DOCSLIB.ORG

Broadway Bridge Tied Arches

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Broadway Bridge Tied Arches BROADWAY BIOGRAPHY SUMMARY BRIDGE TIED Ms. McCombs is a Senior Arkansas Department of ARCHES Technical Advisor with 22 Transportation replaced the years of experience in HNTB’s Broadway Bridge over the Kansas City office. Her project Arkansas River along the experience includes analysis existing alignment in and design of tied-arch downtown Little Rock, bridges, deck arch bridges, Arkansas. The bridge was cable-stayed bridges, curved closed to traffic for 6 months girder bridges and to allow construction of the conventional I-girder bridges. approach spans and to float the She enjoys spending her time new arches into place. This mentoring younger engineers paper will discuss the design and helping people by considerations of the two volunteering as a member of basket-handled 440 foot tied the Technical Advisory network arch bridges over the Committee for Bridging the Arkansas River. During the Gap Africa, a non-profit design process, the designers organization designing and were met with challenges to NATALIE MCCOMBS, constructing pedestrian bridges satisfy design criteria that PE, SE in rural Africa. compounded and increased construction costs. The initial design criteria allowed for Ms. Sarah Larson is an installation of the River Rail Engineer III with nine years of Trolley required a floor system experience in HNTB’s Kansas with longitudinal composite City office. Her project stringers and transverse non- experience includes analysis composite floorbeams. and design of tied-arch Combined with the initial bridges, deck arch bridges, aesthetic inclination of the curved-girder bridges and arch, the length and depth of conventional I-girder bridges. non-composite floorbeams She enjoys working on drove the height of the floor challenging, complex bridge system and significantly projects and sharing her increased the weight of passion for engineering with structural steel. An informal those around her. value engineering study was performed to evaluate the SARAH LARSON, PE option of allowing for future expansion of the River Rail Trolley, and the aesthetics of an inclined arch. The study revealed ways to save costs to the project and still satisfy the owner’s aesthetic appeal with slightly modified design criteria. Page 1 of 8 BROADWAY BRIDGE TIED ARCHES Project Overview Constructing a project in the heart of downtown The existing Broadway Bridge, built in 1922, that Little Rock would be a challenge. Just like most connected North Little Rock and Little Rock, urban areas, open areas for construction lay-down Arkansas served the community as a vital yards are minimal. Additionally, there are several transportation link and a tribute to World War I bridges crossing the Arkansas River nearby with veterans. The existing structure, shown in Figure 1: height restrictions further impeding construction Existing Structure Figure 1, included one steel arch access options. Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the span, three additional concrete deck arch spans and project site indicating the number of adjacent several concrete beam spans. Extensive bridges and available staging areas for the project. deterioration of the concrete superstructure caused The red highlight shows the Broadway Bridge and the sidewalk to be closed. Chunks of concrete were the yellow highlights depict the available falling from the structure onto parking lots, trails, construction staging areas. The alignment for the roads and the river below. new structure did not have any options for relocation so the new structure would be built on the current alignment. Furthermore, the communities wanted to limit the closure time of the Broadway Bridge to six months or less. Figure 2: Project Limits Figure 1: Existing Structure Input from the Project Stakeholders was gathered The structure crosses the Arkansas River, a and they wanted the new structure to provide a navigable waterway on a lock and dam system, and tourist destination and a gathering place for local carries vehicular traffic into the downtown area with users. Pulaski County decided to contribute $20 nearly 24,500 vehicles a day and 1% truck traffic. million to the project for a signature structure. Needing to construct a bridge over the navigation span would contribute to the overall design approach Structure Type Selection to the project. Many factors were considered when selecting the In addition, the neighboring communities have an structure type. A recap of the concerns includes a 6- extensive trail system and one of the top month closure window, the same alignment as enhancements for the new bridge was to add existing structure, a gathering place for the local pedestrian and cyclist access with a new 16-foot users, aesthetics, navigation channel restrictions, wide shared-use-path and bridge-to-ground access vertical clearance for the navigation channel, the ramps on both sides of the river. The existing traffic lock and dam system, and limited construction capacity was adequate with four 11-foot traffic laydown areas. Structure types considered for the lanes, two in each direction, and two 4-foot replacement structure included a cable-stayed shoulders. Page 2 of 8 structure, a plate girder bridge, a delta-plate girder cast once the arch spans were set in place. This bridge and a tied arch structure. method keeps the weight of the structure as low as possible to make the float-in a success. The cable-stayed option provided aesthetic appeal and could span the entire river. However, the traffic Ultimately, the best bridge type for the site and site closure window would be more than 6-months and restrictions was the tied arch. Two 440-foot basket- would not be acceptable. Additionally, the costs for handled steel tied arch spans were chosen for the this structure were not feasible and it was not main span river crossing and plate girder spans were selected. used for the approach. The plate girder option called for an increased A general layout of the floor system includes structure depth and required a grade raise to meet the stringers spaced at 7-foot 6-inches and floorbeams navigation clearance. This option lacked aesthetic spaced at 36-foot 8-inches along the length of the tie appeal but was easy to fabricate. Accelerated bridge span. construction techniques were considered but ultimately the plate girder option was not selected. Original Design Criteria A delta plate girder has some aesthetic appeal but The initial stakeholder input indicated the original restricted the navigation span. The construction of design criteria for the project would include the delta girder extended the construction time and accommodating the future River Rail Trolley and an was not selected. aesthetic feature of the “nearly touching” two inclined arches. The benefits of the tied arch structure included the aesthetic appeal of the basket-handled arches and a A River Rail Trolley system is used to connect Little shallower superstructure to minimize the effects of Rock and North Little Rock. The system currently the vertical clearance issues in the navigation span. only has one bridge route that crosses the Arkansas The construction advantages of using a steel tied River. The stakeholders wanted to be able to arch benefit the project in several ways. An accommodate the future River Rail Trolley accelerated bridge construction technique, floating expansion on the new structure in the future. They the arches in place, significantly reduces the traffic wanted a minimally invasive construction method closure window and can be accomplished within the that would allow for lightweight construction 6-month closure period. The arches can be equipment to make the modifications to the structure fabricated off-site. The erection of the structure on should the need arise. The minimally invasive barges can occur on the water and does not tie up the construction method was to use a thickened slab and limited construction laydown yards. The arches can allow concrete notches to be cut in the deck to allow be floated into place within a 24-hour window in the for the trolley rails. This idea worked well for the navigation channel thus reducing the overall impact steel plate girder approaches. The girders were to the water traffic. parallel to each other and allowed the slab to be thickened over two plate girders to accommodate the The tied arch steel framing system consisting of two additional 8-inch concrete deck as shown in Figure tie girders, two arch ribs, bracing, ten stringers and 3. thirteen floorbeams per span, is a stable structure that can be moved. Steel stay-in-place form work Applying the same provisions for the future trolley was added to the structure to allow the slab to be system posed challenges for the tied arch spans. The Figure 3: Future River Tail Trolley Cross PageSection 3 of – Approach8 Span and Original Design Criteria floor system consisted of longitudinal stringers and transverse floorbeams. The transverse floorbeams interfered with the thickened slab. The first of three options included a 10-inch uniform haunch. This would allow a 2” haunch over the two stringers under the thickened slab and a 10” haunch over the floorbeams and the eight additional stringers. This posed challenges for the composite beam design with a less than desirable load path and it was deemed unreasonable and not selected. The second option presented was to use only transverse members that were notched to match the desired slab thickening. The stringer/floorbeam Figure 4: Typical Section - Original Design Criteria option allowed for a 36-foot 8-inch spacing between floorbeams. The floorbeam only option resulted in The arch rib inclination lead to an unusual pattern at least 3 times the number of floorbeams for a 12- for the arch rib lateral bracing. The spacing of the foot floorbeam spacing and a thicker deck to span arch ribs at the apex were near 8-foot from between the floorbeams.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Modern Steel Construction 2009
    Reprinted from 2009 MSC Steel Bridges 2009 Welcome to Steel Bridges 2009! This publication contains all bridge related information collected from Modern Steel Construction magazine in 2009. These articles have been combined into one organized document for our readership to access quickly and easily. Within this publication, readers will find information about Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC), short span steel bridge solutions, NSBA Prize Bridge winners, and advancement in coatings technologies among many other interesting topics. Readers may also download any and all of these articles (free of charge) in electronic format by visiting www.modernsteel.org. The National Steel Bridge Alliance would like to thank everyone for their strong dedication to improving our nation’s infrastructure, and we look forward to what the future holds! Sincerely, Marketing Director National Steel Bridge Alliance Table of Contents March 2009: Up and Running in No Time........................................................................................... 3 March 2009: Twice as Nice .................................................................................................................. 6 March 2009: Wide River ..................................................................................................................... 8 March 2009: Over the Rails in the Other Kansas City ........................................................................ 10 July 2009: Full House .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ch. 407 Structural Steel
    2012 INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION—2012 DESIGN MANUAL CHAPTER 407 Steel Structure NOTE: References to material in 2011 Design Manual have been highlighted in blue throughout this document. 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 5 407-1A Plate Thicknesses ........................................................................................................ 5 407-1B Flange Grouping for Fabrication ................................................................................ 5 407-1C Girder Weld Splice Details ......................................................................................... 5 407-1D Safety Handrail Details ............................................................................................... 5 407-1E Bearing Restraints ....................................................................................................... 5 407-2A Weathering Steel (Paint Limits) .................................................................................. 5 407-2B Drip Bar Details .......................................................................................................... 5 407-4A Annual Traffic Growth Rates ...................................................................................... 5 407-4B Schematic of Top Flange
    [Show full text]
  • Steel Bridge Design Handbook Vol. 13
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Steel Bridge Design Handbook Bracing System Design Publication No. FHWA-HIF-16-002 - Vol. 13 December 2015 FOREWORD This handbook covers a full range of topics and design examples intended to provide bridge engineers with the information needed to make knowledgeable decisions regarding the selection, design, fabrication, and construction of steel bridges. Upon completion of the latest update, the handbook is based on the Seventh Edition of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The hard and competent work of the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) and prime consultant, HDR, Inc., and their sub-consultants, in producing and maintaining this handbook is gratefully acknowledged. The topics and design examples of the handbook are published separately for ease of use, and available for free download at the NSBA and FHWA websites: http://www.steelbridges.org, and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge, respectively. The contributions and constructive review comments received during the preparation of the handbook from many bridge engineering processionals across the country are very much appreciated. In particular, I would like to recognize the contributions of Bryan Kulesza with ArcelorMittal, Jeff Carlson with NSBA, Shane Beabes with AECOM, Rob Connor with Purdue University, Ryan Wisch with DeLong’s, Inc., Bob Cisneros with High Steel Structures, Inc., Mike Culmo with CME Associates, Inc., Mike Grubb with M.A. Grubb & Associates, LLC, Don White with Georgia Institute of Technology, Jamie Farris with Texas Department of Transportation, and Bill McEleney with NSBA. Joseph L. Hartmann, PhD, P.E. Director, Office of Bridges and Structures Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Steel Bridge Design Handbook
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 4: Three-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel Tub Girder Bridge Publication No. FHWA-HIF-16-002 - Vol. 24 December 2015 FOREWORD This handbook covers a full range of topics and design examples intended to provide bridge engineers with the information needed to make knowledgeable decisions regarding the selection, design, fabrication, and construction of steel bridges. Upon completion of the latest update, the handbook is based on the Seventh Edition of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The hard and competent work of the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) and prime consultant, HDR, Inc., and their sub-consultants, in producing and maintaining this handbook is gratefully acknowledged. The topics and design examples of the handbook are published separately for ease of use, and available for free download at the NSBA and FHWA websites: http://www.steelbridges.org, and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge, respectively. The contributions and constructive review comments received during the preparation of the handbook from many bridge engineering processionals across the country are very much appreciated. In particular, I would like to recognize the contributions of Bryan Kulesza with ArcelorMittal, Jeff Carlson with NSBA, Shane Beabes with AECOM, Rob Connor with Purdue University, Ryan Wisch with DeLong’s, Inc., Bob Cisneros with High Steel Structures, Inc., Mike Culmo with CME Associates, Inc., Mike Grubb with M.A. Grubb & Associates, LLC, Don White with Georgia Institute of Technology, Jamie Farris with Texas Department of Transportation, and Bill McEleney with NSBA. Joseph L. Hartmann, PhD, P.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Over Jones Falls. This Bridge Was Originally No
    The same eastbound movement from Rockland crosses Bridge 1.19 (miles west of Hollins) over Jones Falls. This bridge was originally no. 1 on the Green Spring Branch in the Northern Central numbering scheme. PHOTO BY MARTIN K VAN HORN, MARCH 1961 /COLLECTION OF ROBERT L. WILLIAMS. On October 21, 1959, the Interstate Commerce maximum extent. William Gill, later involved in the Commission gave notice in its Finance Docket No. streetcar museum at Lake Roland, worked on the 20678 that the Green Spring track west of Rockland scrapping of the upper branch and said his boss kept would be abandoned on December 18, 1959. This did saying; "Where's all the steel?" Another Baltimore not really affect any operations on the Green Spring railfan, Mark Topper, worked for Phillips on the Branch. Infrequently, a locomotive and a boxcar would removal of the bridge over Park Heights Avenue as a continue to make the trip from Hollins to the Rockland teenager for a summer job. By the autumn of 1960, Team Track and return. the track through the valley was just a sad but fond No train was dispatched to pull the rail from the memory. Green Spring Valley. The steel was sold in place to the The operation between Hollins and Rockland con- scrapper, the Phillips Construction Company of tinued for another 11/2 years and then just faded away. Timonium, and their crews worked from trucks on ad- So far as is known, no formal abandonment procedure jacent roads. Apparently, Phillips based their bid for was carried out, and no permission to abandon was the job on old charts that showed the trackage at its ' obtained.
    [Show full text]
  • Glulam Timber Bridges for Local Roads Zachary Charles Carnahan South Dakota State University
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Theses and Dissertations 2017 Glulam Timber Bridges for Local Roads Zachary Charles Carnahan South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Carnahan, Zachary Charles, "Glulam Timber Bridges for Local Roads" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1173. http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/1173 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GLULAM TIMBER BRIDGES FOR LOCAL ROADS BY ZACHARY CHARLES CARNAHAN A thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science Major in Civil Engineering South Dakota State University 2017 iii DISCLAIMER The contents of this report, funded in part through grant(s) from the Federal Highway Administration, reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the South Dakota Department of Transportation, the State Transportation Commission, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was funded by the South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) and the Mountain Plains Consortium (MPC) University Transportation Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Steel Bridge Design Handbook
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A: Two-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge ArchivedPublication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 21 November 2012 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Quality Assurance Statement The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the publicArchived in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A: Two-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge Publication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 21 November 2012 Archived Archived Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 21 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A: Two-Span November 2012 Continuous Straight Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Karl Barth, Ph.D. (West Virginia University) 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. HDR Engineering, Inc. 11 Stanwix Street 11. Contract or Grant No. Suite 800 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Skew Angle on the Behavior of Bowstring Girder Bridge
    International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 06 Issue: 01 | Jan 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 Effect of Skew Angle on the Behavior of Bowstring Girder Bridge Santhosh Kumar R1, Dr. Mahadev Achar M2, Dr. H Eramma3 1Post Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University B D T College of Engineering, Karnataka, India 2Senior Vice-President, Transys Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India 3Associate Professor, Dept. Civil Engineering, University B D T College of Engineering, Karnataka, India ---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract - The presence of Skew angle in the bridge plays 1.1 History of Bridge Development an important role. All the times it is not possible to have 0 degree skew bridge or straight bridge, therefore at certain Construction of bridges is not a new science. Since as situations it is necessary to provide certain amount of skew to per reference earliest bridge available across Nile-river built the bridge. In such situations special attention required to in about 2650 BC. The giant trees felling across natural understand the behavior of bridge. The stresses distribution in streams were the simple bridges to cross streams for ancient the bridge is not uniform and it varies with the skew angle. peoples and that was the basic idea for them to development Few studies shows that up to 20 degree skew angle the of bridges. From this idea they started using timber as basic behavior of the bridge is similar to the straight bridge, but material for bridge building and this has been followed by beyond 20 degree the behavior is quite different.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Art for Long Span Prestressed Concrete Bridges of Segmental Construction
    STATE OF THE ART FOR LONG SPAN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES OF SEGMENTAL CONSTRUCTION Segmental prestressed concrete bridges are described in terms of cross-sectional shape, layout of tendons, casting procedures, jointing techniques, and design details. Techniques of analysis for structures of this type are reviewed. Prospects for use of this type of construction in the United States are discussed and current work outlined. Geoffrey C. Lacey John E. Breen Ned H. Burns University of New South Wales The University of Texas The University of Texas Sydney, Australia Austin, Texas Austin, Texas In highway bridge construction access and minimize obstruction. there is an increasing trend toward With stream crossings, even longer the use of longer spans. This trend is spans in the 300 ft. (90 m) range will the result of a number of different sometimes be necessary. When all requirements relating to safety, factors are considered the trend to- economy, function and esthetics. ward long span bridges seems irre- The February 1967 report(38> of versible. the special AASHO Traffic Safety Precast I-girders, of the type now Committee calls for the "adoption widely used for spans up to 120 ft. and use of two-span bridges for over- (37 m), will not be adequate for passes crossing divided highways .. these longer spans. It was pro- to eliminate the bridge piers normal- posed(48) that AASHO Type VII- ly placed adjacent to the outside girders might be used for simple shoulders." To comply with these spans up to 140 ft. (43 m) and con- safety criteria, two-span, three-span, tinuous spans up to 160 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • G 13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis.Pdf
    G13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis 2nd Edition American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials National Steel Bridge Alliance AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration Copyright © 2014 by the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration All rights reserved. ii G13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis PREFACE This document is a standard developed by the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration. The primary goal of the Collaboration is to achieve steel bridge design and construction of the highest quality and value through standardization of the design, fabrication, and erection processes. Each standard represents the consensus of a diverse group of professionals. It is intended that Owners adopt and implement Collaboration standards in their entirety to facilitate the achievement of standardization. It is understood, however, that local statutes or preferences may prevent full adoption of the document. In such cases Owners should adopt these documents with the exceptions they feel are necessary. Cover graphics courtesy of HDR Engineering. DISCLAIMER The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the material contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty of the part of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) or of any other person named herein, that this information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or patents.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge News January 2021
    State Aid Bridge News January 2021 (Carrolton Township Bridge 23536, Heron Rd. over the South Branch of the Root River, Fillmore County, Minnesota, a winner of the 2019 MnDOT - AGC Bridge Construction Awards.) Bridge Inspection General In the 2020 MnDOT Bridge Inspection Seminars, the afternoon session for Program Adminis- Contents: trators focused on a SIMS tutorial and a Bridge Inspection Program Administrator Checklist (PDF). Another thorough resource to supplement the PA checklist is the Bridge and Structure • Bridge Inspection General (pg. 1-2) Inspection Program Manual (BSIPM) (PDF). Also, at the PA session a presentation on “Stuff • Fatigue Study Update (pg. 2-3) You Should Now” as a PA was delivered. We would encourage all designated PA’s to revisit • Bridge Maintenance (pg. 3-4) this presentation and other available PA materials and resources before each new inspection season to assure your local bridge inspection program remains fully compliant from year to • Bridge Hydraulic News (pg. 4-5) year. But always remember MnDOT staff in the Bridge Inventory Management Unit and • MCEA County Engineers Bridge Committee Bridge Inspection Unit, along with State Aid Bridge and your DSAE are available to advise and Update (pg. 5-6) to help you through situations that can obstruct or distract your efforts to fulfill the NBIS • Local BRIM Update (pg. 6) regulations. And, our friendly FHWA Bridge Engineer, Tim Anderson is your key resource with related NBIS matters and other FHWA Bridge programs. Tim’s contact information can be • 2020 Featured Local Bridge Projects (pg. 7) found on the FHWA Minnesota Division Staff Directory webpage.
    [Show full text]
  • Difference Between Deck Type and Through Type Bridge and Their Components
    Difference between Deck Type and Through Type Bridge and their Components Naveen Choudhary 1 DEFERENCE BETWEEN DECK TYPE AND THROUGH TYPE RAILWAY BRIDGES • Deck-type bridges refer to those in which the road deck is carried on the top flange or on top of the supporting girders. • Through type bridge - The carriageway rests at the bottom level of the main load carrying members. In the through type plate girder bridge, the roadway or railway is placed at the level of bottom flanges. Mr. Naveen Choudhary, GEC Ajmer 2 DEFERENCE BETWEEN DECK TYPE AND THROUGH TYPE RAILWAY BRIDGES Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 3 DEFERENCE BETWEEN DECK TYPE AND THROUGH TYPE RAILWAY BRIDGES Through type deck bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 4 DEFERENCE BETWEEN DECK TYPE AND THROUGH TYPE RAILWAY BRIDGES Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 5 DEFERENCE BETWEEN DECK TYPE AND THROUGH TYPE RAILWAY BRIDGES Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 6 Through Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 7 Through Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 8 Through Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 9 Deck Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 10 Deck Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 11 Deck Type Bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 12 Cross-Section deck type bridge Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 13 Normal span ranges of bridge system Mr. Naveen Choudhary,GEC Ajmer 14 Normal span ranges of bridge system TYPE Maximum Span 500 m Steel arch bridge 240 m Steel bow-string girder bridge 1200 m Steel cable suspension bridge 30 m Steel plate girder 10 m Steel rolled beam bridge 180 m Steel truss bridge Mr.
    [Show full text]