LOADING CONDITIONS FOR DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS FOR STABILITY ANALYSES Constr. condition: See drawing ( Max. operation condition: same except for F-STATOR + Standard A A.S.H.O. Add 10% for impact. G-UPPER BEARING BRACKET + H-TRANSFER CAR f ALLOWABLE INCREASE OF UNIT STRESSES TEMPERATURE REINFORCEMENT .0% Use: 25% 005 Min. for deck 25% 1.6 Kips per wheel 33% Reference drawing. 103-0-563 Add 10% for impact. Concrete 3000 psi (ultimate @ 28 days)* Reinf. fs 20,000 psi in flexure fs: 16,000 psi web reinf. Figure 168.-Powerplant structural design data-Service bay. three parts-the upstream gallery, the downstream gallery, and the cross walls. The upstream gallery was designed as a two-floor bent or frame with various loads from the superstructure columns, floor loads and saturated backfill on the upstream wall combined. The beams in the upstream galleries at elevations 3153.50 and 3168.50 presented an unusually difficult design problem. A large tensional force, in addition to moment and shear forces, was transmitted to the beams from the maximum loading condition. The combination of tensional and shear forces resulted in a cracked section. Therefore, it was necessary to design the beam stirrups and longitudinal reinforcement to handle these stresses in addition to the moment stresses. The downstream gallery was designed as a four-floor bent or frame with a cantilever deck. Various loads from the superstructure columns, transformer deck, floor loads, tailwater loads, etc., were combined. The transformer deck was designed for a transformer inplace and another transformer moving on the transfer rails. The designs for the upstream gallery, the transformer deck, and the downstream gallery were solved by the trial-load method using an electronic digital computer. Spot checks of the machine results were made to verify the validity of the solutions. Since the unit bay system is used for the powerplant, two cross walls are required at each expansion joint. Adjacent cross walls are separated by a 1-inch expansion joint; so calculations were made for the moments, shears, deflections, and necessary reinforcement for a temperature rise of 20° F., using the Bureau's Design Standards No. 9.4 The cross walls were also designed to carry the load from the second-stage concrete to the base slab. (2) Unit bay 1 was designed similar to units 2 through 8 with the addition of a comprehensive analysis of the effect of the cable and elevator tower for shear, foundation pressures, and earthquake. The visitor's walkway or balcony also created very special design problems. 3 "Report on Foundation Adequacy and Design Considerations of Glen Canyon Dam," Julian Hinds, Chairman, John J. Hammond, Raymond E. Davis, Edward B. Burwell, Jr., John W. Vanderwilt, Denver, Colo., May 7, 1957. 4 "Design Standards No. 9, Buildings-Chapter 3, Concrete Details-Figure 19, Design of Walls Adjacent to 1-Inch Expansion Joints," Bureau of Reclamation, October 27, 1959. A control joint - parapet)" -22-9′′ Top of 18" structural slab, Fl. 3168.17 FLOOR-EL. 3168.50 Unit 8 only Top of parapet, EI. 3191. 67 -3-0° ELEVATION DRAFT TUBE GATE SEATS EXPLANATION First stage concrete Second stage concrete (not included in this contract) Bug Blockout concrete NOTES For general concrete outline notes, see 40-0-5432. Structural Arrangement drawings are preliminary and are subject to change, pending final design. Typical construction joints are shown; additional joints may be required. Floor elevations are to the top of structural concrete. Seals shown in horizontal construction joints are Type N2 metal seals. Seals shown in vertical construction joints are Type F For details of keys in construction joints, see 40-0-5249. For control joints, Types A and B, see 40-D-5250 and 5251. Handrailing post recesses shall be formed as shown on 40-0-5148. 3-0′′ DESIGN CHANGES TO BEAMS, SLABS, OPENINGS, DELETED UNITI AND CHANGED REFERENCE LINES. REVISED Figure 170.-Powerplant structural arrangement plans-Unit bays 2 through 8. CHIEF DESIGNING ENGINEER SECTION A-A |