File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Comparison of prestressed concrete bridge girders designed by three different codes

TitleComparison of prestressed concrete bridge girders designed by three different codes
Authors
Du, JAu, FTKLu, WJi, W
KeywordsConcrete bridge
Deterministic analysis
Girder
Limit state design
Prestressed concrete structures
Issue Date2004
PublisherScience Press.
Citation
Progress In Safety Science And Technology Volume 4:Proceedings Of The 2004 International Symposium On Safety Science And Technology, 2004 PART A, p. 899-904 How to Cite?
AbstractThis paper compares the prestressing requirements of prestressed concrete bridge girders designed using three codes: the Chinese Code, the Hong Kong Code and the AASHTO LRFD Code. Typical post-tensioned concrete girders of spans ranging from 25 m to 40 m are considered. The analysis indicates that the service limit state governs the design according to the Chinese Code and the AASHTO LRFD Code. However for the Hong Kong Code, only those with longer spans are controlled by the service limit state. The actual number of strands needed by the AASHTO LRFD Code is quite close to that needed by the Chinese Code, while that required by the Hong Kong Code is about 18% to 33% higher than that required by the AASHTO LRFD Code.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/110945
References
References in Scopus

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDu, Jen_HK
dc.contributor.authorAu, FTKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLu, Wen_HK
dc.contributor.authorJi, Wen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-26T02:27:55Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-26T02:27:55Z-
dc.date.issued2004en_HK
dc.identifier.citationProgress In Safety Science And Technology Volume 4:Proceedings Of The 2004 International Symposium On Safety Science And Technology, 2004 PART A, p. 899-904en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/110945-
dc.description.abstractThis paper compares the prestressing requirements of prestressed concrete bridge girders designed using three codes: the Chinese Code, the Hong Kong Code and the AASHTO LRFD Code. Typical post-tensioned concrete girders of spans ranging from 25 m to 40 m are considered. The analysis indicates that the service limit state governs the design according to the Chinese Code and the AASHTO LRFD Code. However for the Hong Kong Code, only those with longer spans are controlled by the service limit state. The actual number of strands needed by the AASHTO LRFD Code is quite close to that needed by the Chinese Code, while that required by the Hong Kong Code is about 18% to 33% higher than that required by the AASHTO LRFD Code.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherScience Press.en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofProgress in Safety Science and Technology Volume 4:Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Safety Science and Technologyen_HK
dc.subjectConcrete bridgeen_HK
dc.subjectDeterministic analysisen_HK
dc.subjectGirderen_HK
dc.subjectLimit state designen_HK
dc.subjectPrestressed concrete structuresen_HK
dc.titleComparison of prestressed concrete bridge girders designed by three different codesen_HK
dc.typeConference_Paperen_HK
dc.identifier.emailAu, FTK:francis.au@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityAu, FTK=rp00083en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-12344285379en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros134823en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-12344285379&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume, v. 4en_HK
dc.identifier.issuePART Aen_HK
dc.identifier.spage899en_HK
dc.identifier.epage904en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridDu, J=36442226500en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridAu, FTK=7005204072en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLu, W=7404215149en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJi, W=13408458200en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats

OR

Export to Other Non-XML Formats