Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMárquez Peñaranda, J F
dc.contributor.authorPineda Rodríguez, J R
dc.contributor.authorRojas Suárez, J P
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-23T21:05:24Z
dc.date.available2022-11-23T21:05:24Z
dc.date.issued2022-01-06
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.ufps.edu.co/handle/ufps/6609
dc.description.abstractBridges represent an important application of physics capable of solving real transportation problems. Knowledge of convenience of different mechanical solutions when analyzing and designing bridge is needed. For these reasons, this work is focused on the study of convenience of using two types of bridges. Simply supported short-medium span bridges (30 m to 45 m) are usually excessively long when choosing reinforced concrete solutions and usually short for other types of structures such as cable-stayed or cantilever bridges. The suitability of simply supported bridges leads to the need of studying their cost benefit ratios. This work studies the cost benefit ratio for post-tensioned concrete beams and structural steel girders in simply supported straight bridges. Eight models built of type I sections were used in both cases to analyze the bridges using a software based on the stiffness method. Span of each bridge was set to 30 m, 35 m, 40 m, and 45 m. The convenience of each type of bridge was done comparing the total and the cost per linear meter of each solution (post-tensioned and structural steel). Comparison was done using material consumption, labor, and construction processes costs only. Also, allowable vertical displacement given by current bridge design standards was verifiedeng
dc.format.extent8spa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherJournal of Physics: Conference Seriesspa
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Physics: Conference Series. Vol 2153 No°1[2022]
dc.rights© 2022 by the authorseng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/spa
dc.sourcehttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2153/1/012004spa
dc.titleAn application of physics: simply supported bridges made of post-tensioned concrete and structural steel beameng
dc.typeArtículo de revistaspa
dcterms.referencesMuñoz Díaz E E 2011 Ingeniería de Puentes. Reseña Histórica, Tipología, Diagnóstico y Recuperación (Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana)spa
dcterms.referencesAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASTHO) 2017 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (Washington: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials)spa
dcterms.referencesAmerican Concrete Institute (ACI) 2014 Building Code Requirements for Structural, ACI 318S-14 (United States of America: American Concrete Institute)spa
dcterms.referencesAsociación Colombiana de Ingeniería Sísmica (AIS) 2014 Norma Colombiana de Diseño de Puentes, LRFD –CCP 14 (Colombia: Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial)spa
dcterms.referencesAsociación Colombiana de Ingeniería Sísmica (AIS) 2010 Reglamento Colombiano de Construcción Sismo Resistente, NSR10 (Bogotá: Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial)spa
dcterms.referencesEl-Zohairy A, Alsharari F, Salimc H 2020 Analytical model and parametric study for externally posttensioned reinforced concrete-steel composite beams Structures 27 411spa
dcterms.referencesVasdravellis G, Tan B U E L, Kirkland B 2012 The effects of axial tension on the sagging-moment regions of composite beams Journal of Constructional Steel Research 72 240spa
dcterms.referencesCalifornia Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2015 Bridge Design Practice (Sacramento: California Department of Transportation)spa
dcterms.referencesHaas T 2014 Are reinforced concrete girder bridges more economical than structural steel girder bridges? A South African perspective Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering 8(1) 43spa
dcterms.referencesDelgado C A, Zúñiga B R 2015 Comparación de Costos entre Puentes con Vigas de Acero, Concreto Reforzado y Postensado Considerando la Variación de la Luz Libre (Cartagena de India: Universidad de Cartagena)spa
dcterms.referencesAlmeida J A, Armas A E 2019 Diseño y Comparación Económica de la Superestructura de un Puente de 30 Metros de Luz Considerando Variantes de Losa con Vigas de Hormigón Postensado y Vigas-LosasCajón (Quito: Escuela Politécnica Nacional)spa
dcterms.referencesMontgomery D C, Runger G C1996 Probabilidad y Estadística Aplicadas a la Ingeniería (México: McGraw-Hill)spa
dc.contributor.corporatenameJournal of Physics: Conference Seriesspa
dc.identifier.doi10.1088/1742-6596/2153/1/012004
dc.publisher.placeReino Unidospa
dc.relation.citationeditionVol. 2153 No° 1 [2022]spa
dc.relation.citationendpage7spa
dc.relation.citationissue1[2022]spa
dc.relation.citationstartpage1spa
dc.relation.citationvolume2153spa
dc.relation.citesJ F Márquez-Peñaranda et al 2022 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2153 012004 DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/2153/1/012004
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Physics: Conference Seriesspa
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.rights.creativecommonsAtribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0)spa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501spa
dc.type.contentTextspa
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlespa
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTspa
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2spa
oaire.versionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85spa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionspa


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2022 by the authors
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2022 by the authors