The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 76 (1998) > Issues > Issue 15 > Analyses for Creep of Continuous Steel and Composite Bridge Beams, According to EC4: Part 2
Name of File 6248-76-15.pdf cached at 17/12/2017 23:36:30 - with 5 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\76\769f70c2-b3c8-4cc2-bc71-08c1de41a93c.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\769f70c2-b3c8-4cc2-bc71-08c1de41a93c_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 769f70c2-b3c8-4cc2-bc71-08c1de41a93c_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Analyses for Creep of Continuous Steel and Composite Bridge Beams, According to EC4: Part 2

The term ‘hyperstatic effects due to creep’, as used in ENV 1994:2 (the draft Eurocode for composite bridges’), may be unfamiliar Its interpretation in global analysis is explained. A two-span beam is analysed using two modular ratios, as in the UK Bridge Code, and using three, as in the Eurocode. A method of numerical analysis, using current software, is explained. The methods are applied to a beam of mixed construction, a beam prestressed by jacking at a support, and to efsects of shrinkage. The extent to which the simpler method (current practice in the UK) could be unsafe is usually small for the first subject, but may not be for the other two. Professor R.P. Johnson and Professor Dr Ing G. Hanswille