{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/53755"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/53755","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Comparison of a two-hinged and a three-hinged spandrel-braced arch highway bridge","abstract":"The weights of the main members of the two structures are as follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 72,000 lb per truss Three-hinged arch ....... 85,900 lb per truss Considering the weights of details and laterals to vary in the same ratio as the main members of the respective arch trusses, it was found that the three-hinged arch was lighter than the two-hinged arch by 8.5%. The maximum deflection for each arch structure was found at the center with the live load across the entire span. They compare ae follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 0.90 in. Three-hinged arch ....... 1.28 in. An inspection of Tables 8 and 10 indicates that for the two-hinged arch, a relative lateral yielding of supports of small magnitude (0.25 in.) produces no critical stresses, whereas, a lateral displacement of larger magnitude would over-stress upper chord and diagonal members.","abstract_html":"The weights of the main members of the two structures are as follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 72,000 lb per truss Three-hinged arch ....... 85,900 lb per truss Considering the weights of details and laterals to vary in the same ratio as the main members of the respective arch trusses, it was found that the three-hinged arch was lighter than the two-hinged arch by 8.5%. The maximum deflection for each arch structure was found at the center with the live load across the entire span. They compare ae follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 0.90 in. Three-hinged arch ....... 1.28 in. An inspection of Tables 8 and 10 indicates that for the two-hinged arch, a relative lateral yielding of supports of small magnitude (0.25 in.) produces no critical stresses, whereas, a lateral displacement of larger magnitude would over-stress upper chord and diagonal members.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Cornwell, John Alexander"],"institution":"Virginia Polytechnic Institute","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Civil Engineering","degree_department":"Civil Engineering","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1951,"date_issued":"1951","date_published":"1951","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:56Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en_US"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53755","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Civil Engineering"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Cornwell, John Alexander"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2015-06-26T20:54:29Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2015-06-26T20:54:29Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1951"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Civil Engineering"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en_US"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53755"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The weights of the main members of the two structures are as follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 72,000 lb per truss Three-hinged arch ....... 85,900 lb per truss Considering the weights of details and laterals to vary in the same ratio as the main members of the respective arch trusses, it was found that the three-hinged arch was lighter than the two-hinged arch by 8.5%. The maximum deflection for each arch structure was found at the center with the live load across the entire span. They compare ae follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 0.90 in. Three-hinged arch ....... 1.28 in. An inspection of Tables 8 and 10 indicates that for the two-hinged arch, a relative lateral yielding of supports of small magnitude (0.25 in.) produces no critical stresses, whereas, a lateral displacement of larger magnitude would over-stress upper chord and diagonal members."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Comparison of a two-hinged and a three-hinged spandrel-braced arch highway bridge"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.department":["Civil Engineering"],"dc:creator":["Cornwell, John Alexander"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2015-06-26T20:54:29Z"],"dc:date.available":["2015-06-26T20:54:29Z"],"dc:date.issued":["1951"],"dc:description.abstract":["The weights of the main members of the two structures are as follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 72,000 lb per truss Three-hinged arch ....... 85,900 lb per truss Considering the weights of details and laterals to vary in the same ratio as the main members of the respective arch trusses, it was found that the three-hinged arch was lighter than the two-hinged arch by 8.5%. The maximum deflection for each arch structure was found at the center with the live load across the entire span. They compare ae follows: Two-hinged arch ......... 0.90 in. Three-hinged arch ....... 1.28 in. An inspection of Tables 8 and 10 indicates that for the two-hinged arch, a relative lateral yielding of supports of small magnitude (0.25 in.) produces no critical stresses, whereas, a lateral displacement of larger magnitude would over-stress upper chord and diagonal members."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/53755"],"dc:language.iso":["en_US"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["Comparison of a two-hinged and a three-hinged spandrel-braced arch highway bridge"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Civil Engineering"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:56Z"}