橋梁外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　翻譯原文</b></p><p>　　關鍵詞：橋梁；河堤；土工布；膜與土工格柵</p><p><b>　　英國鎖城大橋</b></p><p><b>　　引言</b></p><p>　　本文描述的是在受限制地區(qū)用最小的費用修建一座鐵路橋梁使之

2、成為開放的住宅發(fā)展區(qū)。鎖城地區(qū)是位于住宅發(fā)展十分緊張的韋斯頓超</p><p>　　馬雷的東部。監(jiān)督橋梁建設的客戶是城堡建設有限公司，它由二大房建者組成。該區(qū)的規(guī)劃局是北盛捷區(qū)議會（NSDC）。該發(fā)展地區(qū)被分為布里斯托爾和?？巳亍Ｒ?guī)劃條件規(guī)定，直到建成這條橫跨的鐵路大橋為止，該地區(qū)南部區(qū)域不可能適應居住?？梢婃i城大橋的建成對該地區(qū)發(fā)展的重要性。</p><p>　　客戶的工程師、工程顧問

3、、一般設計原則和初步認同原則下(AIP)與NSDC發(fā)出投標文件。</p><p>　　該合同在2000年7月1授予安迪。投標價值1.31億美元，合同期定為34周，到2001年4月完成。</p><p><b>　　二、地基</b></p><p>　　在招標階段佩爾研究了一些優(yōu)化設計和招標后的裁決計劃進行了充分的經(jīng)濟分析后交付承包商，院長及安迪

4、 。原來設計要求H型</p><p>　　鋼樁柱下的橋臺地區(qū)與相鄰鐵路線之間必須是垂直運動。經(jīng)審查后的地面條件和根據(jù)以往的經(jīng)驗判斷，現(xiàn)澆位移樁，使用其他類似地方的河堤下，可驅動更接近軌道而不會有任何問題。并在受影響區(qū)域進行了監(jiān)測，打樁作業(yè)和水平高程的變化小于要求的6毫米。</p><p>　　在地面下覆蓋厚達19米的軟沖積土。這下面是2米層堅定/硬粘土泥巖或砂巖基石。兩種類型的驅動現(xiàn)澆樁設

5、計了340和380毫</p><p>　　米的大口徑水管，以應付不同載入條件所造成的橋梁和堤壩的不同荷載。 這些有利于樁體的載入。最多可達一天8個樁的記錄?？傞L度</p><p>　　驅動介于22和24米之間。試驗證實了完整的設計和表示最多解決在工作負荷為六毫米</p><p><b>　　三、荷載傳遞，路基</b></p>&l

6、t;p>　　樁被用來抑制端口的負載轉移，這是因為修建時采用了石頭和網(wǎng)膜。 在招標圖紙上顯示了基礎頂部擴大樁，再運用早先經(jīng)驗， 佩爾指出這個設計方法可能被運用減少墊層的深度，并且把這種方法使用在城堡大橋上。 通過熔鑄一個擴大的部分1.1m在每樁上面，距離到樁下減少了1 m直徑，并且薄膜的間距在墊層的增加因而被減少了。 假設成拱形的作用在承臺依靠角度458從堆到墊層的上面，可能相應地減少石頭的深度。通過合理的設計，墊層的整體深度從15

7、00毫米減少了到900毫米。 這樣減少了挖掘深度并保留了原始的底層。.</p><p>　　墊層路堤上升到最大高度6.3 m的車道高程。為了減少蔓延的路堤，招標設計最初面臨混凝土預制板垂直側壁。這是后來修正的在投標階段用紅磚砌筑的垂直墻壁，迫使改變設計中的鋼筋路堤。路基被分包兩個部分以坦薩為基礎和規(guī)范發(fā)展的佩爾弗里斯赫曼恩路段。其系統(tǒng)組成的單軸土工格柵在不同規(guī)定垂直間隔的壓實顆粒物質。顆粒狀材料，符合高速公路規(guī)范

8、做路堤材料的相關規(guī)定。該網(wǎng)格，掛靠在干燥的混凝土砌塊上形成近垂直的路堤。被垂直排水層分開。在兩者之間安裝了隔水帶并且在前面修建了磚砌飾面。 </p><p><b>　　四、橋梁和橋墩</b></p><p>　　橋面包括預制預應力混凝土梁和一塊跨度20m的現(xiàn)澆鋼筋混凝土平板。圖4和5顯示橋梁的長度和橫斷面。 在加強的橋臺建立支撐梁。在支撐梁區(qū)域凸顯了橋臺狹窄的特點，

9、并且這些太狹窄的橋臺</p><p>　　不能避免的退出工作結構，并對混凝土砌塊側壁的河堤產(chǎn)生壓力。為了克服這個困難，把河堤的擋土墻在橋臺附近擴大，并使之成為完全擋土墻 (圖8)。 因為這變動太大以至于不能掩藏，在磚墻的上面放置的磚砌和預制混凝土做了加寬的區(qū)域，并在橋臺附近形成了壩肩。最后的布局給橋梁帶來了增值效應并豐富了橋梁和其施工方法。</p><p>　　一旦澆注了混凝土，整個橋面將

10、形成一個整體。 這方法消除了梁與支撐之間的轉動，因此，使橋面形成了一個統(tǒng)一的更加陡峭坡度。為了保持橋面產(chǎn)生壓力保持一樣，使橋面出現(xiàn)橫向的排水，這是招標圖紙不允許的。 這就提出了一個南部路基高于預期150毫米。</p><p>　　設計要求在梁和橋面板之間容納一些復雜的服務設備。這些設備是一條250毫米直徑總水管(通過一條350毫米直徑輸送管)， HV電纜和一條四種方式的BT輸送管。在招標圖紙上看這些服務設備是在橋

11、梁之間缺失的部分通過，而不是在它的下面通過。這些可利用的部分損失能夠使橋梁的自重更小、結構減輕，而且橋梁的截面尺寸更大，這些臨時的設施在孔中通過。因此，要求作出詳細的安裝說明，這又是一個非常棘手的工作。</p><p>　　橋梁的布局方案是一個整體的固定結構。并且，重新設計成了垂直路線，以適應橋面的變化。這就導致了南部橋臺的升高，從而，橋面的坡度增加。因此，對上面的橋梁產(chǎn)生了連鎖反應。為提供合理的橋面跨越坡度，在

12、橋南部的樁相應的增長，在增長最多的地方增加深度超過300毫米。這要求在預應力混凝土中增加更大預應力。</p><p><b>　　五、護墻</b></p><p>　　標準型的P2護墻的目的是保護的邊緣河堤。因此，對該小組提出了相當大的挑戰(zhàn)。必須在原先的位置澆注鋼筋混凝土，承包商對這種解決方案提出了健康與安全問題，因為在地面上澆注6m的邊緣梁是十分危險的，必須要用到更

13、多的腳手架和永久模板，并且，施工將延長幾個星期，工期將更加緊張。</p><p>　　為此，承包商建議使用預制混凝土欄桿來替代在原處澆注混凝土。然而，由于橋梁采用的是最小半徑，所以每個混凝土梁的長度受到限制，以避免出現(xiàn)外觀問題。并且計算表明混凝土欄桿會受到使用限制。</p><p>　　另外一種折衷的解決辦法包括一個預制件和邊緣現(xiàn)澆的行人/自行車道建設，最終克服了這些問題。為了實現(xiàn)理想的效

14、果，邊梁的預制需要的足夠的大小和形狀的磚塊，以確保邊緣的路堤穩(wěn)定。此外，雙方每個單位將需要略錐形，以適應半徑的彎道，并且護墻后螺栓支持搖籃要預先安裝在正確的間距上。由于設計師和承包商通力合作，盤區(qū)類型的數(shù)量從30減少到17，排列在長度從最多3.65 m減少到最小限度1.98 m，并保留欄桿位置恒定間距沿堤防的主要長度（如圖9）。</p><p>　　預制的構件通過現(xiàn)場澆注在一起，形成了一個整體。同時連欄桿和擴大的

15、路堤也澆注在一起。把橋面板澆注在一起，使之形成梁。并且橋面板做了腳趾形設計，利用其摩擦力來抵抗欄桿的偶然荷載，用連續(xù)的橋面板和懸臂式結構抵抗外部的對 橋面的扭轉和傾覆力。</p><p>　　P2支持部分被做成水平并且與橋梁完美的組合在一起。而末端被混凝土掩蓋保證了外觀的整潔。</p><p><b>　　六、運作</b></p><p>　　

16、在整個計劃中最值得欣慰的是能夠很好的維護各個方面的關系。大家在工程合同約定下一起工作，在出現(xiàn)矛盾之前，舉行定期會議時告知承包商、設計師、客戶的工程師和客戶的建筑師工程之間相互通告事情的最新事態(tài)發(fā)展和處理的意見。并且在感興趣的方面打開信息交換的通道適時的通信，例如處理好鐵路軌道等，并按要求保證資金適時到位。在遇到工程最后期限緊張時或發(fā)現(xiàn)設計圖紙有小遺漏時要以專業(yè)的方式進行溝通。這事成為承包商在整個合同期間維護信用的關鍵。</p>

17、;<p><b>　　七、摘要</b></p><p>　　鎖城大橋是集現(xiàn)代和創(chuàng)新于一體的設計（圖9）。加上其美麗的外觀，不僅美化了當?shù)丨h(huán)境。還增加了外界聯(lián)系。更有利于新住宅的發(fā)展。并且在橋的南部還建立了一個公園，這將提高大橋的地位和整體的外觀。在今后幾年里，鎖城大橋將是所有參與建造者的自豪。</p><p><b>　　參考文獻</b&

18、gt;</p><p>　　Nowak.A.S.（1995年）。 “橋梁設計方法的校準” 研究所碩士論文121（8），1245-1251；</p><p>　　Nowak.A.S.（1999年）。 “橋梁設計規(guī)范中設計方法的校準”， 運輸研究會368號NCHRP報告,華盛頓；</p><p>　　Nowak.A.S.（1993年）。 “公路橋的活荷載模型”，

19、 J. Struct.Safety,13（1–2）, 53–66.</p><p>　　dsen.B.和Nielsen.P.C.（1978年a）。 “橫梁和縱梁的測試”， 加拿大溫哥華不列顛哥倫比亞大學土木工程系的匯總報告；</p><p>　　Madsen.B.和Nielsen.P.C.（1978年b）。 “1977年六月到1978年五月，在加拿大做了抗彎實驗”， 加拿大溫哥

20、華市不列顛哥倫比亞大學土木工程系工程部門出版的25號結構研究叢書；</p><p>　　Castle Bridge, Weston-Super-Mare, UK</p><p>　　1. INTRODUCTION</p><p>　　This paper describes a minimal-cost solution to a road bridgeover a

21、 railway, on a restricted site, to open up land for residential development. Locking Castle is an area under heavy residential development on the eastern side of Weston-Super Mare. Overseeing the development and client f

22、or the bridge isLocking Castle Limited, a company owned in consortium by two major house builders. The planning authority is North Somerset District Council (NSDC). The development area is splitin half by the Bris</p&

23、gt;<p>　　The client’s engineer, Arup, agreed general design principlesand the preliminary Approval in Principle (AIP) with NSDCprior to the issue of tender documents.</p><p>　　The contract was awarded

24、 to Dean & Dyball in July 2000 for atender value of £1·31 million and the contract period was set at34 weeks for a completion in April 2001. A simpli?edprogramme is shown in Fig. 2.</p><p>　　2.

25、 GROUNDWORKS</p><p>　　During the tender stage Pell Frischmann looked at a number ofre?nements to the tender design and following the award of thescheme undertook a full value engineering exercise in conjunct

26、ion with the contractor, Dean & Dyball. The</p><p>　　originaldesign called for steel H-piles under the bridge abutment areasadjacent to the railway line where limited vertical movement ofthe track was es

27、sential. Following a review of the groundconditions and based on previous experience, the team successfully argued that cast-in-situ displacement piles, usedelsewhere under the embankments, could be driven closer tothe t

28、racks without any problem. The tracks were monitoredduring piling operations and level changes of less than 6 mmwere recorded alon</p><p>　　The ground conditions at the site consist of made groundoverlying u

29、p to 19 m of soft alluvial clay. Below this either a2 m layer of ?rm/stiff clay on mudstone or sandstone bedrockexists. Two types of driven cast-in-situ piles were designed byKeller, 340 and 380 mm in diameter, to cope w

30、ith the differentloading conditions caused by the bridge and the embankment.These were driven to refusal from the existing ground level. Thepoor ground contributed to rapid pile installation and rates of up to eig</p&

31、gt;<p>　　3. LOAD TRANSFERMATTRESS AND EMBANKMENTS</p><p>　　The piles were used to support a load transfer mattress,which was constructed fromlayers of stone and geomembrane grids. Enlarged head piles

32、had been shown on the tender drawing but, again drawing on previous experience, Pell Frischmann demonstrated that this design method could be utilised to reduce the depth of the</p><p>　　mattress and it was

33、suggested that this approach be employed at Locking Castle. By casting an enlarged head of 1·1 m diameter at the top of each pile, the distance to the next pile was reduced and thus the span of the geomembranes in t

34、he mattress layers was decreased. Given that the arching effect in the mattress relies on an angle of 458 from the pile to the top of the mattress, the depth of stone could be reduced accordingly.</p><p>　　T

35、he overall depth of the mattress was reduced from 1500 mm to 900 mm by rationalising the design in this way. This also led to savings in reduced excavation to the original ground level (Fig.</p><p>　　3).Abov

36、e the mattress the embankment rises to a maximum height of 6·3 m to carriageway level. To reduce the spread of the embankment, the tender design originally indicated faced precast concrete panels to vertical sidewal

37、ls. This was amended later in the tender stage to vertical walls of class A red brickwork, forcing a change in the design of the reinforced embankment. The design of the embankment was subcontracted to Tensar, based on a

38、 speci?cation developed by Pell Frischmann. Their system c</p><p>　　4. BRIDGE AND ABUTMENTS</p><p>　　The bridge deck consisted of prestressed Y3 precast concrete beams and an in situ reinforced

39、concrete slab spanning 20 mover the railway lines. Figs 5 and 6 show the long- and crosssection of the bridge. The beams were supported on bankseats founded on the reinforced embankments. The narrow nature of the embankm

40、ents was accentuated at the bankseat area sand it was soon obvious that these were too narrow to avoidresting the structure on the concrete block sidewalls of theembankments. To overcome </p><p>　　Once place

41、d, the PCC beams were cast into each bankseat by the addition of an integral endwall. This eliminated the need for bearings and movement joints, thus creating an integral and steeper gradients on the approach roads. Pres

42、sure to keep the deck construction as shallow as possible came also from the discovery that the original tender drawings had not allowed for a deck crossfall to shed water. This raised the southernembankment 150 mm highe

43、r than anticipated.</p><p>　　The design was further complicated by the requirement to accommodate services under the bridge deck, between the beams, and through the integral end wall. These services were a 2

44、50 mm diameter water main (through a 350 mm diameter duct), an HV electric cable and a four-way BT duct. The loss of section was overcome by agreement to run the electric cable over the top of the deck, rather than below

45、 it, as it was not</p><p>　　physically possible to bring it through the identi?ed location on the tender drawings. The loss of available wall section led to the requirement for smaller numbers of, but larger

46、 diameter, bars ?tted around the holes through the endwalls. This is turn made the detailing and ?tting of these bars one of the trickiest elements of the job.</p><p>　　Although generally ?xed by the layout

47、 of the overall scheme, the vertical road alignment was redesigned to accommodate the change in alignment of the bridge deck. This led to an increased gradient on the southern embankment but also had a knock-on effect on

48、 the loading of the bridge. To provide a reasonable rollover across the deck from the steep gradients on either side, the depth of surfacing increased to over 300 mm at its deepest point. This greater loading increased t

49、he amount of prestressi</p><p>　　5. APPROACH EMBANKMENT PARAPETS</p><p>　　Standard parapets of type P2 were designed to protect the edges of the approach embankments and the support for these pr

50、esented the team with a considerable challenge. Originally shown as in situ reinforced concrete, it soon became clear that this solution would provide the contractor with a signi?cant health and safety problem. Casting e

51、dge beams 6 m above the ground was potentially dangerous, required a lot of scaffolding mand permanent formwork, and would add weeks to the tight construction p</p><p>　　To overcome this, the contractor prop

52、osed using precast concrete parapet supports in lieu of in situ. However, due to the tight centreline radii on the bridge approaches (50 m radius), the length of each PCC section would need to be limited to avoid a ‘thre

53、epenny piece’ appearance. This created its ownproblems when design calculations showed that accidental loadings on the parapet would not be restrained by the use of small discrete PCC units.</p><p>　　A compr

54、omise solution consisting of a precast edge piece and an in situ section under the footway/cycleway construction was eventually developed to overcome the problems. To achieve the desired effect, the precast edge beam wou

55、ld need to be of suf?cient size and shape to rest on the brick/block edging of the embankment without being unstable. In addition, the sides of each unit would need to be slightly tapered to accommodate the radii of the

56、bends, and the parapet support post bolt cradle would</p><p>　　The precast units were tied together by means of an in situ element. This comprised a slab extending the entire length of the embankments from t

57、he bankseats to the end of the parapet units. The slab was cast continuously, without joints, so that it acted as a beam. The slab was designed with a toe, which, together with friction, counteracts the lateral forces fr

58、om accidental loading of the parapet posts while the overturning forces of any impact are countered by the weight and cantilever effect </p><p>　　6. TEAM WORKIN</p><p>　　One of the most pleasing

59、 aspects of the scheme was the goodworking relationship that was maintained between all parties. Although working under the General Conditions of Contract for Building and Civil Engineering GC/works/1,2the contractor was

60、 keen to espouse the ethics of partnering. Regular meetingsbetween the contractor, designer, client’s engineer and client’s architect took place to keep all parties informed of the latest developments and to deal with co

61、ncerns before they became a distract</p><p>　　7. SUMMARY</p><p>　　Locking Castle Bridge is based on a modern and innovative design which, along with its appearance (Fig. 10), bene?ts the local e

62、nvironment and provides a focal point for the new residential development. The creation of a park adjacent to the southern embankment will enhance the status and appearance of the bridge in years to come and provide a se

63、nse of pride forall those involved in the construction of Locking Castle Bridge.</p><p>　　REFERENCES</p><p>　　1.Speci?cation for Highway Works. In: Manual of ContractDocument for Highway Works.

64、 Highways Agency. TheStationery Of?ce, 1993.</p><p>　　2.GC/Works/1: Conditions of Contract for Major Building and Civil Engineering Works. Single Stage Design & Build, The Stationery Of?ce, 1998.</p&

65、gt;<p>　　本科畢業(yè)設計（論文）</p><p><b>　　外文翻譯</b></p><p>　　題 目： Castle Bridge, Weston-Super-Mare, UK</p><p>　　學 院 ： 土木建筑學院</p><p>　　專 業(yè) ： 土木工程專業(yè)（橋

66、梁）</p><p>　　年 級 ： 2007級 橋梁3班</p><p>　　學生姓名 ： 曹 沖 </p><p>　　學 號 ： 07010907</p><p>　　指導老師 ： 劉 東</p><p><b>　　重慶交通大學</b&g