My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Hardesty & Hanover
SIBFL
>
City Clerk
>
Bids-RFQ-RFP
>
RFQ
>
(19-11-01) Prof Eng and Arch Srvcs Ped Bridge REVISED
>
Responses
>
Hardesty & Hanover
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2020 3:56:17 PM
Creation date
1/14/2020 3:49:08 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
391
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />STRUCTURES <br />The Bridge Development Report (BDR) performed during the Initial Engineering Phase will <br />establish the basic parameters that will affect the work in the Final Engineering Phase. The BDR <br />will consider various bridge elements and compare them for viability, durability, constructability, <br />maintainability, and cost. <br />Examples of BDR element comparisons include: <br />• Main Span Structural System Elements - <br />o Florida U-Beams (FUB) - FUBs are preferred choice from preliminary calculations and <br />design concepts and are featured in the narrative below <br />o Florida I-Beams (FIB) - FIBs introduce more elements to erect, more diaphragms to cast, <br />have less torsional capacity, and add visual clutter with the additional beam lines <br />beneath. <br />o Steel Box or I-girders - With the highly corrosive oceanfront environment, steel <br />superstructures need coating systems that require costly maintenance. Maintenance <br />activities are costly and disruptive to traffic along Collins Ave. <br />• Foundation Elements - <br />o Drilled Shafts - installation of shaft casings increase construction vibration risk to adjacent <br />high value properties <br />o Augercast piles - minimal installation vibration <br />The following discussion previews the BDR process and presents solutions resulting from our initial <br />screening of known project issues. Final recommendations will be documented for City and FDOT review, <br />comments, and approval prior to proceeding to Final Engineering phase. <br />Main Structural System <br />The structural system needs to solve the following requirements to satisfy the functionality and geometry <br />of the Bridge Park: <br />• Complex Irregular Plan Geometry - requires a superstructures system that can accommodate <br />width changes without excessive cost or complicated details <br />• Grade Separated Park Areas - requires a superstructure cross section that can accommodate <br />different elevations without excessive structural depth <br />• Single Span - requires a superstructure system that spans the entire Collins Avenue corridor <br />We propose the use of a “spine and rib” system with a spine of consisting of three redundant, <br />Florida U Beams (FUBs) and continuous transverse concrete ribs of varying lengths. The spine and <br />rib system provides structural redundancy, weight efficiency, geometric versatility, durability, <br />constructability, and low-cost relative to other systems such as heavy segmental post-tensioned <br />systems or high maintenance steel. <br />It is critical to provide a simple and redundant structural system to support the complex <br />functionality. It is equally important to develop a structural system that is safely constructible and <br />durable to protect the City’s investment. <br /> <br />D-12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.