Search

The paper describes load and resistance factor design (LRFD) calibration for the resistance factor used in the Stiffness Method internal stability soil failure limit state for geogrid mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. The Stiffness Method was recently adopted in the current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials LRFD Bridge Design Specifications in the US, and will appear in the next edition of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code. The paper describes the details of the calibration of the soil failure limit state which is unique to the Stiffness Method. Calibration outcomes include consideration of the concept of level of understanding in the selection of nominal load and resistance values which is unique to LRFD foundation engineering practice in Canada. A practical conclusion from these calculations is that if product line-specific creep test data are available to estimate the reinforcement secant creep stiffness used for design, then a resistance factor of 1.0 is reasonable for US practice. If only minimum average roll value tensile strength data are available, then a value of 0.95 is recommended for US practice. For Canadian practice, the corresponding values for typical level of understanding are 0.90 and 0.85, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bridge infrastructure assets should be planned, designed, constructed, and operated to account for the physical processes that may occur over their service lives. In ice-affected rivers, this includes the interaction of bridge infrastructure with river ice. Advancements in river-ice science and modelling of ice processes in ice-covered rivers have enhanced the abilities of civil/hydrotechnical engineers to plan, design, and construct bridges in and along rivers with seasonal ice covers. In this paper, an overview is presented of ice-related considerations with respect to bridges. The bottom-chord elevation of the bridge superstructure with respect to water and ice levels, pier design to withstand ice forces, the waterway opening for ice passage, ice-induced scour, and research needs are discussed. However, as outlined in the paper, research on ice loads and passage at bridge sites and on hydroclimatic and ice conditions that led to bridge damage and failure remains needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between the 2006 and 2014 editions of CSA S6, significant changes were made to the simplified method of analysis (SMA) for all girder bridges, including transverse wood deck on wood girder bridges. The load-distribution predictions became more conservative, resulting in both load-limit posting of existing bridges and increased cost for bridge construction, repair, and replacement. In this paper, we examine the load distribution for the timber bridge inventory in NS. Finite-element models are developed and rigorously validated; a parametric study, consisting of 204 bridges, is performed; current SMA equations are evaluated; and new equations for the truck-load distribution width are derived. The new equations bring SMA predictions of the longitudinal bending moment for transverse wood deck on wood girder bridges into line with currently expected safety-index levels. Corrected bias factors and coefficients of variation for live-load analysis/evaluation in conjunction with CSA S6 are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)