Per AASHTO the bridge must be designed for future configurations so the design lanes are between edges of deck. A median barrier could be removed in the future.
You can create a user defined loading and apply it to girders in the center of the cross section. This will account for the median barrier dead load.
I thought that that would be the answer. I've got a third barrier separating a mixed use trail, a sidewalk, and two architectural barriers. I've got the section in PGSuper looking good, and thought, "why not go all the way". Thanks though!
Wouldn't an issue with this solution be that PGSuper would place vehicular live loads where the median is supposed to be? From my understanding, placing a median would tell PGSuper that vehicles are not allowed on there, where as removing it would allow it to place vehicles in the middle.
I am currently have the same issue as this person. I am working on a span that tapers out and can't figure out how to keep the concrete median in the middle of the bridge.
Per AASHTO the bridge must be designed for future configurations so the design lanes are between edges of deck. A median barrier could be removed in the future.
You can create a user defined loading and apply it to girders in the center of the cross section. This will account for the median barrier dead load.
I thought that that would be the answer. I've got a third barrier separating a mixed use trail, a sidewalk, and two architectural barriers. I've got the section in PGSuper looking good, and thought, "why not go all the way". Thanks though!
B
Wouldn't an issue with this solution be that PGSuper would place vehicular live loads where the median is supposed to be? From my understanding, placing a median would tell PGSuper that vehicles are not allowed on there, where as removing it would allow it to place vehicles in the middle.
I am currently have the same issue as this person. I am working on a span that tapers out and can't figure out how to keep the concrete median in the middle of the bridge.