PROVIDENCE RIVER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGEFINAL CAPSTONE PRESENTATION

CIVIL ENGINEERING CLASS OF 2014 | APRIL 29, 2014

BEVERLY XU (PROJECT MANAGER) – SUSTAINABILITY AND COST ESTIMATIONMAX VINHATEIRO – PIER ANALYSIS AND ABUTMENT DESIGNTHOMAS SCHIEFER – BRIDGE DECK DESIGN PARTNERJENN THOMAS – BRIDGE DECK DESIGN PARTNERRACHEL CONNOR (PROJECT DRAFTER) – PIER DECK DESIGNKA LING WU – CANOPY DESIGN

I-195 Redevelopment Parcels June 2007 - RIDOT Feasibility Study Pedestrian Bridge Design Competition

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

INTRODUCTION

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

I-195 REDEVELOPMENT PARCEL

Pier Removal

Steel truss

Steel girder

Concrete

Glu-lam

$0.0 $1,000,000.0 $2,000,000.0 $3,000,000.0 $4,000,000.0 $5,000,000.0

$4,043,055.00

$1,540,539.00

$1,597,103.00

$1,634,426.00

$2,034,810.00

$1,395,741.00

$1,403,317.00

$1,433,734.00

$1,997,914.00

$1,281,675.00

$1,310,224.00

$1,341,268.00

$1,770,520.0072 degrees

60 degrees

Offset

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

FEASIBILITY STUDY

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

FEASIBILITY STUDY

PIER DECK

BRIDGE DECK

CANOPY

GEOTECHNICAL

EXISTING PIERS

• Five piers span the river• 76 feet span between

• 141’x6’• Concrete encased in 1.5’ granite blocks• Deep concrete T-beam

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

GEOTECHNICALGEOTECHNICAL

EXISTING PIERS

• Shear reinforcement• Flexural reinforcement

GEOTECHNICAL

EXISTING PIERS - ANALYSIS

Flipped problem upside-down

Solve for continuous load

GEOTECHNICAL

EXISTING PIERS - RESULTS

• Allowable distributed load of 305.9 k/ft

• Multiply by entire length of pier: 141 ft.• Divide into total area feeding into single pier: ~ 4,780 ft2

• Area load on bridge deck: 9.07 k/ft2

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SOIL CONDITIONS

• Mixture of compacted sand, gravel, fill, some silt

• Thick layers of silt

• Previous bridge loads transferred to bedrock• Largely undisturbed soil

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SOIL CONDITIONS

West bank

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SOIL CONDITIONS

East bank

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – BEARING CAPACITY

2 methods considered:

• Terzaghi:

qult=cNc+qNq+0.5γBNγ

Model based on theory of plasticity applied to soil

Requires values of shear angle, density, cohesion

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – BEARING CAPACITY

• Meyerhof:

qallow=N/4Kd

Empirical formula, uses only boring log data,simple design assumptions

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – BEARING CAPACITY

West bank bearing capacity: 5.87 k/ft2

East bank bearing capacity: 3.91 k/ft2

Use to calculate area required to deliver loads to soilAssign length of combined footings: 26’ 6”

E1: 3’ 7”. W1: 4’ 1” W2: 3’ 4”

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SHEAR

1-Way shear:

ϕVc=ϕ2f'cbwd≥Vu

2-Way shear:

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT

Concrete is weak in tensionSteel rebar added to take tensile loads from moments

Area of steel calculated from ultimate moment:

As=Mu/(ϕfyjd )

FOOTING Long Span Short Span

E1 8 No. 6 bars @ 5” 19 No. 8 bars

W1 5 No. 9 bars @ 9” 23 No 8 bars

W1 5 No. 7 bars @ 8” 21 No. 7 bars

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT

E1

W1

W2

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SETTLEMENT

Settlement occurs in silt layersIncreasing depth -> increased area of applied load

GEOTECHNICAL

FOUNDATION DESIGN – SETTLEMENT

s = Cc/(1+e0)*Hlog((σ’v0 +∆σ )/σ’v0)

FOOTING Settlement

E1 .63 in.

W1 .96 in.

W2 .52 in.

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

BRIDGE DECK

DESIGN

30° northwest Upward slopes of 1:20 and 1:15 4 girders No joist system Two columns per pier +/- 75 foot spans

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: DESIGN

With original orientation

Added joist system

Changed average span length

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: DESIGN - SPANS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: JOINTS

Bottom of columns completely restrained All other joints have no restraints or constraints All joints welded

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: AREA LOADS

LOADS: Dead Snow Deck Live Wind Earthquake

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: MEMBER ASSIGNMENTS

I BEAM/W FLANGE HSS/BOX BEAM WT SECTION

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: MEMBER ASSIGNMENTS

GIRDERJOIST

COLUMN

GIRDER: HSS28x6x1/2 JOIST: W8x40COLUMN: W12x96

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: ANALYSIS

DEFLECTIONS

MOMENT DIAGRAM

SHEAR DIAGRAM

BRIDGE DECK

SAP MODEL: ANALYSIS

BRIDGE DECK

MOVING FORWARD

Thermal Loads Seismic Conditions Wind Uplift

BRIDGE DECK

GRAVITY LOAD DETERMINATIONS

Dead Load-Member Loads

-HSS28x6x1/2 Girder Weight: 112.4 plf-W8x40 Joist Weight: 40 plf-W12x96 Column Weight: 96 plf-Total Weight: 296.351 kips

-Decking Loads: 30 psf

Live Load-International Building Code (IBC) and Additional Factor of Safety-100 psf

Snow Load-American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE) Code 7-10-30psf

BRIDGE DECK

LATERAL LOAD DETERMINATIONS

Wind Load-ASCE 7-10 Standard Chapter 26-Net Wind Pressure: 19.42 psf

Seismic Load-ASCE 7-10 Standard Chapter 12-Seismic Data Taken from United States Geological Survey (USGS)

Maps-Lateral Seismic Load: 44.84 Kips

Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Combinations-7 Equation Combinations-Use Maximum (Most Conservative) Combination-Treat Lateral Load and Gravity Loads Separately

BRIDGE DECK

TRIBUTARY AREA

Tributary Area of Girder

Tributary Area of Column

Tributary Width of Girder

BRIDGE DECK

HSS28x6x1/2 GIRDER ANALYSIS

Moment Analysis-Both Exterior and Interior Girders were Analyzed

-Tested for Moment Strength

-Calculated Maximum Allowable Moment for Custom Beams Using Method in American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Manual

-Analyzed as Simply Supported Beam

Interior Exterior

Maximum Moment in Beam (K-ft) 483.12 708.39

Max Allowed Moment (K-ft) 3644.25 3644.25

Meets Design Constraint?

BRIDGE DECK

W8x40 JOIST ANALYSIS

Moment Analysis-Tested for Joist Above Columns (Takes Larger Load)

-Tested for Moment Strength

-Values for Maximum Allowable Moment Available in AISC Steel Manual

-Analyzed as Simply Supported Beam with Girder Weights as Point Loads

Maximum Moment from Distributed Load (Kips-ft) 86.8

Maximum Moment from Point Loads (Kips-ft) 8

Total Maximum Moment (Kips-ft) 94.8

Max Allowed Moment (Kips-ft) 149

Meets Design Constraint?

BRIDGE DECK

W12x96 COLUMN ANALYSIS

Axial Loading-Gravity Loads are Applied Axially to Columns-Columns are not “Slender” Enough to be Analyzed for Elastic or Inelastic

Buckling-Analyzed for Shear Yielding Instead-Results for 10.5 ft Column

Lateral Loading-Seismic Load Treated as Point Load Acting at Top of Column-Column Tested for Maximum Allowable Moment-Not Necessary to Test for Interaction of Loads

Factored Load (Kips) 333.4

Maximum Allowable Load (Kips) 1127

Meets Design Constraint?

Maximum Moment (Kips-ft) 470.82

Maximum Allowable Moment (Kips-ft) 551

Meets Design Constraint?

BRIDGE DECK

RESULTS COMPARISON

Difference in Applied Moments

-Moments from Hand Calculations are Larger

-Example: 162.82 Kip-ft (SAP) versus 483.12 Kip-ft

-Loading Cases are the Same

Reasons for the Discrepancy

-Difference in Member Length

-Difference in Joint Connections

-Greater Capacity in SAP

BRIDGE DECK

VIBRATIONS

Why Test Vibrations?

-All Structures Vibrate

-Pedestrian Walking Can Cause Resonance

-Millennium Bridge in London

How to Test Vibrations?

-Find vibrational frequencies of all members and of whole system

-Solve for Acceleration Limit,

-Bridge Considered Safe if is less than 5.00%

BRIDGE DECK

SOFTWARE MODELING

Modeled in RAM Structural Software-Only One Panel of the Bridge will be Analyzed-RAM Structural Software only tests for one type of vibration

Modeling Challenges-RAM does not allow custom beams-Only performs vibrational analysis for steel-composite decking

BRIDGE DECK

HAND CALCULATIONS FOR VIBRATIONS

Steel Design Guide #11 “Floor Vibrations Due to Human Activity”-Use Same Values as in RAM Model

-Treatment of Joists and Girders

-Conditions for interior breamPoint Force, is 92lbsDamping Ratio, , is 0.01

-Need to find Panel Weight, W and Frequency, for both members and system

-Acceration Limit is solved by:

BRIDGE DECK

RESULTS COMPARISON

Result Summary

Output from: RAM Software Hand Calculations

Frequency (Hz)

HSS20x12x5/8 2.65 2.25

W8x48 4.95 4.42

System 2.33 2.15

Acceleration limit, ao/g (%) 2.16 1.8

Comparisons-Produced Similar Values

-Both Show the Bridge Satisfies Design Criterion

PIER DECK

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

• Collaboration with bridge deck

•Tapered Beams

• Cantilevered spans

PIER DECK

BASIC LAYOUT

40’ 20’ 40’ 40’ 40’

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

PIER DECK

BASIC LAYOUT

PIER DECK

TAPERED BEAMS

PIER DECK

DEFLECTIONS

Maximum deflection of cantilever: (L/360)*2 = 2.667 in.

Largest deflection: 1.9593 in.

PIER DECK

DEMAND/CAPACITY RATIOS

PIER DECK

DEMAND/CAPACITY RATIOS

SPAN TYPE DEMAND/CAPACITY RATIO

Interior Box Beam – 10 ft. 0.033 – 0.383

Interior Box Beam – 40 ft. 0.144 – 0.174

Exterior Girder (W14x68) – 10 ft. 0.044 – 0.215

Exterior Girder (W14x68) – 40 ft. 0.127 – 0.139

Typical Joist 0.077 – 0.600

Column 0.123 – 0.236

PIER DECK

MOMENT DIAGRAMS

Mu = -260.08 kip-ft

Mu = -523.95 kip-ft Mu = -375.57 kip-ft

PIER DECK

MOMENT DIAGRAMS

Mu = -14.04 kip-ft Mu = -84.24 kip-ft

PIER DECK

REVIT MODEL

PIER DECK

REVIT MODEL

aa

aa

PIER DECK

REVIT MODEL

PIER DECK

REVIT MODEL

CANOPY

INTRODUCTION

3 tempered metal clad canopies Deep “V” structures Solar collectors

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

CANOPY

SPECIFICATIONS

180’ long, 22’ wide

CANOPY

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Gravity LoadDead Load, Live Load, Snow Load

Lateral LoadWind Load, Seismic Load

Deflection Limits

CANOPY

GRAVITY LOAD

• Dead loadSelf-weight: ~100 KipMetal Cladding and Solar panels: ~5 psf

• Snow load: 30 psf

• Live load: 20 psf

CANOPY

LATERAL LOAD• Wind Load

• Seismic Load: 15 kips

CANOPY

DESIGN

CANOPY

DESIGN

• 10 Fan Trusses

• Frame with releases

• Biggest column size: W36x170

• Number of pieces per canopy: 305

• Weight per canopy: 98.1 Kip

• Cost per canopy: $217,660

CANOPY

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

• Structure of canopies designed• Challenges:

Frame releasesDeflection limitsArea section properties

• Room for improvementOther truss designsOther member section types

SUSTAINABILITY

WOOD DECKING

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

IPE Structural grade Durable, weather resistant 4” X 6” decking Forest Stewardship Council certified

SUSTAINABILITY

SNOWMELT SYSTEM

Solar-heated glycol circuit

Utility corridor

Glycol-heated pedestrian path

SUSTAINABILITY

SNOWMELT SYSTEM

qconduction

qconvection qradiation

Tatm

Tsurface

Tfluid

¼ ”

6”1”ø

qconduction = qconvection + qradiation

COST ESTIMATION

COST ESTIMATION

History Geotechnical Bridge Deck Pier Decks Canopy Sustainability Cost

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONSTEEL - MATERIAL AND INSTALLATIONCONCRETE - MATERIAL AND INSTALLATIONSUSTAINABILITY FEATURESNON-STRUCTURAL FEATURESPROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTSPERMITTINGCONTINGENCIESSITE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR

COST ESTIMATION

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

ITEM COST

Borings, field stake out, elevations $3,525.00

Drawings of boring details $1,245.00

Report and recommendations from P.E. $2,850.00

TOTAL $7,620.00

COST ESTIMATION

STEEL COST SUMMARY

ITEM COST

Material $876,226.12

Fabrication $428,068.63

Shipment $19,458.00

Steel Erection – Crane $7,426.67

Steel Erection – Crew $125,472.00

Moment Connections $56,000.00

Profit $76,132.57

TOTAL $1,598,783.99

COST ESTIMATION

CONCRETE COST SUMMARY

ITEM COST

Spread and continuous footings $6,902.50

Rebar Reinforcement $781.95

Profit $384.22

TOTAL $8,068.67

COST ESTIMATION

SUSTAINABLE FEATURES

ITEM COST

FSC Certified Wood $955,597.50

Snowmelt System $25,030.63

TOTAL $980,628.13

COST ESTIMATION

ADDITIONAL COSTS

ITEM COST

Architectural Fees $454,080.13

Construction Management Fees $127,710.03

Engineering Structural Fees $70,950.02

Permits $56,760.02

Contingencies $283,800.08

TOTAL $993,300.28

ITEM COST

Railings $207,900.00

Ornamental Lighting $35,000.00

TOTAL $242,900.00

COST ESTIMATION

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

ADJUSTED PROJECT COST: $4,114,817

COST PER SQUARE FOOT: $221.52

UNADJUSTED PROJECT COST: $3,831,301

COST ESTIMATION

VALUE ENGINEERING

Reduce depth of wood decking Narrower bridge deck and canopy Construction staging

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

SPECIAL THANKS TO…

PERRY ASHENFELTER, ASSISTANT PM, SHAWMUT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

PROFESSOR JANET BLUME, BROWN UNIVERSITY ENGINEERING

CHRISTOPHER BULL, SENIOR LECTURER IN ENGINEERING, BROWN UNIVERSITY

DAVID CARCHEDI, PhD, P.E., GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL INC.

WIL HERNANDEZ, RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DR. INDREK KULAOTS, LECTURER IN ENGINEERING, BROWN UNIVERSITY

JULIE MARTON, P.E., ODEH ENGINEERS INC.

MICHAEL MCCORMICK, ASSISTANT VP, DEPT OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

DAVID ODEH, P.E., ODEH ENGINEERING, ADJUNCT LECTURER, BROWN UNIVERSITY

MICHAEL SIGMON, F.D. STERRITT LUMBER CO.

PATRICIA STEERE, P.E., STEERE ENGINEERING INC.

THANK YOU

QUESTIONS?