appendix a engineering appendix for detailed project
TRANSCRIPT
APPENDIX A
ENGINEERING APPENDIX FOR DETAILED PROJECT REPORT
for
E. AU GRES RIVER SEA LAMPREY TRAP
IOSCO COUNTY, MICHIGAN
Prepared by the
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DETROIT DISTRICT
Table of Contents
1. GENERAL INFORMATION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 LOCATION ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.4 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 1
2. TRAP COMPLEX GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................... 2
2.1 LAMPREY TRAPS.................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 LIFT SYSTEM ......................................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 PLATFORM ........................................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 REAL ESTATE ........................................................................................................................................ 3
3. ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................................................ 3
3.1 ALTERNATIVE 1 - NO ACTION .................................................................................................................. 3 3.2 ALTERNATIVE 3 – ATTRACTANT WATER TRAP ADJACENT TO MDNR SEA LAMPREY BARRIER ............................... 3
4. DESIGN ........................................................................................................................................... 4
4.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 SURVEY DATA ....................................................................................................................................... 4 4.3 GEOTECHNICAL DATA............................................................................................................................. 4 4.4 HYDRAULIC DATA...................................................................................................................................... 4 4.5 ALTERNATIVE 3 ..................................................................................................................................... 5
4.5.1 Loading ......................................................................................................................................... 5 4.5.2 Platform: ...................................................................................................................................... 5 4.5.3 Walkway Support ......................................................................................................................... 5 4.5.4 Hoist: ............................................................................................................................................ 6 4.5.5 Lamprey Traps: ............................................................................................................................. 6 4.5.6 Steel Sheet Pile (SSP) Barrier: ....................................................................................................... 6 4.5.7 Site Access: ................................................................................................................................... 6
5. CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 6
6. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ......................................................................................................... 6
7. COST: ................................................................................................................................................... 7
ATTACHMENT A: PROJECT DRAWINGS
ATTACHMENT B: DESIGN COMPUTATIONS
ATTECHMENT C: SOIL PROFILE
1
1. General Information
1.1 Introduction: The purpose of this report is to present alternatives for construction of a
new sea lamprey trap structure at the existing Michigan Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR) Sea Lamprey Barrier in National City, Iosco County, MI. This report will be an
appendix to the Detailed Project Report (DPR) being prepared by Planning Division.
1.2 Background: The East Au Gres River was selected by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) for construction of a new sea lamprey trap. The purpose of the trap is
to prevent the upstream migration of sea lamprey during spawning season. Currently, there is an
existing sea lamprey barrier and the river is treated with lampricides. Although testing indicates
the lampricides are not detrimental to the ecosystem as a whole, there are some native species
which are adversely affected by the chemical treatment. A permanent lamprey trap would
significantly reduce, and possibly eliminate, the need for the costly lampricide treatment. In
addition, a permanent trap structure has been proven to be more efficient and effective than
temporary trapping methods.
1.3 Location: The proposed trap location is at the site of the current Michigan Department
of Natural Resources (MDNR) Sea Lamprey Barrier in Iosco County, MI (See Figure 1). The
barrier is currently owned and maintained by the MDNR.
Figure 1: Location Map
1.4 Existing Site Conditions: Per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirements, the lamprey
trap structure will be placed on the downstream side of the MDNR sea lamprey barrier in the
barrier tailrace. The area downstream of the barrier is unaltered natural river geomorphology.
As-Built survey data of the E. Branch Au Gres River Lamprey Barrier was provided to USACE
by the MDNR. In addition, a survey was conducted in summer 2014 at the proposed project site.
Both the as-built drawings and the summer 2014 survey will act as the base for project design.
2
Figure 2: Existing Conditions
2. Trap Complex General Requirements
2.1 Lamprey Traps: Per USFWS one lamprey trap is required for Alternative 3. The trap
will be approximately 4-feet square and 5 feet tall. The trap is constructed with galvanized steel
mesh, plates and angles. All requirements pertaining to the lamprey trap were provided by
USFWS. A typical photo of an existing lamprey trap has been provided in Figure 3. Detailed
design of the trap will be completed during the next phase of the project. To provide cost
estimate data for the trap, the trap example shown in Figure 3 was used to estimate member sizes
and quantities. The trap will bisect the existing MDNR barrier, with two baffles located in the
downstream portion. The upstream portion will be enclosed in a steel plate structure fed with two
12” valves, creating the desired velocity of water to attract the Sea Lamprey. The trap will sit at
an elevation of 627.00’ when submerged.
PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD
STAGING AREA
PROPOSED TRAP STRUCTURE LOCATION
EXISTING MDNR BARRIER
EXISTING DAM ACCESS
3
Figure 3: Lamprey Trap
2.2 Lift System: A lift system is required to raise the trap inserts from the riverbed to the
platform. Per the USFWS each trap insert will hold up to 500 pounds of lamprey. In addition,
USFWS has indicated that the use of a manual, mechanical hoist is preferred. The lift system for
the alternative will consist of a jib crane secured to a pile support. The required rating capacity of
the crane will be 1000 lbs to account for the potential for additional loading.
2.3 Platform: A platform/walkway is needed to provide access to the lamprey trap. The
platform will be located adjacent to the trap and will be approximately 10 feet wide to allow for
access for transporting the lamprey, the lamprey trap, and USFWS personnel. The platform will
be supported with steel piles and will have a surface consisting of steel grating. A galvanized
steel handrail will also be installed. The top of the platform will be located at an elevation of
639.89’, in order to facilitate easier retrieval of trapped sea lamprey. The height of the platform
allows for clearance of the existing SSP on the west bank. The structure will be designed to
withstand submerged conditions.
2.4 Real Estate: All real estate requirements including work and storage areas, channel
improvement, and site access easements were coordinated with Real Estate Branch (RE) and are
shown in Attachment A. For further discussion and real estate quantities see the Real Estate
Appendix of the DPR report.
3. Alternatives
3.1 Alternative 1 - No Action: For this alternative, no action will be taken and the USFWS
will continue with their current temporary trapping procedures.
3.2 Alternative 3 – Attractant Water Trap Adjacent to MDNR Sea Lamprey Barrier: The
trap complex for this alternative would be placed bisecting the existing MDNR sea lamprey
barrier, with two baffles located downstream to attract and trap the sea lamprey. The trap
4
structure would utilize piles in conjunction with steel plates and angles as trap guides to direct
flow and secure the lamprey trap. Access to the trap would be provided through the construction
of a pile supported platform and connecting to a proposed steel sheet pile wall. The platform
would not rely on existing structures for support and the piles would not disrupt existing scour
stone adjacent to the bank. In addition, to maneuver the traps, a manual hoist and the required
support structure would be installed.
Concept drawings of this alternative can be found in Attachment A to this appendix. It should be
noted that this alternative is the preferred location for the USFWS because of access to the trap
for maintenance. This alternative places the lamprey trap in a location for optimal sea lamprey
capture per USFWS.
4. Design
4.1 General: All design calculations can be found in Attachment B.
4.2 Survey Data: As Built survey data of the East Au Gres Sea Lamprey Barrier was
provided to USACE by MDNR. In addition, a survey was conducted in summer 2014 at the
proposed project site. Both the as-built drawings and the summer 2014 survey will act as the
base for project design.
4.3 Geotechnical Data: The generalized subsurface conditions for the proposed Sea
Lamprey Traps are based on historical borings conducted in the vicinity of the proposed trap for
the adjacent MDNR sea lamprey barrier. Boring Location Test Hole-1 and Test Hole-3 from the
1982 MDNR investigation provided the nearest and most representative view of the likely
subsurface conditions. The maximum depth that the soil borings extended to was El. 575. Based
on an assumed channel bottom elevation of EL. 583, the subsurface soil profile of Test Hole-3
likely consists of approximately 2-4 feet of loose brown sand with an average Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) N-value of 4-10 blows per foot (bpf), 2-4 feet of soft brown clay with an
average Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-value of 2-4 blows per foot (bpf) and an undrained
shear strength of 250 psf (based on historical data), and finally hard brown clay with an average
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-value of more than 30 blows per foot (bpf) and an undrained
shear strength of 4000 psf (based on historical data).
4.4 Hydraulic Data: The Hydraulics and Hydrology office estimated the flows and water
elevations for various intervals. The results are shown in the table below:
Event Conservative Height
(ft) Conservative Velocity
(fps) Regular Height
Regular Velocity
2-Yr 6.7 2.66 6.17 2.56
25-Yr 10 3.31 8.75 3.68
100-Yr 10.72 3.44 9.33 3.19
500-Yr 11.48 3.56 9.88 3.29
5
4.5 Alternative 3
4.5.1 Loading: Loading on the lamprey trap complex will consist of dead loads, live loads, stream pressure loads, wind loads, and seismic loads. Loads were identified based on the AASHTO LRFD Guide Specifications for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges. In addition, ice load was considered. It was the opinion of the design engineer that because the project is located in a cold region it would be reasonable to design for horizontal ice load. In order to account for potential ice and debris forces, a load of 5 kip per foot was applied to the platform piles, at the two year design flow level, as this would be the most likely level of ice impact.
4.5.2 Platform: The access platform was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD
Guide Specifications for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges using the software program STAAD Pro v8i. A572 Grade 50 steel was assumed for the design. Because the platform supports will be considered fracture critical members, additional material toughness criteria will be required. All walkway steel will be galvanized for reduced maintenance and increased corrosion resistance.
4.5.3 Walkway Support: Piles will be used to support the platform and trap guides. The
piles will be galvanized steel and will provide a moment connection to the walkway support columns. To provide flat surfaces to act as trap supports and guides, wide flange beam sections will be used. The recommended design soil properties for the design of the foundation systems is presented below.
Depth (ft)
Soil Description
Unit Weight, γ’ (pcf)
Undrained shear
strength, Su (psf)
Soil Modulus,
k (pci)
Soil Strain,
ε50
Angle of Internal Friction,
φ (degrees)
0
4 Loose Brown Sand
115 --- ---*4 ---*4
28
4 7
Soft Brown Clay 125 250 500 .007
22 7 20
Hard Brown Clay
135 to 145 4000 2000 .004
26
Notes: 1. Due to potential scour effects, some thickness of the soil strata immediately below the channel bottom shall be omitted from any analysis. 2. Borings did not extend below 9.5’ feet below the estimated channel bottom. Survey Boring notes indicate hard clay encountered for subsequent depth at neighboring boring hole number 3. 3. Subsurface profile based on conditions as reported at Boring Hole-1 and Boring Hole-3. 4. Omit soils to 4 feet depth from any P-4 lateral analysis.
The recommended design requirements for the pile foundation are as follows:
6
1. Specify a minimum embedment depth of the piles based on the provided axial and lateral
shear capacity as well as the potential for up to two (2) foot of scour along the river
bottom at the pile locations.
2. Design each pile for an ultimate factored axial load of 10 kips, maximum shear at top of
pile of 5 kips, and maximum bending moment at top of pile of 152.714 kip – inches.
4.5.4 Hoist: Per the USFWS, a lift system shall be designed to lift 500 pounds of lamprey
plus the trap insert from the riverbed to the platform complex. In order to accomplish this, a
manual hoist will be specified with a capacity of 1000 lbs to account for any unforeseen applied
loadings.
4.5.5 Lamprey Traps: Lamprey traps as shown in Figure 3 will be designed per USFWS
recommendations. The traps are to be 4’x4’ and will be 5’ high allowing trapping of a significant
portion of the water column. Assisting with the direction and velocity are plates and two valves
on the upstream side of the trap. The two 12” inlet valves upstream are to direct the water
towards the trap structure. They are located on the northern part of the trap structure and will
include sluice gates. The plates are situated along the outside of the upstream trap, forming a cell
where the inflow from the valves can normalize to an ideal velocity to flow through the trap. For
the feasibility level design, no design calculations for the traps were completed. The trap
materials were estimated based on previous USFWS designs. Design calculations will be
completed at the beginning of the next project phase. To provide cost estimate data for the traps,
the trap example shown in Figure 3 was used to estimate member sizes and quantities.
4.5.6 Steel Sheet Pile (SSP) Barrier: The SSP barrier height on the west bank of E. Au
Gres will be increased to match the height of the bank embedment, from the bank to the
westernmost edge of the sea lamprey trap. This will require a portion of the SSP wall to be
replaced (approximately 5 feet). To compensate for the additional height on the west side of the
E. Au Gres barrier, the east side of the barrier will be expanded by the same distance into the east
bank. An existing, failing SSP wall on the east bank will be removed and a new wall constructed
approximately 5 feet eastward. Additional analysis for correct embedment was completed in
CWALSHT for the SSP wall, resulting in an embedment depth of 27.1’.
4.5.7 Site Access: Access to the area will be accomplished through the use of a proposed
10’ wide maintenance access road. Analysis was completed in CWALSHT for a PZ22 Steel
Sheet Pile (SSP) wall to provide reinforcement, with a required embedment of at least 25.5’, to
be located between the access road and the river, adjacent to the access road. The SSP will run
from the top of the bank by the access to the existing dam to the connection at the walkway
access for the sea lamprey trap. Gravel will be placed to create a stable surface.
5. Construction: It was assumed that primary access to the project site would be from the area
adjacent to the existing MDNR sea lamprey barrier, on the west side of the Au Gres River. It is
assumed that construction will be completed using land based equipment working from the river
bank. It is assumed that a crane will be used to reach the opposite bank to perform the required
SSP removal and placement.
6. Operation and Maintenance: Operation and maintenance for this project is limited due to the
selection of galvanized steel materials. Maintenance of the project would include periodic
inspections of the steel members and traps. No major material corrosion or damage is expected
7
over the 50 year design life of the project. Operation of the project may include the removal of
accumulated debris prior to placement of the lamprey traps and any requirements to maintain the
mechanical hoist. Overall operation and maintenance would be performed by USFWS personnel.
7. Cost: A copy of the construction cost estimate and supporting documentation can be found in
the cost appendix to the DPR.
ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT DRAWINGS
D
c
B
A
cott Rd
' • •
Minnesota
Duluth Office
Wisconsin
1
Location Map
~ Lake Superior
Michigan
Illinois
Proj~ct Location. MDNR Sea Lamprey Barner, East Au Gres River Iosco County, Ml
N
'
2 3 4
EAST AU GRES RIVER SEA LAMPREY TRAP MDNR SEA LAMPREY BARRIER
IOSCO COUNTY, MICHIGAN
•
5
SEA LAMPREY TRAP AND RAMP LOCATION WING WALL RELOCATION
lndlana Ohio
LOCATION MAP SCALE: N/A
I Plant Rd
WSherman St Whit t emor e . E Shermon St Whinemore Rd
Duby Rd
Tunl• Rd
Keystone Rd
~ "' ; ~ :t 'g i North St . " !
School SI PreseoU Rd
Le-g t Rd
Alob3ster Rd
•
eurlei&h :rwp lu•lle Rd
t<eyslone Rd
. • . I
Whlnemore Rd
• •
Alabaster Rd
lurtle Rd
. • • u
i • •
• 0
~ Whlttemore Rd Sh~rman
Cit)I
• • • " • ! ~
Keyslone Rd
Al.lbas!er Rd
Turli• Rd
• • i 0
~ . 'l . • • •
Legget Rd
I
I I
I I
I
I I MB·&
~=~;r: ------MDNR SEA LAMPREY BARRI~
Alabaster R<I
. • ~ < •
Turtle Rd
~
i •
' . •
• • ~ • ' • •
, . ' ~
SITE LOCATION
EXISTING ACCESS ROAD OFF OF GREENWOOD RD
Sources: Esri, HERE, Delorme. USGS, lntermap, increment P Corp OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
NRCAN. Esri Japan. METI . Esri China (Hong Kong ), Esri (Thailan'll), Tomlom , Mapmylndia. ©
VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1 "=3,000'
.................................
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
'----,
,' , , I I
.... ----649---l
I I ,
847·7
147·3
r--.... 11'¥" I -..., /' I ' I I ' I ' ' I ' \\ I ', ' I
' ' ' ' ' I I I I
'
NOTES
' '
•
I , ,
, I
I
PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1" = 20'
THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEYS MADE ON THE DATES INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
GRID COORDINATES GRIDS SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE U.S. STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM. STATE OF MICHIGAN, CENTRAL ZONE (2112), 1983 NORTH AMERICAN DATUM. (NAD83), U.S. SURVEY FEET.
VERTICAL DATUM ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988. (NAVD88)
SURVEY INFORMATION SURVEY BY GOURDIE-FRASER DATE OF SURVEY 05/29/2014
, I I J I J J
J I J I I I
I I : I .... J _,
/ f.11..---1 L(la I ,-1 ' 111/
•
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I I I
"" ,-' ' '
--- --
' ' ' ' ' '
--, I I I
'
845•3
I I I I I I I
' 64&, ................. ' , , ', ---....... , ,
i /'
843•3
, , '
' '
i !
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
NICHOLAS ZAGER P.E.,CHIEF GEOTECH & STRUCTURES BRANCH
WILLIAM D. MERTE P.E., CHIEF COST & GENERAL ENGINEERING BRANCH
PHILLIP C. ROSSS P.E., CHIEF ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION OFFICE
MICHAEL K O'BRYAN P.E., CHIEF ENGINEERING & TECHNICAL SERVICES
'
THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE DETROIT DISTRICT OF
' '
THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS OR SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION DESIGNATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIER EMPLOYMENT AS REQUIRED BY ER 1110-1-8152
US Anny Corps of Engineers" Detroit District
·:o cg d z ..
it. z>< z o.
~ w
v ii'~ .. . ij " §~ ::> w_ ... z
!;;: "' ~-z w
f;l ~ 8~ ~ cE; u:
~ ~ " g 0
l'l:! ~ .. ~ " cZ 0
~ w wW ~ t: l:! z ii!
!:! w z i~ g ffi ~ ~i ~ 0.: "'" ..
w < "
c .. W w-;}! ~
~~ w~ !ll ;\
SHEET IDENTIFICATION
GI001 SHEET 01 OF 06
D
c
B
A
/ /
/
,'1 I I
' ' ' J
I I
I /
/ I
I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I I I I I I I
~ I I I I I
' I I
1
/ I
I
I I
/ I
I
I
I I
I
--·8 ' ---
\ co \ . I If'--. C0 ! '<t i c.o f'--. / '<t r C.O I I
6 --
I
I
I
I I
/ I
I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I
I I
I
/ I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
1643 I I
' -, ; <.D
' ' I I I I I
'
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
2_-, I
~- - -- --- -- ---,,
I
I I
I
/ I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I
I I
' \ I I I
I I
I
I I
I I I
I I
I I
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
647·3
2 3 4
OVERALL PLAN VIEW SCALE: 3/16" 1'
/ I
I
,-
5
64 3,>-~ / I
I / I I
I I
/54'4. 8 I I I I f I I I f I I I I I I I f I
644·7 I f f I
6~4~· 3 ' ' ' ' /54'4. 4
I I
' ' --
2
LEGEND:
586· 6
587·32 GROUND SHOT
HARD SURFACE SHOT
CONCRETE SURFACE
CHAIN LINK FENCE
REQ'D MAJOR
REQ'D MINOR EXISTING MINOR
EXISTING MAJOR
us Anny Corps of Engineers• Detroit District
cli :::i
w < c g a.
w
< c
SHEET IDENTIFICATION
V-401 SHE:ET 02 OF OB
2
V-101WINGWALL RELOCATION PLANSCALE: 1/4"=1'
CONCRETE SURFACE
CHAIN LINK FENCE
EXISTING MAJOR
EXISTING MINOR
REQ'D MINOR
REQ'D MAJOR
REQ'D PZ-22 SSP
EXISTING SSP
SLOPE.4'-10 1/2" EAST. REGRADE SURROUNDINGRELOCATE EXISTING WINGWALL
EXISTING SSPCONNECT REQ'D SSP TO
SHEETPILE
AU
GR
ES
RIV
ER
02
CG101
AB03
CG
101.d
gn
TR
UE
NO
RT
H
WIN
GW
ALL R
EL
OC
ATIO
N P
LA
N
SO
LICIT
ATIO
N N
O.:
FIL
E N
AM
E:
DW
N B
Y:
CK
D B
Y:
DE
SIG
NE
D B
Y:
DE
SC
RIP
TIO
N
1
D
2 3
C
4 5
A
B
MA
RK
AP
PR.
DA
TE:
FIL
E N
UM
BE
R:
SIZ
E:
SU
BMIT
TE
D B
Y:
PL
OT S
CA
LE:
PL
OT D
AT
E:
DA
TE
MA
RK
DE
SC
RIP
TIO
N
CO
NT
RA
CT N
O.:
IDENTIFICATION
SHEET
DA
TE
AP
PR.
SHEET OF
®
SA AF
E
Y
Y
T
PS
CO
RP
S
OF
EN
GIN
EE
RS
DE
TR
OIT
DIS
TRIC
T
Increase Profit...S
ub
mit V
EC
P'S
Valu
e
Engin
eerin
g
DE
TR
OIT,
MIC
HIG
AN
DE
TR
OIT DIS
TRIC
T
U.S.
AR
MY C
OR
PS O
F E
NGIN
EE
RS
34
X22
N/A
06
P.
RO
SS
MA
W911
XK-X
X-X-0
000
BM
07-3
1-2
014
Detroit District
of Engineers
US Army Corps
B.
GE
RK
EN
FE
ASIBILIT
Y S
TU
DY
10S
EP
T2014
SE
A L
AM
PR
EY T
RA
PA
U G
RE
S RIV
ER
NA
TIO
NA
L CIT
Y M
ICHIG
AN
IOS
CO C
OU
NT
Y
LEGEND:
GROUND SHOT
HARD SURFACE SHOT
586 6
587 32
627
628
628
629
630
630
630
631
631
631 1
631 1 631 5
4'-10 1/2 "
632
632
632 0
632 7
632 7
632 8
632 9
633
633
633 1
634
634
635
635
636
637
637
638
639
640
640
640
641
642 643
644
D
c
B
A
REQ'D GRAVEL GRADE PATH
1
REQ'D HAND RA 11:
REQ'D 1~" GRATING
~ REQ'D W1 OX49 (TYP)
EXISTING SSP
~
1 PLAN V-401 SCALE: a"=1'
4'-0" 14'-1"
~--------------------------------------
I
I __.... '
I I -
I ~
! . '
-
6(29 1 641 61
' ' ' '
2
' '
' ,529 1 ~ ~41 62 629 1 §2-9' ',_----639--~~ 641 6:
TOP OF WATER 632
~ BOARD.:9', _________ .>
3'-11"
-
-..._ ______ _,. . -
REQ'D PZ22 SSP WALL
TOP W1 OX49 EL 638.69
REQ'D L4X4X1/2" ... v
~
.... ·--·-..K:.1.
:' y '· - L.
i.----
~
~ ,,.
(TYP)
TOP REQ'D SSP EL 636.55
REQ'D 4' X 4' TRAP
REQ'D 12" DIA PIPE
TOP REQ'D SSP EL 636.55
REQ'D GRAVEL GRADE PATH
3
REQ'D HAND RAii:
REQ'D 1~" GRATING
REQ'D 4' X 4' TRAP
,r•/ • J "·. REQ'D (2) 11'-10 1/2" X 5'-1" X 1/2" THICK PLATE
'~ ......
I
I - BOT SLAB EL 627.0
I I I
EXISTING SSP WALL
I I I
-I I
BOT SSP EL 620.0
I I I '
~w~-~.---------.m~1 ----.rrm-w w - BOT W1 OX49 EL 603.0
A SECTION ST10 SCALE: ~"=1'
• REQ'D SLUICE GATE NOT SHOWN
, __ _
lo
REQ'D PZ22 SSP WALL
REQ'D W10X4~
4
3'-11"
II ,,,., /I
5
REQ'D SLUICE GATE
REQ'D 12" DIA PIPE
R EQ'D (1) 6'-5 3/4" X 5'-1" X 1/2" THICK PLATE
-+-~ R I 7
~---- ~ ----- ~ -1---------------------------------------·-l--il-'I- EQ'D (2) 6'-5 3/4" X 5'-1" X 1/2" THICK PLATE
I/ I I I REQ'D PZ22 SSP~
EXISTING SSPWALL- "'
~
I I I I
I I I I I
-------t-1i....---------------- -----------'---------·M!-1' " , ______ \'._____ ~ !----------~~~~~~I--~~~-~==-~~i
r REQ'D CONCRETE
- - - / SLAB
4'-1" ~ ~ -----------------)~
_____________ m:! __ v ----------------~ I ,, ""'' I --..._, t---._ "--
REQ'D L4X4X1/2"---~: ,,--\ :- : ----- REQ'D 4.x4, EXISTING SSP WALL (TYP) I \ ., I SEA LAMPREY TRAP
I--+----_,~ ..... -------------_;_-_;_ _________ ..,.,_~~·~~-"-'-'•' ..... _ _._ '-II-I--------------------------------------------Hf------------- ------- I..'
4'-9" 18'-0" .
22'-5"
PLAN SCALE: i"=1'
10'-0"
4'-11" 4'-3"
B ST10
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
REQ'D 12" DIA PIPE - TOP REQ'D SSP EL 636.55
REQ'D (2) 11'-10 1/2" X 5'-1" X 1/2" THICK PLATE
REQ'D (1) 11'-10 1/2" X4'-10" X 1/2" THICK PLATE
- BOT SLAB EL 627 .0
L.JJ' ·w·~----H-+--- EXISTING ssp WALL
I I I I I I I I I I I I L.LI
I I I I I I I I I I I I L.LI
SECTION SCALE: !"=1'
- BOT W10X49 & SSP EL 620.0
- BOT W10X49 EL 603.0
• REQ'D SLUICE GATE NOT SHOWN
US Anny Corps of Engineers• Detroit District
·:o Oo zo
(j z9 ,;; o~ z
I- w .. ;:: ~ ~
ID - ~~ :; 0 :J
•. N ~~ z
~* I-
("j- z ~ "::; en$ 8~ u:
w !<
~ " b " "'< -' ;: ():;
~ a. ID
" w
oz -' w 1) wW ~ I= "' z"'
"' "' - "' en -W z :; 0 b en "' ;: :; ID 0: w. :J . -'
""' " "' "' a. a. Cl) c::
w !< "
"' !i :;
Ii a. a. <( ...
0 ~ w a. !< w " en 0 -
c "" n
··N UJ 0 :; -<( I-z en UJ 2! ~~
w~ ~~
w
J~! w z Ci f- z z (.) <C w -(!) LL. c:: -0 f- :i::: Cl)~(.) a. Cl :l' ~ t:: f--'"
~ u~o >- f- c:: ::;: w f-c:: Cl w <C 0
cli :::i
...J
a.~ ~w f-0 >-od wz c::o o.::;:f-~1;3 en <C -wz Cl)~
a.
SHEET IDENTIFICATION
ST101 SHE:ET 03 OF OB
g> an s G') 0 ....... ~o
5: I'\.)
0 m z Cll -I :::c :!! m s;~ -I 0 z
)>
m I ><
Cll I -I z :-::::1 G) n ~I ~ G)
)> ~ 0 ...lo.
v 0
Cll
~ I s; r
"'U m ~ -(") ~ - )> II ~ r
en m (") -I r, -0
;o I z m
Q I
~ ~
~"' r /;:'.I m m >< I Cll
-I I z G)
G)
~ 0 m
IOSCO COUNTY NATIONAL CITY MICHIGAN
AU GRES RIVER SEA LAMPREY TRAP
REQ'D ROAD REHABILITION PLAN
OJ
)>;o -um "UO ;o -oo xq °'-I ' -:::c a_ =n
:E;:i; -G)
~~ < m r ;o 0 )> 0
~ ;u F:: ~ ri:i ~
l~o 0)
"'U ~
r )> z < -m ~
HUIBll 3rnll
DESIGNED BY: RKEN
~ ~ SIZE: I FILE NAME: 34X22 AB05CG102.dgn
(')
FEASIBILITY STUDY 10SEPT2014
IARK DESCRIPTION DATE IAPPR.IMARK DESCRIPTION
0
DATE APPR
co c: CD ~ (/I ~m ... 0", -·IC :I --·::::1 c " "' -·CD Ill CD 0 -~o :::!. en ., n • .,, - .. 0
D
c
B
A
.coll Rd
• • ! " •
WShermMI St
Duby Rd
turtle Rd
Keystone Rd
i
Plant Rd
Whr~i'} .::.h~•~ S<
• N I
Whittemore Rd
• ~ •
School SI Prescotl Rd
Leg 11 Rd
Alabaster Rd
• • . c • ~
ou rleith • Tw p Turtle Rd
• • . c • ! "
Keys.tone Rd
REAL ESTATE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 20'
• • • • ! = ~ ~ • ~
w111nemore Rd
• •,
• • ~ m
Ouarry Rd
\
Alaba11er Rd
Turtle Rd
;; • " Whittemore Rd Shoe-rm an
Nati onal Twp City
Wh1t1emore Rd___,...
Alabaslll!'r Rd Al.;ibasto::r Rd
Turtle Rd turue Rd
;; . . J A, ,,.. •• Keystone Rd . _ ~ _ ©
t PC NRCAN Esri Japan. METI, Esri China (Hong Kong ), Esn (Tha1lan'll), TomTom, Mapmylnd1a, Sources: Esri, HERE, Del orme, USGS, lntermap , incremen orp., , OpenStreetMap contributors. and the GIS User Community
VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 3,000'
3
_ MDNR SEA LAMPREY BARRIER SITE LOCATION
- EXISTING ACCESS ROAD OFF OF GREENWOOD RD
4
ESTATE PLAN REAL ~ SCALE: 1" = 20' ~
Wda
Duluth Office
5
PERMANENT ACCESS APPROX 0.3013 ACRE
WORK AND STORAGE APPROX 0.0724 ACRE
PERMANENT EASEMENT APPROX 0.0736 ACRE
Location Map
Wisconsin
Illinois
Indiana Ohio
Project Location. . MDNR sea Lamprey Barrier, East Au Gres River Iosco County, Ml
US Army Corps of Engineers@ Detroit District
·:o Oo zo
d z~ z "' Q,
~ w
i= ~ "' .. "' 0 ~~ ::J
.. " -x I- z W' <,/ -I- - _, - z w < "? 0 "' 0 O!; _, "~ (I) ;;: Oz u:
w ~ ~ I-
" 0 "' < _, " ,. ~ "->' w "' " _,
oZ w 11 w!:<! >' I- (I)
z"' "' t: (I) (I) £1w z ,. 0 b (/) "' "' "' w. ;;: "' ::J . _, ""' " "' (I) "- "-
.,. 0 ~ "-w (I) 0 -
5
z 0
ii:
~ "
"' "' < "' .: "-"-<
w ~ "
::J z t;; 0
>- ~ t: "' :! " "' (I) - w
~ " "-
c
"' " .. N wo "' -< "' z"
"' wo _, "' u: "'
.. gj WX ~ .. (/) "'
SHEET IDENTIFICATION
RR101 SHEET 02 OF 06
ATTACHMENT B
DESIGN COMPUTATIONS
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
E Au Gres Sea Lamprey Trap
4/14/2015COMPUTATION TITLE: DATE:
Access Road SSP Analysis4/19/2015
Note: This design procedure follows the guidelines set forth by EM 1110-2-2504, 1994, starting on pg. 6-1
allowable bending stress =
minimum section modulus =
Maximum Moment, M max = 18.92 k-ftAssumed Yield Strength, F y = 39 ksiAllowable Bending Stress, f b = 19.5 ksi
Minimum Section Modulus, S min = 11.6 in3
SSP Section = PZ22Section Modulus of Section, S = 18.1 in3
Applied bending stress, F b = 12.5 ksi
ACCEPTABLE
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-FitzgeraldCHECKED BY:
Blake Gerken
yb ff 5.0=
bfM
S maxmin =
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9: 20: 33
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
G~EB SEA LAMPREY TMP ACCE:S.S J~.OAD SSJ?
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES 1.00 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES
III. --WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135. 00 140.00 145.00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135. 00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V .A. --RIGHTS IDE
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 643.00 645.00 647.00
ELEVATION (FT)
635.00 634.00 633.00 632.00 630.00
642.00 FT.
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.50
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V. B. --LEFTSIDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.50
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI.--WATER DATA
UNIT WEIGHT RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION LEFTSIDE ELEVATION NO SEEPAGE
62.40 (PCF) 628. 00 (FT) 628. 00 (FT)
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS
VII.A.--VERTICAL LINE LOADS NONE
VII.B.--VERTICAL UNIFORM LOADS LEFTS IDE RIGHTS IDE
(PSF) (PSF) 0.00 250.00
VII.C.--VERTICAL STRIP LOADS NONE
VII.D.--VERTICAL RAMP LOADS NONE
VII.E.--VERTICAL TRIANGULAR LOADS NONE
VII.F.--VERTICAL VARIABLE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
**************************
* SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
TIME: 9:20:36
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
<------NET------> NET <---LEFTS IDE---> (SOIL + WATER) <--RIGHTS IDE--->
ELEV. WATER PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 642.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 86.0 885.5 86.0 885.5 641. 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 123.2 1132. 2 123.2 1132. 2 640.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 162.0 1488.9 162.0 1488.9 639.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.8 1845.6 200.8 1845.6 638.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 239.6 2202.3 239.6 2202.3 637.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 278.4 2605.2 278.4 2605.2 636.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 317.3 3265.5 317.3 3265.5 635.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 356.1 3999.0 356.1 3999.0 634.0 0.0 115. O* 27.6 279.9 4612.0 394.9 4639.6 633.0 0.0 230.0* 55.1 203.7 5234.5 433.7 5289.6
632.0 0.0 345.0* 82.7 127.5 5792.6 472.5 5875.4 631. 0 0.0 460.0* 110. 3 51. 5 5974.9 511. 5 6085.2 630.0 0.0 572. 2* 137.2 0.0 5899.0 572.2 6036.2 630.0 0.0 575.0 137.9 -1.3 5897.1 573.7 6035.0 629. 0 0.0 699.0 165.4 -53.0 5981.3 645.9 6146.7 628.0 0.0 876.6 188.2 -178.9 6161.8 697.7 6350.0 627.0 0.0 959.0 201. 5 -217.5 62 96. 2 741. 5 6497.7 626. 0 0.0 1035.4 210.0 -264.5 6375.7 770.8 6585.6 625. 0 0.0 962.8 230.7 -178.8 4379.6 784.0 4610.3 624.0 0.0 1025.4 277. 5 -127.5 3874.0 897.9 4151.5 623.0 0.0 1088.0 314.8 -68. 4 5463.2 1019.6 5778. 0 622.0 0.0 1241.6 329.1 -195.4 5564.4 1046.2 5893.5 621. 0 0.0 1374.2 341.7 -301.4 5652.1 1072.8 5993.8 620.0 0.0 1503.2 352.8 -402.9 5750.5 1100. 3 6103.2 619.0 0.0 1637.0 364.9 -507.3 5868.4 112 9. 7 6233.3 618.0 0.0 1773.9 379.7 -612.9 5978.7 1161. 0 6358.4 617.0 0.0 1924.5 395.5 -729.8 6083.0 1194. 7 6478.5 616.0 0.0 2068.3 409.6 -840.7 6188.9 1227.6 6598.6 615.0 0.0 2204.8 423.4 -946.8 6295.4 1257.9 6718.B 614.0 0.0 2347.6 441. 4 -1059.4 6397.6 1288.2 6839.0 613.0 0.0 2496.5 467.8 -1177.8 6498.0 1318. 8 6965. 8 612.0 0.0 2645.5 494.5 -1295.0 6611. 6 1350.5 7106. 0 611. 0 0.0 2794.3 517.8 -1411.1 6735.4 1383. 2 7253.2 610.0 0.0 3504.9 570.8 -1946.6 9199.8 1558.3 9770.5 609.0 0.0 3942.8 550.0 -2449.6 9948.3 1493.2 10498.3 608.0 0.0 3820.9 502.0 -2537.1 8375.8 1283.9 8877.8 607.0 0.0 3966. 4 529.8 -2653.6 8538.9 1312.8 9068.8 606.0 0.0 4113. 3 557.6 -2771. 6 8702.1 1341.7 9259.8 605.0 0.0 4283.8 587.4 -2913.2 8864.2 1370. 7 9451. 5 604.0 0.0 4469.1 618.8 -3069.5 9030.6 1399.6 964 9. 4
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE FOR THIS ELEVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9:20:37
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II. --SUMMARY
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
*****WARNING: STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL ELEVATIONS. SEE COMPLETE OUTPUT.
BOTTOM ELEV. (FT) 609.51 PENETRATION (FT) 25.49
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 3.1697E+04 AT ELEVATION (FT) 618.73
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"3): l.8690E+l0 AT ELEVATION (FT) 642.00
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II. --RESULTS
BENDING SCALED ELEVATION MOMENT SHEAR DEFLECTION
(FT) (LB-FT) (LB) (LB-INA3) 642.00 O.OOOOE+OO 0. l.8690E+l0 641.00 4.9198E+Ol 105. 1. 7771E+10 640.00 2.2185E+02 247. 1.6852E+l0 639.00 5.5651E+02 429. 1.5933E+10 638.00 l.0920E+03 649. 1.5016E+l0 637.00 1. 8 671E+03 908. 1.4101E+10 636.00 2.9206E+03 1206. 1.3188E+10 635.00 4.2914E+03 1542. 1. 2281E+10 634.00 5.9991E+03 1860. 1.1381E+l0 633.00 7.9867E+03 2102. 1. 0492E+10 632.00 l.0178E+04 2268. 9.6167E+09 631. 00 1.2497E+04 2357. 8.7589E+09 630.02 l.4814E+04 2382. 7.9424E+09 630.00 1. 4871E+04 2382. 7.9226E+09 629.00 1.7244E+04 2355. 7 .1121E+09 628.00 1.9552E+04 2239. 6.3313E+09 627.00 2.1695E+04 2041. 5.5843E+09 626.00 2.3619E+04 1800. 4.8748E+09 625.00 2.5302E+04 1578. 4.2060E+09 624.00 2.6799E+04 1425. 3.5810E+09 623.00 2.8170E+04 1327. 3.0022E+09 622.00 2.9442E+04 1195. 2. 4 721E+09 621. 00 3.0522E+04 947. 1.9928E+09 620.00 3.1302E+04 595. 1.5663E+09 619.00 3 .1678E+04 140. 1.1937E+09 618.00 3.1546E+04 -420. 8.7587E+08 617.00 3.0800E+04 -1092. 6.1243E+08 616.00 2.9325E+04 -1877. 4. 0211E+08 615.00 2.7010E+04 -2771. 2.4234E+08 614.00 2.3747E+04 -3774. 1. 2911E+08 613.00 1.9424E+04 -4892. 5.6760E+07 612.00 l.3923E+04 -6129. l.7805E+07 611. 25 8. 9772E+03 -7128. 4.8911E+06 611. 00 7.1447E+03 -7277. 2.7219E+06 610.00 1.0205E+03 -3925. 3.6827E+04 609.51 O.OOOOE+OO 0. O.OOOOE+OO
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
III. --WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
TIME: 9:20:37
NET PRESSURE
(PSF) 86.00
123.19 162.00 200.81 239.63 278.44 317.25 356.06 279.88 203.69 127.50
51. 52 0.00
-1. 26 -53.01
-178.95 -217.46 -264.52 -178.78 -127.47 -68.39
-195.42 -301.44 -402.86 -507.28 -612.94 -729.77 -840.69 -946.85
-1059.36 -1177.80 -1294.98 -1381.69
209.79 6494.15 9565.62
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> WATER <----LEFTS IDE-----> <---RIGHTSIDE---->
ELEVATION PRESSURE PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF)
642.00 0. 0. 0. 86. 886. 641.00 0. 0. 0. 123. 1132. 640.00 0. 0. 0. 162. 1489. 639.00 0. 0. 0. 201. 1846. 638.00 0. 0. 0. 240. 2202. 637.00 0. 0. 0. 278. 2605. 636.00 0. 0. 0. 317. 3265. 635.00 0. 0. 0. 356. 3999. 634.00 0. * 115. 28. 395. 4640. 633.00 0. * 230. 55. 434. 5290. 632.00 0. * 345. 83. 473. 5875. 631. 00 0. * 460. 110. 512. 6085. 630.02 0. * 572. 137. 572. 6036. 630.00 0. 575. 138. 574. 6035. 629.00 0. 699. 165. 64 6. 6147. 628.00 0. 877. 188. 698. 6350. 627.00 0. 959. 201. 741. 6498. 626.00 0. 1035. 210. 771. 6586. 625.00 0. 963. 231. 784. 4610. 624.00 0. 1025. 277. 898. 4151. 623.00 0. 1088. 315. 1020. 5778. 622.00 0. 1242. 329. 1046. 5894. 621. 00 0. 1374. 342. 1073. 5994. 620.00 0. 1503. 353. 1100. 6103. 619.00 0. 1637. 365. 1130. 6233. 618.00 0. 1774. 380. 1161. 6358. 617.00 0. 1925. 395. 1195. 6478. 616.00 0. 2068. 410. 1228. 6599. 615.00 0. 2205. 423. 1258. 6719. 614.00 0. 2348. 441. 1288. 6839. 613.00 0. 2497. 468. 1319. 6966. 612.00 0. 2645. 494. 1350. 7106. 611. 25 0. 2757. 512. 1375. 7216. 611. 00 0. 2794. 518. 1383. 7253. 610.00 0. 3505. 571. 1558. 9771. 609.51 0. 3943. 550. 1493. 10498. 608.00 0. 3821. 502. 1284. 8878.
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE AT THIS ELEVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9: 22: 22
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
~GRES. SEA LAMfREY TRAP ACCESSJ ROAD SSJ?;i
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES 00 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES l.QO
III. --WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL 642.00 FT.
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V.A.--RIGHTSIDE
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 643.00 645.00 647.00
ELEVATION (FT)
635.00 634.00 633.00 632.00 630.00
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1. 00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1. 00
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V. B. --LEFTS IDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.00
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26. 00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI.--WATER DATA
UNIT WEIGHT RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION LEFTSIDE ELEVATION NO SEEPAGE
62.40 (PCF) 628. 00 (FT) 628. 00 (FT)
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS
VII.A.--VERTICAL LINE LOADS NONE
VII.B.--VERTICAL UNIFORM LOADS LEFTS IDE
(PSF) 0.00
RIGHTSIDE (PSF) 250.00
VII.C.--VERTICAL STRIP LOADS NONE
VII.D.--VERTICAL RAMP LOADS NONE
VII.E.--VERTICAL TRIANGULAR LOADS NONE
VII.F.--VERTICAL VARIABLE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
************************** * SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
TIME: 9:22:25
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
ELEV. (FT) 642.0 641. 0 640.0 639.0 638.0 637.0 636.0 635.0 634.0 633.0
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
NET WATER (PSF)
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<---LEFTS IDE---> PASSIVE ACTIVE
(PSF) (PSF) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
115.0 27.6 230.0* 55.1
<------NET------> (SOIL + WATER)
ACTIVE PASSIVE (PSF) (PSF) 86.0 1381.7
123. 2 2061. 5 162.0 2711.0 200.8 3389.9 239.6 4534.3 278.4 6528.0 317.3 8470.0 356.1 8921.3 279.9 8403.0 203.7 8330.3
<--RIGHTS IDE---> ACTIVE PASSIVE
(PSF) ( PSF) 86.0 1381.7
123.2 2061.5 162.0 2711.0 200.8 3389.9 239.6 4534.3 278.4 6528.0 317.3 8470.0 356.1 8921.3 394.9 8430.5 433.7 8385.4
632.0 0.0 392.2* 82.7 80.3 8698.1 472.5 8780.8 631. 6 0.0 489.6* 94.8 0.0 8901.2 489.6 8996.0 631. 0 0.0 614.8* 110. 3 -103.3 9162.4 511. 5 9272. 7 630.0 0.0 809.9 137.9 -236.2 9633.6 573.7 9771.4 629.0 0.0 1076.2 165.4 -430.2 10032.2 645.9 10197.7 628.0 0.0 1367.1 188.2 -669.4 10374.9 697.7 10563.1 627.0 0.0 1520.8 201. 5 -779.3 10659.4 741. 5 10860.9 626.0 0.0 1671. 8 210.0 -901.0 10880.6 770.8 11090. 5 625.0 0.0 1136. 6 230.7 -352.6 3522.3 784.0 3753.0 624.0 0.0 1025.4 277.5 -127.5 2100.8 897.9 2378.2 623.0 0.0 1547.6 314.8 -528.0 8226.2 1019. 6 8541. l 622.0 0.0 1823.6 329.1 -777.4 8382.4 1046.2 8711.5 621. 0 0.0 2016.6 341.7 -943.8 8538.4 107 2. 8 8880.l 620.0 0.0 2216.0 352.8 -1115. 7 8681.9 1100. 3 9034.7 619.0 0.0 2409.2 364.9 -1279.4 8813. 9 112 9. 7 9178.8 618.0 0.0 2611.8 379.7 -1450.8 8945.0 1161. 0 9324.8 617.0 0.0 2833.5 395.5 -1638.8 9075.2 1194. 7 9470.7 616.0 0.0 3054.8 409.6 -1827.2 9215.3 1227.6 9625. 0 615.0 0.0 3275.8 423.4 -2017.9 9390.6 1257.9 9813. 9 614.0 0.0 3482.6 441. 4 -2194.4 9589.5 1288.2 10030. 9 613.0 0.0 3681. 4 467.8 -2362.6 9781.8 1318.8 10249.5 612.0 0.0 3892.7 494.5 -2542.2 9973.3 1350.5 10467.8 611. 0 0.0 4110.3 517.8 -2727. 0 10168.0 1383.2 10685.8 610.0 0.0 6176.6 570.8 -4618.3 18808.2 1558.3 19379.0 609.0 0.0 7092.6 550.0 -5599.5 20535.7 1493.2 21085.7 608.0 0.0 6157.7 502.0 -4873.8 13865.5 1283.9 14367.5 607.0 0.0 6376.0 529.8 -5063.2 14156.5 1312.8 14686.4 606.0 0.0 6635.6 557.6 -5293.9 14453.3 1341.7 15010.9 605.0 0.0 6928.5 587.4 -5557.8 14767.6 1370.7 15355.0 604.0 0.0 7225. 3 618.8 -5825.7 15094.7 1399.6 15713.4
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE FOR THIS ELEVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME : 9 : 2 2 : 2 6
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II. --SUMMARY
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
*****WARNING: STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL ELEVATIONS. SEE COMPLETE OUTPUT.
BOTTOM ELEV. (FT) 618.07 PENETRATION (FT) 16.93
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 1.8926E+04 AT ELEVATION (FT) 626.44
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"3): 5.6799E+09 AT ELEVATION (FT) 642.00
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9:22:26
I.--HEADING
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP ACCESS ROAD SSP
II.--RESULTS
BENDING SCALED NET ELEVATION MOMENT SHEAR DEFLECTION PRESSURE
(FT) (LB-FT) (LB) (LB-IW3) (PSF) 642.00 O.OOOOE+OO 0. 5.6799E+09 86.00 641.00 4.9198E+Ol 105. 5.3002E+09 123.19 640.00 2.2185E+02 247. 4.9205E+09 162.00 639.00 5.5651E+02 429. 4.5412E+09 200.81 638.00 l.0920E+03 649. 4.1629E+09 239.63 637.00 1. 8671E+03 908. 3.7865E+09 278.44 636.00 2.9206E+03 1206. 3.4134E+09 317.25 635.00 4.2914E+03 1542. 3.0454E+09 356.06 634.00 5.9991E+03 1860. 2.6849E+09 279.88 633.00 7.9867E+03 2102. 2.3348E+09 203.69 632.00 l.0170E+04 2244. 1.9985E+09 80.32 631. 56 l.1157E+04 2262. 1.8566E+09 0.00 631.00 l.2424E+04 2233. 1.6797E+09 -103.29 630.00 l.4583E+04 2063. l.3825E+09 -236.20 629.00 1. 6495E+04 1730. 1.1104E+09 -430.24 628.00 1. 7970E+04 1180. 8.6670E+08 -669.43 627.00 l.8796E+04 455. 6.5399E+08 -779.32 626.00 1.8842E+04 -385. 4.7365E+08 -900.97 625.00 l.8098E+04 -1011. 3.2575E+08 -352.60 624.00 1.6948E+04 -1252. 2.0907E+08 -127.47 623.00 1.5566E+04 -1579. 1.2165E+08 -527.98 622.00 1.3681E+04 -2232. 6.1052E+07 -777.38 621. 00 1.1033E+04 -3093. 2.3983E+07 -943.81 620.00 7.4397E+03 -4122. 5.8434E+06 -1115. 67 619.34 4.4694E+03 -4894. 1.2898E+06 -1223.71 619.00 2.7859E+03 -4847. 3.9932E+05 1499.96 618.07 O.OOOOE+OO 0. O.OOOOE+OO 8935.73
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
III.--WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 641.00 640.00 639.00 638.00
WATER PRESSURE
(PSF) 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> <----LEFTSIDE-----> <---RIGHTS IDE----> PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE
(PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 0. 0. 86. 1382. 0. 0. 123. 2061. 0. 0. 162. 2711. 0. 0. 201. 3390. 0. 0. 240. 4534.
637.00 0. 0. 0. 278. 6528. 636.00 0. 0. 0. 317. 8470. 635.00 0. 0. 0. 356. 8921. 634.00 0. 115. 28. 395. 8431. 633.00 0. * 230. 55. 434. 8385. 632.00 O.* 392. 83. 473. 8781. 631. 56 O.* 490. 95. 490. 8996. 631. 00 O.* 615. 110. 512. 9273. 630.00 0. 810. 138. 574. 9771. 629.00 0. 107 6. 165. 646. 10198. 628.00 0. 1367. 188. 698. 10563. 627.00 0. 1521. 201. 741. 10861. 626.00 0. 1672. 210. 771. 11091. 625.00 0. 1137. 231. 784. 3753. 624.00 0. 1025. 277. 898. 2378. 623.00 0. 1548. 315. 1020. 8541. 622.00 0. 1824. 329. 1046. 8712. 621. 00 0. 2017. 342. 1073. 8880. 620.00 0. 2216. 353. 1100. 9035. 619.34 0. 2343. 361. 1120. 9130. 619.00 0. 2409. 365. 1130. 9179. 618.07 0. 2612. 380. 1161. 9325. 617.00 0. 2834. 395. 1195. 94 71.
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE AT THIS ELEVATION.
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
E Au Gres Sea Lamprey Trap
4/14/2015COMPUTATION TITLE: DATE:
Barrier Addition SSP Analysis 4/29/2015
Note: This design procedure follows the guidelines set forth by EM 1110-2-2504, 1994, starting on pg. 6-1
allowable bending stress =
minimum section modulus =
Maximum Moment, M max = 2.34 k-ftAssumed Yield Strength, F y = 39 ksiAllowable Bending Stress, f b = 19.5 ksi
Minimum Section Modulus, S min = 1.4 in3
SSP Section = PZ22Section Modulus of Section, S = 18.1 in3
Applied bending stress, F b = 1.6 ksi
ACCEPTABLE
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-FitzgeraldCHECKED BY:
Blake Gerken
yb ff 5.0=
bfM
S maxmin =
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015 TIME: 7:58:05
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES
III.--WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 5.00
10.00 15.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 5.00
10.00 15.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V.A.--RIGHTSIDE
ELEVATION (FT)
627.90 627.90 627.90 627.90
ELEVATION (FT)
627.90 627.90 627.90 627.90
630.50 FT.
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.00
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTER:'.\JAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115.00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V.B.--LEFTSIDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.00
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115.00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26. 00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26. 00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI.--WATER DATA UNIT WEIGHT 62.40 (PCF) RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION 631. 99 (FT) LEFTSIDE ELEVATION 627.90 (FT)
NO SEEPAGE
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL.:::2015 TIME: 7:58:10
************************** * SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
<------NET------> NET <---LEFTSIDE---> (SOIL + WATER) <--RIGHTS IDE--->
ELEV. WATER PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 630.5 93.0 0.0 0.0 93.0 93.0 0.0 0.0 629.5 155.4 0.0 0.0 155.4 155.4 0.0 0.0 628.5 217.8 0.0 0.0 217.8 217. 8 0.0 0.0 627.9 255.2 0.0 0.0 255.2 255.2 0.0 0.0 627.5 255.2 91. 5 6.6 170.3 340.1 6.6 91. 5 626.9 255.2 228.7 16.5 43.0 467.4 16.5 228.7 626.7 255.2 275.1 19.8 0.0 510.4 19.8 275.1 626. 5 255.2 320.2 23.1 -41. 9 552.3 23.1 320.2 625.5 255.2 548.9 39.6 -254.1 764.6 39.6 548.9 625.0 255.2 480.5 52.7 -172.7 683.1 52.7 480.5 624.5 255.2 455.9 69.5 -131. 2 641. 6 69.5 455.9 623.5 255.2 751. 9 97.9 -398.8 909.3 97.9 751. 9 622.5 255.2 938.4 123.1 -560.1 1070.6 123.1 938.4 621. 5 255.2 1124. 0 148.2 -720. 5 1230.9 148.2 1124. 0 620.5 255.2 1310. 3 173.4 -881.7 1392 .1 173.4 1310.3 620.0 255.2 1407.3 186.5 -965. 6 1476.0 186.5 1407.3 619.5 255.2 1511. 8 200.6 -1056.0 1566.4 200.6 1511. 8 618.5 255.2 1728. 2 229.7 -1243.3 1753.7 229.7 1728.2 617.5 255.2 1944.4 258.9 -1430.3 1940.7 258.9 1944.4 616.5 255.2 2160.4 288.1 -1617.1 2127.6 288.1 2160.4 615.5 255.2 2376.4 317.3 -1803.9 2314.3 317.3 2376.4 614.5 255.2 2592.3 346.5 -1990.6 2501. 0 346.5 2592.3 613.5 255.2 2808.1 375.7 -2177.2 2687.6 375.7 2808.l 612.5 255.2 3023.8 404.8 -2363.8 2874.2 404.8 3023.8 611. 5 255.2 3239.6 434.0 -2550.3 3060.8 434.0 3239.6 610.5 255.2 3455.3 463.2 -2736.9 3247.3 463.2 3455.3 610.0 255.2 5477.4 513.2 -4709.0 5219.4 513.2 5477.4 609.5 255.2 6551.0 514.8 -5780.9 6291. 3 514.8 6551.0 608.5 255.2 4913.7 445.8 -4212.7 4723.1 445.8 4913.7 607.5 255.2 5218.1 472 .1 -4490.8 5001.2 472.1 5218.1 606.5 255.2 5522.5 498.4 -4768.9 5279.4 498.4 5522.5 605.5 255.2 5827.0 524.6 -5047 .1 5557.5 524.6 5827.0
604.5 255.2 6131. 5 550.9 -5325.3 5835.8 550.9 6131. 5 603.5 255.2 6436.0 577.2 -5603.6 6114 .1 577.2 6436.0 602.5 255.2 6740.5 603.4 -5881.9 6392.4 603.4 6740.5 601. 5 255.2 7045.1 629.6 -6160.3 6670.7 629.6 7045.1 600.5 255.2 7349.7 655.9 -6438.6 6949.1 655.9 7349.7 600.0 255.2 7504.4 669.2 -6579.9 7090.4 669.2 7504.4 599.5 255.2 7 663. 7 683.0 -6725.5 7235. 9 683.0 7663.7 598.5 255.2 7987.1 710. 9 -7020.9 7 531. 4 710. 9 7987.1 597.5 255.2 8310.5 738.9 -7316.5 7826.9 738.9 8310.5
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II.--SUMMARY
TIME: 7:58:12
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
BOTTOM ELEV. (FT) 619.78 PENETRATION (FT) 8.12
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 2.3429E+03 AT ELEVATION (FT) 623.48
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"3): 1.3614E+08 AT ELEVATION (FT) 630.50
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN IN"4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015
I. --HEADING
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II. --RESULTS
ELEVATION BENDING MOMENT SHEAR
SCALED DEFLECTION
TIME: 7:58:12
NET PRESSURE
(FT) (LB-FT) (LB) (LB-IN"3) (PSF) 630.50 O.OOOOE+OO 0. 1.3614E+08 92.98 629.50 5.6888E+Ol 124. 1.1463E+08 155.38 628.50 2.6915E+02 311. 9.3237E+07 217.78 627.90 4.9705E+02 453. 8.0603E+07 255.22 627.50 6.9626E+02 538. 7.2343E+07 170.32 626.90 1. 0419E+03 602. 6.0334E+07 42.99 626.70 1.1644E+03 606. 5.6416E+07 0.00 626.50 1.2838E+03 602. 5.2675E+07 -41.91 625.50 1.8295E+03 454. 3.5221E+07 -254.14 625.00 2.0281E+03 347. 2.7621E+07 -172.67 624.50 2.1818E+03 271. 2. 0896E+07 -131.19 623.50 2.3429E+03 6. 1. 0317E+07 -398.82 622.50 2.1229E+03 -473. 3.7311E+06 -560 .13 621.84 1. 6809E+03 -878. 1. 4116E+06 -665.98 621. 50 1. 3509E+03 -1043. 7.3289E+05 -306.50 620.50 3.3070E+02 -821. 2.6991E+04 750.86 620.00 3.6105E+Ol -313. 2.6677E+02 1279.54 619.78 0.0000E+OO 0. 0.0000E+OO 1516.53
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN IN"4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
III. --WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> WATER <----LEFTSIDE-----> <---RIGHTS IDE---->
ELEVATION PRESSURE PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF)
630.50 93. 0. 0. 0. 0. 629.50 155. 0. 0. 0. 0. 628.50 218. 0. 0. 0. 0. 627.90 255. 0. 0. 0. 0. 627.50 255. 91. 7. 7. 91. 626.90 255. 229. 16. 16. 229. 626. 70 255. 275. 20. 20. 275. 626.50 255. 320. 23. 23. 320. 625.50 255. 549. 40. 40. 549. 625.00 255. 481. 53. 53. 481. 624.50 255. 456. 69. 69. 456. 623.50 255. 752. 98. 98. 752. 622.50 255. 938. 123. 123. 938. 621. 84 255. 1061. 140. 140. 1061. 621. 50 255. 1124. 148. 148. 1124. 620.50 255. 1310. 173. 173. 1310. 620.00 255. 1407. 186. 186. 1407. 619.78 255. 1512. 201. 201. 1512. 618.50 255. 1728. 230. 230. 1728.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015 TIME: 8:02:51
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES
III. --WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 125.00 135. 00 140.00 145. 00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 5.00
10.00 15.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 5.00
10.00 15.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V.A.--RIGHTSIDE
ELEVATION (FT)
627.90 627.90 627.90 627.90
ELEVATION (FT)
627.90 627.90 627.90 627.90
630.50 FT.
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1.00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.50
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135. 00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V.B.--LEFTSIDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE 1. 00 LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE 1.50
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI. --WATER DATA UNIT WEIGHT 62. 40 (PCF) RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION 631. 99 (FT) LEFTSIDE ELEVATION 627.90 (FT)
NO SEEPAGE
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015 TIME: 8:02:55
************************** * SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
<------NET------> NET <---LEFTS IDE---> (SOIL + WATER) <--RIGHTS IDE--->
ELEV. WATER PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 630.5 93.0 0.0 0.0 93.0 93.0 0.0 0.0 629.5 155.4 0.0 0.0 155.4 155.4 0.0 0.0 628.5 217.8 0.0 0.0 217.8 217.8 0.0 0.0 627.9 255.2 0.0 0.0 255.2 255.2 0.0 0.0 627.5 255.2 53.8 6.6 208.1 302.4 6.6 53.8 626.9 255.2 134.4 16.5 137 .3 373.1 16.5 134.4 626. 5 255.2 188.1 23.1 90.2 420.3 23.1 188.1 625.7 255.2 290.9 35.7 0.0 510.4 35.7 290.9 625.5 255.2 322.5 39.6 -27.7 538.1 39.6 322.5 625.0 255.2 332.6 52.7 -24.7 535.1 52.7 332.6 624.5 255.2 353.2 69.5 -28.5 539.0 69.5 353.2 623.5 255.2 505.1 97.9 -152.0 662.4 97.9 505.1 622.5 255.2 632.0 123.1 -253.7 764.2 123.l 632.0 621. 5 255.2 758.8 148.2 -355.3 865.8 148.2 758.8 620.5 255.2 885.4 173.4 -456.8 967. 3 173.4 885.4 620.0 255.2 951. 3 186.5 -509.6 1020.1 186.5 951. 3 619.5 255.2 1022.3 200.6 -566.5 1077. 0 200.6 1022.3 618.5 255.2 1169.3 229.7 -684.4 1194. 8 229.7 1169. 3 617.5 255.2 1316.3 258.9 -802.2 1312.6 258.9 1316. 3 616.5 255.2 1463.2 288.1 -919.9 1430.3 288.1 1463.2 615.5 255.2 1610.0 317. 3 -1037.5 1548.0 317.3 1610.0 614.5 255.2 1756.9 346.5 -1155.2 1665.6 346.5 1756.9 613.5 255.2 1903.7 375.7 -1272.8 1783.2 375.7 1903.7 612.5 255.2 2050.5 404.8 -1390.4 1900.9 404.8 2050.5 611. 5 255.2 2197.3 434.0 -1508.0 2018.5 434.0 2197.3 610.5 255.2 2344.0 463.2 -1625.6 2136 .1 463.2 2344.0 610.0 255.2 2980.4 513.2 -2212.0 2722.4 513.2 2980.4 609.5 255.2 3377.1 514.8 -2607.1 3117. 5 514.8 3377.1 608.5 255.2 3064.3 445.8 -2363.3 2873.8 445.8 3064.3 607.5 255.2 3250.2 472 .1 -2522.9 3033.3 472 .1 3250.2 606.5 255.2 3436.1 498.4 -2682.5 3192.9 498.4 3436.1 605.5 255.2 3622.0 524.6 -2842.1 3352.6 524.6 3622.0
604.5 255.2 3807.9 550.9 -3001.8 3512.2 550.9 3807.9 603.5 255.2 3993.8 577.2 -3161. 5 3671. 9 577.2 3993.8 602.5 255.2 4179.8 603.4 -3321.2 3831.6 603.4 4179.8 601. 5 255.2 4365.8 629.6 -3480.9 3991.3 629. 6 4365.8 600.5 255.2 4551.7 655.9 -3640.6 4151.1 655.9 4551.7 600.0 255.2 4646.2 669.2 -3721. 7 4232.2 669.2 4646.2 599.5 255.2 4743.5 683.0 -3805.3 4315.8 683.0 4743.5 598.5 255.2 4941. 2 710. 9 -3975.1 4485.5 710.9 4941.2 597.5 255.2 5138. 9 738.9 -4144.8 4655.3 738.9 5138.9
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
BY CLASSICAL METHODS
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II. --SUMMARY
TIME: 8:02:56
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
BOTTOM ELEV. (FT) 616.13 PENETRATION (FT) 11. 77
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 4.2163E+03 AT ELEVATION (FT) 621. 22
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"3): 4.3687E+08 AT ELEVATION (FT) 630.50
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN IN"4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 14-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SLB SSP BARRIER
II.--RESULTS
ELEVATION BENDING MOMENT SHEAR
SCALED DEFLECTION
TIME: 8:02:56
NET PRESSURE
(FT) 630.50 629.50 628.50 627.90 627.50 626.90 626.50 625.73 625.50 625.00 624.50 623.50 622.50 621. 50 620.50 620.00 619.50 618.92 618.50 617.50 616.50 616 .13
(:::,B-FT) (LB) (LB-IN"3) O.OOOOE+OO 0. 4.3687E+08 5.6888E+Ol 124. 3.8505E+08 2.6915E+02 311. 3.3335E+08 4.9705E+02 453. 3.0253E+08 6. 9727E+02 545. 2.8214E+08 1.0577E+03 649. 2.5195E+08 l.3270E+03 694. 2.3218E+08 1.8758E+03 729. 1.9544E+08 2.0468E+03 726. l.8451E+08 2.4063E+03 713. 1. 6193E+08 2.7594E+03 699. l.4038E+08 3.4238E+03 609. 1. 0102E+08 3.9398E+03 406. 6.7547E+07 4.2021E+03 102. 4.0847E+07 4.1091E+03 -304. 2.1358E+07 3.8976E+03 -546. l.4291E+07 3.5584E+03 -815. 8.9026E+06 2.9823E+03 -1166. 4.5378E+06 2.4509E+03 -1365. 2.5150E+06 1.0526E+03 -1306. 3.1742E+05 9. 24 71E+Ol -488. 1.8303E+03 O.OOOOE+OO 0. O.OOOOE+OO
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN IN"4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
(PSF) 92.98
155.38 217.78 255.22 208.06 137. 33
90.18 0.00
-27.70 -24. 71 -28.53
-152.01 -253.74 -355.33 -456.82 -509.62 -566.53 -635.33 -319.76
438.12 1195. 99 1473.36
III.--WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> WATER <----LEFTS IDE-----> <---RIGHTSIDE---->
ELEVATION PRESSURE PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF)
630.50 93. 0. 0. 0. 0. 629.50 155. 0. 0. 0. 0. 628.50 218. 0. 0. 0. 0. 627.90 255. 0. 0. 0. 0. 627.50 255. 54. 7. 7. 54. 626.90 255. 134. 16. 16. 134. 626.50 255. 188. 23. 23. 188. 625.73 255. 291. 36. 36. 291. 625.50 255. 323. 40. 40. 323. 625.00 255. 333. 53. 53. 333. 624.50 255. 353. 69. 69. 353. 623.50 255. 505. 98. 98. 505. 622.50 255. 632. 123. 123. 632. 621.50 255. 759. 148. 148. 759. 620.50 255. 885. 173. 173. 885. 620.00 255. 951. 186. 186. 951. 619.50 255. 1022. 201. 201. 1022. 618.92 255. 1108. 218. 218. 1108. 618.50 255. 1169. 230. 230. 1169. 617.50 255. 1316. 259. 259. 1316. 616.50 255. 1463. 288. 288. 1463. 616.13 255. 1610. 317. 317. 1610. 6'14. 50 255. 1757. 346. 346. 1757.
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
E Au Gres Sea Lamprey Trap
4/14/2015COMPUTATION TITLE: DATE:
East Bank Rehab SSP 4/29/2015
Note: This design procedure follows the guidelines set forth by EM 1110-2-2504, 1994, starting on pg. 6-1
allowable bending stress =
minimum section modulus =
Maximum Moment, M max = 21.42 k-ftAssumed Yield Strength, F y = 39 ksiAllowable Bending Stress, f b = 19.5 ksi
Minimum Section Modulus, S min = 13.2 in3
SSP Section = PZ22Section Modulus of Section, S = 18.1 in3
Applied bending stress, F b = 14.2 ksi
ACCEPTABLE
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-FitzgeraldCHECKED BY:
Blake Gerken
yb ff 5.0=
bfM
S maxmin =
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9 : 0 2 : 0 9
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
~RE1)< S.E~.;Lp.MPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK. REHAB
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES
III. --WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135. 00 140.00 145.00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V.A.--RIGHTSIDE
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 646.00 647.00 649.00
ELEVATION (FT)
635.00 634.00 633.00 632.00 630.00
642.00 FT.
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE
DEFAULT DEFAULT
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115.00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V. B. --LEFTS IDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE
DEFAULT DEFAULT
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115.00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI.--WATER DATA
UNIT WEIGHT RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION LEFTSIDE ELEVATION NO SEEPAGE
62.40 (PCF) 628. 00 (FT) 628. 00 (FT)
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS
VII.A.--VERTICAL LINE LOADS NONE
VII.B.--VERTICAL UNIFORM LOADS LEFTS IDE
(PSF) 0.00
RIGHTS IDE (PSF) 90.00
VII.C.--VERTICAL STRIP LOADS NONE
VII.D.--VERTICAL RAMP LOADS NONE
VII.E.--VERTICAL TRIANGULAR LOADS NONE
VII.F.--VERTICAL VARIABLE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
**************************
* SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
TIME: 9:02:13
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
<------NET------> NET <---LEFTS IDE---> (SOIL + WATER) <--RIGHTS IDE--->
ELEV. WATER PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 642.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.3 359.9 32.3 359.9 641. 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96. 5 1132 .1 96. 5 1132 .1 640.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 150.6 1767.2 150.6 1767.2 639.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 204.7 2402.3 204.7 2402.3 638.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 258.9 3018.5 258.9 3018.5 637.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 313.0 3482.1 313.0 3482.1 636.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 361. 8 3848.6 361. 8 3848.6 635.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 405.3 4378.1 405.3 4378.l 634.0 0.0 115. O* 27.6 333.2 4 965. 9 448.2 4993.5 633.0 0.0 230.0* 55.1 263.1 5494.3 493.1 5549.4
632.0 0.0 345.0* 82.7 193.0 5734.7 538.0 5817.4 631. 0 0.0 460.0* 110. 3 120.0 5777.3 580.0 5887.6 630.0 0.0 575.0* 137.9 51. 9 5939.6 626.9 6077.5 629.2 0.0 671. 6 159.4 0.0 6099.4 671. 6 6258.8 629.0 0.0 699.0 165.4 -14.7 6144.7 684.2 6310.2 628.0 0.0 876.6 188.2 -144.5 6345.5 732.1 6533.8 627.0 0.0 959.0 201. 5 -193.7 6464.9 765.3 6666.4 626.0 0.0 1035.4 210.0 -245.8 6543.0 789.6 6753.0 625.0 0.0 962. 8 230.7 -188.5 4492.3 774.3 4723.1 624.0 0.0 1025.4 277.5 -141.6 3991.9 883.8 4269.4 623.0 0.0 1088.0 314.8 -56.9 5645.0 1031.1 5959.8 622.0 0.0 1241.6 329.l -181.0 5712. 5 1060.6 6041. 6 621. 0 0.0 1374.2 341.7 -284.1 5777.8 1090.1 6119. 5 620.0 0.0 1503.2 352.8 -382.7 5867.9 1120. 5 6220.7 619.0 0.0 1637.0 364.9 -484.2 5974.2 1152. 8 6339.1 618.0 0.0 1773.9 379.7 -586.5 6089.9 1187. 4 6469.6 617.0 0.0 1924.5 395.5 -701.2 6208.0 1223.3 6603.5 616.0 0.0 2068.3 409.6 -810.6 6324.5 1257.7 6734.1 615.0 0.0 2204.8 423.4 -914.2 6434.6 1290.6 6857.9 614.0 0.0 2347.6 441. 4 -1024.1 6536.9 1323. 5 6978.3 613.0 0.0 2496.5 467.8 -1140. 4 6637.5 1356.1 7105. 3 612.0 0.0 2645.5 494.5 -1257.5 6751.2 1388.0 7245.7 611. 0 0.0 2794.3 517.8 -1375.2 6875.2 1419.1 7393.0 610.0 0.0 3504.9 570.8 -1899.6 9401.4 1605.3 9972 .1 609.0 0.0 3942.8 550.0 -2400.6 10148.7 1542.2 10698.7 608.0 0.0 3820.9 502.0 -2499.8 8520.3 1321.1 9022.3 607.0 0.0 3966. 4 529.8 -2619.8 8697.6 1346.6 9227.5 606.0 0.0 4113. 3 557.6 -2740.5 8875.0 1372. 8 9432.7 605.0 0.0 4283.8 587.4 -2883.9 9050.0 1399.9 9637.4 604.0 0.0 4469.l 618.8 -3042.1 9219.3 1427.0 9838.l
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE FOR THIS ELEVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9:02:14
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II.:--SUMMARY
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE"METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
*****WARNING: STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL ELEVATIONS. SEE COMPLETE OUTPUT.
BOTTOM ELEV'. (FT) 607.99 PENETRATION (FT) 27.01
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 3.8232E+04 AT ELEVATION (FT) 617.74
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"3): 2.4247E+l0 AT ELEVATION (FT) 642.00
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II. --RESULTS
BENDING SCALED ELEVATION MOMENT SHEAR DEFLECTION
(FT) (LB-FT) (LB) (LB-INA3) 642.00 O.OOOOE+OO 0. 2.4247E+l0 641. 00 2.6863E+Ol 64. 2.3112E+10 640.00 1.4854E+02 188. 2 .1977E+l0 639.00 4.2084E+02 366. 2.0842E+10 638.00 8.9788E+02 597. 1.9708E+l0 637.00 1.6338E+03 883. l.8576E+10 636.00 2.6818E+03 1221. 1. 7446E+l0 635.00 4.0908E+03 1604. 1.6321E+10 634.00 5.8858E+03 1974. 1.5204E+10 633.00 8.0144E+03 2272. 1.4096E+10 632.00 1.0406E+04 2500. 1.3002E+l0 631. 00 1.2990E+04 2656. 1.1927E+10 630.00 l.5695E+04 2742. 1.0873E+l0 629.22 1.7842E+04 2763. 1.0072E+10 629.00 1.8452E+04 2761. 9.8474E+09 628.00 2 .1184E+04 2681. 8.8532E+09 627.00 2.3785E+04 2512. 7.8956E+09 626.00 2.6192E+04 2292. 6.9791E+09 625.00 2. 8371E+04 2075. 6.1078E+09 624.00 3.0360E+04 1910. 5.2855E+09 623.00 3.2213E+04 1811. 4.5156E+09 622.00 3.3975E+04 1692. 3.8014E+09 621. 00 3.5559E+04 1459. 3.1459E+09 620.00 3.6860E+04 1126. 2.5518E+09 619.00 3.7778E+04 693. 2.0213E+09 618.00 3. 8211E+04 157. 1.5560E+09 617.00 3.8056E+04 -487. 1.1567E+09 616.00 3.7201E+04 -1242. 8.2305E+08 615.00 3.5536E+04 -2105. 5.5356E+08 614.00 3.2956E+04 -3074. 3.4534E+08 613.00 2.9350E+04 -4156. 1.9391E+08 612.00 2.4604E+04 -5355. 9.3046E+07 611. 00 1.8600E+04 -6672. 3. 4511E+07 610.29 1.3467E+04 -7784. l.2994E+07 610.00 1.117 4E+04 -8102. 7.9144E+06 609.00 3.5842E+03 -6332. 5.7214E+05 608.00 -2.2278E-01 -92. -6.5345E-02 607.99 O.OOOOE+OO 0. O.OOOOE+OO
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
TIME: 9: 02: 14
NET PRESSURE
(PSF) 32.34 96. 49
150.61 204.74 258.87 313.00 361. 85 405.32 333.19 263.14 192.95 120.04
51. 94 0.00
-14.74 -144.53 -193.69 -245.81 -188.55 -141.62 -56.94
-180.97 -284.12 -382.66 -484.18 -586.49 -701.20 -810.63 -914.19
-1024 .11 -1140. 41 -1257.47 -1375.18 -1748.77
-463.52 4005.08 8473.67 8522.21
III.--WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> WATER <----LEFTS IDE-----> <---RIGHTS IDE---->
ELEVATION PRESSURE PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE (FT) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF)
642.00 0. 0. 0. 32. 360. 641.00 0. 0. 0. 96. 1132. 640.00 0. 0. 0. 151. 17 67. 639.00 0. 0. 0. 205. 2402. 638.00 0. 0. 0. 259. 3019. 637.00 0. 0. 0. 313. 3482. 636.00 D. D. 0. 362. 3849. 635.00 D. 0. 0. 405. 4378. 634.DO D. * 115. 28. 448. 4993. 633.00 D. * 230. 55. 493. 5549. 632.00 D. * 345. 83. 538. 5817. 631.00 0. * 460. 110. 580. 5888. 630.00 Cl. * 575. 138. 627. 6078. 629.22 0. 672. 159. 672. 6259. 629.00 0. 699. 165. 684. 6310. 628.00 D. 877. 188. 732. 6534. 627.00 D. 959. 201. 765. 6666. 626.00 D. 1035. 210. 790. 6753. 625.00 D. 963. 231. 774. 4723. 624.00 D. 1025. 277. 884. 4269. 623.00 D. 1088. 315. 1031. 5960. 622.00 D. 1242. 329. 1061. 6042. 621. OD D. 1374. 342. 1090. 6119. 620.00 0. 1503. 353. 1121. 6221. 619.0D 0. 1637. 365. 1153. 6339. 618.00 0. 1774. 380. 1187. 6470. 617.00 0. 1925. 395. 1223. 6604. 616.00 0. 2D68. 41D. 1258. 6734. 615.00 0. 2205. 423. 1291. 6858. 614.00 0. 2348. 441. 1323. 6978. 613.00 0. 2497. 468. 1356. 7105. 612.00 0. 2645. 494. 1388. 7246. 611. DO 0. 2794. 518. 1419. 7393. 610.29 0. 3301. 556. 1552. 923D. 610.0D D. 35D5. 571. 1605. 9972. 609.00 0. 3943. 550. 1542. 10699. 608.00 0. 3821. 5D2. 1321. 9022. 607.99 0. 3966. 530. 1347. 9227. 606.00 0. 4113. 558. 1373. 9433.
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE AT THIS ELEVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9: 05: 00
I.--HEADING
**************** * INPUT DATA * ****************
'E'AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP .SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II. --CONTROL CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURES FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURES
III.--WALL DATA
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135. 00 140.00 145.00
SAT. WGHT. (PCF)
115. 00 115. 00 125.00 135.00 140.00 145.00
ELEVATION AT TOP OF WALL 642.00 FT.
IV.--SURFACE POINT DATA
IV.A.--RIGHTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
IV.B.--LEFTSIDE DIST. FROM WALL (FT)
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
V.--SOIL LAYER DATA
V .A. --RIGHTSIDE
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 646.00 647.00 649.00
ELEVATION (FT)
635.00 634.00 633.00 632.00 630.00
LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE DEFAULT LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE DEFAULT
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115.00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
V. B. --LEFTS IDE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR ACTIVE PRESSURE LEVEL 2 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR PASSIVE PRESSURE
DEFAULT DEFAULT
ANGLE OF ANGLE OF <-SAFETY-> MOIST INTERNAL COH- WALL ADH- <--BOTTOM--> <-FACTOR-> WGHT. FRICTION ES ION FRICTION ES ION ELEV. SLOPE ACT. PASS. (PCF) (DEG) (PSF) (DEG) (PSF) (FT) (FT/FT)
115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 628.00 0.00 DEF DEF 115. 00 28.00 0.00 15.12 0.00 625.00 0.00 DEF DEF 125.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 620.00 0.00 DEF DEF 135.00 22.00 0.00 11. 88 0.00 610.00 0.00 DEF DEF 140.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 600.00 0.00 DEF DEF 145.00 26.00 0.00 15.08 0.00 DEF DEF
VI.--WATER DATA
UNIT WEIGHT RIGHTSIDE ELEVATION LEFTSIDE ELEVATION NO SEEPAGE
62.40 (PCF) 628.00 (FT) 628. 00 (FT)
VII.--VERTICAL SURCHARGE LOADS
VII.A.--VERTICAL LINE LOADS NONE
VII.B.--VERTICAL UNIFORM LOADS LEFTS IDE
(PSF) 0.00
RIGHTS IDE (PSF) 90.00
VII.C.--VERTICAL STRIP LOADS NONE
VII.D.--VERTICAL RAMP LOADS NONE
VII.E.--VERTICAL TRIANGULAR LOADS NONE
VII.F.--VERTICAL VARIABLE LOADS NONE
VIII.--HORIZONTAL LOADS NONE
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015
I.--HEADING
************************** * SOIL PRESSURES FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * **************************
TIME: 9:05:06
'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II.--SOIL PRESSURES
ELEV. (FT) 642.0 641. 0 640.0 639.0 638.0 637.0 636.0 635.0 634.0 633.0
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
NET WATER (PSF)
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<---LEFTS IDE---> PASSIVE ACTIVE
(PSF) (PSF) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
115.0 27.6 230.0* 55.1
<------NET------> (SOIL + WATER)
ACTIVE PASSIVE (PSF) (PSF) 32.3 576.1 96.5 2853.2
150. 6 4341.1 204.7 5253.2 258.9 6194.2 313.0 7555.0 361. 8 8006. 4 405.3 7917.4 333.2 8223.0 263.1 8593.7
<--RIGHTS IDE---> ACTIVE PASSIVE
(PSF) (PSF) 32.3 576.1 96.5 2853.2
150. 6 4341.1 204.7 5253.2 258.9 6194.2 313.0 7555.0 361. 8 8006. 4 405.3 7917.4 448.2 8250.5 493.1 8648.8
632.0 0.0 392.2* 82.7 145.8 8990.3 538.0 9073.0 631. 2 0.0 571.9* 105.0 0.0 9380.0 571. 9 9485.0 631. 0 0.0 614.8* 110 .3 -34.8 94 72. 9 580.0 9583.2 630.0 0.0 809.9 137.9 -183.0 9916.1 626.9 10054.0 629.0 0.0 107 6. 2 165.4 -392.0 10312.3 684.2 10477.7 628.0 0.0 1367.1 188.2 -635.0 10680.5 732.1 10868.8 627.0 0.0 1520.8 201. 5 -755.6 10965. 0 765.3 11166. 5 626. 0 0.0 1671. 8 210.0 -882.3 11186.2 789.6 11396.2 625.0 0.0 1136. 6 230.7 -362.4 3490.9 774.3 3721. 6 624.0 0.0 1025.4 277.5 -141.6 2057.0 883.8 2334.5 623.0 0.0 1547.6 314.8 -516.5 8479.6 1031.1 8794.5 622.0 0.0 1823.6 329.1 -762.9 8581.1 1060.6 8910.2 621. 0 0.0 2016.6 341.7 -926.5 8685.4 1090.1 9027.1 620.0 0.0 2216.0 352.8 -1095.5 8813.7 1120. 5 9166.4 619.0 0.0 2409.2 364.9 -1256.3 8974.0 1152. 8 9338.9 618.0 0.0 2611.8 379.7 -1424.4 9133.8 1187. 4 9513.6 617.0 0.0 2833.5 395.5 -1610.2 9274.0 1223.3 9669. 5 616.0 0.0 3054.8 409.6 -1797.1 9414.9 1257.7 9824.5 615.0 0.0 3275.8 423.4 -1985.3 9590.7 1290.6 10014.1 614.0 0.0 3482.6 441. 4 -2159.1 9790.2 1323.5 10231.7 613.0 0.0 3681.4 467.8 -2325.2 9983.0 1356.1 10450.8 612.0 0.0 3892.7 494.5 -2504.7 10175.1 1388.0 10669.5 611. 0 0.0 4110. 3 517.8 -2691.1 10370.1 1419.1 10887.9 610.0 0.0 6176.6 570.8 -4571. 3 19277.7 1605.3 19848.5 609.0 0.0 7092.6 550.0 -5550.5 21016.1 1542.2 21566.l 608.0 0.0 6157.7 502.0 -4836.6 14109.6 1321.1 14611.6 607.0 0.0 6376.0 529.8 -5029.4 14440.5 134 6. 6 14970.3 606.0 0.0 6635.6 557.6 -5262.8 14767.7 1372. 8 15325.3 605.0 0.0 6928.5 587.4 -5528.6 15080.1 1399. 9 15667.5 604.0 0.0 7225.3 618.8 -5798.3 15384.0 1427.0 16002.8
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE FOR THIS E~EVATION.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHORED OR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9:05:07
**************************** * SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II.--SUMMARY
WALL
MAX.
MAX.
RIGHTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
LEFTSIDE SOIL PRESSURES DETERMINED BY SWEEP SEARCH WEDGE METHOD.
*****WARNING: STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL ELEVATIONS. SEE COMPLETE OUTPUT.
BOTTOM ELEV. (FT) 616.98 PENETRATION (FT) 18.02
BEND. MOMENT (LB-FT) 2.1421E+04 AT ELEVATION (FT) 625.87
SCALED DEFL. (LB-IN"'3): 7.1637E+09 AT ELEVATION (FT) 642.00
NOTE: DIVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ELLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
PROGRAM CWALSHT-DESIGN/ANALYSIS OF ANCHOREDOR CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS BY CLASSICAL METHODS
DATE: 15-APRIL-2015 TIME: 9: 05: 07
**************************** * COMPLETE OF RESULTS FOR * * CANTILEVER WALL DESIGN * ****************************
I.--HEADING 'E AU GRES SEA LAMPREY TRAP SSP WALL EAST BANK REHAB
II. --RESULTS
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 641. 00 640.00 639.00 638.00 637.00 636.00 635_. 00 634.00 633.00 632.00 631.19 631. 00 630.00 629.00 628.00 627.00 626.00 625.00 624.00 623.00 622.00 621. 00 620.00 619.00 618.39 618.00 617.00 616.98
BENDING SCALED MOMENT SHEAR DEFLECTION (LB-FT) (LB) (LB-INA3)
0.0000E+OO 0. 7.1637E+09 2.6863E+Ol 64. 6.7091E+09 l.4854E+02 188. 6.2547E+09 4.2084E+02 366. 5.8005E+09 8.9788E+02 597. 5.3470E+09 l.6338E+03 883. 4.8952E+09 2.6818E+03 1221. 4.4462E+09 4.0908E+03 ·1604. 4.0019E+09 5.8858E+03 1974. 3.5647E+09 8.0144E+03 2272. 3.1377E+09 1.0398E+04 24 76. 2.7247E+09 l.2429E+04 2535. 2.4041E+09 1.2917E+04 2532. 2. 3296E+09 l.5407E+04 2423. l.9568E+09 l.7703E+04 2135. 1.6106E+09 l.9602E+04 1622. 1. 2950E+09 2.0887E+04 927. l.0131E+09 2.1414E+04 108. 7. 6726E+08 2 .1168E+04 -515. 5.5828E+08 2.0509E+04 -767. 3.8581E+08 1. 9609E+04 -1096. 2.4876E+08 l.8214E+04 -1735. 1.4552E+08 1. 6070E+04 -2580. 7.3639E+07 1. 2998E+04 -3591. 2.9397E+07 8.8325E+03 -4767. 7.4574E+06 5.6691E+03 -5568. 2.0136E+06 3.4842E+03 -5528. 6.0061E+05 8.2674E-01 -179. -2.0167E-01 O.OOOOE+OO 0. O.OOOOE+OO
NOTE: ~IVIDE SCALED DEFLECTION MODULUS OF ~LLASTICITY IN PSI TIMES PILE MOMENT OF INERTIA IN INA4 TO OBTAIN DEFLECTION IN INCHES.
NET PRESSURE
(PSF) 32.34 96. 49
150.61 204.74 258.87 313. 00 361. 85 405.32 333.19 263.14 145.77
0.00 -34.77
-182.99 -391.97 -635.01 -755.55 -882.26 -362.36 -141.62 -516.53 -762.93 -926.49
-1095.47 -1256.33 -1359.31
1568.59 9130.04 9276.75
III.--WATER AND SOIL PRESSURES
ELEVATION (FT)
642.00 641. 00 640.00
WATER PRESSURE
(PSF) 0. 0. 0.
<-------------SOIL PRESSURES--------------> <----LEFTS IDE-----> <---RIGHTS IDE----> PASSIVE ACTIVE ACTIVE PASSIVE
(PSF) (PSF) (PSF) (PSF) 0. 0. 32. 576. 0. 0. 96. 2853. 0. 0. 151. 4341.
639.00 0. 0. 0. 205. 5253. 638.00 0. 0. 0. 259. 6194. 637.00 0. 0. 0. 313. 7555. 636.00 0. 0. 0. 362. 8006. 635.00 0. 0. 0. 405. 7917. 634.00 0. 115. 28. 448. 8251. 633.00 O.* 230. 55. 493. 8649. 632.00 0. * 392. 83. 538. 9073. 631.19 O.* 572. 105. 572. 9485. 631. 00 O.* 615. 110. 580. 9583. 630.00 0. 810. 138. 627. 10054. 629.00 0. 107 6. 165. 684. 10478. 628.00 0. 1367. 188. 732. 10869. 627.00 0. 1521. 201. 765. 11167. 626.00 0. 1672. 210. 790. 11396. 625.00 0. 1137. 231. 774. 3722. 624.00 0. 1025. 277. 884. 2334. 623.00 0. 1548. 315. 1031. 87 94. 622.00 0. 1824. 329. 1061. 8910. 621. 00 0. 2017. 342. 1090. 9027. 620.00 '.l. 2216. 353. 1121. 9166. 619.00 0. 2409. 365. 1153. 9339. 618.39 0. 2533. 374. 1174. 9446. 618.00 0. 2612. 380. 1187. 9514. 617.00 0. 2834. 395. 1223. 9669. 616.98 0. 3055. 410. 1258. 9825. 615.00 0. 327 6. 423. 1291. 10014.
* STANDARD WEDGE SOLUTION DOES NOT EXIST FOR INDICATED PRESSURE AT THIS ELEVATION.
Page 1 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
References1. LRFD Guide Specification for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges, December 20092. AASHTO LRFD 2012
Determine Design LoadingsNote: Loadings will be placed into STAAD to determine design bending moments and shears.
Dead Load
Beam Self Weight See STAAD Analysis
Steel Grating 45.5 lb/ft
Handrailing & Toe Plate 20 lb/ft
Live Load
Live Load Pressure= 90 psf (Ref 1)
Platform Width, w= 7 feetLoad Applied At Girder= 315.000 lb/ft
Wind Loading
Lateral Wind Loading - Transverse Direction
(AASHTO Signs Articles 3.8 and 3.9)
Design Wind Speed, V= 90 mphKz= 0.86 (H=16 feet above Channel bottom, Eq. C3-1)G= 1.14Ir= 1.15 (Ref 1 Section 3.4)
Cd= 1.7 (Flat Shape)
Design Wind Pressure, Pz= 39.74 psf
Area Impacted by Wind:Toe Plate Area = 72 in2/ft (Assume 6" High Toe Plate)
Girder Area = 120 in2/ftHandrail Area Impacted by Wind = 54 in2/ft
TOTAL 1.7 ft2
Lateral Wind Loading = 0.068 k/ft*** Assumed Transverse Lateral Wind Load is acting on the centroid of the girder in the Staad Model.
Vertical Wind Loading
(Ref 2 Section 3.8.2)
Upward Wind Force = 0.02 ksfWidth of deck, wdeck = 7.00 ft (Conservative since actual span is 5 feet)
Vertical Wind Load @ windward quarterpoint of deck = 0.14 k/ft
Vertical Wind Load on Windward Girder = 0.105 k/ftVertical Wind Load on Opposite Girder = 0.035 k/ft
Seismic Load
Seismic Load DeterminationPeak Ground Accerlation Coeff, PGA = 1.9 % Fig 3.10.2.1-1
Long-period spectral acceleration coeff, S1 = 2.3 % g Fig 3.10.2.1-3
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
The load on the deck is to be distributed to the girders. Assuming a simply supported beam, 75% of the load is distributed to the windward girder and 25% of the load to the leeward girder.
(Assumed W-19 Steel 1-3/4 x 3/16 w=13 psf)(1 1/2 Diameter Steel Pipe (2.72 lb/ft) 3 Rail with 6"x1/4" Toe Plate (5.10 lb/ft) rounded to 20 lb/ft to allow for hardware)
(To Outer Edge Of Girder), (Conservative since actual span is 5 feet)
dRzz CIGVKP 200256.0=
Page 2 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Short-period spectral acceleration coeff, Ss = 4 % g Fig 3.10.2.1-2
Assume Site Class D
Determine Seismic ZoneEq 3.10.4.2-6
Site Factor, Fv = 3.5 Table 3.10.3.2-3
Accerlation Coeff, SD1 = 0.0805
Seismic Zone = 1 Table 3.10.6-1
Determine Minimum Design Connection Force
Eq 3.10.4.2-2
Site Factor, Fpga = 2.5 Table 3.10.3.2-1
Accerlation Coeff, As = 0.0475
Determine Dead LoadDead Load Reaction 2.034 kips (STAAD Analysis)
Total Horizontal Force Per SupportPlaform 0.305 kips
Ice Accretion/Snow Loading
Ground Snow Load, pg = 40 psf (ASCE 7 Figure 7-1)Width of deck, wdeck = 7.00 ft
Ice Accretion/Snow Load on Girder = 140 lb/ft
Thermal Loading
Per Reference 2 3.12.2, use Procedure A to determine the design thermal movement associated with a uniform temperature change.
(Reference 2 3.12.2.3-1)
TMinDesign= -30 °FTMaxDesign= 120 °F
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, α= 0.0000065 in/in/°F (AISC Table 17-11)Expansion Length of Girder, L= 168 in
Design Thermal Movement Range, ΔT= 0.1638 in
Hydrostatic Loading (WAstatic)
Per 4.7.41 because the bridge is in seismic zone 1, seismic analysis is not required. However, Section 3.10.9 requires a minimum design connection force for all seismic zones.
ASCE 7 Figure 7-1 recommends a ground snow load of 40 psf be used in National City, MI.
The average daily temperature is below 32°F for over 14 days per year. Therefore, National City, MI is considered a Cold Climate region and the Temperature Ranges for Steel will be -30° to 120°F (Reference 2 Table3.12.2.1-1.)
Therefore, horizontal design connection force in retrained directions shall not be less than .15 times vertical reaction due to tributary permanent load and tributary live loads assumed to exist during an earthquake. It is assumed no live load will exist during an earthquake. Ref: Section 3.10.9.2
Because the lamprey trap platform will be considered a flow through structure and that, due to the platforms location, there will not be any anticipated hydrostatic pressure differential, the hydrostatic loading will not be considered.
(Conservative since actual span is 5 feet)
11 SFS vD =
PGAFA pgaS =
Page 3 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Stream Pressure (WAstream)
Drag coefficient, CD = 1.4 Ref 2, Table 3.7.3.1-1, debris lodged against pier
River
Event Velocity (fps)Pressure (ksf/ft of wall) Pressure (kips )
Extreme 500 3.56 0.01774304 0.014785867Usual 25 3.31 0.01533854 0.012782117Ice Condition 2 2.66 0.00990584 0.008254867
Load Cases
Notes:
- Extreme 1 includes earthquake loads.- Extreme 2 (check flood) relates to the extreme hydraulic event.- Extreme 2 (ice) relates to ice loading.
Strength 1 (25-year event): 1.25DL+1.75LL+1.0WAstream,25
Strength 3 (Wind parallel to flow in u/s direction): 1.25DL+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W
Strength 3 (Wind parallel to flow in d/s direction): 1.25DL+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W
Strength 3 (Wind perpendicular to flow): 1.25DL+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W
Extreme 1: 1.25DL+0.5LL+1.0WAstream,25+1.0EQ
Extreme 2 (Check Flood): 1.0DL+0.5LL+1.0I+1.0WAstream,500
Service 1 (Wind parallel to flow in d/s direction): 1.0DL+1.0LL+WAstream,25+.3W
Service 1 (Wind parallel to flow in u/s direction): 1.0DL+1.0LL+WAstream,25+.3W
Service 1 (Wind perpendicular to flow): 1.0DL+1.0LL+WAstream,25+.3W
Service 2: 1.0DL+1.3LL+1.0WAstream,25
Fatigue 1: 1.0LL+1.0W
STAAD RESULTS
Primary Girder
A STAAD Model Was Developed - Refer To: E. Au Gres Platform.stdVMAX: 5.336 KIPS Vertical Shearing Load
Load Cond: Strength 1 (Beam 33)
MZ: 11.76 K-FT Strong Axis BendingLoad Cond: Strength 1 (Beam 34)
MY: 0.88 K-FT Weak Axis BendingLoad Cond: Strength 1 (Beam 37)
Design Primary Girder
Design Beam Section: W10x49
Beam PropertiesTotal Span, L= 14.00 ft
Flange Width, bf= 10 inFlange Thickness, tf= 0.56 in
- Strength 3 (wind) is the load combination relating the bridge exposed to high wind velocities. The load combination will be considered for winds parallel to flow in the d/s direction), winds parallel to flow in the u/s direction and winds perpendicular to flow. These wind conditions will cover the worst loading conditions for the upstream walkway columns, platform columns and biaxial bending in the walkway columns.
- Service 1 is the load combination relating to the normal operation use of the bridge with high winds. Similar to the Strength 3 load combination winds parallel to flow in both the u/s and d/s directions as well as winds perpendicular to flow will be considered.
Stream pressure will be applied as a uniform load on the walkway columns and girders. Based on data from H&H office, the platform will be submerged at the 25 year event
1000
2VCp D=
Page 4 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Beam Depth, d= 10 inWeb Depth for Shear, D= 8.88 in
Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 inSection Modulus, Sx= 54.6 in3
Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in4
Moment of Inertia (x-axis), Ix= 272 in4
Plastic Section Modulus, Zx= 60.4 in3
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.8.2.3-4)
Distance Between Flange Centroids, h= 9.44 inDepth of the Web in Compression, Dc= 4.44 in
rt= 2.859628217 inSteel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
Lower Unbraced Limit, Lp= 5.74 ft
(Reference 2 6.10.8.2.3-5)
rt= 2.86 inUpper Unbraced Length Limit, Lr= 18.03 ft
Unbraced Length, Lb= 14.00 fth/tw= 27.76470588
Check Cross Section Proportion Limits (REF 2 Section 6.10.2)
Web Proportion Limits
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.1-1)(No Longitudinal Web Stiffeners)
D/tw= 26.11764706 OK
Flange Proportion Limits(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-1)
λf=bf/2tf= 8.928571429 OK
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-2)
bf= 10 inD/6= 1.48 in OK
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-3)
tf= 0.561.1tw= 0.374 OK
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.2.2-4)
Iyc= 272 in4
Iyt= 272 in4
Iyc/Iyt= 1 OK
150≤wt
D
0.122
≤f
f
tb
6Db f ≥
wf tt 1.1≥
101.0 ≤≤yt
yc
II
yrtr F
ErL π=
ytp F
ErL 0.1=
Page 5 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Size W-Shape BeamYield Stress, Fy= 50 ksi
Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 11.76 ft-kipsφ= 1.00 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
Required Section Modulus, Sreq= 2.82 in3
Calculate Applied Bending Stresses
Strong Axis BendingMaximum Bending Moment, Mu= 11.76 ft-kips
Beam Strong Axis Section Modulus, Sx= 54.60 in3
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50.00 ksiApplied Bending Stress, Fb= 2.59 ksi
Weak Axis Bending Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 0.88 ft-kips
Beam Weak Axis Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in3
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiApplied Bending Stress, Fb= 0.56 ksi
Checks
Check if shape is compact
Shape must satisfy both of the following criteria
1) (Ref 2 Section 6.10.8.2.2-4)
Flange Width, bf= 10 inFlange Thickness, tf= 0.56 in
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
bf/2tf= 8.93
0.38√(E/Fy) 9.152bf/tf < 0.38(E/Fy)^0.5 Therefore Shape Meets Compact Criteria
2) (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.2-4 and 6.10.1.10.2-2)
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
2Dc/tw= 26.125.7*E/√Fy= 137.27
Shape Meets Non Compact Criteria
Both Criteria are satisfied, therefore shape is compact, Rb=1
req
uy S
MFφ
=
yf
f
FE
tb
38.02
≤
yw
c
FE
tD 7.52
≤
Page 6 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Check Local Buckling of Compression Flange
λf=bf/2tf= 8.929λpf= 9.152λrf= 13.487
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)Web Load Shedding Factor, Rb= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.2)
Steel Yield Strength, Fyc = 50 ksiFyr=0.7Fyc= 35 ksi
λf<=λpf Therefore Use Eqn 6.10.8.2.2-1 OKLocal Buckling Resistance, Fnc= 50 ksi Eqn 6.10.8.2.2-1Local Buckling Resistance, Fnc= 50.77 ksi Eqn 6.10.8.2.2-2
Governing Local Buckling Resistance, Fnc= 50 ksi
Check Lateral Torsional Buckling
Unbraced Length, Lb= 14.00 ftLower Unbraced Limit, Lp= 5.74 ftUpper Unbraced Limit, Lr= 18.03 ft
Lp<Lb<=Lr
Moment Gradient Modifier, Cb= 1 ConservativeCompression Flange Yield Stress incl Residual Stress Effects,
Fyr= 35 ksi Taken as 0.7Fyc
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)Web Load Shedding Factor, Rb= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.2)
Compression Flange Yield Strength, Fyc= 50 ksi
Lateral Torsional Buckling Resistance, Fnc= 39.92 ksiLateral Torsional Buckling Resistance, Mn=FncSx= 181.628 kip-ft
Page 7 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Check DeflectionDeflections as determined from the STAAD Model
Maximum LL Deflection, δmax= 0.0140 inL/360= 0.4667 in
Deflection Less than L/360, OK
Maximum DL Deflection, δmax= 0.005 in
Check Shear
Fyw= 50 ksiD= 8.88 intw= 0.34 in
D/tw= 26.117647061.12√(Ek/Fyw)= 60.31 (6.10.9.3.2-4 Applies, k=5) (Assuming No Stiffeners)
C= 1
Nominal Shear Capacity of Girder, Vn= 87.56 kipsΦ= 1.00
Factored Shear Capacity, ΦVn= 87.56 kips
Page 8 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Check Web Yielding
Depth of beam, d= 10 inMaximum load applied to beam web, Ru= 5.336 kipsDistance of Load from End of Member, l= 0 ft
USE D6.5.2-3
k= 4.1875 in Bf/2-K1N= 10 in (Assume Beam Flange Width)Fy= 50 ksitw= 0.34 inΦ= 1
Web Capacity, ΦRn= 347.96875 kipsMaximum load applied to beam web, Ru= 5.336 kips
Web Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Web Crippling
Depth of beam, d= 10 inMaximum load applied to beam web, Ru= 5.336 kipsDistance of Load from End of Member, l= 0 ft
USE D6.5.3-3 or 3-4
N= 10 inFy= 50 ksitw= 0.34 intf= 0.56 in
Modulus of Elasiticity, E= 29000 ksiN/d= 1
Φ= 0.8Web Capacity, ΦRn= 159.9371139 kips
Page 9 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Maximum load applied to beam web, Ru= 5.336 kipsWeb Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Net Section Fracture
Diameter of Holes in Flange,D=d+1/16= 0.8125 in 3/4" boltNumber of holes in Flange, n= 2
Flange Width, bf= 10 inFlange Thickness, tf= 0.56 in
Fu= 65 ksi A572Net Area, An=(bf-nD)tf= 4.69 in2
Gross Area, Ag=bftf= 5.6 in2
Yield Stress, Fy= 50 ksi
0.84(An/Ag)Fu= 45.73 ksiBending Stress, ft= 2.59 ksi
Flange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Web Bend Buckling Resistance
Page 10 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Modulus of Elasiticity, E= 29000 ksi
Bend-Buckling Coefficient, k= 36Beam Depth, d= 10 in
Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 inHybrid Factor, Rh= 1
Fy= 50 ksiRhFy= 50 ksi
Fy/0.7= 71.429 ksiCalculated Fcrw= 1086.18 ksi
Applied Fcrw= 50.00 ksiWeb Bend-Buckling Resistance, Mn=FcrwSx= 227.50 kip-ft
Φ= 1Web Bend-Buckling Capacity, ΦMn=ΦFcrwSx= 227.5 kip-ft
Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 11.8 kip-ftWeb Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Tension Flange Flexural Resistance
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1.0 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)Flange Capacity, Fyt= 50 ksi
Fnt= 50 ksiΦ= 1 (6.5.4.2)
ΦFnt= 50 ksiApplied Bending Stress, Fb= 2.59 ksi Strong and Weak Direction
Tension Flange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Permanent Deformation at Sevice Limit State
Maximum Strong Axis Bending Moment for Service II, MII = 0.322 ft-kipsMaximum Weak Axis Bending Moment for Service II, MII = 0.010 ft-kips
Beam Strong Axis Section Modulus, Sx= 54.60 in3
Beam Weak Axis Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in3
Flange Yield Stress, Fyf= 50.00 ksiHybrid Factor, Rh= 1.0 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)
Strong Axis Flange Stress, ff= 0.070659341 ksiWeak Axis Flange Stress, fl= 0.006363636 ksi
(Per 6.10.1.9.1-2 k=36.0 for doubly symmetric I-Shaped Members, from
Page 11 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
= 0.073841159 ksi
= 40 ksi
Flange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Combined Bending Stresses
Flange Bending Stress, fbu= 2.59 ksiFlange Lateral Bending Stress, fl= 0.56 ksi
Φ= 1 (6.5.4.2)Flange Capacity, Fnc= 39.92 ksi (Flange is Compact)
fbu+1/3fl= 2.773103955 ksiFlange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Flange Lateral Bending Stress, fl= 0.56 ksiFlange Bending Stress, fbu= 2.59 ksi
Φ= 1 (6.5.4.2)Flange Capacity, Fnt= 50.00 ksi
fbu+1/3fl= 2.773103955 ksiFlange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check:
Flange Capacity, Fyc= 50 ksifbu+fl= 3.15 ksi
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1.00Φ= 1 (6.5.4.2)
ΦRhFyc= 50 ksiFlange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Page 12 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Girder Design Summary
Failure Mode Capacity Required CheckFlexure (Section Modulus) 54.60 2.82 OKLateral Torsional Buckling (Bending Moment ft-kips) 181.628 11.76 OKShear (Kips) 87.56 5.336 OKWeak Axis Flexure (Bending Moment ft-kips) 77.92 0.88 OK
Beam Size: W10x49Beam Material: FCM A572 Grade 50 w/ Charpy Requirement
Design Horizontal Beam Clip Angle Connection
Angle PropertiesSteel Yield Strength, Fy= 50 ksi A572
Steel Ultimate Strength, Fu= 65 ksi A572Modulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
Beam PropertiesSteel Yield Strength, Fy= 50 ksi A572
Steel Ultimate Strength, Fu= 65 ksi A572Modulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
Bolt Diameter, d= 0.75 inBolt Edge Distance,Le= 1.5 in
Bolt Spacing, s= 3 inHole Diameter=d+1/16=h= 0.8125 in
Bolt Area, Ab= 0.4418 in2
The beam to Angle connection will be checked based on the following failure modes:1) Bolt Shear2) Bolt Bearing3) Shear Yielding 4) Shear Rupture 5) Block Shear Rupture of Angle6) Slip Critical Strength
1) Bolt Shear (A325 Bolt with threads in Shear Plane)
(Reference 2 6.13.2.7-2)
Bolt Shear Strength, Fub = 120 ksi
Bolt Area, Ab = 0.4418 in2
Number of Shear Planes, Ns = 1φs = 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
Shear Strength Per Bolt, φRn= 16.12 kips/boltNumber of Bolts, n= 2
Connection Capacity, Rr = φRn= 32.23 kips
2)Bolt Bearing
Angle Thickness, t= 0.375 inAngle Fu= 65 ksi A572 Gr 50
Girder Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 inGirder Fu= 65 ksi
(Reference 2 6.4.3.1)
The bearing stresses in the Clip Angle connection will be governed by the thinnest steel portion.
sbubn NAFR 38.0=
Page 13 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Use Equation 6.13.2.9-1 since bolts are spaced at greater than 2.0d for both clear distance between holes and end distance.
(Reference 2 6.13.2.9-1)
Material Thickness, t= 0.375 inFu= 65 ksi
Bolt Diameter, d= 0.75 inφ= 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
2.4dtFu= 43.875 kips (Angle)
Material Thickness, t= 0.34 inFu= 65 ksi
Bolt Diameter, d= 0.75 inφ= 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
2.4dtFu= 39.78 kips (Girder)
Bolt Capacity, φRn= 31.824 kipsConnection Capacity For Bearing, Rr = 63.648 kips
3) Shear YieldRef 2 6.10.9.2-2
φ= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)Girder Yield Stress, Fy= 50 ksi
Web Depth at Connection, d= 7.5 in (Coped Beam, Assume T dimension)Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 in
Girder Gross Area, =dtwAg= 2.55 in2
Girder, FyAg= 127.5 kips
Angle Yield Stress, Fy= 50 ksiAngle Length, l= 7.5 in
Angle Web Thickness, t= 0.375 inAngle Gross Area, Ag=lt= 2.8125 in2
Angle FyAg= 140.625 kips
Governing FyAg= 127.5 kips
Shear Yield Capacity, φRn= 73.95 kips
4) Shear Rupture
Ref 2 6.10.9.2-2 Adapted for Rupture
φ= 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
Girder Ult. Stress, Fu= 65 ksiWeb Depth at Connection, d= 7.5 in
Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 in
Girder Gross Area, =dtw=Ag= 2.55 in2
Number of Bolts in Shear Plane=n= 2Hole Diameter, h= 0.8125 in
Hole Area=Ah= 0.2763 in2
Girder Net Shear Area, Anv=Ag-nAh= 1.998 in2
Girder, FuAnv= 129.84 kips
Angle Ultimate Stress, Fu= 65 ksiAngle Length, l= 7.5 in
Angle Web Thickness, t= 0.375 in
un dtFR 4.2=
gyn AFR 58.0φφ =
nvun AFR 58.0φφ =
Page 14 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Angle Gross Area, Ag=lt= 2.8125 in2
Number of Bolts in Shear Plane=n= 2Hole Diameter, h= 0.8125 in
Hole Area=Ah= 0.3047 in2
Angle Net Shear Area, Anv=Ag-nAh= 2.203 in2
Angle, FuAnv= 143.203125 kips
Governing, FuAnv= 129.84 kips
Shear Rupture Capacity, φRn= 60.245 kips
5) Block Shear Rupture
Angle
(Reference 2 6.13.4-1)
φ= 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)Angle Ultimate Stress, Fu= 65 ksi
Angle Yield Stress, Fy= 50 ksiRp= 0.9 Punched Holes
Ubs= 1 (Uniform Stress)Angle Thickness, t= 0.375 inEdge Distance, Le= 1.5 in
Bolt Spacing, s= 3 inHole Diameter, h= 0.8125 in
Net Shear Area=(s+Le-1.5(h))t=Anv= 2.35546875 in2
Gross Shear Area=(s+Le)t=Agv= 1.6875 in2
Net Tension Area=(Le-0.5h)t=Ant= 0.41015625 in2
0.6FuAnv+UbsFuAnt= 118.52 kips
0.6FyAgv+UbsFuAnt= 77.29 kips
Governing Strength= 77.29 kips
Block Shear Capacity, φRn= 55.65 kips
Girder
(Reference 2 6.13.4-1)
φ= 0.8 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)Rp= 0.9 Punched Holes
Girder Ultimate Stress, Fu= 65 ksi
Girder Yield Stress, Fy= 50 ksi
Ubs= 1 (Uniform Stress)Web Thickness, t= 0.34 inEdge Distance, Le= 1.5 in
Bolt Spacing, s= 3 inHole Diameter, h= 0.8125 in
Net Shear Area=(s+Le-1.5(h))t=Anv= 1.115625 in2
Gross Shear Area=(s+Le)t=Agv= 1.53 in2
Net Tension Area=(Le-0.5h)t=Ant= 0.371875 in2
0.58FuAnv+UbsFuAnt= 66.23 kips
0.58FyAgv+UbsFuAnt= 68.54 kips
Governing Strength= 66.23 kips
Page 15 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Block Shear Capacity, φRnRp= 47.69 kips
6)Slip-critical Strength
(Reference 2 6.13.2.8-1)
Hole Size Factor for Standard Hole, kh = 1.000 Standard (Reference 2 6.13.2.8-2)Class C Surface Condition Factor, ks = 0.330 Class A (Reference 2 6.13.2.8-3)
Number of Shear Planes, Ns = 1.000Minimum Required Bolt Tension, Pt = 28.000 kips (Reference 2 6.13.2.8-1)
Nominal Slip Resistance, Rn = 9.240 kips/boltFactored Resistance, Rr = 27.720 kips
Girder Connection Summary (Vertical Shear)
Failure Mode Connection Capacity 1) Bolt Shear 32.23 kips2) Bolt Bearing 63.65 kips3) Shear Yielding 73.95 kips4) Shear Rupture 60.24 kips5) Block Shear Rupture of Angles 47.69 kips6) Slip Critical Strength 27.72 kips
Connection Vertical Shear Capacity, φRn= 27.72 kips
Applied Vertical Shear, Vu= 5.336 kipsConnection OK for Vertical Shear
Column End Plate
Determine Plate Thickness
(AISC 14th Ed Eqn 14-2)
(AISC 14th Ed Eqn 14-3)
(AISC 14th Ed Eqn 14-4)
Beam Depth, d= 10 inBeam Flange Width, bf= 10 in
Plate Width, N = 10.25 in. 10" + .25" for weldPlate Length, B = 10.25 in. 10" + .25" for weld
λ = 1 (Conservative) m = 0.375 in n = 1.125 in n' = 2.5 in l = 2.5 in
(AISC 14th Ed Eqn 14-7a)
Plate Width, N = 10.25 in.Plate Length, B = 10.25 in.
( )',,max nnml λ=
295.0 dNm −
=
y
a
BNFPlt
9.02
min =
28.0 fbB
n−
=
fdbn41'=
tsshn PNkkR =
Page 16 of 16
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 4/14/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Trap Platform Girder DesignBJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
M.P.F
Applied Load, P a = 5.34 kipsYield Strength, F y = 36 ksi
Minimum plate thickness, t min = 0.17 inDesign Plate thickness, t d = 0.38 in
Use 3/8" Plate
Design Grating
Check Loading ChartFrom ANSI/NAAMM Standard Metal Bar Grating 531-09 for W-19 (1 3/4" x 3/16") Grating
Recommended max span = 87 in (Based on 1/4" Deflection under 100 psf)Max Uniform Load, U = 237 psf
Maximum Concentrated Load, C = 829 lb
Page 1 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
References1. LRFD Guide Specification for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges, December 20092. AASHTO LRFD 20123. AASHTO Standard Specification for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals, Fifth Edition 20094. FHWA Equestrian Design Guidebook for Trails, Trailheads and Campgrounds (Bridge and Overpass Design)
Determine Design Loadings
Dead Load
Beam Self Weight Calculated in STAADNote: See Platform girder caclulations for other applied dead loads.
Wind Loading
Design Wind Pressure, Pz= 39.74 psf (Walkway Design Calculations)
Pier column width, b= 10 inLateral Wind Loading, WLcolumn= 33.12 lb/ft
Crane Live LoadNote: A jib crane will be secured to a pile to allow for the removal of the lamprey traps. It will be modeled as a concentrated moment on the end of the pile.
Crane Capacity = 1000.00 lbsMoment Arm = 5.50 ft
Concentrated Crane Live Load Moment = 5.50 ft-kips
Ice/Debris Loading
Design Ice Pressure, P= 5000.00 lb/ft
Pier column width, b= 10 inLateral Ice Loading, WLcolumn= 4166.67 lb/ft
Note: Winter flows at the project site are low. Therefore it will be assumed that the ice will act at 2yr flow level.
Hydrostatic Loading (WAstatic)
Stream Pressure (WAstream)Stream pressure will be applied as a uniform load on the walkway columns.
Drag coefficient, CD = 1.4 Ref 2, Table 3.7.3.1-1, debris lodged against pier
River
Event Velocity (fps)Pressure (ksf/ft of wall) Pressure (kips/ft )
Extreme 500 3.56 0.01774304 0.014785867Usual 25 3.31 0.01533854 0.012782117Ice Condition 2 2.66 0.00990584 0.008254867
Load Cases
Notes:
- Extreme 1 includes earthquake loads.- Extreme 2 (check flood) relates to the extreme hydraulic event.- Extreme 2 (ice) relates to ice loading.
Strength 1 (25-year event): 1.25DL+1.75LL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+0.5T
Strength 3 (Wind parallel to flow in u/s direction): 1.25DL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W+0.5T
Strength 3 (Wind parallel to flow in d/s direction): 1.25DL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W+0.5T
Strength 3 (Wind perpendicular to flow): 1.25DL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+1.4W+0.5T
Extreme 1: 1.25DL+0.5LL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+1.0EQ+1.0S
Extreme 2 (Check Flood): 1.0DL+0.5LL+1.0I+1.0WAstatic,500+1.0WAstream,500
Service 1 (Wind parallel to flow in d/s direction): 1.0DL+1.0LL+1.0WAstatic,25+WAstream,25+.3W+1.0T
Service 1 (Wind parallel to flow in u/s direction): 1.0DL+1.0LL+1.0WAstatic,25+WAstream,25+.3W+1.0T
Service 1 (Wind perpendicular to flow): 1.0DL+1.0LL+1.0WAstatic,25+WAstream,25+.3W+1.0T
Service 2: 1.0DL+1.3LL+1.0WAstatic,25+1.0WAstream,25+1.0TFatigue 1: 1.0LL+1.0W
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Note: Loadings will be placed into STAAD to determine design bending moments and shear. The loads shown below will be in addition to loads placed on the platform and transferred to the columns through the girders.
- Strength 3 (wind) is the load combination relating the bridge exposed to high wind velocities. The load combination will considered for winds parallel to flow in the d/s direction), winds parallel to flow in the u/s direction and winds perpendicular to flow. These wind conditions will cover the worst loading conditions for the upstream walkway columns, platform columns and biaxial bending in the walkway columns.
Because the lamprey trap platform will be considered a flow through structure and that, due to the platforms location, there will not be any anticipated hydrostatic pressure differential, the hydrostatic loading will not be considered.
- Service 1 is the load combination relating to the normal operation use of the bridge with high winds. Similar to the Strength 3 load combination winds parallel to flow in both the u/s and d/s directions as well as winds perpendicular to flow will be considered.
1000
2VCp D=1000
2VCp D=
Page 2 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
STAAD RESULTS
A STAAD Model Was Developed - Refer To E. Au Gres Platform.std
VMAX: 2.910 KIPS (Strong Axis)Load Cond: Beam 56, Extreme 2 (Used to be conservative)
VMAX: 0.575 KIPS (Weak Axis)Load Cond: Beam 58, Strength 1
MZ: 13.19 K-FT Strong Axis BendingLoad Cond: Beam 56, Extreme 2
MY: 4.25 K-FT Weak Axis BendingLoad Cond: Beam 58, Strength 1
PMAX = 9.906 KIPS Axial LoadLoad Cond: Beam 48, Strength 1
Design Primary Girder
Design Beam Section: W10x49
Beam PropertiesSpan, L= 13.00 ft (Actual Height above grade is 11 ft, 2 ft has been allowed for scour.)
Flange Width, bf= 10 inFlange Thickness, tf= 0.56 in
Beam Depth, d= 10 inWeb Depth for Shear, D= 8.88 in
Web Thickness, tw= 0.34 inMoment of Inertia, Iy= 93.4 in4
Section Modulus, Sx= 54.6 in3
Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in4
Moment of Inertia (x-axis), Ix= 272 in4
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.8.2.3-4)
Distance Between Flange Centroids, h= 9.44 inDepth of the Web in Compression, Dc= 4.44
rt= 2.859628217 inSteel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
Lower Unbraced Limit, Lp= 5.74 ft
(Reference 2, 6.10.8.2.3-5)
rt= 2.86 inUpper Unbraced Length Limit, Lr= 18.03 ft
Unbraced Length, Lb= 13.00 ft (Actual Height above grade is 8 ft, 2 ft has been allowed for scour.)h/tw= 27.76470588
Check Cross Section Proportion Limits (REF 2 Section 6.10.2)
Web Proportion Limits
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.1-1)(No Longitudinal Web Stiffeners)
D/tw= 29.41176471 OK
Flange Proportion Limits(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-1)
λf=bf/2tf= 8.928571429 OK
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-2)
bf= 10 inD/6= 1.666666667 in OK
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.1.2-3)
tf= 0.561.1tw= 0.374 OK
ytp F
ErL 0.1=
150≤wt
D
0.122
≤f
f
tb
6Db f ≥
wf tt 1.1≥
yrtr F
ErL π=
Page 3 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
(Ref 2 Eqn 6.10.2.2.2-4)
Iyc= 272 in4
Iyt= 272 in4
Iyc/Iyt= 1 OK
Size W-Shape BeamYield Stress, Fy= 50 ksi
Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 13.2 ft-kipsφ= 1.00 (Ref 2 Section 6.5.4.2)
Required Section Modulus, Sreq= 3.17 in3
Calculate Applied Bending Stresses
Strong Axis BendingMaximum Bending Moment, Mu= 13.19 ft-kips
Beam Strong Axis Section Modulus, Sx= 54.60 in3
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50.00 ksiApplied Bending Stress, Fb= 2.90 ksi
Weak Axis Bending Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 4.25 ft-kips
Beam Weak Axis Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in3
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiApplied Bending Stress, Fb= 2.73 ksi
Checks
Check if shape is compact
Shape must satisfy both of the following criteria to be considered compact.
1) (Ref 2 Section 6.10.8.2.2-4)
Flange Width, bf= 10 inFlange Thickness, tf= 0.56 in
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
bf/2tf= 8.930.38√(E/Fy) 9.152
bf/tf < 0.38(E/Fy)^0.5 Therefore Shape Meets Compact Criteria
2) (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.2-4)
Steel Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksiModulus of Elasticity, E= 29000 ksi
2D/tw= 26.125.7*E/√Fy= 137.27
Shape Meets Non-Compact Criteria
Both Criteria are satisfied, therefore, Rb=1
Check Lateral Torsional Buckling
101.0 ≤≤yt
yc
II
req
uy S
MFφ
=
yf
f
FE
tb
38.02
≤
yw
c
FE
tD 7.52
≤
Page 4 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Unbraced Length, Lb= 13.00 ftLower Unbraced Limit, Lp= 5.74 ftUpper Unbraced Limit, Lr= 18.03 ft
Lp<Lb<Lr
Moment Gradient Modifier, Cb= 1 ConservativeCompression Flange Yield Stress incl Residual Stress Effects,
Fyr= 35 ksi Taken as 0.7Fyc
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)Web Load Shedding Factor, Rb= 1 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.2)
Compression Flange Yield Strength, Fyc= 50 ksi
Lateral Torsional Buckling Resistance, Fnc= 41.14 ksiLateral Torsional Buckling Resistance, Mn=FncSx= 187.181 kip-ft
Check DeflectionDeflections as determined from the STAAD ModelFor the column, because LL listed in the load combinations is vertical, the maximum deflection that is reported is the maximum from Service Load Combinations.
Maximum Service Deflection, δmax= 0.0150 inL/360= 0.4333 in
Deflection Less than L/360, OK
Entire Beam Cross SectionCheck Strong Axis Shear
Fyw= 50 ksiD= 8.88 intw= 0.34 in
D/tw= 26.117647061.12√(Ek/Fyw)= 60.31
1.4√(Ek/Fyw)= 75.39C= 1 (6.10.9.3.2-6) (k=5 assume no stiffeners are present)
Nominal Shear Capacity of Girder, Vn= 87.56 kipsΦ= 1.00
Factored Shear Capacity, ΦVn= 87.56 kips
Page 5 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Check Weak Axis ShearNote: For weak axis shear D=bf and tw=tf.
Fyw= 50 ksiD= 10.00 intw= 0.56 in
D/tw= 17.857142861.12√(Ek/Fyw)= 60.31
1.4√(Ek/Fyw)= 75.39C= 1 (6.10.9.3.2-6) (k=5 assume no stiffeners are present)
Nominal Shear Capacity of Girder, Vn= 162.40 kipsΦ= 1.00
Factored Shear Capacity, ΦVn= 162.40 kips
Check Web Bend Buckling Resistance
Modulus of Elasiticity, E= 29000 ksiBend-Buckling Coefficient, k= 36 (doubly symetric I-shaped section)
Beam Depth, d= 10 inWeb Thickness, tw= 0.34 inHybrid Factor, Rh= 1
Fy= 50 ksiRhFy= 50 ksi
Fy/0.7= 71.429 ksiFcrw= 1086.18 ksi
Web Bend-Buckling Resistance, Mn=FcrwSx= 227.50 kip-ft
Page 6 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Φ= 1Web Bend-Buckling Capacity, ΦMn=ΦFcrwSx= 227.5 kip-ft
Maximum Bending Moment, Mu= 13.2 kip-ftWeb Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Permanent Deformation at Sevice Limit State
Maximum Strong Axis Bending Moment for Service II, MII = 5.763 ft-kipsMaximum Weak Axis Bending Moment for Service II, MII = 1.355 ft-kips
Beam Strong Axis Section Modulus, Sx= 54.60 in3
Beam Weak Axis Section Modulus, Sy= 18.7 in3
Flange Yield Stress, Fyf= 50.00 ksiHybrid Factor, Rh= 1.0 (Ref 2 Section 6.10.1.10.1)
Strong Axis Flange Stress, ff= 1.266575092 ksiWeak Axis Flange Stress, fl= 0.869679144 ksi
= 1.701414664 ksi
= 40 ksi
Flange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check Combined Bending Stresses
Flange Bending Stress, fbu= 2.90 ksiFlange Lateral Bending Stress, fl= 2.73 ksi
Φ= 1 (6.5.4.2)Flange Capacity, Fnc= 41.14 ksi (Flange is Compact)
fbu+1/3fl= 3.808381031 ksiFlange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Check:
Flange Capacity, Fyc= 50 ksifbu+fl= 5.63 ksi
Hybrid Factor, Rh= 1.00Φ= 1 (6.5.4.2)
ΦRhFyc= 50 ksiFlange Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Girder Design Summary
Failure Mode Capacity Required CheckFlexure (Section Modulus) 54.60 3.17 OKLateral Torsional Buckling (Bending Moment ft-kips) 187.181 13.19 OKShear (Kips) 87.56 2.910 OKWeak Axis Flexure (Bending Moment ft-kips) 77.92 4.25 OK
Beam Size: W10x49Beam Material: A572 Grade 50
Page 7 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Compression Members
Check Limiting Slenderness Ratio for Bracing Member
Effective Length Factor, K = 1.2 (Ref 2 Section 4.6.2.5-1)Unbraced Length, L 13 ftGoverning Radius of Gyration, rs 2.54 in Z-Axis Governs
(Ref 2 Section 6.9.3)
KL/rs= 73.7 OKKL/rs ≤ 120 Therefore, shape meets limiting slenderness requirement
Check for Slender Elements
Check Flange
Half of Width of Flange, b = 5 inFlange Thickness, t = 0.56 in
Plate Buckling Coefficient, k = 0.56 (Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)Modulus of Elasticity, E = 29000 ksi
Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksi
(Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)
b/t = 8.9k√(E/Fy) 13.5
Flange is non-slender
Check Web
T-Dimension of Beam, b = 7.5 inWeb Thickness, t = 0.34 in
Plate Buckling Coefficient, k = 1.4 (Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)Modulus of Elasticity, E = 29000 ksi
Yield Strength, Fy = 50 ksi
(Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)
b/t = 22.1k√(E/Fy) 33.7
Web is non-slender
Determine Axial Compression
For non-slender, noncomposite, I Shaped flexural buckling must be checked. Kzlz=Kyly therefore torsional buckling is not applicable
Flexural Buckling
Gross cross-sectional area, Ag = 14.4 in2
(Reference 2 6.9.4.1.2-1)
Elastic Critical Buckling Resistance, Pe = 758.8 kips
For compression member cross-sections that consists entirely of non-slender elements take Q=1.0 (Reference 2 6.9.4.2.1)
Equivalent Nominal Yield Resistance, Po = QFyAg = 720.00 kipsPe/Po = 1.05 OK
Since Pe/Po > 0.44 use equation 6.9.4.1.1-1 from reference 2.
(Reference 2 6.9.4.1.1-1)
Pn = 484.00 kips
Available Strength, Pr = ΦcPn 338.8 kipsUltimate Load, PMAX = 9.91 kips
PMAX < Pr OK
(Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)
(Φc = 0.7 for undamaged piles subjected to axial compression)
(Ref 2 Section 6.9.4.2.1-1)
120L≤
srK
yFEk
tb≤
g
s
e A
rKL
EP 2
2
=
π
0658.0 PP e
oPP
n
=
yFEk
tb≤
Page 8 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
Calculate Moment MagnifierBecause the columns are subject to both axial loads and bending, they will be analyzed as a Beam Column.
Modulus of Elasticity, E = 29000.00 ksiMoment of Inertia (x-axis), Ix= 272.00 in4
Moment of Inertia, Iy= 93.40 in4
Effective Length Factor, K = 1.20 (Ref 2 Section 4.6.2.5)Unbraced Length, lu= 13.00 ft
Euler Buckling Load (Strong Axis), Pe= 2221.54 KipsEuler Buckling Load (Weak Axis), Pe= 762.84 Kips
Maximum Axial Load, Pu = 9.91 Kips
Cm= 1.00 (Ref 2 Section 4.5.3.2.2b)Stiffness Reduction Factor, φK= 1.00 (Steel Member)
Strong Axis δb= 1.00Weak Axis δb= 1.01
Strong Axis δs= 1.00Weak Axis δs= 1.01
M2b= 0 ft-kips
Moment due to lateral applied loads, M2s= 13.2 ft-kips (Strong Axis)Moment due to lateral applied loads, M2s= 4.25 ft-kips (Weak Axis)
Magnified Moment due to lateral applied loads, δsM2s= 13.25 ft-kips (Strong Axis)Magnified Moment due to lateral applied loads, δsM2s= 4.31 ft-kips (Weak Axis)
Check Combined Axial and Bending Capacity
Applied Axial Force, Pu = 9.91 kipsFactored Compressive Resistance, Pr= 338.8 kips
Pu/Pr = 0.02923827Use Eqn. 6.9.2.2-1
Factored Strong Axis Flexural Resistance, Mrx = 187.18 kip-ftFactored Weak Axis Flexural Resistance, Mry = 77.92 kip-ft
Factored Flexural Strong Axis Applied Amplified Moment, Mux = 13.25 kip-ftFactored Flexural Weak Axis Applied Amplified Moment, Muy = 4.31 kip-ft
The connections from the primary load carrying girders to the columns apply the gravity loads to the center of the column resulting in no moment in the column and no defelection at the midpoint of the member, therefore for both the strong and weak axis,
For the combined axial and bending capacity check, the maximum axial capacity will be combined with the maximum bending moments from different load cases. This will be done due to the fact that the stress driving the high extreme load case for bending moments is ice forces. The extent of ice and debris along with its elevation is not known, therefore by including the extreme bending moment, the overall result will be conservative. Once additional data is obtained regarding the ice/debris loading, the analysis will be modified.
Page 9 of 9
PROJECT TITLE: DATE:
East Au Gres River Sea Lamprey Trap 2/19/2015
COMPUTATION TITLE: CHECKED BY: DATE:
Platform Column Design BJG 4/29/2015
COMPUTED BY:
Maria Post-Fitzgerald
= 0.140668246 (6.9.2.2-1)
= 0.141281924 (6.9.2.2-2)
Combined Force Ratio = 0.140668246
Column Has Sufficient Capacity, OK
Page 1 of 2
COMPUTED BY: DATE:
Post-Fitzgerald 4/22/2015CHECKED BY: DATE:
Gerken 4/30/2015
Beams - W10x49, Gr 50
Length of girder = 78 ftWeight of girder = 49 plf
Total weight of girders = 1.911 ton
Columns - W10x49, Gr 50
Length of girder = 322 ftWeight of girder = 49 plf
Total weight of girders = 7.889 ton
Column Base Plates
Base Plate Width = 10.25 inBase Plate Length = 10.25 in
Base Plate Thickness = 0.375 inBase Plate Unit Weight = 15.3 psf
Quantity = 9Total weight of girders = 0.050233008 ton
Solid Plates For Trap Inlet
Plate Height = 5.0833 ft Plate Length = 6.4792 ft
Plate Thickness = 0.5 in Plate Unit Weight = 20.4192 psf Grade A36
Quantity = 3Total weight of plates = 1.0087815 ton
Steel Angle For Trap (L4x4x3/8)
Length of Angle = 44 ftWeight of angle = 9.8 plf
Total weight of angle = 0.2156 ton
3/4" A325 Bolts w/ Nuts and Washers
Number of Bolts 64 EA
Welds
1/4" Fillet WeldsLength of Weld For Angles = 88 ft
Length of Weld for Plate = 0 ftLength of Weld for Base Plates = 30.75 ft
Length of Weld for Trap Inlet Plates= 4.319466667 ft 8 welds @ 5' each
Total Length of 1/4" Fillet Weld = 123.07 ft
Primary Frame Members (L2x2x1/4)Length of Angle = 78 ftWeight of angle = 3.19 plf
Total weight of angles = 0.12441 ton
Lifting Bar (WT4x6.5)Length of WT = 4 ft
Weight of WT = 6.5 plfTotal weight of WT = 0.013 ton
Steel Mesh (Approximate Opening Size 1/4")
Mesh Area = 80 sfConcrete Slab For Trap
Total Slab Area = 50.38 sfEstimated Slab Thickness = 10.00 in
Total Slab Volume = 1.55 CY
Concrete Slab Reinforcement (Assume #4 Bars in Both Directions in Each Face of Slab)
Length of Bar Per SF= 8.00 ftArea of Slab = 50.38 sf
Total Length of Bar = 403.03 ftUnit Weight of Bar = 0.67 lb/ft
PROJECT TITLE:
E Au Gres Sea Lamprey TrapCOMPUTATION TITLE:
Quantity Takeoffs - Alternative 3
(The Lamprey Traps will be fully designed during the next phase of the project, however, based on photos of existing structures the following quantities were developed. The traps will measure 4' W x 4' D x 5' H)
(Welds will be used to secure the steel plates and angles for the traps and to secure the base plates to the column.)
Page 2 of 2
COMPUTED BY: DATE:
Post-Fitzgerald 4/22/2015CHECKED BY: DATE:
Gerken 4/30/2015
PROJECT TITLE:
E Au Gres Sea Lamprey TrapCOMPUTATION TITLE:
Quantity Takeoffs - Alternative 3Total Weight = 0.134610684 Ton
Steel Grating
Total Grating Area = 225.00 sf (Scaled From MS)
Jib Crane (1/2 Ton Capacity)Total Number of Cranes 1.00 EA
Galvanized Steel Hand RailTotal Length of Handrail 55.00 ft
SSP for Access Road Stabilization (Assume PZ 22)
Length of SSP = 78.572 ft (From Microstation)Height of SSP = 32.5 ft (CWALSHT)Weight of SSP = 22 psf
Total weight of SSP = 28.08949 ton
SSP for Barrier (Assume PZ 22)
Length of SSP = 8.3 ft (From Microstation)Height of SSP = 16.5 ft (CWALSHT)Weight of SSP = 22 psf
Total weight of SSP = 1.50645 ton
SSP for East Bank SSP Wall Rehab (Assume PZ 22) (Length of Wall Equivalent For Demolition Section)
Length of SSP = 47 ft (From Microstation)Height of SSP = 34 ft (CWALSHT)Weight of SSP = 22 psf
Total weight of SSP = 17.578 ton
12" Sluice Gate12" Wide x 3', Quantity= 1
Access Road and Ramp Gravel Quantity, .30 mile Access Road= 234.67 cy
Gravel Quantity, Access Ramp= 7.14 cy
Access Road GeotextileArea of Geotextile Required = 1408.00 SY
ATTACHMENT C
SOIL PROFILE
Project Title: £. Au csra:~ s.cr Computation Title: Sa1" f'l<l::;>-f!LL Date: 6(9., \rA~ 1;; Calculated By: t-Y Checked By: Page: ·;L of -:1..
us Army Corps of Engineers ~ Detroit District