Assessment of the Bill Emerson Memorial Bridge - FTP Directory ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10. Appendix B: Unit Conversion1 m = 3.28 ft1 cm/sec 2 = 0.394 in/sec 21 km = 0.621 miles1 kN/m 3 = 6.38 lb/ft 31 kN/m = 68.6 lb/ft1 kN-m = 0.7371 kip-ft1 MPa = 0.145 ksi106
Missouri Department <strong>of</strong> TransportationOrganizational ResultsP. O. Box 270Jefferson City, MO 65102573.526.43351 888 ASK MODOTinnovation@modot.mo.gov
Page 1 and 2:
Organizational Results Research Rep
Page 3 and 4:
TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
Page 5 and 6:
Executive SummaryOpen to traffic on
Page 7 and 8:
8. All cables behave elastically un
Page 9 and 10:
Table of ContentsExecutive summary.
Page 11 and 12:
List of Figure CaptionsFigure 1.1 A
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 5.30 29 th mode shape (1.032
Page 15 and 16:
1. Introduction1.1. GeneralCable-st
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 1.1Artist rendering of the B
Page 19 and 20:
Expansionand lateralearthquakerestr
Page 21 and 22:
3. Evaluate the model by conducting
Page 23 and 24:
2. Automatic Retrieval of Peak Acce
Page 25 and 26:
2.2.3. Map/Find stationsClicking th
Page 27 and 28:
2.2.5. Displaying seismogramsTo dis
Page 29 and 30:
Figure 2.8Directory chooser2.2.6. S
Page 31 and 32:
3.2. Seismic instrumentation networ
Page 33 and 34:
The main bridge from Bent 1 to Pier
Page 35 and 36:
(a) South side of deck at support o
Page 37 and 38:
(a) North side of deck at middle of
Page 39 and 40:
The seismic responses at the top (T
Page 41 and 42:
Polyreference Complex Exponential (
Page 43 and 44:
are evaluated and presented in Figu
Page 45 and 46:
0.353.50.330.252.5Amplitude0.20.15A
Page 47 and 48:
1 x 10-4 Frequency(Hz)Amplitude0.90
Page 49 and 50:
Amplitude0.20.180.160.140.120.10.08
Page 51 and 52:
Amplitude0.20.180.160.140.120.10.08
Page 53 and 54:
1.20.80.400 100 200 300 400 500 600
Page 55 and 56:
4. Finite Element Modeling of Bill
Page 57 and 58:
Since the cable stays are connected
Page 59 and 60:
Table 4.3Initial property of cables
Page 61 and 62:
Table 4.4Spring and damping coeffic
Page 63 and 64:
(a) View of the entire bridge(b) Vi
Page 65 and 66:
4.6. RemarksA detailed 3-D FE model
Page 67 and 68:
knω = (5.4)nm nSimilarly, when dam
Page 69 and 70: mainly corresponds to the vertical
Page 71 and 72: thFigure 5.10 9 mode shape (0.740Hz
Page 73 and 74: thFigure 5.19 18 mode shape (0.947H
Page 75 and 76: Figure 5.27 26 th mode shape (0.977
Page 77 and 78: When the bridge deck moves up and d
Page 79 and 80: 1.1Frequency (Hz)0.90.70.5BC Case 1
Page 81 and 82: 1.1Frequency(Hz)0.90.70.5Plus 0Plus
Page 83 and 84: no difference among the three cases
Page 85 and 86: The FE model of the bridge was vali
Page 87 and 88: 10.6TestFE model0.2-0.20 100 200 30
Page 89 and 90: 1.20.80.40-0.4TestFE model0 100 200
Page 91 and 92: differences is that the exact locat
Page 93 and 94: (a) Vertical acceleration time hist
Page 95 and 96: The FE model of the cable-stayed br
Page 97 and 98: Displacement (m)0.30.20.10-0.1-0.2X
Page 99 and 100: Station D1 (before amplification) a
Page 101 and 102: ending of the tower as shown in Fig
Page 103 and 104: symmetric about the centerline of t
Page 105 and 106: Tensile stress (MPa)800750700650600
Page 107 and 108: 7. Conclusions and RecommendationsB
Page 109 and 110: The vast arrays of acceleration dat
Page 111 and 112: 14. Cunha A, Caetano and Delgado T.
Page 113 and 114: 42. Song, W., Giraldo, D.F., Clayto
Page 115 and 116: Figure A.2 Vertical stiffness and d
Page 117 and 118: A.2 Group Interaction FactorThe cro
Page 119: For a group of piles with identical
show all

Assessment of the Bill Emerson Memorial Bridge - FTP Directory ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?