Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?
Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?
(OP)
Recently, we have been involved in the task of connecting two adjacent bridge superstructures. These structures (and many similar ones exist) are exactly the same, were built at the same time, share the same substructure, but have two independent superstructures with their inside edges spaced only 50 mm apart. We are connecting these structures in order provide a completely (more or less) waterproof superstructure. Generally this has been a simple enough task. However, the question has come up as to why these superstructures were originally designed to act independently of each other.
Can anyone provide some feedback?
Can anyone provide some feedback?






RE: Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?
As for why, it may be just a simple explanation as the bridge width which is standardized (and there could be several different bridge widths) to accomondate a variety of roadway widths were developed. Hence the slab, design, girder design, and other appertunances are somewhat standard as well. This is my experience with one such state DOT.
Another reason might be construction. With the introduction of paving machines, a contractor is limited in the width of bridge deck he can place without having joints in the bridge decks. Where possible joints are always eliminated.
Just a couple of ideas.
RE: Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?
This means that there will be relative displacements under load at the joint and you should connect them with a sufficiently soft and/or ductile material, otherwise you could experience cracks (and water infiltrations) in your protective superstructure. The best solution should be to keep the superstructures separate.
prex
motori@xcalcs.com
XcalcS
Online tools for structural design
RE: Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?
RE: Connection of Adjacent Bridge Structures - why?