Concrete Bridge Design Comparison Of Chinese Code,Aashto And Eurocode

Clauses about concrete bridges design of Chinese Code(in/out of operation)《General Design Specifications of Highway Bridges and Culverts》JTG D60-2015,JTG D60-2004,《Specifications for Design of Highway Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Bridges and Culverts》JTG 3362-2018,JTG D62-2004,American《AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification》8th Edition 2017 and Eurocode were compared.The main work are as follows:1)Comparison of Main requirements of bride design.Guidelines,design reference period,design service life,limit states,design situation and safety level were compared.2)Comparison of common material parameter.The strength level,streghth value,and other parameters(possion ratio,elastic Module,thermal expansion coefficient)of Concrete,reinforcement,prestressed steel were compared.3)Comparison of action and combination of action.The categories of action,combination under different limit states,dead load and vehicle load(including dynamic factor,braking force,centrifugal force)were compared,moment and shear force were calculated under dead load and combination of dead load plus vehicle load.4)Comparison of ultimate limit states.Calculation method of bending,shearing,compression,tension resistance were compared and analysed,beam overturning also was compared.5)Comparison of service limit states.Category of prestressed concrete,method of stress calculation,anti-cracking,crack width and deflection calculation method were compared.6)Analyse of appraising index.The section margin,stress margin and deflection margin were calculated,finnaly the comprehensive margin was calculatedGeneral design requirements,materials,action classifications,action combinations,ultimate limit states and service limit state verification methods specified in the Chinese coede,AASHTO code and Eurocode were compared,differences between the specifications were comprehensively compared.