DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 16. Trail Bridges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 16. Trail Bridges Chapter 16. Trail Bridges ...................................................................................... 16-1 16.1. Bridge Site Evaluation ................................................................................ 16-1 16.2. Selecting a Bridge Design .......................................................................... 16-7 16.2.1. Log Stringer Bridge ................................................................................. 16-9 16.2.1.1. Applications .................................................................................... 16-9 16.2.1.2. Attributes ........................................................................................ 16-9 16.2.1.3. Limitations ...................................................................................... 16-9 16.2.1. Milled Stringer Bridge ........................................................................... 16-11 16.2.1.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-11 16.2.1.2. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-11 16.2.2. Glue-Laminated (Glulam) Stringer Bridge ............................................. 16-13 16.2.2.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-13 16.2.2.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-14 16.2.2.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-14 16.2.2.4. Drop Down Deck Design .............................................................. 16-15 16.2.2.5. Arched Bridge Design .................................................................. 16-17 16.2.3. Overhead Wooden Truss Bridge .......................................................... 16-17 16.2.3.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-17 16.2.3.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-17 16.2.3.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-18 16.2.4. Hip Truss Wooden Bridge ..................................................................... 16-19 16.2.4.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-19 16.2.4.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-19 16.2.4.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-20 16.2.5. All Weather Steel I Beam Bridge .......................................................... 16-20 16.2.5.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-20 16.2.5.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-20 16.2.5.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-21 16.2.6. Galvanized Steel I Beam Bridge ........................................................... 16-23 16.2.6.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-23 16.2.6.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-23 16.2.6.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-24 16.2.7. Steel Truss Bridge ................................................................................ 16-25 16.2.7.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-25 16.2.7.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-25 16.2.7.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-25 16.2.8. Aluminum Truss Bridge ........................................................................ 16-26 16.2.8.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-26 16.2.8.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-26 16.2.8.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-26 16.2.9. Fiber Reinforced Plastic (Fiberglass) I Beam Bridge ............................ 16-27 16-i 16.2.9.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-27 16.2.9.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-27 16.2.9.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-28 16.2.10. Fiber Reinforced Plastic (Fiberglass) Pony Truss Bridge .................. 16-28 16.2.10.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-28 16.2.10.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-28 16.2.10.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-29 16.2.11. Suspension Bridge ............................................................................ 16-29 16.2.11.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-29 16.2.11.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-30 16.2.11.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-30 16.2.12. Pipe Bridge ........................................................................................ 16-31 16.2.12.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-31 16.2.12.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-31 16.2.12.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-31 16.2.13. Architectural and Historical Considerations ....................................... 16-32 16.3. Selecting an Abutment Design ................................................................ 16-32 16.3.1. Earthen/Rock Abutment ........................................................................ 16-33 16.3.1.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-33 16.3.1.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-34 16.3.1.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-34 16.3.2. Soil/Rock Retention Abutments ............................................................ 16-34 16.3.3. Interlocking Wooden/Plastic Cribbed Abutment .................................... 16-35 16.3.3.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-35 16.3.3.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-35 16.3.4. Multi-Tier Rock Abutment ..................................................................... 16-36 16.3.4.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-36 16.3.4.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-37 16.3.4.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-37 16.3.5. Concrete Abutments ............................................................................. 16-38 16.3.5.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-38 16.3.5.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-38 16.3.5.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-38 16.3.6. Trestle Abutments ................................................................................ 16-39 16.3.6.1. Applications .................................................................................. 16-39 16.3.6.2. Attributes ...................................................................................... 16-40 16.3.6.3. Limitations .................................................................................... 16-42 16.3.7. Abutment Sills ....................................................................................... 16-42 16.3.7.1. Types of Abutment Sills ................................................................ 16-43 16.3.7.2. Sizing an Abutment Sill ................................................................ 16-44 16.3.7.3. Length of a Mudsill ....................................................................... 16-47 16-ii 16.4. Initial Best Management Practices .......................................................... 16-48 16.5. Abutment Layout ....................................................................................... 16-49 16.5.1. Establishing a Center Line and Clearing............................................... 16-49 16.5.2. Determining the Abutment Elevations .................................................. 16-51 16.5.3. Excavating Earthen Abutments and Abutment Foundations ................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications Arch Bridges
    10/23/2014 Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications • Bridges are used to span across distances that are difficult to otherwise pass through. • Rivers • Deep gorges • Other roadways Bridges and Applications Arch Bridges • There are four basic types of bridges – Arch – Beam – Suspension – Cable‐stayed • Each type has different design and is therefore better suited to different applications 1 10/23/2014 Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • Instead of pushing straight down, the weight of an arch bridge is carried outward along the curve of the arch to the supports at each end. Abutments, carry • These supports, called the abutments, carry the load the load and keep the ends of the bridge from spreading outward. and keep the ends of the bridge from spreading outward Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • When supporting its own weight and the • Today, materials like steel and pre‐stressed weight of crossing traffic, every part of the concrete have made it possible to build longer arch is under compression. and more elegant arches. • For this reason, arch bridges must be made of materials that are strong under compression. New River Gorge, – Rock West Virginia. – Concrete 2 10/23/2014 Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • Usually arch bridges employ vertical supports • Typically, arch bridges span between 200 and called spandrels to distribute the weight of 800 feet. the roadway to the arch below. Arch Bridges One of the most revolutionary arch bridges in recent years is the Natchez Trace Parkway Bridge in Franklin, Tennessee, which was opened to traffic in 1994. It's the first American arch bridge to be constructed from segments of precast concrete, a highly economical material.
    [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]
  • Timber Bridges Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance
    Timber Bridges Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Michael A. Ritter, Structural Engineer United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Ritter, Michael A. 1990. Timber Bridges: Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance. Washington, DC: 944 p. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author acknowledges the following individuals, Agencies, and Associations for the substantial contributions they made to this publication: For contributions to Chapter 1, Fong Ou, Ph.D., Civil Engineer, USDA Forest Service, Engineering Staff, Washington Office. For contributions to Chapter 3, Jerry Winandy, Research Forest Products Technologist, USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. For contributions to Chapter 8, Terry Wipf, P.E., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Structural Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. For administrative overview and support, Clyde Weller, Civil Engineer, USDA Forest Service, Engineering Staff, Washington Office. For consultation and assistance during preparation and review, USDA Forest Service Bridge Engineers, Steve Bunnell, Frank Muchmore, Sakee Poulakidas, Ron Schmidt, Merv Eriksson, and David Summy; Russ Moody and Alan Freas (retired) of the USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory; Dave Pollock of the National Forest Products Association; and Lorraine Krahn and James Wacker, former students at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. In addition, special thanks to Mary Jane Baggett and Jim Anderson for editorial consultation, JoAnn Benisch for graphics preparation and layout, and Stephen Schmieding and James Vargo for photographic support. iii iv CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 TIMBER AS A BRIDGE MATERIAL 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. l- 1 1.2 Historical Development of Timber Bridges ............................. l-2 Prehistory Through the Middle Ages ....................................... l-3 Middle Ages Through the 18th Century ................................... l-5 19th Century ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Design Example: Two-Span Continuous Straight Wide-Flange
    U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2B: Two-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel Wide-Flange Beam Bridge ArchivedPublication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 22 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 2B: Two-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel Wide-Flange Beam Bridge Publication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 22 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. 22 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2B: Two-Span November 2012 Continuous Straight Composite Steel Wide-Flange Beam 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]
  • Truss Bridges
    2009 Bridges and Structures Outline • Introduction of Project Organizers and Program o Overall Concept of the half day o Images of Bridges in NH, ME and MA that are examples of the 5 Bridge Designs Beam Bridge Arch Bridge Truss Bridge Suspension Bridge Cable-Stayed Bridge o Images of existing bridges other students / groups have done • Call off participants 1 through 5 o Creating 5 Groups (1 Group for each Bridge Design which creates 4 individuals per Bridge Design.) If more than 20 individuals, then count 1 thru 7 or 8 to create two or three more groups. There will then be 2 of the same bridge types for some of the 5 Bridge Designs. • Package of information for Groups o Groups to review material (Bridge to be wide enough to accept bricks) o Groups to discuss their Bridge o Groups to draw out their Bridge Design o Groups to divide into two sub-groups Cutting Assembly • Presentation of Bridges by Groups (short narrative as to-) o Type of Bridge o Design solution • Test of Weight that each bridge can handle o Groups document their thoughts on their Bridge • Awards / Overview of how and why bridges worked / did not work Materials: Balsa Wood Package for each Bridge Type Group 3’ long sticks maximum String / rope, Glue (Sobo,) Exacto knives, packing tape Other: Bricks or other items for weight Scale for measuring weight units Camera to document before, during and after bridge testing Two sawhorses for bridge weight test American Institute of Architects New Hampshire Chapter Schedule • Introduction of Team Members and Program: 10 minutes o Overall Concept of the Day: 10 minutes o Images of Bridges in NH, ME and MA that are examples of the 5 Bridge Designs 4 minutes Beam Bridge Arch Bridge Truss Bridge Suspension Bridge Cable-Stayed Bridge o Images of existing bridges other students / groups have done 4 minutes • Call off participants 1 through 5 8 minutes o Creating 5 Groups (1 Group for each Bridge Design which creates 4 individuals per Bridge Design.) If more than 20 individuals, then count 1 thru 7 or 8 to create two or three more groups.
    [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]
  • Lesson Plan – Primary Pensacola Bay Bridge Replacement Project Goes to School Program 2017/18 Primary School Edition
    PENSACOLA BAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT GoesGoes toto School!School! Gumdrop Bridge Lesson Plan – Primary Pensacola Bay Bridge Replacement Project Goes to School Program 2017/18 Primary School Edition Any teacher, school, or school district may reproduce this for classroom use without permission. This work may not be sold for profit. Concept by Pensacola Bay Bridge Specialty Outreach Team Version 1804 PENSACOLA BAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT Gumdrop Bridge Lesson Plan ELEMENTARY GRADE LEVELS Introduction: As an early introduction to architecture and engineering elementary school students may build a gumdrop bridge. Making a gumdrop bridge that is well designed means students using simple geometric shapes along with flexible joints, can create a structure that is deceptively strong and will not collapse under pressure. One bridge design that is common employs a pattern of squares and triangles that repeats. However, students are allowed to experiment to find the building strategy that suits their aesthetic preferences and class requirements. Students will be encouraged during the exercise to: • Demonstrate what types forces influence a bridge’s design • Design and build a model bridge that reaches the largest span bearing in mind the given constraints • Design and build a model that is able to hold the maximum amount of weight under given constraints. This lesson plan is meant to serve as a resource for teachers. Specifically, you will find supplemental classroom materials (both in-class worksheets, videos and student activity sheets) that are engaging for students and easy for you to implement, as well as applicable and relevant to the benefit of the new Pensacola Bay Bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Timber Bridges Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance
    Timber Bridges Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance Michael A. Ritter, Structural Engineer United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Ritter, Michael A. 1990. Timber Bridges: Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance. Washington, DC: 944 p. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author acknowledges the following individuals, Agencies, and Associations for the substantial contributions they made to this publication: For contributions to Chapter 1, Fong Ou, Ph.D., Civil Engineer, USDA Forest Service, Engineering Staff, Washington Office. For contributions to Chapter 3, Jerry Winandy, Research Forest Products Technologist, USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. For contributions to Chapter 8, Terry Wipf, P.E., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Structural Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. For administrative overview and support, Clyde Weller, Civil Engineer, USDA Forest Service, Engineering Staff, Washington Office. For consultation and assistance during preparation and review, USDA Forest Service Bridge Engineers, Steve Bunnell, Frank Muchmore, Sakee Poulakidas, Ron Schmidt, Merv Eriksson, and David Summy; Russ Moody and Alan Freas (retired) of the USDA Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory; Dave Pollock of the National Forest Products Association; and Lorraine Krahn and James Wacker, former students at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. In addition, special thanks to Mary Jane Baggett and Jim Anderson for editorial consultation, JoAnn Benisch for graphics preparation and layout, and Stephen Schmieding and James Vargo for photographic support. iii iv CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 TIMBER AS A BRIDGE MATERIAL 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................. l- 1 1.2 Historical Development of Timber Bridges ............................. l-2 Prehistory Through the Middle Ages ....................................... l-3 Middle Ages Through the 18th Century ................................... l-5 19th Century ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This Chapter Presents Background of the Study, Research Question, Research Objective, Significance Of
    CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter presents background of the study, research question, research objective, significance of research, scope and limitation of research, clarification of key term, and organization of writing. 1.1 Background of study Everybody knows that language is the most important thing in human life. (Finochiaro, 1974) argues that, language is an arbitrary vocal symbol which permits all people in a given culture, or other people who have learned the system of that culture, to communicate or to interact. Every human has a requirement to communicate with other. Language is a system of symbol that is meaningful and articulate sound which is arbitrary and conventional, which is used as a means communicating by a group of human being to give birth to feelings and thoughts. Shortly, the main function of language is for communication and interaction among people (Syamsuddin, 1986). Human beings need language as their communication because language as the branch of linguistic. Semantic is the systematic study of meaning, and linguistic semantic is the study of how language organize and express meanings (Charles, 1998). The researcher expects this study is useful for the other researcher who wishes to know about semantics. Moreover, semantics as an important branch of linguistics is interesting to be studies especially when it is applied to literary work such as song, poem and prose. In semantics, it studies about meanings. According to (Charles, 1998) the dimensions of meaning include reference and denotation, connotation, sense relations, lexical and grammatical meaning, morphemes, homonymy, polysemy, lexical ambiguity, sentence and meaning. Besides that, according to (Chaer, 2002) kind of meaning include a lexical, grammatical and contextual meaning, referential and non referential meaning, denotative and connotative meaning, conceptual and associative meaning, and lexeme.
    [Show full text]
  • Grammyvinnarna Halestorm Till Sverige I Höst
    2013-04-29 09:22 CEST Grammyvinnarna Halestorm till Sverige i höst Grammyvinnarna Halestorm till Sverige i Grammyvinnarna Halestorm till Sverige i höst höst Grammyvinnande metalbandet Halestorm kommer till Sverige igen med sin svettiga Grammyvinnande metalbandet Halestorm liveshow. Klart sedan tidigare är att kommer till Sverige igen med sin svettiga bandet kommer vara support till Alter liveshow. Klart sedan tidigare är att Bridge i Stockholm den 29 oktober, men bandet kommer vara support till Alter nu kan vi också meddela att Halestorm Bridge i Stockholm den 29 oktober, men intar Brewhouse i Göteborg den 30 nu kan vi också meddela att Halestorm oktober och KB i Malmö den 1 november intar Brewhouse i Göteborg den 30 för två egna brutala konserter. Biljetterna oktober och KB i Malmö den 1 november släpps till försäljning den 25 april. för två egna brutala konserter. Biljetterna Halestorm har sedan de senast satte fot släpps till försäljning den 25 april. på svensk markvunnit en Grammy för ”Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance” som Halestorm har sedan de senast satte fot första tjejfrontade band någonsin, en på svensk markvunnit en Grammy för triumf som sätter standarden högt. ”The ”Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance” som Strange Case of...”, bandets högoktaniga första tjejfrontade band någonsin, en andra album blev snabbt en triumf som sätter standarden högt. ”The kritikerälskling och har klättrat långt upp Strange Case of...”, bandets högoktaniga på listorna världen över och fansen har andra album blev snabbt en varit som galna. Deras popinjicerade kritikerälskling och har klättrat långt upp metalpunk har funnit sin publik som på listorna världen över och fansen har törstar efter feta riff och monstruösa varit som galna.
    [Show full text]
  • Brian Marshall/Alter Bridge
    30 Bass Guitar MaGazine Brian Marshall 5pp_BC.indd 30 09/01/2012 16:10 Climbing to the top of the rock and roll tree isn’t without its sacrifices. But Brian Marhsall wouldn’t have it any other way Photos by Tina Korhonen ou’ll often hear rock Prima donna rock star he ain’t! you go to. If you’re lucky you some fans have taken time to stars complaining We get talking about the might get to see some of the come around to it.’ about their lot in UK tour that has just ended, major sights, but with travel, When Creed crumbled in life. If they’re not which by all accounts went soundcheck, media stuff and 2004, Brian hooked up with being hounded by the press superbly with sell-out dates, all that, you don’t get much the rest of the band, minus Ythat they often court, then and conversation naturally time to explore. I also find singer Scott Stapp, and formed they’re struggling with life turns to life on the road. Sure, the time zone changes and Alter Bridge. Myles Kennedy on the road, away from their it has its ups and downs, but temperature changes hard took up lead vocals and the families and creature comforts, by and large it’s a pretty good on the body. Going from band released their first album, or they have serious issues life, according to Brian. ‘You somewhere warm to suddenly a collection of songs that were with the current state of the do have to make sacrifices.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge Strength: Truss Vs. Arch Vs. Beam
    CALIFORNIA STATE SCIENCE FAIR 2015 PROJECT SUMMARY Name(s) Project Number Christopher J. Nagelvoort J0322 Project Title Bridge Strength: Truss vs. Arch vs. Beam Abstract Objectives/Goals The objective of this experiment was to determine which bridge design is the strongest against heavy loads through deflection testing on three bridge models. Also the goal was to understand and analyze how much greater the strength would be between the three models and plausibly why their strengths differ. Methods/Materials The project began with the design and then construction of the bridge models that were 0.75 meters long, out of glue and wooden popsicle sticks. Before deflection testing occurred, supplies need were a bucket, bag of sand, string, scale, caliber, construction paper, and a testing stand to stabilize the bridge models before loads were attached. Finally deflection testing initiated by loading each bridge model with 1 # 7 pounds of sand, with 1 pound increments. For each load the deflection was measured and recorded. Results For cumulative deflection, the truss bridge under 7 pounds of load deflected 0.2 cm. The arch bridge under 7 pounds achieved 0.69 cm. While the span/beam bridge deflected by 2.01 cm under the same 7 pound load. The deflection for each 1 pound load increment was also measured and recorded. This deflection is referred as incremental deflection. The average incremental deflection for the truss bridge was 0.0285 cm. For the arch bridge, the average is 0.0985 cm and the span/beam bridge#s average is 0.2871 cm. Conclusions/Discussion With the bridge#s designs researched and tested, it was determined that the truss is the strongest bridge, with arch the second, and span/beam dramatically weaker than the other two.
    [Show full text]