DEFLECTION AND EXPANSION JOINTS

Joints in bridges fall into two categories: deflection joints and expansion joints.

4.14.1 Deflection Joints

Contrary to what the name implies, deflection joints, when placed in concrete barriers and parapets, are used primarily to minimize the vertical shrinkage cracking that would otherwise occur in long, unjointed panels. Some states permit a longitudinal spacing of joints as great as 30 ft (9.1 m) in simple spans. Over piers of continuous bridges, the spacing is generally less, 7.5 ft (2.3 m) or closer. Preformed joint filler is used to form the joints and is left in place. Sometimes the placement of parapet concrete is required to be done in two stages, with placement of alternate panels only in the first stage, to facilitate placement of the joint filler.

When barriers are permitted to be slipformed, the deflection joints are sawn an inch or so deep on the periphery of the barrier, and then caulked with a joint sealer. In this case, the steel is not made discontinuous at the joints. Slipforming is a much faster way of constructing barriers, but the finished appearance, especially the straightness of the top, is sometimes rather crude compared with conventionally formed barriers.

Deflection joints can extend full depth of the barrier or parapet, or through only the top portion. Deflection joints in the New Jersey safety-shape barriers, when the concrete is placed in forms, are sometimes placed only above the curb portion of the barrier. In this case, the longitudinal reinforcing steel is continuous in the curb, but discontinuous at the joints above the curb. This usually results in reflection cracks developing in the curb below the joints.

It is also common, in spite of the joints, to see one or more vertical cracks between the joints in long panels. These cracks may be aggravated by bridge deflection but are caused primarily by shrinkage. The development of these cracks illustrates a rule of thumb applied to slabs on grade, that there will be a tendency to crack if the slab is longer than twice its width. However, the likelihood of ultimate damage to the bridge resulting from these unwanted cracks is small, and so the cost to provide more closely spaced joints is not justified.

Deflection joints are also used in the deck slab at piers or over transverse floor beams where the slab is not continuous (and sometimes when it is continuous), and at abutments where the bridge slab abuts the approach slab. Since the amount of movement is small, due only to rotation, the joint can be sealed with a small compression seal or with liquid joint sealer.

LEVELING CEILINGS

The older the house, the more likely its ceiling joists are sagging. If you’re gutting the old finish ceiling, the easiest way to create a flat, level plane for the drywall that will follow is to fasten light­weight steel studs to the old joists at a uniform height below the lowest joist (see p. 168).

With the aid of a helper, stretch a taut, level stringline perpendicular to existing joists at each end of the room and position each string lower than the bottom of the lowest joist so the studs won’t deflect it as you work. Here’s how:

1. Use a self-leveling laser level to establish a level line around the room that is % in. below the lowest point of your ceiling joists.

Подпись: bracing FOR A LOAD In addition to providing something solid to nail stud wall plates to, blocking also braces a floor, distributing loads between joists so that individual joists can carry roughly 10 percent to 15 percent more than unbraced joists. If you don't need solid blocking to nail wall plates to but still want to brace joists, consider installing bridging, which is metal or 1x4 wood pieces installed diagonally between joists. Bridging is generally easier and quicker to retrofit than solid blocking and interferes less with pipes and wires running in the joist bays. Where Walls Meet

image347

Where a new partition abuts an existing wall, cut back finish surfaces to the centers of the nearest stud on either side, and add studs to nail the partition to.

2. At this height, drive nails into the comers of the room. Stretch a taut string perpendicular to the ceiling joists at both ends of the room.

3. Line up the bottom edges of the steel studs Яв in. above these taut strings, as you and your helper screw studs to the faces of the ceiling joists. (The Иб-in. gap is necessary to avoid mov­ing the string and misaligning studs.)

4. Unless the ceiling is badly out of level (more than 1h in.), use 4-in.-wide steel studs. Lift the studs over the leveled strings, and lower each stud till its bottom edge is Ув in. above the strings.

5. Once the stud is correctly positioned, use 1-in. screws to attach it to the joist; stagger screws every 16 in. along the length of the stud. Place the screws back at least h in. from the lower edge of the joist. Use aviation snips to cut light (20-gauge to 25-gauge) steel framing.

Note: If the ceiling joists are undersize, rotted, or very springy, fix those conditions first. Screw­ing light steel to the joists won’t strengthen them appreciably.

STRAIGHTENING STUDS

Before installing drywall on recently gutted or newly erected stud walls, scrutinize them to make sure they’re flat. Stud variations of ‘/ in. (from flat) are generally acceptable, unless they’re in bathroom or kitchen walls—where studs should be within Me in. of flat. There, plumbed cabinets will make high and low spots glaringly obvious. Granted, you can scribe cabi­net backs to fit wavy walls, but it’s easier to straighten studs while they’re still exposed.

Eyeball walls for obvious discrepancies. Then stretch taut strings across the stud edges at several heights. If the studs aren’t flush to the top or sole plates, hammer them flush and screw on steel reinforcing-angles (see the photo on p. 61) to attach studs to the new position; more toenailing might split them. Next stretch a taut string, chest high, across the wall plane to find really high (protruding) and low (receding) spots. Mark them with a pencil. Finally, use a 6-ft. or 8-ft. level or straightedge to assess individual studs for bowing. Scribble symbols directly on stud edges, indicating high spots to be planed down, where studs bow toward you, and low spots to be built up, where studs bow away from you. Use special cardboard furring strips to build up the low spots.

Подпись: When studs bow into the room, use a power planer to plane down the high spots. Make the first pass over the high point of the bow; then make several successively longer passes to feather out the surface. Plane down high spots. Before power planing the high spots, use a magnet to scan the old studs for nails. Nails will destroy planer blades, so if the nails are too rusty or deep to pull, use a metal-cutting blade in a reciprocating saw to shave down the stud edges—a tedious process. If studs are nail free, plane down the high spots in several passes, starting at the middle of the high spot and gradually tapering out. Because knots are hard, they’ll take more passes. Use your straightedge to check your progress, and use taut strings to check the whole wall again after build­ing up or planing down the studs. Caution: Wear eye protection when using a power planer.

Common sense and “feel” are a big part of the straightening process: If all the studs in the wall have a slight bow inward or outward, the wall won’t be flat, but drywall covering it may look flat. In that case, leave the studs as they are.

Independent Tests Yield Clear Performance Comparisons

Fisette conducted independent testing of housewrap not to establish quantifiable data that mimicked real-world performance, but rather to subject the products to a set of sim­ple laboratory conditions to see how they compared. For more on Fisette’s testing, see www. umass. edu/bmatwt/publications.

According to Fisette’s research, the best housewraps (those that resist water infiltra­tion and also permit water vapor to evapo­rate) include Tyvek HomeWrap, R-Wrap by Berry Plastics™ Corporation, Typar® (manu­factured in 2003 or later), and—believe it or not—traditional #15 felt paper (see the side­bar on p. 75).

I prefer Tyvek, which scored well for resisting water penetration in the Massachu­setts study while also having one of the industry’s highest perm ratings for water- vapor diffusion. Although #15 felt paper costs less and scores well in all categories,

I like housewrap products because the vari­ety of sizes available (3-ft. to 10-ft. widths) really speeds up the installation process.

Подпись: HousewrapIndependent Tests Yield Clear Performance ComparisonsAlso, the compatible sealing tapes and acces­sories make housewrap a superior air barrier compared to felt paper.

Choices

 

PinkWrap®

(Owens Corning)

Type: Perforated, woven polyolefin Perm rating: 14.0 Notes: Translucent membrane makes it easy to see where to nail siding. 800-438-7465; www. pinkwrap. com

 

Nonwoven

 

Woven

 

HomeWrap

(DuPont™)

Type: Nonwoven polyolefin Perm rating: 58.0 Notes: The first housewrap on the market more than 30 years ago; accounts for 70% of total house – wrap sales; highest perm rating. 800-448-9835; www. tyvek. com

 

StuccoWrap1 (DuPont)

Type: Nonwoven polyolefin Perm rating: 50.0 Notes: Designed specifically for use under traditional – and synthetic-stucco applications; helps to reduce cracking because it won’t absorb water or expand and contract. Surface texture channels water. www. tyvek. com

 

Typar (Fiberweb®)

Type: Nonwoven polyolefin Perm rating: 11.7 Notes: Excellent protection against surfactants, making it ideal for use under stucco or cedar siding; guaranteed to be tear-resistant. 800-284-2780; www. typarhousewrap. com

 

Independent Tests Yield Clear Performance Comparisons

Irish Method

In the publication by Brennan et al. (2000) is proposed another method of SMA design developed in Ireland. This method allows for a required discontinuous grada­tion of an asphalt mix between 0.6 mm and 5.0 mm sieves (for SMA 0/14) to create a strong skeleton of coarse grains. The determination of the properties of the coarse aggregate fraction (greater than 2 mm), screened out of the aggregate mix, has been recognized as the key issue, as in other methods. The density of the compacted coarse aggregate fraction is determined by vibration; a sample is tested under low pressure in the mold used during the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test by placing it on a vibration table commonly used for compacting samples of ready-mix concrete. The sample is compacted to the refusal density with the use of variable values of ampli­tude until the moment particles start crushing (the amount of fine particles smaller than 2 mm is about 1%).

Having already obtained information about the density of the coarse-aggregate fraction and the target content of air voids in the SMA samples, one can use the formulas detailed by Brennan et al. to calculate the necessary content of the coarse – aggregate fraction for the mix to fulfill all determined requirements (e. g., void content).

OTHER METHODS OF DESIGN

7.5.1 Dilation Point Method

The dilation point method, which was devised by the American National Center for Asphalt Technology (NCAT) and then adopted in Australia (Stephenson and Bullen, 2002), serves to determine the maximum content of aggregate less than 4.75 mm (i. e., the passive fraction), which still does not cause the dilation of the coarse aggregate (i. e., the active fraction). The method consists of preparing a series of samples with various contents of fine aggregate. The samples are compacted in a gyratory com­pactor with a constant content of binder and stabilizer. According to the rule, voids among the coarse aggregate are gradually filled with passive particles. This has an impact on the SMA’s particular properties; in the Australian method the resilient modulus is examined. The point at which a skeleton is filled with passive particles is determined through an analysis of the height of samples during compaction in the gyratory compactor. Tests of different contents of fine aggregate at various screen­ings through 4.75, 2.36, 1.18, and 0.6 mm sieves have been conducted.

Limitations of Hydrologic Frequency Analysis

3.9.1 Distribution Selection: Practical Considerations

Many different probability distributions have been proposed for application to hydrologic data. Some of them were proposed because the underlying concept of the distribution matched the goal of hydrologic frequency analysis. For ex­ample, the extremal distributions discussed in Sec. 2.6.4 have very favorable properties for hydrologic frequency analysis. Ang and Tang (1984, p. 206) noted that the asymptotic distributions of extremes in several cases tend to converge on certain limiting forms for large sample sizes n, specifically to the double­exponential form or to two single-exponential forms. The extreme value from an initial distribution with an exponentially decaying tail (in the direction of the extreme) will converge asymptotically to the extreme-value type I (Gumbel) distribution form. Distributions with such exponentially decaying tails include the normal distribution and many others listed in Sec. 2.6. This is why Gumbel (1941) first proposed this distribution for floods, and it has gained consider­able popularity since then. Also, the properties of the central limit theorem discussed in Sec. 2.6.2 have made the lognormal distribution a popular choice for hydrologic frequency analysis.

In the 1960s, as the number of different approaches to flood frequency analy­sis were growing, a working group of U. S. government agency hydrologic experts was formed by the U. S. Water Resources Council to evaluate the best/preferred approach to flood frequency analysis. Benson (1968) reviewed the results of this working group and listed the following key results of their study:

1. There is no physical rule that requires the use of any specific distribution in the analysis of hydrologic data.

2. Intuitively, there is no reason to expect that a single distribution will apply to all streams worldwide.

3. No single method of testing the computed results against the original data was acceptable to all those on the working group, and the statistical consul­tants could not offer a mathematically rigorous method.

Subsequent to this study, the U. S. Water Resources Council (1967) recom­mended use of the log-Pearson type 3 distribution for all flood frequency anal­yses in the United States, and this has become the official distribution for all flood frequency studies in the United States. There are no physical arguments for the application of this distribution to hydrologic data. It has added flexi­bility over two-parameter distributions (e. g., Gumbel, lognormal) because the skewness coefficient is a third independent parameter, and the use of three parameters generally results in a better fit of the data. However, a number of researchers have suggested that the use of data for a single site may be insufficient to estimate the skewness coefficient properly.

Beard (1962) recommended that only average regional skewness coefficients should be applied in flood frequency analysis for a single station unless that record exceeds 100 years. This led the U. S. Water Resources Council (1967) to develop maps of regional skewness coefficient values that are averaged with the at-a-site skewness coefficient as a function of the number of years of record. For details on the procedure, see Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data (1982). Linsley et al. (1982) noted that although regional skewness coefficients may not make for more reliable analysis, their use does lead to more consistency between values for various streams in the region.

The Board Foot

Whether you are dealing with the local sawmill or buying salvage, you need to be familiar with the term board foot, because that is the unit by which timber is sold.

A board foot (BF) is a square foot of wood one inch thick, or 144 cubic inches (2,360 cubic centimeters) of material. Every linear foot (LF) of a full one-by-twelve board is a board foot, but every linear foot of a full two-by-six is also a BF, because it also contains 144 cubic inches of wood (2 x 6 x 12=144). A linear foot (LF) is also called a running foot at many sawmills.

This lumber scale gives the number of board feet with virtually every size of rough-cut lumber you are likely to want, in lengths from eight feet (2.44 meters) to twenty feet (6 meters).

Lumber scale, in board feet (BF)

Size Length (feet)

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

(Inches)

1 x 3

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1 x 4

2.7

3.3

4.0

4.7

5.3

6.0

6.7

1 x 6

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

1 x 8

5.3

6.7

8.0

9.3

10.7

12.0

13.3

1 x 10

6.7

8.3

10.0

11.7

13.3

15.0

16.7

1 x 12

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2×2

2.7

3.3

4.0

4.7

5.3

6.0

6.7

2×4

5.3

6.7

8.0

9.3

10.7

12.0

13.3

2×6

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2×8

10.7

13.3

16.0

18.7

21.3

24.0

26.7

2 x 10

13.3

16.7

20.0

23.3

26.7

30.0

33.3

2 x 12

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

32.0

36.0

40.0

3×6

12.0

15.0

18.0

21.0

24.0

27.0

30.0

3×8

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

32.0

36.0

40.0

3×10

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

3 x 12

24.0

30.0

36.0

42.0

48.0

54.0

60.0

Size

Length (feet)

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

(Inches)

4×4

10.7

13.3

16.0

18.7

21.3

24.0

26.7

4×6

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

32.0

36.0

40.0

4×8

21.3

26.7

32.0

37.3

42.7

48.0

53.3

4x 10

26.7

33.3

40.0

46.7

53.3

60.0

66.7

4x 12

32.0

40.0

48.0

56.0

64.0

72.0

80.0

5x 10

33.3

41.7

50.0

58.3

66.7

75.0

83.3

6×6

24.0

30.0

36.0

42.0

48.0

54.0

60.0

6×8

32.0

40.0

48.0

56.0

64.0

72.0

80.0

6x 10

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

6x 12

48.0

60.0

72.0

84.0

96.0

108.0

120.0

8×8

42.7

53.3

64.0

74.7

85.3

96.0

106.7

8x 10

53.3

66.7

80.0

93.3

106.7

120.0

133.3

8x 12

64.0

80.0

96.0

112.0

128.0

144.0

160.0

10x 10

66.7

83.3

100.0

116.7

133.3

150.0

166.7

10x 12

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0 200.0

12 x 12

96.0

120.0

144.0

168.0

192.0

216.0 240.0

already leaning, is to tie a cable to it and pull it down with a piece of heavy equipment, such as a tracked excavator, or a large backhoe, bulldozer, or front – end loader. Yes, a few timbers might be damaged, but this damage will usually occur at the ends of timbers, where mortise and tenon joints are torqued during the pull. With “timber framing for the rest of us,” you wont be using those old joints anyway In effect, you will be just losing some length. You can expect to get a good iz-footer out of an old 14-foot beam, for example.

Dress for the job with tough work clothing, leather or other heavy-duty work gloves, and heavy footwear with thick soles. If working inside a bam, wear a hardhat.

RISER DIAGRAMS

Riser diagrams are often required by code officers prior to any plumbing be­ing installed. Supplying a detailed riser diagram (Fig. 5.44 and Fig. 5.45) is usu­ally a standard part of a permit applica­tion. You can also use riser diagrams to help you when sizing a vent system. If

RISER DIAGRAMS

FIGURE 5.45 ■ DWV riser diagram, with size and location of pipes. (Courtesy of TAB Books, Home Plumbing Illustrated, by R. Dodge Woodson, p. 50)

RISER DIAGRAMS

FIGURE 5.46 ■ Poorly designed DWV layouts. (Courtesy of TAB Books, Home Plumbing Illustrated, by R. Dodge Woodson, p. 55)

RISER DIAGRAMS
you draw a riser for the job you are working with, the diagram will make it easier for you to label the fixture-unit loads and the sizes of the vents re­quired. Another good use of a riser diagram is to minimize wasted piping. If you draw your piping path on paper, you can spot situations where an alter­native plan might be used to minimize the cost of labor and materials (Fig. 5.46 and Fig. 5.47).

A Side-by-Side Comparison Is Often Pointless

Nowadays, any approved weather-resistive barrier, from #15 felt to high-tech house – wrap, touts the dual benefit of being a weather-resistive drainage plane that also allows the passage of water vapor. But not every product balances these two features equally. To add to this confusion, house – wraps are now available in dozens of variet­ies, so how do you choose? Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer.

The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) is working to standardize the tests used to evaluate weather-resistive barriers. For now, when trying to gain code approval, manufacturers can choose from at least two dozen different tests. Even if two manufacturers choose the same test, though, there is nothing to regulate the way in which the test materials are set up. This vari­ability makes it nearly impossible to com­pare one product’s performance to another’s.

According to Paul Fisette, director of building materials and wood technology at the University of Massachusetts, one tested value that usually stands up to side-by-side comparison is a material’s permeance rating, but sometimes even that can be misleading.

1. Create a secondary weather barrier behind the siding, preventing wind-driven rain and other water from reaching the sheathing.

2. Serve as an air barrier

to prevent air infiltration, helping to reduce heating and cooling costs.

3. Provide a vapor – permeable membrane

that allows moisture in framing lumber or insula­tion to escape.

Perm Ratings Tell Part of the Story

Permeance ratings, or perms, reflect the measure of a material’s ability to transfer water vapor; the higher the perm number, the more permeable the material. For instance, 6-mil polyethylene sheeting has a very low perm rating of 0.06, which means that it prevents the passage of nearly all water vapor. Current building codes require a weather-resistive barrier to match or exceed grade-D building paper, which has a perm rating of about 5.0. To meet this requirement, perm ratings for commonly available brands of housewrap range from about 5.0 for Dow®’s Weathermate™ to

58.0 for Tyvek®’s HomeWrap®.

Materials with higher perm ratings speed the escape of trapped moisture. But higher ratings do not necessarily equal better housewraps, because the methods of achiev­ing a high perm rating can be different.

For instance, some low-tech housewraps achieve their high perm ratings with mechanically punched perforations in the membrane. These perforations increase the passage of water vapor, but they also make the housewrap more susceptible to bulk – water leakage.

On the other hand, more-advanced non­perforated housewraps, such as HomeWrap and R-Wrap®, offer even greater moisture – vapor transmission (higher perms) than their perforated counterparts. They are also more effective at preventing the movement of bulk water.

WEATHERING STEEL

The cost of initial painting and periodic repainting of structural steel bridges can often be eliminated by the use of bare weathering steel. From an economic standpoint, the use of multicoat high-technology paint systems should be reserved to those bridges that are not suitable candidates for weathering steel.

To ensure successful long-term performance, the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) has published “Guidelines for the Use of Unpainted Weathering Steel.”

Principal considerations are as follows:

• Consider with caution use in marine coastal areas; in areas of frequent high rainfall, high humidity, or persistent fog or condensing conditions; at grade separations in “tunnel-like” conditions; and at low-level water crossings. (Some states such as New Jersey require painting of weathering steel girders if within 15 ft (4.6 m) of salt water.)

• Eliminate expansion joints where possible.

• Use a trough under open expansion joints.

• Paint all steel within a distance of US times the depth of girders from bridge joints.

• Seal box members where possible or provide weep holes to allow proper drainage and circulation of air.

• Seal overlapping surfaces exposed to water to prevent capillary penetration action.

• Implement maintenance and inspection procedures designed to detect and minimize corrosion.

• Divert roadway drainage away from the bridge.

• Clean troughs, reseal deck joints, and periodically clean and—when needed— repaint all steel in the vicinity of joints.

• Regularly remove all dirt, debris, and other deposits that trap moisture.

• Regularly remove all vegetation that can prevent natural drying of wet steel surfaces.