×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

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!

*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

Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

(OP)
I do a lot of load ratings using older plans and often the design loading is "HS20-44" or "HS20-44 with Alternate Military Loading". When I compare versus the bridge inventory it will sometimes include Alternate Military Loading when the plans only specify HS20-44. I know that "44" is the year that AASHTO developed the HS20 loading configuration so maybe military loading was implied during WWII, but my intuition wants to consider the loading as HS20 unless Alternate Military Loading is explicitly stated. Can somebody please clarify this for me?

RE: Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

The AML came about during the interstate era. My oldest AASHO dates back to 1953 and has no mention of it. The first mention of it I see is 12th ed. (1977) of AASHTO, section 1.2.5 (G)Interstate Highway Bridge Loadings. It specifically says for Interstate bridges. The 13th ed. of the Standard Specs added "bridges that carry heavy loads.


An afterthought: When I started working the the 70's, load ratings were somewhat new. Perhaps some of the bridges you're looking at were rated several years after original construction and the owner wanted both conditions checked.

RE: Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

If I remember right, the AML was required for any bridges that were on the National Highway System (NHS routes) at the time of design.

RE: Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

Another standard that was around the same time is the Bureau of Public Roads PPM 20-4.

This applied alternate tandem loading of 24k/axle at 4' spacing for interstate highway bridges approved on or after July 17, 1956 and to bridge components and floor systems with spans under 40 feet.

RE: Does HS20-44 always include Alternate Military Loading?

The tandem axle truck is one of the standard design trucks we use. I think it's 25 kips per axle for the LRFD HL-93 loading, though. We apply it for all bridges, even though it would only control the design for very short spans.

For our bridges on Interstate 80, we apply a tandem train loading, also - 2 tandem trucks 50 feet apart (+ lane load) for moment, shear, and bearing reactions at interior piers.

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! Already a Member? Login



News


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close