ABSTRACTS
A box girder bridge is a special case of folded plate with closed cross section. Box girder bridges have proved to be very efficient structural solution for medium and long span bridges. Thin-walled box girder bridges are most economical. There are three box girder configurations commonly used in practice. Box girders can be constructed as Single cell (one box), multi-spine cell (separate boxes) or multi-cell (contiguous boxes or cellular shape). Analytically, however, the box girder bridge is a complex indeterminate problem. Several researches have been carried out on advanced analytical methods of analyzing thin-walled box girder bridge for many years in order to better understand the behavior of all types of box-girder bridges, the results of these different research works are dispersed and undervalued. Therefore, existing methods for analyzing box girder bridges need to be improved; such improvements will either seek to simplify existing methods or attempt to improve results accuracy.
The present work introduced the structural analysis of box girder bridges using Higher Order (HO4) Finite Strip which is an improvement to the existing higher order HO3 type. On account of its complexity, a MATLAB Computer program for determining structural response of thin-walled box girder bridges was developed using Higher Order (HO4) Flat Shell Strip. A simply supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder bridge was be adopted as the analytical structure. Validation of the theoretical formulations, which is synthesized in the proposed higher order (H04) finite strip computer program, was carried out by comparing the results obtained using the developed program with beam theory solution and the theoretical analysis results in published literature. Using three prototype models of simply supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder bridge i.e. model 1 (two-cell), model 2 (three-cell) and model 3 (four-cell) a numerical study of displacement and stress distributions was carried out to demonstrate the application of the theoretical formulations and developed computer program to the analysis of a typical simply supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder bridge subjected to vehicular loads. The analysis results were compared to the beam theory solution which does not include the effects of shear deformation. Results of analysis showed, among other findings that the effect of shear deformation were more in deflection than in stresses. Based on the results of analysis, distribution of stresses were studied, it was observed that the bending moments are resisted mainly by flanges whereas the shear stresses are resisted mainly by the webs. Investigating the effect of number of cells in a reinforced concrete box girder bridge using the developed model, the analysis results as presented in Tables (4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.11 - 4.19) and Figs.(4.4 – 4.12) showed that the Model 3 (four-cell) is the most efficient of the three prototype model in terms of strength properties – deflection and stress distribution. However, it will be more costly in construction than the other two. Therefore, the principles and programs developed in this research could be used in practice for the analysis of simply supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder bridge, box beam and folded plate structures.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRELIMINARIES
Front cover text
Title page i
Declaration ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Abstracts vi
Table of contents vii
List of Figures xi
List of Tables xiv
List of Symbols xvi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statement of the Problem 3
1.2 Objective of the Study 4
1.3 Significance of the Study 5
1.4 Scope of the Study 6
1.5 Limitations of the Study 6
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Structural responses 7
2.1.1 Primary responses 7
2.1.2 Secondary responses 7
2.2 Analytical methods for box girder bridges 8
2.3 Finite Segment Method/Modified Finite Segment Method 9
2.4 Folded Plate Method 11
2.5 Grillage Analogy Method 11
2.6 BEF/EBEF Method 13
2.7 Finite Difference Method 13
2.8 Energy Variation Principle 14
2.9 Thin –Walled Curved Beam Theory 16
2.10 Finite Element Method 18
2.11 Finite Strip Method 23
2.12 Experimental Studies 24
2.13 MATLAB Software 31
2.14 Other Computer Program 32
2.15 Deductions from Literature Review 33
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Higher Order (Ho4) Finite Strip In-Bending 35
3.1.1 Displacement functions 36
3.1.2 Strain matrix for bending 40
3.1.3 Stiffness matrix, k for bending 40
3.2 Higher Order (HO4) Finite Strip In Plane Stress 41
3.2.1 Displacement functions 42
3.2.2 Strain matric for in – plane 45
3.2.3 Stiffness matrix k for in-plane forces 46
3.3 Flat Shell Strip 46
3.4 Equilibrium Equation 47
3.5 Program Development 48
3.5.1 Algorithm 48
3.5.2 Flowchart 49
3.5.3 Program 51
3.6 Numerical Analysis 51
3.6.1 Description of the bridge and finite strip model for the simply supported box girder bridge 51
3.6.2 Numerical example 53
3.6.2.1 Description of the bridge and its loading 56
3.6.3 Beam theory solution 66
3.6.3.1 Calculations of maximum deflection using beam theory solution method 67
3.6.3.2 Calculations of maximum shear stress using beam theory solution method 70
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Results 75
4.1.1 Higher order (HO4) finite strip result (single cell simply supported box girder bridge) 75
4.1.2 Higher order (HO4) finite strip result (multi cell simply supported box girder bridge) 78
4.1.2.1 Maximum deflection 78
4.1.2.2 Transverse bending moment 80
4.1.2.3 Shear stress 81
4.1.2.4 Longitudinal normal stress 83
4.1.2.5 Longitudinal bending moment 86
4.1.3 Beam theory result (multi cell simply supported box girder bridge) 89
4.1.4 Distribution of shear stress 90
4.2 Discussion of Results 99
4.2.1 Development of higher order (h04) finite strip method 99
4.2.2 Development of MatLab computer program for higher order (h04) finite
strip analysis of multi-cell simply supported box girder bridges 100
4.2.3 Analysis of simply supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder bridge subjected to self weight and vehicular load 100
4.2.4 Validation of the developed higher order (HO4) finite strip model 102
4.2.5 Study of the effects of number of cells in a multi-cell simply supported reinforced concrete box girder bridge 103
4.2.5.1 Comparison of analysis result obtained for two – cell, three – cell and four – cell box girder bridge 104
4.2.5.2 Maximum deflection 104
4.2.5.3 Transverse bending moment 104
4.2.5.4 Shear stress 105
4.2.5.5 Longitudinal normal stress 106
4.2.5.6 Longitudinal bending moment 106
4.2.5.7 Twisting moment 107
4.2.6 Effect of number of cell in a reinforced concrete box girder bridge 107
4.2.7 Comparison of main results of the study with beam theory solution 108
4.2.8 Distribution of bending and shear stresses 108
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION, CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion 110
5.2 Contribution to Knowledge 111
5.3 Recommendation 111
REFERENCE 112
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 : Typical Cross-Section of Single Cell Box Girder Bridge 1
1.2 : Typical Cross-Section of Multi-spine Box Girder Bridge 1
1.3 : Typical Cross-Section of Multi-cell Box Girder Bridge 1
3.1 : Plane Strip HO4 36
3.2 : In-Plane Stress Strip HO4 42
3.3 : Flow Chart for Finite Strip Analysis of simply supported Thin-walled Box Girder Bridges 50
3.4: Longitudinal Section of simply supported Box Girder Bridge 52
3.5: Cross Section of Simply Supported Box Girder Bridge 52
3.6: The Finite Strip (11 Strips) Model showing 12 Nodal Lines for half of the symmetric bridge 52
3.7 : Longitudinal section of the simply supported multi-cell box girder bridge subjected to self-weight and vehicular load (AASHTO HS-25 TRUCK) at the middle of the bridge 53
3.8 : Plan of the four-lane box girder bridge loaded at the mid-span with Four AASHTO HS-25 design vehicle, cantilevered top flange and symmetrical line 53
3.9 : Cross Section of the Two Cell Four-Lane Simply Supported Box Girder Bridge showing wheel loads 54
3.10 : Cross Section of the Three Cell Four-Lane Simply Supported Box Girder Bridge showing wheel loads 55
3.11 : Cross Section of the Four Cell Four-Lane Simply Supported Box Girder Bridge showing wheel loads 55
3.12 : Model 1 cross-section showing nodal lines for half of two cell symmetrical box girder bridge 65
3.13 : Model 2 Cross-section showing nodal lines for half of three cell symmetrical box girder bridge 65
3.14: Model 3 cross-section showing nodal lines for half of four cell symmetrical box girder bridge 66
3.15: Two-cell Box Girder Bridge Section 67
3.16: Section Showing Shaded portion at Upper Flange 70
3.17: Section Showing Shaded portion at Upper Flange and Webs 71
3.18: Section Showing Shaded portion at Bottom Flange 73
4.1: Deflection 75
4.2: Transverse Bending Moment 75
4.3: Longitudinal Normal Stress 76
4.4: Dead Load Deflection for various cells 79
4.5: Live Load Deflection for various cells 79
4.6: Deflection for combined load 79
4.7: Transverse bending moment due to dead load 80
4.8: Transverse bending moment due to live load 81
4.9: Transverse bending moment due to combined load case 81
4.10: Shear Stress due to Dead Load Case 82
4.11: Shear Stress due to Live Load Case 83
4.12: Shear Stress for Combined Load Cases 83
4.13: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Dead Load Case (Bottom Flange) 84
4.14: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Live Load Case (Bottom Flange) 85
4.15: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Combined Load Cases (Bottom Flange) 85
4.16: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Dead Load Case (Top Flange) 85
4.17: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Live Load Case (Top Flange) 86
4.18: Longitudinal Normal Stress due to Combined Load Cases (Top Flange) 86
4.19: Longitudinal Bending Moment due to Dead Load Cases (Top Flange) 87
4.20: Longitudinal Bending Moment due to Live Load Cases (Top Flange) 88
4.21: Longitudinal Bending Moment due to Combined Load Cases (Top Flange) 88
4.22: Longitudinal Bending Moment due to Dead Load Cases (Bottom Flange) 88
4.23: Longitudinal Bending Moment due to Live Load Cases (Bottom Flange) 89
4.24: Longitudinal Bending Moment for Combined Load Cases (Bottom Flange) 89
LIST OF TABLES
3.1: Material Properties of the Bridge 56
3.2: Geometrical Properties of the Two-Cell Box Girder Bridge Model 57
3.3: Geometrical Properties of the Three-Cell Box Girder Bridge Model 57
3.4: Geometrical Properties of the Four-Cell Box Girder Bridge Model 58
3.5: Data for the Analysis of Model 1 with Two – Cells and 44 Finite Strips 58
3.6: Data for the Analysis of Model 2 with Three – Cells and 46 Finite Strips 60
3.7: Data for the Analysis of Model 3 with Four – Cells and 48 Finite Strips 62
4.1: Deflection 76
4.2: Transverse Bending Moment 77
4.3: Stresses 77
4.4: Maximum Deflection for different model of Box Girder Bridge in mm. (Top Flange) 78
4.5 : Maximum transverse bending moment for different model of box girder bridge in KNm/m (Top Flange) 80
4.6 : Shear Stress for Different Model of Box Girder Bridge in MPa (Neutral Axis of the Middle Web) 82
4.7 : Longitudinal Normal Stress for Different Model of Box Girder Bridge at the Top and Bottom Flanges 84
4.8 : Longitudinal Bending Moment for different model of Box Girder Bridge at the Top and Bottom Flange 87
4.9 : Comparison of maximum deflection (m) 90
4.10 : Maximum longitudinal normal stress (MPa) 90
4.11 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 3) 91
4.12 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 2) 92
4.13 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 1) 92
4.14 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Dead Load Case (Model 3) 93
4.15 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Dead Load Cases (Model 2) 94
4.16 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Dead Load Cases (Model 3) 94
4.17 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Live Load Case (Model 3) 95
4.18 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Live Load Cases (Model 2) 96
4.19 : Maximum Shear Stress Distribution in Webs (MPa) for Live Load Cases (Model 3) 96
4.20: Maximum Shear Stress Distribution at Flange-Web Junction (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 3) 97
4.21: Maximum Shear Stress Distribution at Flange-Web Junction (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 2) 98
4.22: Maximum Shear Stress Distribution at Flange-Web Junction (MPa) for Combined Load Cases (Model 1) 99
LIST OF SYMBOLS
𝑚 Number of series terms
𝑢 In-plane displacement component in the x direction In-plane
𝑣 Displacement component in the y direction
𝑤 Deflection component in the z direction
𝑤𝑖 Deflection amplitude (in the z direction) at the nodal line i
𝑤𝑗 Deflection amplitude (in the z direction) at the nodal line j
𝑤𝑘 Deflection amplitude (in the z direction) at the nodal line k
𝑤𝑝 Deflection amplitude (in the z direction) at the nodal line p
𝜃𝑖 Transverse slope amplitude at the nodal line i
𝜃𝑗 Transverse slope amplitude at the nodal line j
𝜃𝑘 Transverse slope amplitude at the nodal line k
𝜃𝑝 Transverse slope amplitude at the nodal line p
𝑢𝑖 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the x direction) at the nodal line i
𝑢𝑗 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the x direction) at the nodal line j
𝑢𝑘 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the x direction) at the nodal line k
𝑢𝑝 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the x direction) at the nodal line p
𝑣𝑖 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the y direction) at the nodal line i
𝑣𝑗 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the y direction) at the nodal line j
𝑣𝑘 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the y direction) at the nodal line k
𝑣𝑝 In-plane displacement amplitude (in the y direction) at the nodal line p
{𝛿𝑏}𝑚 Vector of displacement parameters, where the subscript b denotes bending
{𝛿𝑝}𝑚 Vector of displacement parameters, where the subscript b denotes bending [𝑘𝑏]𝑚 Stiffness Matrix for strip bending, where the subscript b denotes bending [𝑘𝑝]𝑚 Stiffness Matrix for In-plane, where the subscript p denotes In-plane
[𝐵𝑏]𝑚 Strain Matrix for strip bending, where the subscript b denotes bending
[𝐵𝑝]𝑚 Strain Matrix for In-plane, where the subscript p denotes In-plane
[𝐷] Elasticity Matrix
[𝑁𝑏] Matrix of Transverse shape functions called Hermitian cubic polynominals subscript b denote bending
[𝑁𝑝] Matrix of Transverse shape functions called Hermitian cubic polynominals subscript b denote In-Plane
𝐾 Structure Stiffness Matrix
𝑑 Displacement Vector
𝐹 Force Vector
𝛾 Specific Gravity
𝐿 Length of Span
W Effective Width of Bridge
B1 Effective Width of Cantilever
B5 Effective Width of one cell (Two-cell box girder)
B4 Effective Width of one cell (Three-cell box girder)
B2 Effective Width of one cell (Four-cell box girder)
𝐿𝑠 Length of Strip
Tt Thickness of Top Flange
Tb Thickness of Bottom Flange
Tw Thickness of Web
𝐷𝑤 Depth of the web
𝑊𝑡 Width of the top flange
𝑊𝑏 Width of the bottom flange
𝐴 Area
A1 Area of the upper flange
A2 Area of the 3 webs
A3 Area of the bottom flange
𝑄 Shear Force
𝑟 Shear Stress
𝑀 Moments
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A box girder bridge is regarded as a special case of folded plate with closed cross section. Box girder bridges proved to be very efficient structural solution for bridges of medium and long span. The most economical are the thin-walled box girder bridges. There are three types of box girders that are widely used in practice. Box girders can be categorized as single cells (one box), multiple boxes (separate boxes) or multi-cells (contiguous boxes or cellular shape). It can be constructed together with the deck or afterwards, the deck can be constructed separately. The box girders are made up of pre-stressed concrete, reinforced concrete or structural steel. Box girders can be categorized as circular, trapezoidal and rectangular depending on its form (Savio and Reshma 2017).
Fig. 1.1: Typical single cell box girder bridge cross-section
Fig. 1.2: Typical multispine box girder bridge cross-section
Fig. 1.3: Typical multicell box girder bridge cross-section
However, analytically, the box girder bridge is an indeterminate structure. Vlasov (1961a, 1961b, and 1965) provided the fundamental solution for analyzing thin- walled box girder bridges using the theory of Thin-Walled Beam. Several researchers and scholars have since approached the analytical problem with different other methods [Wen (2011); Zhao et al., 2016; Ankush & Mamadapur, 2016; Kumar & Shilpa, 2016; Shuqin, 2016; Feng et al., 2017; Pragya & Bokare, 2017; Gajera et al., 2017; Najla & Priyanka, 2017; Bhagwat et al., 2017; Huili et al., 2017; Khadiranaikar and Venkateshwar, (2016); Wang et al. (2017); Feng et al., 2017; Zhao, 2017; Nalawade et al., 2018; Xue et al., 2018]. In the present research work, the finite strip approach of structural analysis will be used. It is one of the advanced approaches such as the system of finite elements. Cheung (1968A) first introduced the Lower Order Finite Strip Method (LO2) to analyze simply supported plates and extended it to rectangular slabs with general end boundary conditions (Cheung, 1968B). Independently, Power and Ogden (1969) develop the finite strip approach for the rectangular slab bridge analysis. Cheung (1969B) examined curved slab and box girder bridges, using the lower order finite strip.
In 1971, Loo and Cusens implemented a finite strip approach with one inner nodal line (higher order finite strip, HO3). In 1971, Cheung and Cheung used the approach to examine cut conical shaped structures. This method (HO3) has an advantage over the lower order (LO2) because it is more refined and as such converges faster with more accurate result than the lower order method.
The present work seeks an improvement over the Higher Order (HO3) finite strip method by introducing the Higher Order (HO4) finite strip method in which the strip has two internal nodal lines. The concept assumed a higher level of refinement over the HO3 type. Higher order (HO4) flat shell strips will be fully formulated in this work and then applied to the simply supported thin-walled box girder bridge analysis so as to examine the effect of number of cells on the static behaviour of simply supported thin-walled box girder bridges made of reinforced concrete. For example, the analytical rigors involved in higher order (HO4) finite strip method are supposed to be higher than those of the HO3 and lower order (LO2) forms.
MATLAB software will be used to formulate a computer program for the determination of structural behaviour. Shear deformation effects are included in the structural responses determined using Higher Order (HO4) finite strip model. Therefore, all parametric studies will be examined using this developed model. Finally, the results of the structural analysis obtained with the developed model will be compared with the beam theory solution which does not include the effect of shear deformation.
1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This work introduces the structural analysis of box girder bridges using Higher Order (HO4) Finite Strip Method, an improvement to the earlier established HO3 form of higher order. Although, several researches have been carried out on advanced analytical methods of analyzing thin-walled box girder bridge for many years in order to better understand the behavior of all types of box-girder bridges, the results of these different research works are dispersed and undervalued (Ezeokpube, 2015).
Therefore, existing methods for analyzing box girder bridges need to be improved; such improvements will either seek to simplify existing methods or attempt to improve results accuracy. The present work seek an improvement over the Higher Order (HO3) finite strip method by introducing the Higher order (HO4) finite strip method in which the strip has two internal nodal lines. The concept of higher order (HO4) assumed a higher level of refinement over the HO3 type, so it is expected that results will be improved in accuracy. Due to its complexity, the Higher Order (HO4) Flat Shell Strip Model will be used to develop a MATLAB Computer program to assess the structural response of thin-walled box girder. The analytical design shall be implemented as a simple supported thin-walled multi-cell box girder.
The Load considered includes Dead Load (Self-weight), Live Load (Vehicular Loading) and Combined Load Cases (Dead Load + Live Load). The bridge model is a thin-walled four-lane simply supported reinforced concrete box girder bridge. The dimensions of the bridge are chosen so as to fully obey the thin-walled cross-section theory [Kurian and Menon (2007)]. In this review, Higher Order (HO4) Flat Shell Strip will be fully developed and then applied to the Simply Supported Thin-Walled Box Girder Bridge analysis to investigate the effect of the number of cells on the static reaction of a reinforced concrete clearly supported thin walled box girder.
Box Girder Bridge will be categorized in three (3) models, i.e. two-cell, three-cell and four-cell box girders Fig. 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5. For all model the carriage width is kept unchanged as 14.64 m and on both sides the footpath is 1.83 m. The boundary condition is simply supported; span of 48 m with l/d ratio of 25, depth of the box girder is 1.92 m. The webs on the top and bottom flanges are normal; the top flanges are cantilevered due to economical and aesthetic reasons. At the middle span, each bridge lane is subjected to the model vehicle One Standard AASHTO HS-25. A total of four vehicles are centrally located at the four-lane bridge's mid-span. Just half of the bridge is tested for symmetry.
All parametric studies, however, must be evaluated using this computer program developed. Ultimately, compare the results of the analysis obtained using the developed program for 2-cell, 3-cell and 4-cell with the published literature and beam theory solution that totally omit influence of shear deformation.
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objective of this study is to formulate a higher-order (HO4) flat shell strip model and then apply it to the simply supported thin-walled box girder bridge assessment so as to examine the effect of number of cells on the static behavior of reinforced concrete simply supported thin-walled box girder bridges.
And, the specific objectives are to:
(i) Develop a MATLAB computer program based on higher-order (HO4) flat shell model for analyzing a simple supported thin walled multi-cell (two, three and four-cell) box girder bridge including shear deformation effects.
(ii) Use the developed computer program to investigate the effects of number of cells on the static behaviour of a reinforced concrete simply supported thin- walled multi-cell (two, three and four-cell) box girder bridges subjected to dead load (self-weight), live load (vehicular load) and combined load cases (dead load + live load) in terms of strength properties – deflection and stress distribution.
(iii) Finally, the results of the study for two, three and four-cell box girder bridges, are compared with the results of the beam theory approach that does not include the effect of shear deformation and other experimental findings in published literature.
1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Because of its improved stability, serviceability, economy, artistic attractiveness and structural performance, the use of box girder is increasing in popularity in bridge engineering community (Bhivgade, 2016). Box girders are an efficient form of bridge construction because they have reduced weight with optimum flexural rigidity and strength. Box girders have high torsional rigidity and strength compared to an equivalent open cross section member (John & Prasad, 2017).
Significantly, box girder bridge could be a solution for potential problem of traffic growth in Nigeria due to its efficient dispersal of congested traffic, economic considerations and aesthetic beauty, as the hollow portion of such bridges could be used as subways for pedestrian traffic and to accommodate facilities such as public utilities and drainage systems.
Although, several researches have been carried out on advanced analytical methods of analyzing thin-walled box girder bridge for many years in order to better understand the behavior of all types of box-girder bridges, the results of these different research works are dispersed and undervalued (Ezeokpube, 2015). Therefore, existing methods for analyzing box girder bridges need to be improved; such improvements will either seek to simplify existing methods or attempt to improve results accuracy. The present work seek an improvement over the Higher Order (HO3) finite strip method by introducing the Higher order (HO4) finite strip method in which the strip has two internal nodal lines. The concept of higher order (HO4) assumed a higher level of refinement over the HO3 type, so it is expected that results will be improved in accuracy. Significantly, the developed method, higher order (HO4) finite strip model as presented will serve as a preliminary work and a leading research method in the field engineering analysis where very high level of accuracy is of outmost importance.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Using a high-order (HO4) finite strip method, elastic analysis of simply supported thin walled box girder bridge shall be performed to determine the static response that includes the effect of shear deformation. Study of dynamic and stability analysis are outside the scope of this work.
1.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
One of the limitations experienced during compilation of this research work is modeling the developed method {high order (HO4) finite strip model} in MatLab computer program. However, after further research and comprehensive training on MatLab computer program, I was able to overcome by applying the necessary methodologies and commands. Nevertheless, the major limitation of this work is that the fixed support and the continuous bridge structure were not addressed.
Login To Comment