498, .Augusl 1959
t7

HendrXrt

rrrhe Analysis

L.G.

London, Chatto and Windus, 1958'

and

Jaegert

of Grid Franeworks and Related stlrcturestt

A.W.

21b.

18

Parkt

R.

tg

RoesIi,

A.

RoesJ.i,

A.
A.
C.E.

Investigation into the Behsviour of Gorposite

Prestressed Concrete Bridge SJ'abs under Ioadrt

M.E. Thesis, University of Canterbury, 1957'

rGateral Ioad Distribution

in lfultibem Bridgesrt

Fritz Laboratorly Progress Report, No'223'l0t

pl l4r .Iu1y 1955.

fuislovat

Ekberg

ItAn

Jr.,
and

Tests on a Prestressed concrete lfirltibean Bridgen

Proc. Highway Research Board, VoI' 35r
ptJ2 - tlt, t956.
rrRLdLd

&teyt

T[.J.

2l

Walthert

R.E.

rrlnvestigation of lfuItibeam Bridges rr

Journal of the .Arnerican concrete Institute, Proc. vol'J[t
p5O5 - J26, December 1957.

?2

llsssert

K.w.

rrDesign Procedure

for Lateral load Distribution in

Multibean Bridgestr
tlournal of the Prestressed. concrete
p5t+

23

J.E.

Breen,
8nd

A.

Panwt

- 68, August,

rrA Stu4y

A.R.

Cusens,
and

Pdra R.P.

25

Bestt

B.C.

1965.

of Precast

Goncrete Bridge Unitsn

Engineering &cperinent Staiion Bulletin 52

Univer"sity of Missouri; VoI'62, No' 18'

pl4lr Apri}
2l+

Institute, vol.lolNo'4'

1961-

of Concrete lfuItibean Decksn

Journal of the structural Division, ASCEr VoI. 9l r
No. ST5r Pert I.
p255 - 218, Oct'ober 1965.
Dissussion: vot !2, No. sT&r p?9 --66, Arrgust 1966'
rDesign

a prestressed concrete bridge i'ncorporating

transverse rnild stee-L shear connecto$ttr
Research RePorb No. 16,
Csrent and Concrete Associationt Iondont

ItTests

of

p42r Decenber 1963.

215.

Arbiculated P1ate Theorrr and Related Analvsis Methods

26

J.E.
Drbergt
Khachaturiant N.,
R.E.
Fradingert

27

PooI,
Arya,
Robinsont

R,B.
A.S.
A.R.

sIId

Khachaturiant N.

for Ana-lysis of ]tultibean Brifuesn

Journal of the siructural DNision, ASCE, VoI.86, No'sr/r
pf09 - ll8, JulY 196o.
thfethod

trAnalysis

of Multi-bean Bridges with

Bean Elements

of

SIab and Box Sectiontt

Engineering @eriment St'ation, B:ILetin l83r
University of fllinoisr Vo1.62, No'lo5e
P33, &tLy 1965.

28

R.G.

Normant

Di.stribution of l-oadF to Precast Floor Systemstt

Zealand &rgineering: Journal of the N'Z'

ttThe
New

Institution of Engineers, Vol'lf, No'8t

p275

Nafihant

N.D.

30

Spindelt

J.E.

- '/E)t August

1962.

rtDistribrrtion of Ioads in Preca'st Prestressed Concrete

l,le,nbers Without Interior Diaphragmstt
No.ll
Journal of the Prestressed, concret,e Instltute, voL.8,
p24 - Jf , October 1963.
rrA Study

of Bridge Slabs

Having No Transvere Ele)qrral'

Stiffnessrt
Ph.D. Thesis, University of london, 1961'
3l

32

R.P.

Pana,
and

ftrsens t

A.R.

Cusenst
Pana,

A.R. I
R.P.1

ASCE.

and

33

tEdge Beam Stiffening of ltultibean Bridgestf to be pubb-shed in Journa1. of Stmctural Div5sion'

Almed,

tI.

QaUlg,

A.

'1fu-biculated'PlateTtreoryfortheDeterninationofload
Distribution in Mrltibearn Bridgestt to be published in Journal of Strain Analysis'
|lDesignofPrestressedConcrete}trltibeanBridgesl{ith
Diaphragns and Stiffened kberior Bean'stt
Journal of the Anerican concrete Institute, Prov. vof{5at
p327

34O1 November 1955.

Discnssion: Proc. VoL.JZ, Par+ 2, pl20l-1208t

December 1956.

216.

3t+ GaJIia,

A.

tlPreca.gt Reinforced conerete slab Bridges

rrith stiffened

Edgesn

Journal of the lnerican concrebe Institute, Prov. vol.54t

pl083 - lo9l, June 1958'
Transfer Matriges

35Peste1,E.C.;'TulatrjxMethodsinElastomechanicslt
and
F.A. New York, McGrar.rHiIL Book Co., 1963"
Leckie,
Miscellaneous

36

Ti-noshenlco,

s.

37 Ftmaga]]i, E.

rrstrenglh of Materialstrr vol. IIt

New York, D. Van Nostrand Co', lgbl'
trThe use

Magazine

p63

3S Morice,
and
CooIeY,

r
E.H.
P.B.

of Model-s of Rejnforced concrete stnrcturesn

of Concrete Research, VoI' 12' No'35'

'12, JuLY 1960.

rrPrestressed Concretett

Iondon, Pitman, 1958'

39-rrSpecificationforthesupplyanddeliveryofstandard
precastpretensionedbrifueunits-tenfoottoforty
foot sPantt
Ministry of

Works Specification, MC[il

59izc_'

August 1962.
Bem'sn

lO Jones,

R.A.

Rigidity of Stnrctural Concrete

M.E. Thesis, University of Auckland' 1966'

4t Hoel,

P.G.

to Matbematical Statisticsn
NewlorkrJohnWiley&SonsInc',1962(3rdEdition)'

rtTtre F1e,:rural

|{tntr"odrrction

217.

PHOTOGRAPHIC

PLATES

218.

LIST OF PLATES

of the Slippery

after thelr

exbension to

Plate l.

General view
five spans.

Plate 2.

ton f$ointtr loader being manoeuvred into position on span F

of the slippery creek Bridges; the scaffoldj-ng supporbing the dial
gauges and the strain ga.rlge cable lead5ng to the mobile recording
centre on the right, are to be seen in the foreground.
3Lt The 30.2 ttlanerf loader beirrg positioned on sPan c of the
Slippery Creek Bridges; the transverse stressing tendonS are to be
seen exLending from the edge of the deck.
38; A tlryicat view of the dial gauge and scaffold amangeanent used
under the Stippery Creek Bridges; the trpointrr load.er is to be seen
on the deek above.
A view of the }nside of the nrobile control centre, shou'ing
4A:
the strain recording equipment which jnc-Iuded a l0 channel antomatic

Plate J.

Plate 4,

Greek Brid.ges

The 28.6

switch:ing 4paratus (upper left), a manual switch5ng box (Iower left)

The strain gange cables
and the d:irect reading bridge (Iower right).
are to be seen entering the van jn the upper right.
48: Ore of three shear key cracks obseryed in the d'eck of the hol-low-r
cored spans of the $-ippery Creek Bridges at the coryIetion of testilg
- s also P1ate lJ.

Plate

l.

P1ate 6;

A general view of the log beam rnodels (Sl, and SB) showing the
arrangement jn the laboratory of the 1oad.:ij1g frame and hydrarlic jackt
remote control unit and ancillary equipment.

6A: A genera-L view of the prestressing bed used for the marmfacture
of the nodel log beam's.
58: A close up view of the relea^se plates at one end of the log beo
stressi:rg bed.

Plate 7.

A general view of the prestressj-ng bed used for the manufacture

of the model hollor,r-cored bearns. The polystyrene hexagonal cores
are seen nrnnisg the length of the roould.; the relea.se syste'n for

?A:

ttr-i-s bed. wa,s similar

7B:

to that

shown

il

P1ate 68.

A singte 1og bem undergoSlg a load-deflection

assernbly

in the nodel deck SA.

test, prior to

219.

plate 6.

8A: the a.ssenbled log beam decks for the nodels sA and sB showSng
the dial gauges mounted und'er the deck and the loading frame in
position.

plate 9.

88:Asid'eelevationofthelogbeamrnodelsB,undertest.
9A: The a.ssenrbled hollor^r-cored deck shor+jreg the dial galges mounted
j.n
underneath (see plate I lB) and a model tnrck loading rrrangenent
place on the deck above.

plate 1o.

98:TtrePSCone-wirejackstressingthesinglemidsparrtransverge
cable of the ho]-lolrcored, model deck - s also Plate l0B'
loA: .A, close up view of the tgrdra,lj.c jack shorrj-ng the prcving ring

andsteelballsusedfortheapplicationofload.
l0B: The PSC jack being used to transver"sely stress the log bean
see also
decks, Using an e:ctension piece to stress the short ends Plate 98.

plate ll.

plate 12.

.
Plate 13.

plate lL.

of the cor.ner of the log bean deck SB, shorring the

the deckt the
anchorages for the 14 transverse tendons, the camber in

llA:

View

ad.dltional ltr deck sl-ab with reinforcement and the longitudinal

prestressing steel.
deck showing the
I lBr A typical dial gzuge arrngement under a mod'el
given jn Plate 9A'
RS.l frane and nagnetic elA4s; a general view is
tests
A general view (nrmch enlarged) of the log bearn rnodel SA, during

for$ltimatebehaviour.Thesjxtonsoflea,d,fordeadload
eqgrivalence, i-s shorne in place on the deck'
the lrt
l3A: A View of the shear failure between the outside bean and
slab as it, ocsurred during the ultjmate load tests on nodel SA'
138: TLre ouiside bean at fallure after separating from the remainder
of the deck during the ultimate load tests on model SA.
l4A: The hollorrcored model cleck, sHc, und'er load by a sca'led tnrck'
to a
under the inf:luence of abnorsral loading the deck has deflected
pronounced crrnre as seen jn this view. Note also the stressing

jac\ in position to record changes in transverse cable tension during

the u].timate load tests'

llrS: A view of the same modet (SHg) after failure under the scaled
track load:irrg. Note the shear key faiJlres a's well as the di-agonal
comPression

failure

zones'

22n.

l5A: A view of the faj-lure of shear keys of modell sHc'

|58: General vj.ew of the shear key darnage in model SHC'' showing
thedana8ed.-cornersremovedforclarity-cornparev{ithPlate/F.
the e:posed
Plate 16. 16A; A close up'view of a damaged shear key; note also
anchor used. for reduc5lg bond length in these rnodel beans'
of
. 168r A view fr.on under the hollovrcored nodel showing the e:rbent
the diagonal tension cracks at fallure. the view, taken about the

Plate 15.

quarterpolnt,shousasectionofapolystSnenecoren?richwa,s
eryosed after a fragnent of the soffit dropped out during ultLnate
collapse (tUrA bearn fron the edge) '
P1ate

f?.

general view of the transducer dweloped for measuring the

alastic nodulus of concrete blocks. In this view it is seen
clalrped to an 8n x 4n block'under test in the 100 ton Avery testing
machine. ltre direct reading bridge, used for the gtrain
obsenration, is shown on the lower right, wtriJst the calibrating
cylisder and its corpensator are shown above the tran'sducer ltsel:f'
"4.

q,

o
p
Cd

f,;,

F{

.tl
I
f.,

.'
a.

1,
.':Lt'
1I
!

,:

fi
ll

i,.

.;t,:

:fi

v,

\:

j
'I

't

:-' ..

:,

.:-,

' .f.,t
..1
j|

'ld

a'tt: i1

E
P

!o
<+

P1ate
:

!
ai

-ri

("-)'-''-.
-r :fJn

*t

,..

''it,
*

\'r

r.

=4

34
- ,J

I:

.r.r..

lL S?'b'

,:F

--

a'-

r/, .

-J. t
r _r.rqli!
t

't

l','.
-t,r

'. '

]ri

lT/ Yj,fa"'"
''

q3

,.'--r1

'=

li '-.* -'

eF+
t"'i?i

5'

JJ

t'l

tE

hc

p
s+
o

[. t"

"il*

,,3
:11l

Ol

ts

j_d

ff,,

a,
al
I

.4a

l-r
{,1
'-L,

l.

',

tr

.t

tl)

*?^

PLate

7A

Plate

f3A

V/a-

I?

J
7

\L1.

-ll
I'--L

Plate 8A

1u =-iL

T:fi
[-

..

Plate

88

l_l
:i .: l!

..
l;.
CREEK
I IDDFRY

'

Bntocr

PLate

',1

.; t-'

tf-.;.',";

i:.:;Fift
:' r..

".

9A

,rI-H
Plate

'r!-'l

93

rr

fd

o
H
o
td
.,.1

t"

i;','"

*;,

Fd

P
o
<+
o

-+|.lr.F'

\J_i,l;.-.=-. ffir-'{-:--

Plate

Platc

u.A

?late

7B

Plbte

138

:..affx

\.91'.

'l*

| 'r t

\
7

,-

-ila r

Plate

148

.\

h]{--

-r

irq

Plate
-:7

15A
:tCa

.'\
,l\

r{

,--

.,
l
*-r
' --.-r+.-

t-

-r-'.e.1-r-

PIate ]58

- ,' ,J-

"'.i
' ,' ft,.'
(t

'{ .-'

o,

-l

tu

Plate 16A

ir

;.i

z,

:I
,'

tl

r'-

,l 'lI

r\Plate

168

Plate

L7

')o

o3
ac
Q'g

at cc

v'r,,
,t.-*
|

+- \_
-t '