Alternative Support Systems for Cantilever - National Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Design Axial Strength ϕcomp := .90 E λr := .31⋅ Fy_pipe E λp := .07⋅ Fy_pipe λr = 214.05 λ := "Compact" if D_t ≤λ p λ = "Compact" "Noncompact" if λp < D_t ≤λ r AISC Spec. B4 ks_pipe := .5 Fe_short := Fcr_short := "Slender" if D_t > λr ⎛ ⎜ ⎝ π 2 ( ⋅E) Ls_pipe ks_pipe⋅ rpipe ⎡⎡ ⎢⎢⎣ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎞ ⎟ ⎠ F ⎜ ⎛ y_pipe ⎟ ⎞ ⎜ F e_short ⎟ .658⎝ ⎠⋅Fy_pipe 2 ⎤⎤ ⎥⎥ ⎥⎥ ⎦⎦ ( .877⋅Fe_short) if Fe_short < .44⋅Fy_pipe if Fe_short ≥ .44⋅Fy_pipe Fe_short 1.19 10 5 = × ksi AISC Equation E3-4 Pn_s_pipe := ϕcomp⋅Fcr_short⋅Apipe Pn_s_pipe = 857.93 kip AISC Equation E3-1 Summary <strong>for</strong> Short Pipe Flexural Strength Mn_s_pipe = 392 ft·kip Shear Strength Vn_s_pipe = 257.42 kip Torsional Strength Tn_s_pipe = 359.1 ft·kip Axial Strength Pn_s_pipe = 857.93 kip 118
Long Pipe Design Flexural Strength ϕflexure = 0.9 AISC Spec. F1 Mn_l_pipe := ( ϕflexure⋅Fy_pipe⋅Zpipe) E if D_t ≤ ⎜.45⋅ F ⎟ ⎝ y_pipe⎠ Mn_l_pipe = 352.8 ft·kip AISC Spec. F2.1 "Equation Invalid" otherwise Design Shear Strength ϕshear = 0.9 AISC Spec. G1 Fcr := ⎡⎡ ⎢⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢⎢ ⎣⎣ ⎡⎡ ⎢⎣ ⎢ ⎣ ( 1.60⋅E) Ll_pipe ( D_t) Dpipe 1.25 ⋅ ( .78⋅E) ( D_t) 1.5 ⎤⎤ ⎥⎥ ⎦⎦ ⎤⎤ ⎥⎥ ⎥⎥ ⎥⎥ ⎦⎦ otherwise Fcr_shear := min Fcr , .6⋅Fy_pipe if ⎡ ⎢ ⎢ ( ) ⋅( ⋅ ) ⎢ ⎣ ⎛ ( 1.60⋅E) Ll_pipe ( D_t) Dpipe 1.25 ⋅ ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ ≥ ⎡ ⎢ ⎣ ⎞ ( .78⋅E) ( D_t) 1.5 ⎤ ⎥ ⎦ Fcr_shear = 25.2 ksi ϕshear Fcr_shear Apipe Vn_l_pipe := V 2 n_l_pipe = 257.42 kip Design Torsional Strength ϕtorsion = 0.75 Fcr := ⎡ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎡ ⎢ ⎣ ( 1.23⋅E) Ll_pipe ( D_t) Dpipe 1.25 ⋅ ( .60⋅E) ( D_t) 1.5 ⎤ ⎥ ⎦ otherwise ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ if ( ) ⎡ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ( 1.23⋅E) Ll_pipe ( D_t) Dpipe 1.25 ⋅ ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ ≥ ( .60⋅E) ( D_t) 1.5 AISC Spec. G6 AISC Spec. H3.1 Fcr_torsion := min Fcr , .6⋅Fy_pipe Fcr_torsion = 25.2 ksi T n_l_pipe := Fcr_torsion⋅Cpipe Tn_l_pipe = 359.1 ft·kip AISC Spec. H3.1 119
Page 1 and 2:
Report No. BDK75 977-04 Date: Augus
Page 3 and 4:
Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN
Page 5 and 6:
ALTERNATIVE SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR CAN
Page 7 and 8:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the 2004 h
Page 9 and 10:
CHAPTER TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODU
Page 11 and 12:
Torsion Test Data .................
Page 13 and 14:
LIST OF FIGURES Figure page Figure
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 4-15. Arrangement of the LVD
Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This project
Page 19 and 20:
CHAPTER 2 BACKGROUND The following
Page 21 and 22:
information obtained in the late 19
Page 23 and 24:
these problems. The concern with fa
Page 25 and 26:
opposite side, see Figure 2-2 The s
Page 27 and 28:
2.2.4 Helical Pipes This option wou
Page 29 and 30:
2.3 Alternative Foundations from Ot
Page 31 and 32:
Figure 2-10. Drilled concrete piles
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 2-13. Grouted soil anchors G
Page 35 and 36:
The pad and pier foundation, found
Page 37 and 38:
comments and recommendations on pre
Page 39 and 40:
CHAPTER 3 DESIGN IMPLICATIONS Based
Page 41 and 42:
Figure 3-2. Differences between con
Page 43 and 44:
2 [ ] 2 2 ( r ) + 3. 25 ( r ) − (
Page 45 and 46:
eakout surface for a single plate,
Page 47 and 48:
strength of a headed anchor in tens
Page 49 and 50:
Figure 3-9. Schematic of anticipate
Page 51 and 52:
Vbfp l e tfp bfp f’c ca1 = the ba
Page 53 and 54:
3.2.2 Equivalent Side-Face Blowout
Page 55 and 56:
computed. See Equation 3-14 below t
Page 57 and 58:
One method to quantify the failure
Page 59 and 60:
• An additional 12-4.5” long, 1
Page 61 and 62:
Applied load Lever arm Figure 4-4.
Page 63 and 64:
Figure 4-8. Isometric view of embed
Page 65 and 66:
Flexural plate breakout area Torsio
Page 67 and 68:
4.2.4 Annular Base Plate Design The
Page 69 and 70:
torsional strength of the lever arm
Page 71 and 72:
4.4 Concrete Block and Tie-Down Des
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 4-13. Arrangement of the LVD
Page 75 and 76:
4.7 Summary of Torsion and Flexure
Page 77 and 78:
foundation displayed the predicted
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 5-5. Specimen at failure 5.1
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 5-7. Torsional moment and ro
Page 83 and 84: torsional 45 degree crack formation
Page 85 and 86: Figure 5-11. Widening of concrete b
Page 87 and 88: Failure cracks widen Bond loosens F
Page 89 and 90: Rear of shaft Figure 5-14. Load and
Page 91 and 92: testing, signifying that the predic
Page 93 and 94: provided in NCHRP Report 412 were i
Page 95 and 96: 6.2.2 Tapered Embedded Steel Pipe a
Page 97 and 98: Figure 6-3. FDOT Design Standards I
Page 99 and 100: This option provides a possible alt
Page 101 and 102: 6.2.5 Cast-in-Place Solid Concrete
Page 103 and 104: This option does have some disadvan
Page 105 and 106: Figure 6-9. Embedded steel pipe and
Page 107 and 108: However, the fillet welds are susce
Page 109 and 110: APPENDIX A TEST APPARATUS DRAWINGS
Page 111 and 112: Figure A-3. Dimensioned side elevat
Page 113 and 114: Figure A-5. Dimensioned drawings of
Page 115 and 116: Figure A-7. Dimensioned plan drawin
Page 117 and 118: Figure A-9. Dimensioned drawing of
Page 119 and 120: Figure A-11. Dimensioned view of em
Page 121 and 122: STIFFENER DESIGN Calculation of Cap
Page 123 and 124: L breakout Concrete Breakout Equiva
Page 125 and 126: Abrg L⋅b 7 in 2 := = .5 Nsb 200
Page 127 and 128: β 1 f c Calculations Using ACI Str
Page 129 and 130: Determine Flexural Capacity of Roun
Page 131 and 132: DEVELOPMENT LENGTHS OF FLEXURAL REI
Page 133: Short Pipe Design Flexural Strength
Page 137 and 138: Superstructure Assembly Strength -
Page 139 and 140: Weld Design Tn_blowout Vweld := Tor
Page 141 and 142: Check_Bolt_Shear := "Sufficient Str
Page 143 and 144: Check Reinforcement No_Bars_Block_R
Page 145 and 146: Tie-Down Design Block Properties Wi
Page 147 and 148: Vmax Total Load that the Tie-down m
Page 149 and 150: λpf := .38⋅ λpw := 3.76⋅ E F
Page 151 and 152: Input and Properties Shaft Torsion
Page 153 and 154: ψcV := 1.4 ψecV := 1.0 ψedV := 1
Page 155 and 156: lbreakout := L + 2⋅1.5ca1 lbreako
Page 157 and 158: Rn_weld := Throat⋅FW Rn_weld 11.1
Page 159 and 160: ⎛ ⎜ ⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜ 9.250
Page 161 and 162: Flexural Capacity of T-Plates Using
Page 163 and 164: FAILURE EQUATIONS Torsion Threshold
Page 165 and 166: Required Length of Shaft Based on B
Page 167 and 168: Design Axial Strength ϕcomp := .90
Page 169 and 170: Design Axial Strength ϕcomp := .90
Page 171 and 172: Zp := ⎛ ⎜ ⎝ bp tp⋅ 2 ⎞
Page 173 and 174: Bolt Properties - D1" ASTM A325 Cen
Page 175 and 176: CONCRETE BLOCK Concrete Block Desig
Page 177 and 178: Check Shear Check_Shear_B := "Suffi
Page 179 and 180: 7'-4" 8" 5'-4" 8" 1'-3" Calculate s
Page 181 and 182: Required Capacity of the Channel As
Page 183 and 184: Check_Flange_Compact_Unit := "Compa
Page 185 and 186:
Rear of Shaft Face of Shaft Figure
Page 187 and 188:
Bolt slippage ends Predicted failur
Page 189 and 190:
APPENDIX D DESIGN GUIDELINES For th
Page 191 and 192:
The designer should then use this i
Page 193 and 194:
• Determine the angle required fo
Page 195 and 196:
Superstructure Base Connection Foun
Page 197 and 198:
1.5ca1 1.5ca1 Length of bearing are
Page 199 and 200:
Vu = 9.04 kip T .u = 198.88 ft·kip
Page 201 and 202:
Increase threaded rod diameter to 2
Page 203 and 204:
Embedded Pipe and Torsion Plates De
Page 205 and 206:
⎝ ⎠ Check_Breakout_Torsion := "
Page 207 and 208:
Lbreakout := tflex.plate + 2⋅1.5c
Page 209 and 210:
( ) .85 if fc < 4000psi β 1 f c .6
Page 211 and 212:
REFERENCES 1. Cook, R.A., and Halco
show all

Alternative Support Systems for Cantilever - National Transportation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?