3134.011米路基宽10米山岭重丘二级公路毕业设计
收藏
资源目录
压缩包内文档预览：
编号：209458256
类型：共享资源
大小：7.24MB
格式：ZIP
上传时间：2022-04-25
上传人：机****料
认证信息
个人认证
高**（实名认证）
河南
IP属地：河南
50
积分
- 关 键 词：
-
3134.011
路基
10
山岭
二级
公路
毕业设计
- 资源描述：
-
资源目录里展示的全都有，所见即所得。下载后全都有,请放心下载。原稿可自行编辑修改=【QQ：401339828 或11970985 有疑问可加】
- 内容简介：
-
Manko Z. 1SCAFFOLDS FAILURES CAUSED BY VEHICLE STRIKES DURING 1 CONSTRUCTION OF NEW VIADUCT OVER A-18 MOTORWAY IN POLAND 2 3 4 5 6 Zbigniew “Zee” Manko 7 Professor of Civil and Structural Engineering, Bridge Division, Institute of Civil Engineering 8 Wroclaw University of Technology, Wybrzeze Wyspianskiego No. 27, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland 9 Tel./fax (+48) 71 352-92-74 zbigniew.mankowp.pl 10 (Corresponding author) 11 12 13 14 Word count: text (3122) + 7 figures (7 250 = 1750) + 0 tables (0 250 = 0) = 4872 15 16 Submission date: June 5, 2009. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 2Abstract: The paper is presented cases of failures of steel scaffolds damaged by vehicle strikes 1 during the construction of new viaducts over the upgraded A-18 motorway in Poland. After 2 several vehicle strikes into the scaffold structures their damaged components were no longer 3 serviceable (considering the safety of the construction works being carried out). This put the 4 contractor to additional expenses connected with the replacement of the damaged scaffold. The 5 causes and consequences of the failures are given and the necessary solutions adopted in the 6 considered cases whereby the traffic situation significantly improved are described. 7 Moreover, it is proposed to increase the minimum vertical clearance required during the building 8 or repairs of bridge structures. 9 10 11 Keywords: Scaffold Failure, Vehicle Strike, Damaged component, New Object, Viaduct 12 Construction, Motorway A-18. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 3INTRODUCTION 1 Formerly in Poland, a little attention was paid to the bridge-specific design and erection of 2 scaffolds, which was the cause of many serious failures (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8). Today 3 bridge scaffolds are classified as engineering structures and require the detailed design, including 4 all aspects, which may occur from their erection, through the full loading of the spans during 5 concreting, to their dismantling, in accordance with the current guidelines (PN-M-47900-3 (9), 6 PN-M-47900-1 (10), and PN-M-48090 (11). When new bridge structures are built over transport 7 obstacles, the continuity of vehicle traffic must be ensured, particularly on national roads, which 8 carry traffic through the whole bridge construction period (12), (13), (14). 9 Unfortunately, the heavy trucks (e.g. TIR lorries) and tractor-trailer units carrying various 10 machines and equipment drive through the clearance gates shaped in the scaffolds using during 11 building of motorway bridge structures most often strike at the new scaffold components already 12 built. It refers these both as well as the trucks of permissible and over normative dimensions 13 which mainly conducting to serious damages of scaffolds or their structural elements. 14 Using as example motorway viaducts WD-14 and WD-12 built over national road A-18 15 (which is being upgraded), the failures of the scaffolds erected to build on site the concrete 16 objects are described and their causes are explained. The cases considered here and the ones 17 presented previously (1), (2), (7), (13), (14), (15), (16) clearly show the need to modify and 18 update the guidelines for erecting scaffolds for the building of road bridge structures. This 19 applies particularly to the minimum headroom (vertical clearance) since the current standard one 20 is inadequate. The above considerations should be taken into account in the designs of bridge 21 structures. 22 23 DESCRIPTION OF OLD AND NEW VIADUCT WD-14 24 The old reinforced concrete viaduct (built in 1934) consisted of two spans having an effective 25 length le = 14.00 + 14.00 = 28.00 m. The span overall width was 6.76 m, load class D (200 kN) 26 according to the PN-85/S-10030 (17), the vertical clearance 4.53 m. The viaduct was situated 27 at a skew of 45 to the roads longitudinal axis. Because of the viaducts bad technical condition, 28 it was not worthwhile to upgrade it and so it was demolished (Figure 1). 29 The new viaduct is located at the 0+179.79 km of Cisowa Jedrzychowiczki (Henrykow) 30 local road No. 4918009 being upgraded. The viaduct makes possible the safe crossing of national 31 road No. 18 at its 13+634.37 km. The designed viaduct WD-14 is located in the place of the old 32 demolished one (Figure 1). 33 The new reinforced concrete viaduct with a trapezoidal single-girder cross section and a 34 continuous-beam static scheme has four spans with an effective length le = 18.00 + 27.00 + 27.00 35 + 18.00 = 90.00 m. The axes of the supports are parallel to the national road and with the 36 viaducts longitudinal axis form an angle of 44.99. The middle spans cross the two carriageways 37 of the national road. There are technological strips and the local road embankment slopes under 38 the extreme spans. The main girder is 1.50 m high and 2.70 m and 3.20 m wide respectively at 39 the bottom and top (at the level of the cantilevers bottom). The cantilevers width varies from 40 0.21 to 0.40 m and their outreach is 1.90 m. The overall width of the load-carrying structure is 41 7.00 m. The overall width of the viaduct is B = 7.70 m, including the roadway between the curbs 42 (6.10 m) and sidewalks with the rigid barriers (2 0.80 m). The viaducts total surface area 43 bounded by the deck edges is A = 7.70 92.10 = 709.17 m2. The local roads technical class is L 44 (4), (5). The target traffic clearance under the viaduct is Hc = 4.70 m. The viaduct traffic loading 45 is as for class B (400 kN) according to the Polish Bridge Load Standard PN-85/S-10030 (17). 46 TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 4The viaduct load-carrying structure was made of reinforced concrete and it reposes on 1 supports (abutments) via elastomer bearings (the middle support and the span structures are 2 joined together monolithically). The grade of the load-carrying structure concrete is B35 and the 3 steel grade 18G2-b. 4 The intermediate supports (piers) have the form of oval columns 2.40 m wide and 1.00 m 5 thick and they are founded directly on a continuous footing 3.60 7.20 m in plan and 1.40 m 6 thick. There is B35 and B30 class concrete in respectively the columns and the footing. The 7 massive abutments are sunk in the embankment and founded directly on a continuous footing 8 4.50 1.20 m in cross section. The wing walls are suspended from the abutment body and joined 9 with the continuous footing. 10 11 USE OF SCAFFOLDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF VIADUCT ON A-18 MOTORWAY 12 Proper working designs of the span scaffolds for the WD-14 WD-19 viaducts were created. For 13 the already built supports (18) the necessary scaffold and formwork to be used under viaduct 14 spans was designed (19), (20), (21), (22), (23), (24), (25), (26). The grade lines for the new 15 viaducts were taken from their design documentation (18). The elevation of the pavement 16 reinforced concrete slabs under the scaffolds was determined based on the levels obtained from 17 geodetic surveys carried out by the building contractor (Figure 2). 18 The RRo scaffolds of type L (20) erected outside the road clearance on each side two 19 towers in the axis of the load-carrying structure and in addition, more widely spaced scaffolds 20 under the spans cantilevers (Figure 3) were to be used for concreting the spans of the viaduct. 21 The spans situated directly above the road clearance were supported by heavy scaffolds 22 H20 type on which double-T (20) steel girders were put up (Figure 2). 23 The following scaffold components were used: 24 steel beams HE-B 160, HE-B 360, HE-B 300, 220M HE; 25 frame supports RRo L supports; 26 grillage supports HUNNEBECK H20; 27 pipe bracings O48.3 4.05/S 235; 28 Structure axisAbrasion asphalt layer0.045 mLashing asphalt layer 0.05 mWeldable insulation 0.005 mDeck slab 0.21-0.40 m2%2%0.250.401.500.351.900.252.700.351.900.253.050.200.603.050.200.600.650.210.40Rigid hand-rail & barrierIPE 160/1.33(1.40)0.210.25(WD-12)0.00Road axis=7.70 FIGURE 1 Cross sections of viaduct WD-14 and WD-12 (dimensions for the latter are given in brackets). TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 5 various connections, i.e. steel couplers and clamps, etc., conforming to the EngelhardRRo 1 standard (16), (20). 2 Moreover, a template of constant-cross-section formwork (Figure 2) with a single girder 3 trapezoidal in cross section was designed and made (21), (22). 4 5 DAMAGE TO SCAFFOLDS DURING THEIR ERECTION 6 General Remarks 7 During the construction of viaduct WD-14 the structural components of the scaffold near the 8 drive-through clearance were damaged twice due to the too small standard headroom (insuffi-9 cient for the proper location of scaffolds for the construction of bridge spans). The standard 10 headroom is H = 4.20 m and in many cases, it no longer meets the current service conditions. 11 Therefore, after the first vehicle struck at the girders of the scaffold situated immediately 12 above the road clearance (conforming to the technical documentation approved by the motorway 13 supervision authority) the headroom was increased by the available reserve (by redesigning and 14 rebuilding the load-bearing structure of the scaffold). This, however, did not help much since 15 soon another vehicle hit the lower part of the scaffold located directly above the drive-through. 16 After the second vehicle strike, the designers of the scaffold together with the viaduct builder had 17 to increase the vertical clearance. They decided that the minimum safe vertical clearance in this 18 concrete slab4.464.463.153.1511x0.3011x0.4251.701.201.701.200.4250.300.4250.304.242.121.061.061.500.750.753.003.000.750.751.501.061.062.124.240.020.220.120.543.56 (3.39)4.56 (4.39)0.020.300.30Centrical strip 0.04 (0.02)16 x HE 300-B0.551.25 + 1.250.51Longitudinal joints(0.59)(1.25+2 x 0.50)(0.55)(0.55)(1.25+2 x 0.50)(0.59)Longitudinal joints0.511.25 + 1.250.55Longitudinal joints0.50Road reinforcedBuilding142.97(143.10)HE 300-B x 9.50 mViaduct axis147.516(147.495)DS 220/220 x 6.00 mDS 220/220 x 6.00 m7xH207xPipemortar 0.02 = 48.3x4.052.122% FIGURE 2 Cross section of viaduct WD-14 with structure of scaffold put up above road clearance. TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 6case should be H1 = 4.30 1 m. At this clearance no 2 more vehicle strikes 3 occurred. The scaffolds 4 and the new vertical 5 clearance were tried out 6 on another viaduct, i.e. 7 WD-19. The vehicle, 8 which previously 9 damaged the scaffold of 10 WD-14 this time, drove 11 through. 12 13 Description of 14 Accidents Involving 15 Vehicles Striking 16 Scaffold Components 17 The first collision 18 occurred on 29 19 September 2005. A TIR 20 lorry (semi trailer height 21 over 4.20 m) from 22 Ukraine struck the 23 scaffold and as a result 24 got stuck under the span, 25 seriously damaging the 26 structural components of 27 the scaffold. 28 A few days later 29 on 3 October 2005 in the 30 morning hours, a tractor-31 trailer unit transporting 32 an excavator struck the 33 scaffold components 34 situated immediately 35 above the clearance of 36 viaduct WD-14. As a 37 result all the girders were 38 knocked off and fell 39 down onto the roadway 40 (Figure 4). Another 41 strike of this vehicle into 42 the scaffold of viaduct 43 WD-12 caused two 44 girders to turn (Figure 5). 45 The transported 46 excavator, as the police 47 WroclawOlszyna18.0027.0027.0018.00Frame support L typeSupport H20 typeFrame support L typeFrame support L typeFrame support L typeLONGITUDINAL SECTION A-ANew roadwayTOP VIEW2%90.009.358.358.35= 4.20HenrykowCisowaLONGITUDINAL SECTION A-ASTEP IIISTEP IISTEP I2%2%4.264.244.33LONGITUDINAL SECTION A-A(c)4.36(d)AA(a)(b) FIGURE 3 Arrangement of EngelhardRRo scaffolds for viaduct WD-14: (a) top view, (b) longitudinal section AA (vertical clearance H = 4.20 m), (c) longitudinal section AA (vertical clearance 4.24 m), and (d) longitudinal section AA (vertical clearance 4.33 m). TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 7findings show, probably was stolen from another building site, which explains the drivers 1 unusual determination to ram all the obstacles on his way. Luckily, at this time, the vehicle 2 traffic on the road was relatively light, there were no construction workers on the scaffolds, no 3 concreting work was being conducted, and so there were no casualties. 4 5 Change of Vertical Clearance in Viaduct WD-14 6 Because of the relatively low elevation of the spans of viaduct WD-14 over the A-18 motorway, 7 nobody expected that the standard vertical clearance of 4.20 m could be insufficient. In the case 8 of the other viaduct over the same road, there were substantial reserves in height owing to the 9 grade line adopted in the design. Therefore, quite simply and naturally the actual vertical 10 clearances under the scaffolds were much larger than the required minimum of 4.20 m. 11 (a) (b) FIGURE 4 View on the damaged scaffold supports in viaduct WD-14 after vehicle struck main girders located above drive-through clearance: (a) view from roadway, (b) side view. (a) (b) FIGURE 5 View of viaduct WD-12 scaffold after vehicle strike: (a) damaged and turned steel girders of scaffold (two girders on Wroclaw side were turned), (b) collapsed reinforcement of span load-bearing structure before planned concreting. TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 8In the case of viaduct WD-14, two vehicle strikes into steel girders located above the 1 drive-through clearance occurred whereby the contractor and the designers had to redesign the 2 scaffold structure several times. 3 The first alteration in the height of the drive-through clearance under the load-bearing 4 girders of the scaffold was made by replacing the HE 360-B girders (10 units) with 16 girders of 5 the HE 300-B type because of which the spacing of the main H20 girders decreased from 9.35 m 6 to 8.35 m. In this way, a vertical clearance of 4.26 m was obtained. It was thought that there 7 would be no more collisions (Figure 3c). 8 After the second vehicle strike into the increased (from 4.20 m to 4.26 m) vertical 9 clearance it became necessary for safety reasons to redesign the height of the drive-through gate. 10 A detailed analysis of the causes of the damage to the scaffold showed that replacing the HE-B 11 300 girders with shorter ones was out of the question because of the insufficient load-capacity of 12 any shorter girders. It was found, however, that it was possible to reduce the height of the 13 formwork trusses situated immediately above the clearance from 0.10 m to 0.06 m. In addition, 14 because of the roadway cross fall (2%) the whole drive-through gate was moved to the edge of 15 the roadway, towards the lowest road grade line whereby a few more reserve centimeters were 16 obtained (Figure 6). In this way a vertical clearance of 4.33 m was obtained at the lowest point of 17 the road (4.36 m at the edge of the clearance), i.e. by 0.13 m larger than the standard clearance of 18 4.20 m and by 0.07 m larger than the other clearance of 4.26 m (Figure 3d). The new drive-19 through height of 4.33 m ensured safe work on the viaduct until its completion. 20 21 CONCLUSIONS 22 Considering the two cases of scaffold failures on viaducts built on the upgraded A-18 motorway, 23 caused by vehicle strikes into scaffold girders situated above the clearance, in the nearest future 24 the much out-of-date guidelines on the minimum vertical road clearance (4.20 m) required 25 during the construction of bridge structures should be amended. Based on the authors 26 experience in the design, site supervision and use of scaffolds it can be stated that the vertical 27 clearance should not be smaller than 4.30 m instead 4.20 m. 28 (a) (b) FIGURE 6 Side view of encased scaffold of viaduct WD-14 prior to concreting load-carrying structure after two vehicle strikes into girders located above clearance: (a) H20 scaffolds erected under formwork, (b) drive-through clearance outline shifted to edge of roadway. TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 9Until the proper amendments are 1 adopted half measures must be used and 2 in the cases where the height of the drive-3 through clearance cannot be increased 4 above 4.20 m, unbreachable solid drive-5 through gates and warning systems, such 6 as audible and visual signaling devices, 7 warning drivers early that their vehicles 8 exceed the height of the drive-through 9 gate located in front of the road structure 10 should be erected. It should be added that 11 if all the above possibilities have been 12 exhausted, one should contact the road 13 services, which must screen vehicles and 14 direct the ones with excessive height to 15 previously prepared diversions. 16 Regardless of the increased road 17 height clearance and additional 18 protections (Figure 7), one should always 19 take into account the fact that because of 20 some irresponsible road users there is a 21 real possibility that the scaffold will be 22 damaged. 23 24 References 25 (1) Flaga, K. Technical-Construction Expert Opinion on Causes of Collapse of Viaduct 26 on Skoczow Cieszyn National Road S-1 in Ogrodzona. Typescript, Cracow, Poland, Aug., 27 2003 (in Polish). 28 (2) Flaga, K. Reflections on Collapse of Viaduct in Ogrodzona. 22nd Scientific-Technical 29 Conference on Structural Failures, PreventionDiagnosticsRepairsReconstruction, Szczecin 30 Miedzyzdroje, Poland, May 1720, 2005, pp. 5366 (in Polish). 31 (3) Furtak, K., and W. Wolowicki. Bridge Scaffolds. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i 32 Lacznosci (WKiL), Warsaw, Poland 2005 (in Polish). 33 (4) Ministry Technical Requirements. Minister of Transport and Marine Economy Order 34 of 2 March 1999 concerning Technical Requirements which Public Roads and their Location 35 Should Meet, Law Gazette (Dz.U.), 1999, No. 43, item 430 (in Polish). 36 (5) Ministry Technical Requirements. Minister of Transport and Marine Economy Order 37 of 30 May 2000 concerning Technical Requirements which Road Structures and their Location 38 Should Meet, Law Gazette (Dz.U.), 2000, No. 63, item 735 (in Polish). 39 (6) Rowinski, L. Working and Load-Bearing Scaffolds. Polskie Centrum Budownictwa 40 (PCB), Warsaw, Poland 2001 (in Polish). 41 (7) Rymsza, J. On Causes of Collapse during Construction of Viaduct over Dual 42 Carriageway S-1 on Skoczow Cieszyn Section. Inzynieria i Budownictwo, Vol. LX, No. 3, 43 2004, pp. 140143 (in Polish). 44 (8) Wolf, M. Bridge Scaffolds and Formworks. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Lacznosci 45 (WKiL), Warsaw, Poland 1964 (in Polish). 46 (9) PN-M-47900-3. Standing Working Metal Scaffold. Frame Scaffolds. 1996 (in Polish). 47 FIGURE 7 View of beam marking height of clearance (3.70 m) before entry into road section where scaffolds were being erected and reinforcement installed prior to concreting spans (vertical clearance for all viaduct being built was 4.20 m and was larger than clearance height on warning gate where there was exit leading to another road). TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.TRB 2010 Annual Meeting CD-ROMOriginal paper submittal - not revised by author.Manko Z. 10(10) PN-M-47900-1. Standing Working Metal Scaffold. Definition. Division and Main 1 Parameters. 1996 (in Polish). 2 (11) PN-M-48090. Steel Scaffolds Made from Folding Components for Bridge 3 Construction. 1996 (in Polish). 4 (12) Glomb, J. Technology of Building Concrete Bridges. Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i 5 Lacznosci (WKiL), Warsaw, Poland 1982 (in Polish). 6 (13) Holowaty, J. Case of Damage to Bridge Scaffold Support Caused by Vehicle Strike 7 during Concreting of Spans. 21st Scientific-Technical Conference on Structural Failures, 8 PreventionDiagnosticsRepairsReconstruction, Szczecin Miedzyzdroje, Poland, May 209 23, 2003, pp. 567572 (in Polish). 10 (14) Holowaty, J. Scaffold Structures for Building Overpasses Providing Access to 11 Bridge Crossing over Regalica River in Szczecin. IV All-Polish Bridge Engineers Conference on 12 Bridge Structures and Equipments, Wisla, Poland, Oct. 1214, 2005, pp. 6370 (in Polish). 13 (15) Barzykowski, W., J. Derecki, A. Feder, L. Jaczewski, A. Jarominiak, and M. 14 Pierozynski. Bridge Construction Mechanization.
- 温馨提示:
1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明，都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
2: 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等，如果需要附件，请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
3.本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸，网页内容里面会有图纸预览，若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑，并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容，请与我们联系，我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
人人文库网所有资源均是用户自行上传分享，仅供网友学习交流，未经上传用户书面授权，请勿作他用。
川公网安备: 51019002004831号