0 Stimmen dafür0 Stimmen dagegen

37 Aufrufe10 SeitenOct 12, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

37 Aufrufe

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Calculation Design
- ST and WINF LOAD From ICE Manual of Bridge Engineering
- Steel Beams With Web Openings
- SPECIFICATIONS OF Box Girder
- Efect of Brazier
- Lateral Torsional Buckling of Castellated Beams
- 5 IJAEST Volume No 1 Issue No 1 Analysis of ion Buckling and Post Buckling of Composite Structure by Generalized Differential Quadrature Method (GDQM)
- 15A 12 Connections
- 28815696
- Steel Composite Bridges Germany
- 173
- Steel Tips C - Large Seismic Steel Beam to Column Connections
- bd1682
- Continuous Beam
- Inelastic Strength of Laterally Unsupported Top-Loaded Built-up Slender Beams_WASET_Barcelona 2013
- l0300
- BMREINForcement
- Plate girder.docx
- UC Presentation Liao
- 1498755178.pdf

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

5-7 September 2012

CASTING OF THE DECK

Hassan Mehri, Roberto Crocetti

Division of Structural Engineering, Lund University, Sweden

Abstract: Trapezoidal cross sections are often used as main longitudinal load-bearing systems in

steel-concrete composite bridges. A critical design stage for these girders occurs during casting of

the bridge deck, when the non-composite steel section must support the entire construction load,

including the wet concrete. A research work was undertaken to study lateral torsional buckling

(LTB) capacity and stiffness requirements of U-shaped girders with focus on discrete torsional

bracings and top lateral truss bracing, under uniform loading condition due to self-weight of

structural system and wet concrete. Findings are then compared with the results obtained by

previous research works and common code specifications.

Keywords: bracing, lateral torsional buckling, stiffness, composite bridges.

1 Introduction

Generally the top flanges of the girders are connected to the concrete deck as a continuous lateral

bracing and the finished work has high torsional stiffness but during erection and construction

period when the deck has not hardened or been attached, compression flanges of built-up steel

girders are susceptible to instability as the girder is as open cross section and therefore relatively

flexible in torsion. Different types of bracing systems are normally used to stabilize bridge girders

against LTB. Typical bracing systems are i) discrete torsional bracing systems and ii) lateral

bracing, in the form of a horizontal truss system. Minimizing the numbers of bracing used, will

lead to a more efficient design since this bracing makes up a significant amount of the total costs.

Moreover, top flange bracing has generally no function once the concrete deck has cured.

Lateral torsional buckling capacity [1] of a simply supported beam subjected to uniform

bending moment about the strong axis is:

M

EI GJ

E I C

1

L

Where =the distance between lateral twisting supports; =modulus of elasticity; =shear

modulus; =torsional constant; =lateral moment of inertia;

=warping constant. It should

be noted that the Eq. (1) was derived assuming the mentioned load and boundary conditions

for a single, doubly-symmetric beam which is restricted to twist and free to warp at both ends.

To account for the effect of variable moment gradients and load conditions, a modification

factor, , is typically applied to Eq. (1). When the lateral and the warping end restraints are

unequal or are not free, the following general approximate method [2] may be used:

C EI GJ

EC

1

C M

2

M

K L

GJ K L

Where

and

are buckling length coefficients about weak axis, z, and strong axis, y,

will increase. Thus

respectively. Decreasing and providing appropriate bracing system,

yielding or local buckling-not global buckling- will control the strength of the girder.

Different types of cross frames or diaphragms are generally used to appropriately decrease the

distortion of the girders by preventing relative twist between the two wings (Fig. 1). For both

twin I-shaped and trapezoidal girders, with an adequate lateral cross-bracing system the

warping stiffness and lateral moment of inertia of the cross section will be high enough to

force two wings work together against torsion and lateral bending (Fig. 1a), otherwise the

buckling capacity of the system will be dropped and global lateral buckling of half of the

system about its own warping center is a possibility.

/2 and for

The warping constant, , for a doubly symmetric I-shaped cross section is

an open top box girder with sloping or vertical webs can be calculated by equations given in

handbooks or other approaches [3]. For both cross sections, the torsion constant is

/3 where h, and are distance between top and bottom flange centroids, width

and thickness of plates that make up the girder cross section, respectively. Assuming that the

connections between the cross frames and the girder are hinged (so that there is no

Vierendeel effect) and the cross frames are stiff enough in their plane, the total torsional

rigidity of twin doubly symmetric, simply supported twin I girders is:

h

S

K ,

K ,

2GJ

2E

I,

I

3

K

4

4 ,

Where

, =St. Venant rigidity,

, = total warping rigidity, S= distance between web

centroids of I girders and index 1 indicates related parameter to one girder about the centroid

and

respectively, in

of each wing, . Substituting , , , and 2 , for the ,

Eq. (2) gives the global buckling moment of doubly symmetric twin I girders [4],

:

M

2C

K L

EI , GJ

E

2K L

I, h

I, I

S 4

Yura [4] has presented a simplified equation retaining only the term , , which is the

dominating term of the Eq. (4). Thus the global lateral buckling capacoty is directly

proportional to the girder spacing S. In this study, Yura also mentions that a substitution of

, could be directly applied to a mono-symmetric

, with effective moment of inertia,

,

cross sections and open box girder system with reasonable accuracy:

SE

I , I , 5

M

C

L

t

I ,

I ,

I 6

c ,

where / is the distance ratio of tension and compression flanges from the centroid of cross;

I , and I , are the lateral moment of inertia of the compression and the tension flanges

about weakest axis, respectively. In the current work, the validity of Eq. (5) for LTB of Marcy

Bridge will be also investigated.

3 Case study

The Marcy Bridge in New York was a pedestrian bridge and collapsed during construction,

resulted in nine severely injured workers and one fatality. The bridge, which spanned 51m,

consisted of a trapezoidal girder with concrete deck acting compositely as a top flange. The

concrete deck was 4200mm wide and approximately 200mm thick. The bridge was straight in

plan and arched in elevation and collapsed during casting of the concrete deck. Casting begun at

the abutments and moved to the mid-span. As the pouring reached the mid-span, global lateral

buckling occurred and the girder collapsed twisting off of its supports at the ends, Fig. 2. The

cross sectional dimensions at mid-span and near the supports are shown in Fig. 3. The web

thickness is constant over the entire length, while bottom flange and top flanges thicknesses

varies between 22mm and 28mm. Eight internal k-frames were used in the Marcy Bridge with

no top lateral truss bracing. All cross frame bracing members were L3 3 38 in angles

.

with a cross sectional area of 1361

Bridge (CS-e: at the ends, CS-m: at the mid span)

The effect of having unsymmetrical cross section (i.e. with different flanges) should be taken

into account in stability analysis especially when the compression flange is the smaller flange.

Eq. (1), (2) and (4) are derived assuming doubly symmetric cross section. The lateral torsional

buckling of mono-symmetric beams can have complicated behaviour depending on boundary

conditions, type of loading and degree of asymmetry. It must be also noted that for monosymmetric beams, where bending is in plane of symmetry, the shear center and the centroid

do not coincide. Most of previous approaches for buckling of mono-symmetric cross sections

can lead to incorrect results for particular cases [6].

An exact formula was presented by Vlasov [7] expressing the elastic buckling moment of

simply supported mono-symmetric beams under uniform moment. Since then, equations for

the elastic critical moment have been developed by various authors [6] with slight

modifications on coefficients and expressions depending on various boundary and loading

conditions. A general formula for the critical bending moment is given by Galambos [2]:

M

Where

C EI

2 K L

4 C K

I K

GJ K L

EI

I

8

I

/ and d is the depth of cross section. To account the effects of monoWhere

symmetry of the cross section, other approach given in AASHTO [9] is substituting 2 , for

, in which Eq. (1) is used.

The result of an exact solution [8] with approximate coefficient of asymmetry and also an

approximate equation given in AISC LRFD [10] are used in current work to verify the model.

0.9d 2

1 1

Generally, two types of analysis can be performed to study buckling problems using the finite

element method: 1) Linear eigen-value buckling analysis, and 2) non-linear incremental

buckling analysis. The eigen-value buckling analysis is used in the current study which is

limited to problems where the pre-buckling displacements are relatively small and any

changes in material properties do not significantly affect the assumption of linearity.

The commercial finite element software, SAP 2000 [11], was used for the current research.

Four-node shell elements with sufficient fine meshing were utilized for modelling the cross

section. Shell elements were utilized since a significant portion of the total strain energy of

the deformed state of these structural systems is due to in-plane behaviour of the elements.

Beam elements with 6 degree of freedoms were used to simulate lateral top flange and crossframe bracing throughout the girder. In order to avoid Vierendeel behaviour, beam elements

were considered as hinged at the both ends.

At the ends of the unbraced length of the girder, the beam is free to warp but prevented to

twist laterally. The girder is free to slide in longitudinal direction at only one end.

A linear elastic isotropic material with E=200GPa and n=0.3 is used for all elements. Linear

eigenvalue buckling analysis has been carried out and the material non-linearity is neglected.

Marcy Bridge was designed as a vertically curved beam with a camber at the mid-span. In this

work the model is assumed initially straight and the benefits of presence of deck formwork

close to the top flanges are also neglected conservatively.

The results obtained by numerical analysis should always be checked by means of traditional

approaches, engineering judgments and laboratory tests. Eq. (1) for LTB capacity is

conservative in predicting the buckling strength for the unbraced case due to the more

favourable moment gradient, load and support height in practice; factors that are all neglected

by the equation. Other factors which are not considered in general equations for LTB capacity

of a beam are the magnitude and distribution residual stresses and effect of initial

imperfections (loading and geometry), discontinuities in the cross section and slope of the

webs in trapezoidal cross sections. The analytical aspects of determining the critical moment

strength of a beam are quite complex and closed-form solutions exist only for most simple

cases. Global LTB values of Marcy Bridge, assuming constant cross section CS-e, (Fig. 3), is

quantitatively presented with exact and approximate solutions in Table 1.

Table 1: Result of FEM analysis and theoretical solutions (Loads at N.A.)

Analysis type

FEM

MNm

Diff. (%)

10.4

10.0

-3.9

8.7

-16.9

Eq. (5)

10.3

-1.3

[8]

The theoretical solutions are derived for loading with uniform distributed moment while FEM

simulations are derived for girders subjected to uniform distributed load. Therefore theoretical

equations should be adjusted [4] by gradient moment factor,

1.12, which is suggested

by other approaches such as [8]. Comparisons between theoretical and FEM results show

good agreement despite that LTB of trapezoidal cross sections is more complicate than

buckling of twin I girders as the shear center is outside of the cross section and the effects of

inclined webs in LTB capacity is ignored in all theoretical solutions. The similar way used for

twin I girders showed more consistent results with general solutions. Supports height in

theoretical formulas is assumed at the Neutral axis level (N.A.) but in reality and in FEM

simulations, supports are placed at bottom layer of the cross section and global buckling

capacity of the girder is slightly increased in this case.

The flange thickness of the cross-section of the Marcy Bridge varies between 22mm and

28mm at the top flange and between 20mm and 22.5mm at the bottom flange. The effect of

changing the cross section along the girder is normally not considered in traditional lateral

torsional buckling solutions.

Table 2: Effect of Non-prismatic cross sections (Load at N.A.)

Section type

Constant Cs-e (Fig. 3)

MNm

Diff. (%)

10.4

-0.1

10.4

10.7

+3.1

Although, there is no high change in cross sectional dimensions in Marcy Bridge, the results

shown in Table 2 indicate that this effect should be considered in buckling capacity of the

girders when cross-sectional properties are significantly changed. Next investigations are

based on real cross sections of Marcy Bridge.

The effect of load height must be taken into account for determining the LTB capacity of a

beam. The case where the load acts on the compression flange of simply supported beam is

the most detrimental as it increases the torque arm. Top flange loading reduces buckling

capacity of a single I-shaped beam for mid-height loading by an approximate factor of 1/1.4

whereas tension flange loading improves the buckling capacity by a 1.4 factor. Yura [4] has

achieved that the load height effect can be ignored for doubly symmetric twin I girders, with

single-curvature bending moment gradient and adequate intermediate torsional bracing. The

effect of load height on buckling capacity with respect to different cross frame stiffness for

Marcy Bridge is shown in Fig. 4. It is evident that load height effect cannot be ignored for

trapezoidal girders even though the girder is torsionally braced by means of cross frames with

NL , where N=number of intermediate cross

large equivalent torsional stiffness,

frames and

torsional stiffness of each cross frame. Top flange loading reduces LTB

capacity of the Marcy Bridge by 0.806 compared to loading at neutral axis (N.A.).

Fig. 4: Effect of load height for Marcy Bridge where M , and M . ., are global LTB capacity

for braced and unbraced case (Load at N.A.); bracing by means of intermediate cross frames

The effect of load height for different web slopes is also investigated where the vertical depth

was held constant while top width was varied and the results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Effect of Load height for different web slopes (cross frames as Marcy Bridge, M.B.)

Slope of webs

0

6.5

13

MNm

MNm

/M

, . .

Top

6.1

N.A.

7.6

Top

12.3

N.A.

15.2

0.806

0.806

5.7

7.1

10.0

12.5

0.795

0.806

5.1

6.5

8.4

10.4

0.779

0.806

The results indicate that for trapezoidal girders interconnected with cross frames the load

height effect is not affected with increasing slope of webs if the depth of girder is kept

constant while top flange loading effect increases with sloping of the web for trapezoidal

girders which are not interconnected by means of cross frames. It is also shown that critical

bending moment of these girders decreases with increasing slope of the webs for both cases:

unbraced, M ,

, and braced , M , even though is increasing. Bracing is achieved by

means of intermediate cross frames.

For low stiffness of internal cross frames, the wings of the girder system (Fig. 1b) behave

independently, governed by general LTB equations considering half part of the girder.

Increasing the cross-frames stiffness, the girder will still buckle in a single half wave until

buckling occurs between the cross frames. Yielding can also control the capacity of the girder

[12]. It can be derived from Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 that for torsional bracing stiffness higher than the

ideal stiffness, the effectiveness of the cross-frames stiffness is dramatically reduced. The

global buckling of a girder system can also be predicted by considering the cross frames as

continuous torsional bracing along the length of the girder [12]:

M

C EI

C

Min M , M 9

Where

/ , N=number of intermediate cross frames;

bucking capacity of

,

are limiting factors corresponding to an unbraced and an effectively

unbraced beam;

and

are the

braced beam, respectively; is top flange loading modification factor;

critical moment corresponding to buckling between the brace points and the plastic strength of

the effective torsional brace stiffness including the stiffness

the section, respectively; and

, and girder system stiffness, , as follow [12]:

of the cross frames, , the web stiffness,

1

1

1

1

10

For k-brace systems [12] such as cross-frames which are used in Marcy Bridge,

is:

2Eb h

A 11

8L

b

Where b

width of bottom flange; h height of cross frame; L length of diagonal

members; and A

cross area section of cross-frame members. Although it is shown that the

sum of intermediate cross frames stiffness is the dominating variable and not the actual

number or spacing of the cross frames [4], the moment capacity of girder system drops when

the cross-frame spacing exceeds 0.25L [13]. It should be considered that in some cases,

fewer cross-frames are normally used under erection rather than service conditions. The GLB

capacity of Marcy bridge with different number of intermediate cross frames, M ,

,

compared to unbraced buckling capacity, M , , with respect to equivalent torsional

stiffness, , is shown in Fig. 5. The result indicates the cross frame bracing system used in

Marcy Bridge has a stiffness which is several times larger than the required torsional stiffness

corresponding to full bracing. It is also shown that providing only one intermediate cross

frame at mid span is more efficient than two cross frames, each at one third of the span, due to

maximum lateral deformation at the mid span. For Marcy Bridge, I I

1.0 where I and I

are respectively in-plane and out-of-plane moments of inertia, if only the steel cross section is

present. Marcy Bridge is one example proving that, the concept lateral-torsional buckling of

the girder cannot occur if the beam is bending about the weaker bending axis is not valid for

trapezoidal girders without top flange bracing system.

Fig. 5: Equivalent cross frame stiffness of M.B. (Load at N.A.). N=Number of cross frames.

Top flange bracing of the U-shaped girder is significantly effective in increasing GLB

strength as it creates a pseudo box cross section which has much higher torsional stiffness to

resist system buckling. LTB can be avoided by properly positioned and designed lateral truss

bracing, before dropping off due to combination of lateral deflection and twisting. Partial or entire

top flange lateral bracing is commonly used to ensure that the design moment does not exceed the

LTB capacity. It should be noted that setting a top lateral bracing system for the entire length

of the girder may be too expensive. It has been shown that installing partial top flange bracing

near the supports is more efficient than bracing at the middle of the girder [14] as it converts

lateral supports from hinged to semi-clamped. In this study it is also indicated that using

single diagonal bracing system (Fig. 6) improves GLB strength of the girder in the same

extent as using X-type system if the cross section area of the diagonal member of the single

brace system is equal to the sum of the cross section areas of the X-type bracing. Having high

top flange

amount of L /L at the ends will increase the GLB of the girder, where L

braced length of the girder. For three different trapezoidal cross sections with different length

between 45m to 62.5m it is shown [14] that top bracing of those bridges with more than 20%

of the entire length at each end does not have a large impact on the GLB strength. Local

buckling of compression flange or webs can occur rather than global lateral torsional buckling

[15], as the unbraced length decreases.

girder by providing partial bracing at the ends

The effect of entire X-type top flange bracing for Marcy Bridge is shown in Fig. 8.

Fig. 8: Effect of entire top flange bracing on GLB capacity of Marcy Bridge,

, .

GLB

capacity

of

Marcy

Bridge

without

top

flange

bracing;

Maximum

bending

,

moment of M.B. due to self-weight of the steel girder and wet concrete deck; and

design

,

moment resistance of M.B. with top flange bracing, with respect to , According to Eurocode 3.

With such a bracing, the moment capacity of top flange braced girder, M , , increases

linearly with respect to increasing cross area of top flange bracing bars, . It can also be

derived that for Marcy Bridge providing top flange truss bracing was a necessity to carry

applied moment, M , caused by self-weight of steel, formworks and wet concrete. It must be

noted that the effect of imperfections should also be taken into account and more bracing are

needed to reach the resistance moment, M , , according to Eurocode 3 or other codes. It is

shown in Fig. 9 that with a partial top flange bracing, applied over a relatively small part of

span length at each end, LTB capacity of Marcy bridge significantly increases due to

providing warping end restraint similar to the laterally fixed ends. Maximum global LTB

capacity of the adequately partial top flange braced bridge at the ends can be predicted

0.5 in theoretical equations such as Eq. (7). It is also shown that partial top

considering K

flange bracing at the ends is more efficient than at the mid-span.

Fig. 9: comparison between entire, partial ends and partial mid-span top flange bracing.

GLB capacity of Marcy Bridge with top flange bracing;

GLB capacity of

,

Marcy Bridge without top flange bracing

10

6 Conclusions

The main conclusions are:

1- Load height effect must be considered in design for both braced and unbraced cases.

This effect is constant for efficiently braced trapezoidal cross sections by intermediate

cross frames and decreases with increasing the slopes for unbraced girders. For

trapezoidal girders subjected to uniform vertical load at the top flanges, the

modification factor, , is suggested as 0.9 0.806 1.12 to take the effect of load

height and moment gradient into consideration.

2- Buckling capacity of non-prismatic cross sections cannot be predicted by current

general solutions and the effect of changing properties of the cross section should be

properly taken into account.

3- Intermediate cross frames stiffness for Marcy Bridge was several times higher than

required for full bracing against distortion. It should be noted that these values for

stiffness and partial bracing length are achieved conducting linear buckling analysis of

Marcy Bridge and must be adequately enhanced to account the effects of

imperfections.

4- If the results of an analysis indicate inadequate bending moment capacity, the strength

of the girder can be improved by adding top flange bracing at the 10-20% of the span

near the supports. Providing X-type bracing with relatively small area cross section

8mm moment capacity of Marcy Bridge increases about 28% which was needed

to prevent the girder against lateral torsional buckling during casting the deck.

References

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

S. Timoshenko and J. M. Gere, Theory of elastic stability. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.

T. V. Galambos, Guide to stability design criteria for metal structures, 5th ed.: John Wiley & Sons,

Inc., 1998.

M. Khorasani and S. F. Stiemer, "Design of mono-symmetirc plate and box girders," The university of

British Columbia (Vancouver)2010.

J. Yura, T. Helwig, R. Herman, and C. Zhou, "Global lateral buckling of I-shaped girder systems,"

Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 134, pp. 1487-1494, 2008.

Pedestrian Bridge Collapse. Available: http://www.exponent.com/pedestrian_bridge_collapse/

I. Balaz and Y. Kolekova, Stability of monosymmetric beams. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv, 1999.

V. Z. Vlasov, Thin-walled elastic beams 2. ed., rev. and augmen. ed. Jerusalem: Israel Program for

Scientific Translations, 1961

J. A. Yura, "Bracing for stability - state-of-the-art," in Proceedings of the 13th Structures Congress.

Part 1 (of 2), April 3, 1995 - April 5, 1995, Boston, MA, USA, 1995, pp. 88-103.

"Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (17th Edition)," ed: American Association of State

Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2002.

AISC, "Specification for structural steel buildings," ed. Chicago, Illinois: American Institute of Steel

Constructions,Chicago, Illinois, 2005.

CSI, "CSI analysis reference manual," ed: Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, California, 1995.

J. A. Yura, "Fundamentals of beam bracing," Engineering Journal, vol. 38, pp. 11-26, 2001.

Q. H. Zhao, B. L. Yu, and E. G. Burdette, "Effects of cross-frame on stability of double I-girder system

under erection," Transportation Research Record, pp. 57-62, 2010.

J. A. Yura and J. A. Widianto, "Lateral buckling and bracing of beams - a re-evaluation after the marcy

bridge collapse," in Structural Stability Research Council - 2005 Annual Stability Conference, Apr 6 - 9

2005, Montreal, QB, Canada, 2005, pp. 277-294.

B. H. Choi, Y.-S. Park, and T.-y. Yoon, "Experimental study on the ultimate bending resistance of steel

tub girders with top lateral bracing," Engineering Structures, vol. 30, pp. 3095-3104, 2008.

- Calculation DesignHochgeladen vonMuhammad Fadzil
- ST and WINF LOAD From ICE Manual of Bridge EngineeringHochgeladen vonRAREEE
- Steel Beams With Web OpeningsHochgeladen vonpestfaria
- SPECIFICATIONS OF Box GirderHochgeladen vonshubham sachan
- Efect of BrazierHochgeladen vonAngiesGarcia
- Lateral Torsional Buckling of Castellated BeamsHochgeladen vonMartin Wijaya
- 5 IJAEST Volume No 1 Issue No 1 Analysis of ion Buckling and Post Buckling of Composite Structure by Generalized Differential Quadrature Method (GDQM)Hochgeladen voniserp
- 15A 12 ConnectionsHochgeladen vonumar_contact
- 28815696Hochgeladen vonsalman10993
- Steel Composite Bridges GermanyHochgeladen vonflorian_grancea1875
- 173Hochgeladen vonRanjit Mishra
- Steel Tips C - Large Seismic Steel Beam to Column ConnectionsHochgeladen vonNugraha Bintang
- bd1682Hochgeladen vonTommy Yap
- Continuous BeamHochgeladen vonFaizal Aliasak
- Inelastic Strength of Laterally Unsupported Top-Loaded Built-up Slender Beams_WASET_Barcelona 2013Hochgeladen vonsteelface
- l0300Hochgeladen vonS.s. Lee
- BMREINForcementHochgeladen vonjh50000
- Plate girder.docxHochgeladen vonHimalayJariwala
- UC Presentation LiaoHochgeladen vonLinda Hayes
- 1498755178.pdfHochgeladen vonBerPessutto
- Is 800 ExtractedHochgeladen vonpushpesh ranjan
- Flexural Behaviour and Design of Coldformed Steel Beams With Rectangular Hollow FlangesHochgeladen vonbiomechanics
- Buckling-012.pdfHochgeladen vonGianluca Zavarise
- Lateral Buckling of Singly Symmetric BeamsHochgeladen vonflorin
- TRESTLES DESIGN 1.xlsxHochgeladen vonAnonymous sfkedkym
- Dynamics and Control of Advanced Structures and MachinesHochgeladen vonWael Salah
- EC3 Calculations V0001Hochgeladen vonmark perez
- Stiff Types Bldg ColHochgeladen vonmrmeraj
- Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures 6ed Zeiman 2010 1117pHochgeladen vonpuppyarav2726
- Bushnell - Buckling of Shells - Pitfall for DesignersHochgeladen von_Asylum_

- What Makes an Engineer an Engineer ENelsonHochgeladen vonVictor Hughes
- TangHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- TorstenHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- BRACING OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE BRIDGE DURING CONSTRUCTIONHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- Hassan MehriHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- NordicSteel2012_HMehriHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- Unequally Spaced Lateral Bracings on Compression Flanges of Steel GirdersHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- SSC13 ProceedingHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- NMR SPECTROHochgeladen vonAvdhesh Mistry
- Jafc2004 Milk NMRHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- 2D StandardizationHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e
- Rac 4 Hplc_dadHochgeladen vonparvaneh.e

- Information Technology Management Frog VLE ApplicationHochgeladen vonValerie Sinti
- CSX Candidate Guide 0218Hochgeladen vonErnest Ofosu
- In for Matic a Logs ExplanationHochgeladen vonmithun
- 1. Introduction 02Hochgeladen vonadam_tomas
- GE Jan 2009 the Potential for Timber Piling in the UK Reynolds BatesHochgeladen vonRaul Martinez Jardon
- Mitosis ReferenceHochgeladen vonJonathan Tumamao Fernandez
- Prince George's County Afro-American Newspaper, March 5, 2011Hochgeladen vonThe AFRO-American Newspapers
- 1965-The Mechanism of heat transfer in nucleate pool boiling- part 1.pdfHochgeladen vonTahok24
- Using the Pendulum to Select CrystalsHochgeladen vonFaustino Uranga
- 2014 Ravenhill Global value chains and development .pdfHochgeladen vonXimena Zapata
- Mudcake controlHochgeladen vonProf Youpa
- Bankers AlgorithmHochgeladen vonRiya Patel
- Why are plants long and thinHochgeladen vonBelaMulder
- Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS), Safety Integrity Levels (SIL), IEC61508, And Honeywell Field InstrumentsHochgeladen vonInter Tung
- PQ and Monitoring Water SystemsHochgeladen vonRama Krishna
- Civil ComplHochgeladen vondbush2778
- Electronic Shops ContactsHochgeladen vonAk Azad
- Vee-Gee-Scientific-Product-Catalog.pdfHochgeladen vonLily Amaya
- Chapter 13 NotesHochgeladen vonIvanTh3Great
- Presentation Spatial Data1Hochgeladen vonRahul Kumar
- Charman's Report on Automated Elections (complete document)Hochgeladen vonakosistella
- MFM - 2012 ABB Adda PresentationHochgeladen vonMr.Soner
- MPREIB2012Hochgeladen vonYasin Daneshfar
- Alibaba FinalHochgeladen vonMohit Gupta
- BD FACSCount BrochureHochgeladen vonAhmed Ghassany
- Klein HarborGuard Pro Technical OverviewHochgeladen vonc108
- Lec1 Conservation of Mass and EnergyHochgeladen vonGab Banaag
- Adhoc Lesson Plan EC2050Hochgeladen vonRaja Pirian
- SS051a SecureHochgeladen vonilovevina
- AbstractHochgeladen vonsanyakap

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.