Bottom Flange Reinforcement in NU I-Girders
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

Bottom Flange Reinforcement in NU I-Girders

Filetype[PDF-5.46 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
  • English

  • Details:

    • Subject/TRT Terms:
    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • Geographical Coverage:
    • Abstract:
      The 1996 edition of AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges stated that nominal confinement reinforcement be placed to enclose prestressing steel in the bottom flange of bridge girders from girder ends to at least a distance eq changed the distance over which the confinement reinforcement was to be distributed from 1.0h to 1.5h, and gave minimum requirements for the amount of steel to be used, No.3 bars, and their maximum spacing, not to exceed 6.

      Research was undertaken to study what impact, if any, confinement reinforcement had on the performance of prestressed concrete bridge girders. Of particular interest was the effect confinement had on the transfer length, development length, and vertical shear capacity of the aforementioned members. First, an analytical investigation was carried out, and then an experimental investigation followed which consisted of designing, fabricating, and testing eight 24” tee-girders and three NU1100 girders. These girders had different amounts and distributions of confinement reinforcement at girder ends and were tested for transfer length, development length, and shear capacity.

      The results of the study indicated that: 1) neither the amount nor distribution of confinement reinforcement had a significant effect on the initial or final transfer length of the prestressing strands; 2) at the AASHTO predicted development length, no significant change was found on the nominal flexural capacity of the tested girders regardless of the amount and distribution of confinement reinforcement; and 3) despite the improved anchorage of prestressing strands at the girder ends when higher levels of confinement reinforcement are used, the ultimate shear capacity of tested girders was found to be considerably higher than nominal capacity even when low levels of confinement reinforcement were used.

    • Content Notes:
      Also attached to this record is the shorter report of the same title, submitted to the Nebraska Department of Roads, also in August, 2010.
    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    You May Also Like

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

    Version 3.26