A field installation using prestressed panel subdecks.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

A field installation using prestressed panel subdecks.

Filetype[PDF-1.78 MB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • Geographical Coverage:
    • OCLC Number:
      194273181
    • Edition:
      Final report.
    • Abstract:
      This final report is a supplement to an earlier report that covered the installation of the first precast, prestressed panel subdecks installed on a bridge in Virginia. The report discusses the inspection of the decks one year after they were completed and the relative ease of construction using the precast subdeck technique as opposed to permanent steel forms and conventional timber forming. Estimates of the relative costs between the three types of forming and consideration of the speed of construction suggest that the precast subdeck technique can reduce superstructure costs and save time and labor during construction. The original bridge design incorporated epoxy-coated reinforcing steel in the cast-in-place upper portion of the decks. This provision was made to protect the reinforcing steel against the intrusion of chlorides since the deck was expected to crack over some of the joints between the subdeck panels. Hairline cracking was observed on some of the decks above the joints between the subdeck-panels. There was no definite pattern to the cracking in some of the other spans, but this may have been due to lack of traffic loading on all but one lane of the twin bridges at the time of the final inspection. While similar cracking is often found in conventionally constructed decks, the joints between the subdeck panels appear to control the location of cracking that might otherwise occur at random locations. It was recommended that the precast subdeck panels technique be considered as a viable alternative for use in the design and construction of bridge decks.
    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.20