expansion joint replacement constructability study report combined 2-23-2015 (2).pdf

Report on Constructability of Expansion Joint Replacement Santa Ana River Crossing, Riverside, CA

Prepared for

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT

700 NORTH ALAMEDA STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

1 Peters Canyon Rd., Suite 130

Irvine, CA 92606

IDS Group Project Number 13.113.01

February, 2015

Location of Expansion Joint. The

existing joint will be replaced

with a new joint to mitigate the

joint leaking problem

INTEGRATED DESIGN SERVICES

1 Peters Canyon Rd., Ste.130, Irvine, CA 92606 | tel. 949.387.8500 | fax. 949.387.0800 | www.idsgi.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. TEMPORARY LATERAL LOADING CRITERIA ..................................................................... 2

2.1 Wind Load .................................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Seismic Load .............................................................................................................. 2

3. CONVAYANCE OF EXPANSION JOINT ASSEMBLIES ...................................................... 3

3.1 Option 1: Cranes ........................................................................................................ 3

3.2 Option 2: Rail Rigging and Lift on Bridge Trusses ...................................................... 3

4. TEMPORARY STRUCTURE STABILITY ............................................................................... 4

4.1 Analysis Approach ...................................................................................................... 4

4.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 4

5. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT PIPE LATERAL RESTRAINT .......................................... 4

5.1 Option 1: Lattice Cage ............................................................................................... 5

5.2 Option 2: Tying Pipe to Bridge Trusses ...................................................................... 5

6. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 6

APPENDIX A:

TEMPORARY SEISMIC AND WIND LOADS

APPENDIX B:

FEASIBILITY STUDY OF CRANE OPTION FOR EXPANSION JOINT REPLACEMENT CONSTRUCTION

APPENDIX C:

TEMPORARY STRUCTURE STABILITY FOR RAIL RIGGING OPTION

APPENDIX D:

PIPE LATERTAL RESTRAINT OPTION 1: LATTICE CAGE FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT RESTRAINT

APPENDIX E:

PIPE LATERAL RESTRAINT OPTION 2: TYING PIPE TO BRIDGE TRUSSES

MWD: Report on Constructability of Expansion Joint Replacement Santa Ana River Crossing Feb, 2015 Page 1

Report on Constructability of Expansion Joint Replacement MWD Upper Feeder

Santa Ana River Crossing, Riverside, CA

The purpose of this constructability study is to demonstrate the feasibility of the construction of the expansion

joint replacement. The existing expansion joint, which is currently leaking, will be replaced with a new

bellows joint. The location and massive size of the pipe joint create constructability challenges for this

project. The construction procedures and sequences provided in this report are considered

recommendations to the contractor but do not limit the contractor from utilizing other means and methods

needed to successfully install the system specified in the construction document. All work plan details,

procedures, shop drawings and calculations of temporary construction in addition to shoring, rigging, etc.

shall be submitted to Metropolitan Water District (MWD) for review and approval before commencing with the

work.

1. INTRODUCTION

As part Task Order # 6, a design was developed to mitigate the water leakage that occurs at the existing

expansion joint of the pipe. The proposed repair of the sleeve-coupling joint is expected to substantially

improve the joint performance although requiring adjustments in the future to maintain the leak mitigation

performance. The joint repair would not require extensive temporary measures during the construction as

materials and equipment could be transported to the joint location using the existing walkway.

During the final design review, a concern was raised by MWD regarding potential liability with quagga-infested

water leaking from the pipe to the Santa Ana River. MWD concluded that the existing expansion joint should

be replaced by a different joint type that prevents water leaks and requires minimum operation maintenance.

A metal bellows expansion joint was identified by MWD for this purpose.

The installation of the bellows joint requires the removal of the existing joint, which creates a constructability

challenge since no access is allowed from the riverbed due to the environmental restrictions at the site. This

necessitates the removal of the top truss diagonal members above the expansion joint to provide access to

the construction. The removal of the diagonal top truss member above the joint, and the opening up of the

steel pipe, alters the existing structural system which results in (1) discontinuity in the top diaphragm that

resists lateral loads, and (2) discontinuity in the steel pipe in both lateral and vertical directions.

An investigation is needed to review the bridges stability and the pipes structural integrity during the joint

replacement operation. In addition, given the size of the pipe, the weight of the expansion joint assembly is

significant (the weight of the new bellows joint assembly is in the order of 5 kips), which also creates another

challenge to bring the joint in place.


It is noted that the steel pipe is currently equipped with an expansion joint that transfers the shear forces

between the pipe segments at either side of the joint, while the bending and the torsional moments are not

transferred through the relatively small overlapping length of the joint. Therefore, the existing expansion joint

provided a "hinge" to the pipe when subjected to vertical and lateral loads. The base isolation of the bridge-

pipe system has been designed to accommodate this. In addition, the truss members and steel pipe strength

have been checked (and strengthened where required) based on the bridge-pipe interaction while

considering the joint hinge.

During the joint replacement construction the pipe will be sliced into two separate pieces with no moment or

shear force transfer. Due to the configuration of the new bellows joint (and to avoid over-stressing the

bellows portion) an external "sleeve" or support is needed to restrain the pipe against the relative lateral

movements (vertical and horizontal). The new configuration between the pipe segments still allows shear

transfer, free axial movement, and no bending and/or torsional moment transfer. After the top truss diagonals

are re-installed, the overall final behavior becomes similar to the current condition in terms of continuity in

the lateral and vertical directions near the expansion joint.

This report outlines the loading criteria used to investigate the integrity of temporary structure during the

proposed joint replacement. Recommended methods of moving of the expansion joint and other construction

materials are also indicated. The report also presents our view of the structural stability of the temporary

structures, and several feasible methods of temporary and permanent lateral restraint of the pipe.

2. TEMPORARY LATERAL LOADING CRITERIA

2.1 Wind Load

Wind load is calculated according to ASCE 7-10, Chapter 29. Refer to Appendix A for a detailed wind load

estimation. It is noted that according to ASCE 37-02, Section 6.2.1, reduction of the design wind speed is

allowed for a temporary structure with construction period between 6 weeks to 1 year. However, our study

does not use the reduced wind load since further analysis indicates that the seismic load, rather than the

wind load governs the lateral loading design of the bridge-pipe system. Wind load stability for crane or trolley

rail operation is not indicated in our study since it is the contractors responsibility.

2.2 Seismic Load

The maximum duration that the temporary condition exists during the construction is estimated to be two (2)

months. The probability that during this short period of time the structure becomes subjected to a large

earthquake is low, therefore current codes and standards (i.e. ASCE 41-6) allow the reduction of the seismic

loads during fast track construction projects. Accordingly, a temporary seismic load of 10% of seismic weight

is used in this study. Refer to Appendix A for detailed calculations of the temporary seismic load demand

according to the procedure of ASCE 41-06, Section 1.6.1.3.


MWD has allowed a short-duration water shutdown during the expansion joint replacement project. Since

there will be no water in the pipe during the removal and replacement of the joint a significant amount of

weight of the system will be reduced leading to less demands of the seismic loads.

3. CONVAYANCE OF EXPANSION JOINT ASSEMBLIES

3.1 Option 1: Cranes

Appendix B includes the feasibility study of the expansion joint assembly conveyance using a crane. This

method utilizes a heavy crane, stationed at the south end of the bridge, with a jib length and a capacity

sufficient to lift the removed expansion joint, as well as the proposed new bellows expansion joint. The

crane lifts the new and existing joints one at a time at the desired location of the feeder pipe. It also lifts them

to the designated temperory stage/storage areas on the south bank of the Santa Ana River near the south

entry.

Our discussion with a crane manufacturer and operator demonstrated that this option is feasible. However,

permits for a crane assembling area at the site (beyond the easement) are to be acquired by MWD if this

option is used.

3.2 Option 2: Rail Rigging and Lift on Bridge Trusses

This option involves trolley rails (rigging system) built on top of the bridge trusses (over the entire length of

T1, bridging over the gap between T1 and T2 trusses, and extending two bays on T2). The trolly moves the

expansion joints (both existing and new, and one at a time) between the south end of the bridge to the joint

location. At the south end of the bridge, a crane will be set up to lift the rigging system, and the joints from

the ground to the trolley rails over the top of the trusses, and vice versa. At the joint location, a lifting assembly

system will be temporary installed to lift and drop the joints into position.

This option does not require heavy lifting over a long distance. Most likely, the footprint of the lighter crane

and the rigging equipment will fit within the corrently designated MWD eastments. The drawback of this

option is the relatively long construction time needed to build and remove the trolley rails and rigging system,

in addition to the complexity of construction the rails on top of the bridge trusses. It is also noted that a

moving load is applied on the bridge trusses in addition to the weight of the trolley rails and the rigging system.

The temporary structure stability and the truss member structural intigrity of this option are discussed in the

following section.


4. TEMPORARY STRUCTURE STABILITY

4.1 Analysis Approach

The rail rigging option imposes a more critical loading condition on the temporary structure than the crane

option. Structure stability and truss integrity are studied for this option only.

In order to evaluate the truss member adequacy under gravity load a Finite Element model of the full bridge

is subjected to the estimated moving weight in the vertical direction. A single truss model (Truss T2 only)

representing the top diaphragm discontinuity and pipe discontinuity is used to evaluate the lateral stability

and the member adequacy for temporary lateral loads. Refer to Appendix C for details.

4.2 Recommendations

Based on the analysis, the following measures are recommended:

The rails will be supported directly by the bridge truss top chords. The rail members shall be

designed to span independently between the truss panel points. Under this configuration, the

existing members of the T1 trusses are found to be adequate to support approximately 9 kips moving

load transported on the rail rigging system.

The influence of the moving load on the misalignment of the opened pipe is estimated to be in the

order of 0.015 inch, which is within tolerances.

The T2 trusses are structurally stable even when temporary discontinuities of the top diaphragm and

the pipe are in effect after removing the top diagonal members and the existing expansion joint. The

truss members are found adequate to resist the estimated moving load and temporary lateral loads.

The actual construction loads, their locations, and the extent of travel shall be submitted by the

contractor to the owner for approval before commencing the work.

It is noted that the dynamic interaction between the moving load and the truss-pipe system was not

considered in this study. To avoid unanticipated vibrations, the trolley speed shall be less than 5 ft.

/sec. The rails shall be carefully leveled to avoid perceptible bumping.

5. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT PIPE LATERAL RESTRAIN

The expansion joint is located near Pier 7 which provides simple end support to the bridge trusses T2 and

T1. The pipe, however, runs continuously over Pier 7 which is one of the supports along its long span, thus,

the curvature of the deformed profile of the pipe is not similar to that of the trusses at the pier supports.

Based on our analysis, if no restraint is provided against the relative vertical and horizontal movements

between the two segments of pipe after it is cut open (as needed to remove the existing expansion joint),


there will be a 0.57 relative displacement in the vertical direction. This is caused by the weight of the pipe

even during water shutdown. This relative displacement could cause misalignment issues when installing the

bellows expansion joint, i.e. difficulty in fitting the new joint at both ends of the displaced pipe segments.

Moreover, if the bellows expansion joint is somehow installed with the 0.57 misalignment, once the water

flow resumes (before pipe restraints are installed between the pipe segments on each side of the new bellows

expansion joint) the bellows expansion joint will be stressed as the result of further relative displacement

(an addition 0.85) due to the additional weight of the water. This incremental force in the vertical direction

is estimated to be 120 kips. Stress in the bellows will significantly reduce its fatigue life which is not

acceptable.

Beside the pipes vertical relative movement restraint, temporary and permanent horizontal restraint shall be

provided as discussed in Section 1 of this report to restore the behavior in the pipe as originally intended to

perform.

5.1 Option 1: Lattice Cage

A lattice-type steel cage is proposed to restrain the pipe relative displacement when the pipe is cut open

before the expansion joint replacement. During this operation, the top face lattices will be kept open to

provide access to remove and lift the existing joint and drop the bellows joint assembly from above.

Once installation of the new joint is completed, new diagonal lattices will be installed on the top face of the

cage and the cage will be left permanently on the pipe. The cage will be attached to the north side pipe

through two channel-rings welded to the pipe, and by a single channel ring which will be separated from the

south side pipe O.D. using Teflon materials (friction coefficient = 0.04, Teflon on Teflon). This cage allows

free axial movement of the pipe, but restrains the pipes vertical and horizontal relative movement.

The lattice cage is designed to have sufficient stiffness and strength to resist the temporary and the

permanent gravity and seismic demands. Refer to Appendix D for detail analysis including the evaluation of

the steel pipe stress.

It is suggested that the lattice cage be assembled at the site over the existing pipe. Clearance between the

lattice cage and the pipe and the bellows joint assembly shall be sufficient for pipe cutting and welding. The

construction of the lattice cage, the modification of trusses for joint conveyance, and the removal of all

temporary elements can all be done before and after the shutdown, and thus reducing the duration of the

shutdown.

5.2 Option 2: Tying Pipe to Bridge Trusses

This option utilizes temporary ties between the steel pipe and the existing bridge trusses to restrain the

relative lateral displacements between the two segments of the opened pipe during the expansion Joint

replacement. Since the shear forces which are currently transferred by the pipe joint will now be transferred

to the bridge trusses (vs. the lattice cage in Option 1), the trusses will need to be strengthened to resist the

pipe reactions.


A detail analysis might show that these temporary ties and truss strengthening could be part of the permanent

restraint. Using this option, the interaction between the pipe and the bridge trusses is altered from the current

condition, which was used as the base of the seismic upgrade design. A preliminary analysis shows that

the impact of such alternation on the demands on the base isolators is minimum. However, the truss member

adequacy requires to be confirmed by further analysis.

The advantage of Option 2 is providing maximum clearance at the pipe and the bellows joint assembly for

pipe cutting and welding. Time of pipe shutdown can be minimized since the construction of the ties, truss

strengthening, the modification of trusses for joint conveyance, and the removal of all temporary elements

can all be done before and after the shutdown. Please refer to Appendix E for details of Option 2.

At the writing of this report, we suggest a lattice cage similar to that used in Option 1 be installed for

permanent purpose and the ties to the bridge trusses be removed. This will simulate the hinge behavior in

the pipe, and the interaction between the pipe and bridge trusses will be the same as the current condition.

This eliminates the necessity to re-check the base isolation design, the strength of the bridge truss elements

and the strength of the pipe. We will need MWD concurrence in selecting Option 1 vs. Option 2.

6. CONCLUSION

This report documents several feasible options studied for the expansion joint replacement. During the

construction, proper lateral restraints will be installed over the pipe. Two options are introduced and found

feasible. The first option utilizes a lattice cage for both temporary and permanent restraint. The second

option utilizes ties to existing bridge trusses. Construction methods to move and lift the expansion joints are

also discussed. At this time, the option that uses a rail rigging system on top of the bridge trusses appears

to be more practical than the crane option. The rail rigging option uses smaller footprint that is more likely to

be contained within the current MWD easements.

The structural integrity during construction are also discussed. The temporary construction loads on the

bridge (pipe-truss system) depends largely on the construction means and methods to be used by the

contractor, particularly when a rail rigging option is chosen. In this preliminary study, such construction loads

are based on engineering judgment and the best information available. The study indicates that minimum

truss reinforcement should be expected for the expansion joint replacement construction. However, MWD

review of the contractor submittals of detailed work plans before commencement of construction is critical.

In summary, we found that the replacement of the existing expansion joint by the proposed bellows type

joint is feasible and constructible. The actual means and methods of accomplishing the task rests solely on

the successful general contractor. All contractors proposed work shall be reviewed and approved by MWD

prior to the commencement of the construction. This step is usually needed to insure the structural integrity

of the entire bridge, and compliance with the requirements of the project.

Temporary Seismic and Wind Loads

1. Temporary and Permanent Structural Conditions

The MWD selected Expansion Joint Repair - replacing existing EJ with a new bellow type EJ - requires

that during the construction,

Procedure (1): the (E) diagonal braces at the top horizontal truss directly above the EJ shall be

removed to provide access to the EJ, and

Procedure (2): the (E) EJ shall be cut and removed before the installation of the new bellow EJ.

Procedure (1) will result in discontinuity in the top diaphragm for lateral loads. Procedure (2) will

result in discontinuity in the steel pipe in both lateral and vertical directions.

Note that before Procedure (2), the steel pipe is equipped with an EJ that transfers shear forces

between the pipe segments on either side of the EJ. But moments are not transferred due to the

relatively small overlapping length. Therefore, before procedure (2), the (E) EJ behaves as a "hinge" in

the pipe when subjected to vertical and lateral loads. Procedure (2) will completely separate the pipe

into two pieces with no moment or shear force transfer.

After the EJ replacement, an external "sleeve" will be installed over the bellow to allow shear transfer

between pipe segments. And the top truss diagonals will be re-installed. The permanent behaviors will

be similar to the current condition in terms of continuity in the lateral and vertical directions near the EJ.

The system behaviors of the temporary structure is substantially different than the current condition

and the permanent condition considered in the design.

2. Rationale for Reduction of Loads on Temporary Structures

The maximum length of the time window that the temporary condition exists during the construction is

estimated to be about 2 months. The likelihood that during this short period of time (2 months) the

temporary structure subjected to a large earthquake or strong wind storm is low, therefore common

engineering practice and referenced codes and standards (i.e. ASCE 37-2, ASCE 41-6) allow reduction of

the seismic and wind loads based on the exposure period.

Also considered in this constructability study is the fact that when the (E) EJ is removed and the pipe is

opened up, there is no water in the pipe, which reduce a significant amount of the system weight and

hence significantly reduce the seismic lateral demands.

3. Calculation of Temporary Seismic Load

Per ASCE 41-06, Section 1.6.1.3, "Adjustment of Mapped Response Acceleration Parameters for other

Probability of Exceedance", the seismic load on the temporary condition described above is estimated

below.

Page A-1

yangbo.chenText BoxAppendix A

Design for earthquake event with 2% probability of exceedance during this 2 months period. Noted

as a (2%|2 months) event, which is an event with probability of exceedance greater than a (10%|50 yrs)

event (regular permanent structural design earthquake).

Mapped response paramenters

Ss = 1.5g

S1 = 0.6g

10%|50 yrs:

SDS = 1g

SD1 = 0.52g

Return period of (2%|2months) event

PR = -Y/ln(1-PEy) = 8.25 yrs

Y = exposure time = 2 month = 1/6 yrs = 0.167yrs

PEy = Probability of Exceedance = 0.02

Eq 1-3, Parameters for (2%|2months) Events

Si = Si 10%|50 (PR/475)n n = 0.44 (Table 1-3)

Ss 2%|2m = Ss 10%|50 (PR/475)n = SDS (PR/475)n = 0.168g

S1 2%|2m = S1 10%|50 (PR/475)n = SD1 (PR/475)n = 0.087g

The isolated structure (pipe + Truss) has a natural period of

Tn = 1 sec (Isolators are stiffer due to smaller displacement)

Use R = 1

I = 1 (This could be 1.0 since 2% probability of exceedance is used)

V = (S1/Tn)(I/R)W = 0.087W

Use minimum V = 0.1 W OK for seismic load

4. Calculation of Wind Load

Risk Category: IV (Essential Facility)

Exposure: C

Special Wing Region: 120 mph (ASCE 7-10 wind speed)

(Note this is corresponding approximately to wind with mean return interval of 1700

yrs.)

Directionality Factor Kd = 0.95

Page A-2

(Table 26.6-1, Chimneys, Tanks, and Similar Structures, Round)

Topographic Factor Kzt = 1 (Figure 26.8-1)

Gust-Effect Factor G = 0.85 (Rigid Structure, Unless otherwise determined in Tables)

Enclosure classication = open

Velocity Pressure:

qz = 0.00256 Kz Kzt Kd V2 Kz = 1.04 (40', Exposure C, Table 29.3-1)

qz = 36.4 psf

DESIGN WIND LOAD (ASCE 7-10 Section 29.5)

F = qz G Cf Af

Wind load Force Coefficients, Cf (Figure 29.5-1)

Cf = 0.55 D = 9.83ft

h = 40ft

D*(qz) =59.3

Moderately smooth

h/D = 4.1

F = qz G Cf Af

F = 17.1 Af

According to ASCE 37-02, Section 6.2.1, a reduciton factor 0.8 is allowed to be applied on the design

wind speed for construction period between 6 weeks to 1 year, which effectively reduces the design

wind load to 0.82 = 0.64 time of the calculated force above.

F = 10.9 Af

Use wind load 20 psf OK for wind load

5. Determine the governing lateral load

For empty pipe condition, seismic weight of Pipe + Truss

1.10 +1.25 = 2.35klf

Seismic Load = 0.1W = 235plf

Wind Load = 20 Af = 200plf (Af = 10x1 = 10 sqft/ft)

Therefore, Seismic Governs

Page A-3

FEASIBILITY STUDY OF TOWER CRANE OPTION AND CRAWLER

CRANE OPTION FOR EXPANSION JOINT REPLACEMENT

CONSTRUCTION

This is to document a preliminary study of the construction feasibility of the MWD proposed expansion

joint replacement project at MWD Upper Feeder over Santa River Crossing, Riverside, CA. The

construction option studied herein envolves a heavy crane stationed at the south end of the bridge (see

Figure below), with a jib length and lifting capacity sufficient to suspend the existing Expansion Joint (EJ)

to be removed from the feeder pipe, as well as the proposed new bellow-type EJ, and to transport them

(one at a time) between the EJ location on the feeder pipe and the designated temperory stage/storage

area on the south bank of the Santa Ana River near the south entry. Additionaly, the use of a crawler

crane was studied due to the area of work limitations per currently approved easements.

1. Crane Capacity Requirements

Google Earth Screenshot

Page B-1

yangbo.chenText BoxAppendix B

Required Jib Length (Radius) = 250

Required Hook Height = 50

Required Capacity at Max Jib Length = 6 kips

2. Equipment Availability

There are several models of tower cranes meeting these criteria available for rental, for example,

Terex Peiner SK575, Terex Comedil CTT 721-40, Potain MDT 412-L10, etc.

Further study and research shows that a crawler crane may be suitable for the project given the area

limitations.

3. Findings of This Study

It is feasible from an equipment capacity point of view. A Crawler Crane instead of a tower

crane may be more suitable given the site conditions and area limitations. A crawler crane can

have a boom length of more than 300 ft, and is capable of the required lifting power. The

crawler crane can be stationed on top of an approximately 40x40 wood platform, which would

not require concrete foundation or soil work.

The crawler crane will require a big assembling area near the location of the final station. From

the assembling area to the final station, the path is preferable to be clear of any obstacles such

as light poles or power lines.

The required crane assembling area may be larger than currently available at the site, at least

per current permit. Either new permit is acquired or assembling would have to be done on an

elevated condition, which would not be cost-effective.

Because of the heavy equipment itself and significant counter weight, there is a concern about

the ground bearing capacity particularly adjacent to underground sewer lines. MWD should

evaluate the existing conditions at all underground utilities.

The station area of a crawler crane need to be approximately 70 away from the pipe line for

boom operation to avoid the pipe or trusses.

Page B-2

Temporary Structure Stability for Rail Rigging Option

Trolley rails, lifts and their construction procedure shall be designed by the Contractor. The

construction loads on the bridge trusses shall be provided for review, and if required the truss

members shall be enhanced before the commencement of construction. However, this study

of the structural adequacy of the as-built trusses elements is based on engineering judgment

and best information available regarding the construction loads. Purpose of this study is to

demonstrate the feasibility and identify potential elements most likely requiring strengthening.

1. Weight of (E) Expansion Joint to Remove

a. 1st Piece to remove: (2.2 kips total)

2 long x 7/8 thick 9-10 Diameter Pipe = 2 x 1.1klf = 2.2 kips

b. 2nd Piece to remove: (7.25 kips total)

3 long x 1 thick 9-10 Diameter Pipe = 3 x 1.26klf = 3.8 kips

C15x50 Channel Ring 9-10 Diameter = 50plf x 30.9 = 1.5 kips

L7x4x3/4 Angle Ring 9-10 Diameter = 26.2plf x 30.9 = 0.8 kips

Bolts and Nuts = 6lbs x 31 = 0.2 kips

9 long x 1 thick 9-10 Diameter Pipe = 0.75 x 1.26klf =0.95 kips

2. Weight of (N) Bellow Expansion Joint

a. (4 kips total estimated by bellow manufacturer)

Center-spool (12) + Butt-strap (2)x6 = 2 x 1.1klf = 2.2 kips

Bellow (2) x 16.75 = 1.7 kips

Bolts and Nuts = 12 lbs x 10 = 0.12 kips

Therefore assuming 9 kips moving weight.

3. Weight of Rails

a. Rails need to be design to control rail deflection

Assume (2) W12x26 rails on trusses

(2) W12x65 bridging the gap over Pier 7

The weight of rails is automatically considered by program in models. Total

weight of rails is estimated to be 12.5 kips.

Note that for T1 Trusses where no temporary discontinuity (top diaphragm and pipe) is

introduced,

Seismic Weight of Trusses + Pipe + Full Water = 1278 kips (See 90%CD Calc. pp 21)

Additional weight during joint replacement construction,

Moving Weight + Rails = 9 kips + 12.5 kips = 21.5 kips

The ratio of additional weight to existing weight that the Bridge Trusses designed for:

Page C-1

yangbo.chenText BoxAppendix C

Additional Weight / Existing Weight = 21.5/1278 = 1.7%

Full bridge model with moving loads (Gravity only):

Moving Load definition: 9 kips downward on one lane. See sketch below for lane definition

(South 2 bays of T2 + Gap between T2 and T1 + Entire T1); lanes are located close to the planes

of the vertical bridge trusses each side of the pipe, taking into account of possibly eccentricity

of loading. The 9 kips is conservatively loaded on one lane rather than distributed over 2 lanes.

Moving load impact on opened pipe misalignment

See below tabulated influence lines for vertical displacements of joints on either side of the

opened pipe. The maximum influence of the 9 kip moving load on the vertical misalignment of

the open pipe is estimated to be about 0.015 inch. This is very small and negligible.

Lanes of

Moving Load

Page C-3

Case Bellow Moving Load Influence forJoint 1550, U3 Case Bellow Moving Load Influence forJoint 874, U3 Differential @

9 kips

Lane Station Sta. Dist Ordinate Ord. Dist Global X Global Y Global Z Influence Lane Station Sta. Dist Ordinate Ord. Dist Global X Global Y Global Z Influence Influence

ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft in

TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 -1.29E-05 TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 -1.52E-04 1.39E-04 1.50E-02

TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 -1.40E-05 TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 -1.52E-04 1.37E-04 1.48E-02

TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 -1.51E-05 TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 -1.51E-04 1.36E-04 1.47E-02


TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 -1.64E-05 TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 -1.19E-04 1.03E-04 1.11E-02




TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 1.88E-06 TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 -4.75E-05 4.94E-05 5.34E-03

TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 1.89E-06 TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 -4.75E-05 4.94E-05 5.34E-03








TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 6.60E-05 TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 -6.88E-06 7.29E-05 7.88E-03




















Influence Line for U3 of Joint #1550 Influence Line for U3 of Joint #874 Misalignment

Page C-4

Moving Load Influence on Truss Member Axial Load:

Critical Case 1: Truss T2 (and Truss T1 similar) End Diagonal Member

Side Truss Diagonal Member 2C15x40+CapPl,

Compression capacity = 805 kips (see Calc. pp. 299)

Max Influence = 8.2 kips = 1% Capacity OK.

Case Bellow Moving Load Influence forFrame 394, RD = 0.5, Axial Force @

9 kips

Lane Station Sta. Dist Ordinate Ord. Dist Global X Global Y Global Z Influence

ft ft ft ft ft Kip in

TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.6413 -5.77

TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 -0.6981 -6.28

TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.7549 -6.79

TrackRail1 4 18 1 0 376.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.755 -6.80

TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 -0.832 -7.49

TrackRail1 6 35.9934 1 0 393.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.9091 -8.18

TrackRail1 7 36 1 0 394.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.9091 -8.18

TrackRail1 8 45.4967 1 0 403.5 -6.75 22.5 -0.6738 -6.06

TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.4385 -3.95

TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.4384 -3.95

TrackRail1 11 64.4967 1 0 422.5 -6.75 22.5 -0.2031 -1.83

TrackRail1 12 73.9934 1 0 431.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0322 0.29

TrackRail1 13 74 1 0 432.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0322 0.29

TrackRail1 14 82.9934 1 0 440.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.031 0.28

TrackRail1 15 83 1 0 441.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.031 0.28

TrackRail1 16 91.9934 1 0 449.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0297 0.27

TrackRail1 17 92 1 0 450.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0297 0.27

TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 0.0281 0.25

TrackRail1 19 109.9934 1 0 467.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0265 0.24

TrackRail1 20 110 1 0 468.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0265 0.24

TrackRail1 21 118.9967 1 0 477 -6.75 22.5 0.0252 0.23

TrackRail1 22 127.9934 1 0 485.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.024 0.22

TrackRail1 23 128 1 0 486.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.024 0.22

TrackRail1 24 136.9967 1 0 495 -6.75 22.5 0.0229 0.21

TrackRail1 25 145.9934 1 0 503.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0218 0.20

TrackRail1 26 146 1 0 504.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0218 0.20

TrackRail1 27 154.9967 1 0 513 -6.75 22.5 0.0208 0.19

TrackRail1 28 163.9934 1 0 521.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0197 0.18

TrackRail1 29 164 1 0 522.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0197 0.18

TrackRail1 30 172.9967 1 0 531 -6.75 22.5 0.0184 0.17

TrackRail1 31 181.9934 1 0 539.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0171 0.15

TrackRail1 32 182 1 0 540.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0171 0.15

TrackRail1 33 190.9967 1 0 549 -6.75 22.5 0.0155 0.14

TrackRail1 34 199.9934 1 0 557.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0139 0.13

TrackRail1 35 200 1 0 558.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0139 0.13

TrackRail1 36 208.9967 1 0 567 -6.75 22.5 0.0118 0.11

TrackRail1 37 217.9934 1 0 575.9967 -6.75 22.5 9.66E-03 0.09

Page C-5

Critical Case 2: Truss T1 Bottom Chord

Side Bottom Chord Member 2C15x33.9+4WebPl,

Tension capacity = 1344 kips (see Calc. pp. 299)

Max Influence = 6.7 kips = 0.5% Capacity OK.


9 kips



TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 3.04E-04 0.00

TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 5.49E-04 0.00

TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 7.94E-04 0.01

TrackRail1 4 18 1 0 376.0033 -6.75 22.5 7.94E-04 0.01

TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 2.01E-03 0.02

TrackRail1 6 35.9934 1 0 393.9967 -6.75 22.5 3.23E-03 0.03

TrackRail1 7 36 1 0 394.0033 -6.75 22.5 3.24E-03 0.03

TrackRail1 8 45.4967 1 0 403.5 -6.75 22.5 0.0329 0.30

TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0625 0.56

TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0625 0.56

TrackRail1 11 64.4967 1 0 422.5 -6.75 22.5 0.0922 0.83

TrackRail1 12 73.9934 1 0 431.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.1218 1.10

TrackRail1 13 74 1 0 432.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.1218 1.10

TrackRail1 14 82.9934 1 0 440.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.184 1.66

TrackRail1 15 83 1 0 441.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.184 1.66

TrackRail1 16 91.9934 1 0 449.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.2461 2.21

TrackRail1 17 92 1 0 450.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.2462 2.22

TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 0.2998 2.70

TrackRail1 19 109.9934 1 0 467.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.3534 3.18

TrackRail1 20 110 1 0 468.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.3535 3.18

TrackRail1 21 118.9967 1 0 477 -6.75 22.5 0.4291 3.86

TrackRail1 22 127.9934 1 0 485.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.5047 4.54

TrackRail1 23 128 1 0 486.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.5048 4.54

TrackRail1 24 136.9967 1 0 495 -6.75 22.5 0.6266 5.64

TrackRail1 25 145.9934 1 0 503.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.7483 6.73

TrackRail1 26 146 1 0 504.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.7484 6.74

TrackRail1 27 154.9967 1 0 513 -6.75 22.5 0.7299 6.57

TrackRail1 28 163.9934 1 0 521.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.7115 6.40

TrackRail1 29 164 1 0 522.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.7114 6.40

TrackRail1 30 172.9967 1 0 531 -6.75 22.5 0.5565 5.01

TrackRail1 31 181.9934 1 0 539.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.4015 3.61

TrackRail1 32 182 1 0 540.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.4014 3.61

TrackRail1 33 190.9967 1 0 549 -6.75 22.5 0.3279 2.95

TrackRail1 34 199.9934 1 0 557.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.2544 2.29

TrackRail1 35 200 1 0 558.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.2543 2.29

TrackRail1 36 208.9967 1 0 567 -6.75 22.5 0.1777 1.60

TrackRail1 37 217.9934 1 0 575.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.1011 0.91

Page C-6

Critical Case 3: Truss T1 Top Chord

Side Top Chord Member 2C15x55+1cvr+2web,




9 kips



TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 2.27E-03 0.02

TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 2.41E-03 0.02

TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 2.55E-03 0.02

TrackRail1 4 18 1 0 376.0033 -6.75 22.5 2.55E-03 0.02

TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 3.42E-03 0.03

TrackRail1 6 35.9934 1 0 393.9967 -6.75 22.5 4.29E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 7 36 1 0 394.0033 -6.75 22.5 4.28E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 8 45.4967 1 0 403.5 -6.75 22.5 -0.0303 -0.27

TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.0648 -0.58

TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.0648 -0.58

TrackRail1 11 64.4967 1 0 422.5 -6.75 22.5 -0.0993 -0.89

TrackRail1 12 73.9934 1 0 431.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.1339 -1.21

TrackRail1 13 74 1 0 432.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.1339 -1.21

TrackRail1 14 82.9934 1 0 440.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.1984 -1.79

TrackRail1 15 83 1 0 441.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.1984 -1.79

TrackRail1 16 91.9934 1 0 449.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.2629 -2.37

TrackRail1 17 92 1 0 450.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.2629 -2.37

TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 -0.3144 -2.83

TrackRail1 19 109.9934 1 0 467.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.3659 -3.29

TrackRail1 20 110 1 0 468.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.366 -3.29

TrackRail1 21 118.9967 1 0 477 -6.75 22.5 -0.4364 -3.93

TrackRail1 22 127.9934 1 0 485.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.5068 -4.56

TrackRail1 23 128 1 0 486.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.5068 -4.56

TrackRail1 24 136.9967 1 0 495 -6.75 22.5 -0.6002 -5.40

TrackRail1 25 145.9934 1 0 503.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.6935 -6.24

TrackRail1 26 146 1 0 504.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.6935 -6.24

TrackRail1 27 154.9967 1 0 513 -6.75 22.5 -0.662 -5.96

TrackRail1 28 163.9934 1 0 521.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.6305 -5.67

TrackRail1 29 164 1 0 522.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.6304 -5.67

TrackRail1 30 172.9967 1 0 531 -6.75 22.5 -0.5554 -5.00

TrackRail1 31 181.9934 1 0 539.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.4803 -4.32

TrackRail1 32 182 1 0 540.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.4802 -4.32

TrackRail1 33 190.9967 1 0 549 -6.75 22.5 -0.4117 -3.71

TrackRail1 34 199.9934 1 0 557.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.3431 -3.09

TrackRail1 35 200 1 0 558.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.343 -3.09

TrackRail1 36 208.9967 1 0 567 -6.75 22.5 -0.2696 -2.43

TrackRail1 37 217.9934 1 0 575.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.1962 -1.77

Page C-7

Critical Case 4: Truss T1 Vertical

Side Vertical Member W14x82,




9 kips



TrackRail1 1 0 1 0 358.0033 -6.75 22.5 3.77E-03 0.03

TrackRail1 2 8.9967 1 0 367 -6.75 22.5 4.14E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 3 17.9934 1 0 375.9967 -6.75 22.5 4.52E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 4 18 1 0 376.0033 -6.75 22.5 4.52E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 5 26.9967 1 0 385 -6.75 22.5 4.92E-03 0.04

TrackRail1 6 35.9934 1 0 393.9967 -6.75 22.5 5.31E-03 0.05

TrackRail1 7 36 1 0 394.0033 -6.75 22.5 5.32E-03 0.05

TrackRail1 8 45.4967 1 0 403.5 -6.75 22.5 0.0279 0.25

TrackRail1 9 54.9934 1 0 412.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0504 0.45

TrackRail1 10 55 1 0 413.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0504 0.45

TrackRail1 11 64.4967 1 0 422.5 -6.75 22.5 0.073 0.66

TrackRail1 12 73.9934 1 0 431.9967 -6.75 22.5 0.0956 0.86

TrackRail1 13 74 1 0 432.0033 -6.75 22.5 0.0954 0.86

TrackRail1 14 82.9934 1 0 440.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.2799 -2.52

TrackRail1 15 83 1 0 441.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.2801 -2.52

TrackRail1 16 91.9934 1 0 449.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.6554 -5.90

TrackRail1 17 92 1 0 450.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.6555 -5.90

TrackRail1 18 100.9967 1 0 459 -6.75 22.5 -0.5434 -4.89

TrackRail1 19 109.9934 1 0 467.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.4314 -3.88

TrackRail1 20 110 1 0 468.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.4313 -3.88

TrackRail1 21 118.9967 1 0 477 -6.75 22.5 -0.3466 -3.12

TrackRail1 22 127.9934 1 0 485.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.2618 -2.36

TrackRail1 23 128 1 0 486.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.2618 -2.36

TrackRail1 24 136.9967 1 0 495 -6.75 22.5 -0.2315 -2.08

TrackRail1 25 145.9934 1 0 503.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.2012 -1.81

TrackRail1 26 146 1 0 504.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.2012 -1.81

TrackRail1 27 154.9967 1 0 513 -6.75 22.5 -0.1782 -1.60

TrackRail1 28 163.9934 1 0 521.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.1552 -1.40

TrackRail1 29 164 1 0 522.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.1552 -1.40

TrackRail1 30 172.9967 1 0 531 -6.75 22.5 -0.1359 -1.22

TrackRail1 31 181.9934 1 0 539.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.1166 -1.05

TrackRail1 32 182 1 0 540.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.1166 -1.05

TrackRail1 33 190.9967 1 0 549 -6.75 22.5 -0.0987 -0.89

TrackRail1 34 199.9934 1 0 557.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.0808 -0.73

TrackRail1 35 200 1 0 558.0033 -6.75 22.5 -0.0808 -0.73

TrackRail1 36 208.9967 1 0 567 -6.75 22.5 -0.0615 -0.55

TrackRail1 37 217.9934 1 0 575.9967 -6.75 22.5 -0.0423 -0.38

Page C-8

Single truss model with moving loads (Lateral and Gravity):

See sketch below for a graphic representation of the models used in this analysis.

A single bridge truss (T2) is analyzed. The truss is modeled as simple supported on 4 points

(corresponding to 2 supports on each pier). Only the portion of pipe within the length of Truss

T2 is modeled. The pipe is fixed at either ends above the pier to represent the effective restrain

from a continuation of the pipe. This single truss model does not fully represent the behaviors

of the full bridge, but rather serves as an approximate of the local behavior of the truss-pipe

interaction under relatively small lateral loading. Note that the temporary seismic load is

estimated to be 10% of the seismic weight, which is much less than the lateral demands in a

MCE earthquake. The displacement of the isolators shall be much smaller than the MCE

displacement and the isolators effective stiffness is higher. Laterally fixed truss supports and

fixed pipe restrains are thus judged to be appropriate for such an approximation purpose.

Above the location of the expansion joint, the top truss diagonal members (2 total) are

removed to represent the temporary structure condition.

Single Truss Model

Page C-9

Two Single Truss Models are created for different stages of construction:

Model A: Hinged Pipe with Full Water Mass

At the expansion joint, the pipe is modeled as a hinge, where shears but no moments

are transferred to the other side of the joint. Mass of water completely fulfilling the

pipe is modeled -- 10% water weight contributing the temporary seismic demand

together with the rest of the structural weight.

Model B: Open Pipe with No Water Mass

At the expansion joint, the pipe is open, where neither shears nor moments are

transferred to the other side of the joint. No mass of water in the pipe is modeled

only the weight of the structure is taken into consideration.

Since SAP2000 program does not handle horizontal moving load, the lateral Trolley Rail loading

on the truss is explicitly modeled as point loads at a few representing locations. The

overturning effect due to the center of mass above the top truss is also considered.

Temporary seismic in transverse direction (Y-Y direction)

Lateral Shear = 9 kips x 0.1 = 0.9 kips (applied as two 0.45 kips point loads in each case)

Overturning = 9 kips x 0.1 x (H/B) = 0.5 kips (applied as up and down point loads in

each case).

Temporary seismic in longitudinal direction (X-X direction)

Lateral Shear = 9 kips x 0.1 = 0.9 kips (applied as four 0.23 kips point loads in each case)

Overturning = 9/2 kips x 0.1 x (H/B) = 0.13 kips (applied as up and down point loads in

each case).

Page C-10

Y-Y Location 1 Y-Y Location 2

Y-Y Location 3 Y-Y Location 4

Y-Y Location 5

Moving Lateral Load (Transverse Direction) Modeled as Point Loads at Critical Locations

Page C-11

X-X Location 1 X-X Location 2

Moving Lateral Load (Longitudinal Direction) Modeled as Point Loads at Critical Locations

Model A:

1. Max lateral drift at frames adjacent to expansion joint

Lateral Drift Ratio 1

Lateral Drift Ratio 2

Page C-12

Drift Ratio 1 (see sketch above for definition)

Max drift ratio 1 = 0.05% very small, negligible

Drift Ratio 2 (see sketch above for definition)


TABLE: Joint Displacements

Joint OutputCase CaseType U1 U2 U3 R1 R2 R3 D(U2) Drift Ratio

Text Text Text ft ft ft Radians Radians Radians ft %

224 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc 1 Combination -0.000592 0.004804 0.001424 -0.000187 0.000038 -0.000144 0.007896 0.05%

224 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc2 Combination -0.00059 0.004804 0.001428 -0.000187 0.000038 -0.000144 0.007933 0.05%




324 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc 1 Combination -0.000085 0.0127 0.001459 -0.000362 0.000031 -0.000235

324 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc2 Combination -0.000081 0.012737 0.001463 -0.000363 0.000031 -0.000231







142 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc 1 Combination -0.000445 0.002266 0.000527 -0.000132 0.000047 -0.000082 0.004206 0.02%





264 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc 1 Combination 0.000212 0.006472 0.000506 0.000053 0.000044 -0.000358

264 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc2 Combination 0.000214 0.006517 0.000509 0.000052 0.000045 -0.000359




Page C-13

2. Bottom truss diagonals

Bottom Diagonals in the Bay Directly under Expansion Joint

Max Axial Load (compression) = 13.3 kips < Brace Capacity = 73.3 kips (Calc. pp. 302), OK.

TABLE: Element Forces - Frames

Frame Station OutputCase CaseType P V2 V3 T M2 M3

Text ft Text Text Kip Kip Kip Kip-ft Kip-ft Kip-ft

627 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -0.932 -0.201 0.011 -0.0003098 0.0521 -0.7264

627 12.4363 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -0.932 -0.004515 0.011 -0.0003098 -0.0668 0.4252









628 0.2917 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -0.933 0.001253 0.00837 -0.0001005 0.0535 0.4262

628 11.4779 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -0.933 0.198 0.00837 -0.0001005 -0.0401 -0.6889









641 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -13.312 -0.21 -0.009097 0.0001664 -0.0409 -0.7717

641 12.4363 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -13.312 -0.013 -0.009097 0.0001664 0.0609 0.4725









642 0.2917 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -13.311 0.001979 -0.012 0.0001993 -0.0588 0.4755

642 11.4779 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -13.311 0.199 -0.012 0.0001993 0.0755 -0.6478









Page C-14

Bottom Diagonals in the End Bay





625 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 0.266 -0.202 0.004869 -0.0001853 0.0066 -0.7272

625 12.4363 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 0.266 -0.004884 0.004869 -0.0001853 -0.0479 0.4286





625 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc4 Combination 0.31 -0.202 0.003995 -0.0001877 -0.00053 -0.7267


625 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc5 Combination 0.329 -0.202 0.003395 -0.0001894 -0.0054 -0.7264


626 0.2917 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 0.227 0.00919 0.026 -0.0001418 0.1574 0.4275

626 11.4779 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 0.227 0.206 0.026 -0.0001418 -0.1336 -0.7764



















640 0.2917 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -14.763 -0.000325 -0.0079 0.0002847 -0.0278 0.4315










Page C-15

Bottom Diagonals in the Interior Bay Adjacent to Expansion Joint





629 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 9.488 -0.205 -0.001547 -0.0003116 -0.0196 -0.7201

629 12.4363 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 9.488 -0.007669 -0.001547 -0.0003116 -0.0023 0.4668









630 0.2917 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 9.487 0.013 -0.007879 0.0001603 -0.033 0.4652

630 11.4779 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination 9.487 0.21 -0.007879 0.0001603 0.0552 -0.7853









643 1.25 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -7.453 -0.2 0.002948 0.0001841 0.011 -0.6973

643 12.4363 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -7.453 -0.002884 0.002948 0.0001841 -0.022 0.4362



















Page C-16

3. Bottom truss chords

Bottom Chord in the Bay Directly under Expansion Joint

Max Axial Load (compression) = 70.9 kips < Member (2C15x33.9_SD) Capacity = 501 kips (Calc.

pp. 299), OK.





151 17.1667 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -61.478 0.344 0.077 0.0009852 -0.2508 -0.9479



















Page C-17

Bottom Chord in End Bay

Max Axial Load (compression) = 80.3 kips < Member (2C15x33.9_SD) Capacity = 501 kips (Calc.

pp. 299), OK.
























Page C-18

4. Frame columns

Critical Frame Column 1 (See sketch above for definition)

Pu = 100.3 kips, Mu = 22 k-ft.

Member W14x82, Capacity Pn = 386 kips (Calc pp. 299), Mn = 297 k-ft, D/C = 0.33 < 1, OK.
























Critical Frame Column 1

Critical Frame Column 2

Page C-19

Critical Frame Column 2 (See sketch above for definition)

Pu = 180.1 kips, Mu = 36.2 k-ft (weak axis)

Member 2C15x40+CapPl, Capacity Pn = 805 kips (Calc pp. 299), Mn = 398 k-ft, D/C = 0.30 < 1,

OK.




394 0 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -152.803 -0.373 0.637 -0.0056 9.4393 3.4877









394 12.8176 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc5 Combination -151.01 0.589 0.883 -0.0048 -0.0626 2.0986

395 0 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -179.993 -0.299 5.144 0.0058 30.5461 3.9974

395 12.8176 10%Lateral + (D+Water) + Y Loc1 Combination -178.792 0.662 5.144 0.0058 -35.3929 1.6691









Page C-20

Model B:

1. Max lateral drift at frames adjacent to expansion joint

Drift Ratio 1 (definition similar to Model A)


Drift Ratio 2 (definition similar to Model A)










324 10%Lateral + Moving Y Loc1 Combination 0.000135 0.010616 0.001411 -0.000279 0.000024 -0.000159


















Page C-21

2. Bottom truss diagonals

Bottom Diagonals in the Bay Directly under Expansion Joint





627 1.25 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 4.712 -0.208 0.001816 -0.0002566 0.0041 -0.758

627 12.4363 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 4.712 -0.011 0.001816 -0.0002566 -0.0162 0.4623







627 1.25 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination 4.531 -0.207 0.002192 -0.0002633 0.0073 -0.7542

627 12.4363 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination 4.531 -0.01 0.002192 -0.0002633 -0.0172 0.4619

628 0.2917 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 4.709 -0.003009 0.006481 -0.0001249 0.0297 0.4663

628 11.4779 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 4.709 0.194 0.006481 -0.0001249 -0.0428 -0.6012







628 0.2917 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination 4.529 -0.003202 0.006354 -0.000124 0.0286 0.4659

628 11.4779 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination 4.529 0.194 0.006354 -0.000124 -0.0425 -0.5995

641 1.25 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination -8.847 -0.213 -0.00404 0.000147 -0.0233 -0.7823

641 12.4363 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination -8.847 -0.016 -0.00404 0.000147 0.0219 0.4957







641 1.25 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination -8.666 -0.213 -0.003665 0.0001403 -0.0201 -0.7861

641 12.4363 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination -8.666 -0.016 -0.003665 0.0001403 0.0209 0.4961

642 0.2917 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination -8.839 -0.002913 -0.004596 0.000204 -0.0239 0.5011

642 11.4779 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination -8.839 0.194 -0.004596 0.000204 0.0275 -0.5675







642 0.2917 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination -8.659 -0.002721 -0.004724 0.0002049 -0.025 0.5015

642 11.4779 10%Lateral + D+ Y Loc5 Combination -8.659 0.194 -0.004724 0.0002049 0.0279 -0.5692

Page C-22

Bottom Diagonals in the End Bay





625 1.25 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 6.114 -0.202 -0.005564 -0.00004602 -0.0601 -0.7269

625 12.4363 10%Lateral + D + Y Loc1 Combination 6.114 -0.005391 -0.005564 -0.00004602 0.0021 0.4345





625 1.25

expansion joint replacement constructability study report combined 2-23-2015 (2).pdf

Documents