×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Cooper E90 surcharge on bridge approach fill

Cooper E90 surcharge on bridge approach fill

Cooper E90 surcharge on bridge approach fill

(OP)
Can someone please explain to me how to interpret Ch.8 Part 5 Section 5.3.1. b. of AREMA which states:

"In calculating the surcharge due to track loading on an abutment and on wingwalls that are in line with the abutment backwalls, the entire load shall be taken as distributed uniformly on the surface of the ballast immediately below the tie, over a width equal to the length of the tie.  With increased depth, the width for distribution can be increased on slopes of 1 horizontal to 2 vertical, with surcharge loads from the adjacent tracks not being permitted to overlap."

I see an ambiguity or omission with respect to individual axle loads at their respective spacings as it does not mention slopes and overlap of these pressures longitudinally along the track.

Am I interpreting this wrong or is there an omission?

Thanks

VoyageofDiscovery

RE: Cooper E90 surcharge on bridge approach fill

The key phrase to understanding this is "the entire load shall be taken as distributed uniformly on the surface".  The method generally used is to take the maximum axle load and distribute it in the longitudinal direction by the axle spacing.  For a standard E-80 design that would be 80k / 5 ft = 16k/ft.  Assume an 8' long tie to make it easy and you end up with a 2 ksf surcharge at the bottom of the tie.  The surcharge load will be 8' wide and infinitely long.  I realize that you could decrease the surcharge load for the lighter axles that are further away from the heavy axles but you are looking at a lot of work for very little benefit.  

If you have 2' of ballast under the tie, the width would increase 1' horizontal on each side of the tie.  Therefore your width would increase to 10' and a surcharge of 1.6 KSF.  

If you have two tracks at 12' centers (unlikely but I need a demonstration), and 4' of ballast under the tie (10' tie).  The width of distribution would be 10' + 4' x (1' horz. / 2' vertical) * 2 sides = 14'.  But this won't work because you will have 2' of surcharge overlapping between the tracks.  I would distribute the load over 26'.  Width outside of the centerline = 7', width between centerlines = 12' and width outside centerline = 7' = 26'.

RE: Cooper E90 surcharge on bridge approach fill

(OP)
Hi purdue86,

Thanks for the response,  yes I too have made these calculations, but I still see a lack of explanation or omission wrt longitudinal distribution in the AREMA clause.

What you say about "distributed uniformly on the surface" and neglecting lateral effects of overlapping soil pressures is a bit of a leap in my view without the AREMA Code specifying it.

Respectfully

VOD

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources