Load Tests on the New Railway Bridges at Tunyogmatolcs and Banreve
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PERIODICA POLYTECHNICA SER. CiVIL ENG. VOL. 35, NOS. 3-4, PP. 265-293 {1991} LOAD TESTS ON THE NEW RAILWAY BRIDGES AT TUNYOGMATOLCS AND BANREVE A. SZITTNER, M. K,,(LL6 and 1. KORONDI Department of Steel Structures Technical University, H-1521 Budapest Received: January 20, 1992. Abstract In this paper, the results of load tests performed on two railway bridges opened to traffic recently are demonstrated. In the course of static measurement, the deflection of the bridge and the stresses in selected points were measured. Dynamic measurements com prised natural frequencies, dynamic factor and dynamic excess. The measurement results obtained were compared with the calculated deflections and stresses. Comparison of model test results for the Simontornya bridge in the design stage and measurement results for the structurally similar Banreve bridge is of special interest. K eywo7'ds: static, dynamic. load test, railway bridge. The Department of Steel Structures at the Technical University of Bu dapest performed the examination of the above bridges in Hungary prior to opening them to traffic. The Railway Bridge over the River Szamos at Tunyogrnatolcs The bridge is a continuous, welded truss girder open above with cross girder distances of 5750 mm and a span layout of 4x46 m. The structure was built with box-girder profiles and HSFG field joints (Fig. 1). The floor structure was constructed with two stringers at a distance of 1500 mm from each other and a continuous flange plate above, which is connected also to the flange-plate of the cross girder. The upper flange is an orthotropic plate. The floor structure works together with the bottom chord of the main girder through the joint at the cross-girders and through the built in brake structures. This contribution was not taken into consideration regarding the main girder, but the floor girders were dimensioned for the overloading from the contribution effect. The tie-plates (Geo plates) were bonded to the flange of the stringers. 266 A. SZITTNER et al. The bridge was designed by the planning bureau UVATERV, manu factured and assembled by the factory GANZ-MAVAG. The field erecting in the axis of the bridge took place on the embankments, and then the whole bridge was pulled longitudinally into its ultimate place. The task of the Department was: examination of the structural behaviour during the erection, completing the static and the dynamic load test. Fig. 1, Main girder of the bridge at Tunyogmatolcs, and the locomotives used for the load test. Examination of the Structural Behaviour during Erection In the course of the pull-in operation" the most unfavourable situation from force theory point of view was developed when the front part of the bridge was functioning as a cantilever in 7 frame-joint length. This state was controlled by disassembling the supporting piles before starting the pull in operation. Before the disassembling of piles, measuring stations were developed in the middle of the bottom and upper chords at the support for strain-gage measurement of Pfender-type. After disassembling the piles, the following average stresses were measured: BRIDGES AT TUNYOGMATOLCS AND BANREVE 267 13579no~~~~~~v~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~m~ 012345678 91011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132 ~~5750 ~I. 8·5750 + 8·5750 .1_ 8·5750 '1 ~~ Span 11. 4. 46 Cl 171 Span Ill. Span IV. ..j ccfE Q~ l£.~~tfl @N ~~Qj~11~1OCX)~~~ __ I ~~~ 1F-6~'2¥00~k¥N~16~'2?00~k~N*I=====I====~========~=========9ICD M62 M62 I 1#i#i#i#:! @N IF=====~i~~I~~i====I==~======~I@ @N I#HW~ @N F=======*=======~I~~~~~~I===*!==~I® I I (Z)N F=====~======~========!F~~~~~~I® I @N '"lli-#t#H# ~t-ffi-#i! @N F=----~~----~~IF===~I====FI uy~m~~~=pI========~IQD 1#i##t#t I i#j#'1#iit F====1==~1~~=1~~1========91~~~~1@ I @N F=nH#~~I~~~IF#H#~~~~~IF=~,r===F======9I@ F=====~~~~'~#Hft~~!F~~~~~==FI ==~==~I@ I I N F=======*=======~=#H#~~%H#==~I~==~#Htt~~I® oof- Fehergyarmat TRAIN INFLUENCE-LINE M62 -I> M62 The train-set consisting of two M 62 locos ~'-mitt slops on the cross-girders with its front-axle FI~I~I ~!~'~~i~~!~!~I~~====~~=========F==========~IQID o 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10 etc. cross-girder M62~-~ 1~1~!~i~~i~!~i~!~======7=~==========~F==========9I~ 1 11 21 ~ 415161 7181 etc. cross-tie 1 locomotive M62 slops on the selected cross-tie with its front-axle Fig. 2. Load positions applied with the load test. 268 A. SZITTNER et al. Table 1 Railway Bridge at Tunyogmatolcs Comparison between the measured (M) and calculated (C) stresses in the course of static load test I\umber Loaded Span Support Span Support IV m-IV III II-III of load span 7-9 8-10 15-17 16-18 23-25 32-34 position Total load A A A A A A 232.4cm2 297.6cm2 166cm2 21.5.2cm 2 215.2cm 2 193.3cm2 1 . Span I -0.042 0.037 -0.126 0.103 0.195 -0.623 2.: C -0.0427 0.037 -0.126 0.103 0.19.5 -0.623 3 0.211 -0.181 0.608 -0.500 -0.946 3.028 C 0.211 -0.181 0.608 -0.500 -0.946 3.028 Ni 0.06 0.92 0.43 -0.69 -0.19 3.16 M 0.08 -0.36 0.43 -0.72 -0.41 3.23 6 Span III -1.029 0.908 -3.089 2.542 4.244 3.028 C -1.029 0.908 -3.089 2.542 4.244 3.028 2.: M -0.53 0.92 -2.10 2.24 2.83 2.07 NI -0.50 0.96 -2.18 2.30 3.00 2.35 8 Span IV .5.139 -4.017 -1.681 3.083 -7.483 -0.623 C 5.139 -4.017 -1.681 3.083 -7.483 -0.623 2.: M 3.32 4.01 -2.41 2.70 -0.84 -0.37 M 3.30 3.78 -2.47 2. -0.91 -0.25 11 -0.042 0.037 -0.126 0.103 0.195 -0.623 Span II -1.029 0.908 -3.089 2.542 4.244 3.028 C -1.071 0.945 -3.215 2.645 4.439 2.40.5 2.: M -0.52 1.30 -2.14 2.69 2.91 1.80 M -0.50 1.11 -2.27 2.67 2.88 1.78 12 Span II 0.211 -0.181 0.608 -0.500 -0.946 3.028 Span IV 5.139 -4.017 -1.681 3.083 -1.483 -0.623 2.: C .5.350 -4.198 -1.073 2.583 -2.429 2.405 M 3.30 4.16 -1.95 2.00 -1.18 1.57 M 3.32 4.017 2.02 -1.29 0.171 14 Span I -0.0142 0.037 -0.126 0.103 0.195 -0.623 Span II 0.191 -0.170 0.573 -0.471 -0.91 2.848 2.: C 0.149 -0.133 0.447 -0.368 -0.696 2.225 M 0.04 0.27 0.34 -0.41 -0.25 2.01 M 0.04 0.15 0.28 -0.34 -0.18 2.00 15 Span II 0.211 -0.181 0.608 -0.500 -0.946 3.028 Span m -1.029 0.908 -3.089 2,542 4.244 3.028 2.: C -0.818 0.727 -2.481 -2.042 3.289 6.056 M -0.40 0.98 -1.61 1.88 2.29 .5.47 M -0.35 -0.89 -1.74 2.03 2.47 5.47 16 Span m 1.094 0.967 -3.283 -2.702 4.345 2.848 Span IV 5.139 -4.017 -1.681 3.083 -1.483 -0.623 2.: C 4.045 -3.050 -4.967 5.785 2.862 2.225 M 2.79 -2.99 -4.85 4.73 2.09 1.79 M 2.70 -2.89 5.06 4.6.5 2.17 2.53 BRIDGES AT TUSYOG.lfATOLCS AND B.4NREVE 269 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 jSlVVVVVSI"){VN\l\I\lV'){V\N\/\I\l\j\/\7 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 2729 31 33 35 o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 A _4 C?lculated train influence- 1-M62 2-M62 2+3 IBar 15-17j 1?Ii~18rr? -Ime for 2-M62 1+2+3+4 ---/-2- 1~4 1213' 9~6 - 3 ...... --., , ..... " - 2Jl;I, 3 - 8"+'" 7 N /' '- 4 --- ,""- " 11 14 E -2 /.: - '""''' '---- ..... " _....... ::;.--..::::--- ". 1+2+3+4 1$4 II /,' fi;.$.o •• ' .-~~"""_-- '<:----0:.<. .... .... ~:,~ 1+4 ' Z -1 ' .-- •• -2 2, 3 ~ O~~~~~~~~~~~~-L~~~==~~~ 1" M62 Calculated train --------··5i·~·54 A I 11 I I I -I> _ ....I.l0fluence-line for 2-M62 52,Lj.l'53 -~ ~~~~~~~~~"~"'+.-+. -::;---~-~---*- ~~~~-,--~I>- N 1 IBar 7-91 66 67 68 69 § 2 1 Z 51 ~54 'l~T631 i 59,$,,56 ~ 3 52 53 61 64 58 57 4 21 *2~Bar 16-"ij29 +0 26 5 22', 23 28 '4!.27 O~~~~~-r-r'-'-~~",,~~~~~~~~~~~~'~ IBar 23-251 116 117:n8 119 101~104ilE~fGlil09~,107 102~03 JP - 108'T'110 111 114 Fig- 3, Train influence lines of the stresses :11easured in the chords 270 A. SZITTNER et al. - on the upper chord bar No.