LEAP Steel Service I HL-93 Reactions

RE: LEAP Steel Service I HL-93 Reactions

Andrew — Tue, 15 Mar 2022 13:41:15 GMT

Thanks for the reply Benji,

My second screenshot is from FEM analysis and is the same load case "HL-93 (Deflection per AASHTO)".

Here is another screenshot from another file using FEM. From my understanding, this is the Service I truck (25% truck + lane), so we should see reactions for it.

My biggest concern is that Service I deflections in Line Girder and Grillage are not accurate comparing to other programs' results, and are much higher than the FEM deflections. That was my concern with seeing what looks like binary code as the reactions for the Service I truck when using Line Girder and Grillage.

Thanks

RE: LEAP Steel Service I HL-93 Reactions

Benji Michael Chit Khin — Tue, 15 Mar 2022 10:43:06 GMT

In your first screenshot it shows the "Load Case" as "HL-93 (Deflection per AASHTO)". It should be set to "HL-93". The deflection Load Case only reports deflection, no other Live Load results.

RE: LEAP Steel Service I HL-93 Reactions

Vinay mysore — Thu, 10 Mar 2022 13:24:59 GMT

I tested this issue and these are my findings.

I tested this issue on Tutorial 1 example .

1) I Ran Line Girder Analysis , Grillage analysis and FEM analysis and in all the 3 cases i did not see the -1010 values in the Support Reaction table.

2) Then i tested the Live Load Deflection values report and i did not see any discrepancy in the report.

I would sugges you check this report.

For more information related to Leap Bridge Steel program please check the wiki articles in the below mentioned Bentley Communities link.

https://communities.bentley.com/products/bridge_design___engineering/w/bridge_design_and_engineering__wiki/20537/leap-bridge-steel-main-page