The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 65 (1987) > Issues > Issue 4 > Bridge Winners and Losers (Rapid Evaluation of Bridge Designs and Construction Methods)
Name of File 4985-65-04.pdf cached at 15/12/2017 21:41:08 - with 5 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\69\695c2c31-5ecc-484f-b15c-733e82513c27.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\695c2c31-5ecc-484f-b15c-733e82513c27_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 695c2c31-5ecc-484f-b15c-733e82513c27_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Bridge Winners and Losers (Rapid Evaluation of Bridge Designs and Construction Methods)

The paper attempts to review those factors which make a particular bridge design more or less economic than the alternative solutions available. It refers only to medium range (say, 20 m to 100 m) simply supported or continuous spans in prestressed concrete or composite steel construction and is not relevant to long-span suspension, cable-stayed, arch- or portal-type bridges or bridges with orthotropic steel plate decks, or to short-span reinforced concrete bridges and culverts. Anthony F. Gee