design to BS 5400
L.A. Clark
\
{
\
... 111 ...
. 111111111
111111111
~
Construction Press
London and New York
f
l
l. ___ ;
j ,
[] :
[]
f] i
III
lJ '
r \
r
11
I
,I[
I
1 .f
II i
.
n
'
i
I
I
l.
II [
. I
..
...... l
[ L
.J
r,
~
il
IJ :
1
,_II~,,
Acknowledgements
I thank many of my fonner colleagues at the Cement and
Concrete Association for the contributions which they
have indirectly made to this book through the discussions
which I had with them, I am particularly indebted to
George Somerville and Gordon Elliott who, each in his
own particular way, encouraged my interest in concrete
bridges. In addition, .it would not have been possible for
me to write this book without the benefit of the numerous
discussions which i have had with bridge engineers
throughout the United Kingdom  I am grateful to each of
them.
My thanks are due to Peter Thorogood and Jim Church
Contents
who read parts of the manuscript and made many constructive criticisms; also to Julie Hill who, with a small contribution from Christine Cope, carefully and efficiently
typed the manuscript.
Finally, prior to writing this book, I had wondered why
it is usual for an author to thank his wife and family  now I
know! Thus, I wish to thank my wife and daughters for
their patience and understanding during the past three
years.
L.A. Clark
June, 1981
Preface
ix
Chapter 5. Ultimate limit state flexure and inplane forces
Notation
xi
Reinforced concrete beams
Prestressed concrete beams
Reinforced concrete plates
Prestressed concrete slabs
Chapter 1.
The New Code
Development of design standards for concrete
structures
Philosophy of limit state design
Summary
Chapter 2.
Publisher's acknowledgements
Figwes 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 8.4 and 10.8 were originally
prepared by the author for the Bridge Engineering Standards Division of the Department of Transport under contract. These figures, together with references to the
requirements of the Department of Transport's Design
Standards, are reproduced with the pennission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Extracts from
British Standards are included by pennission of the British
Standards Institute, 2 Park Street, London WIA 2BS,
from whom complete copies can be obtained.
Introduction
Analysis
Chapter 3,
32
Loadings
Material properties
Material partial safety factors
Design criteria
Y13 values
Summary
I'
I
vi
9
13
16
19
27
27
Chapter 4. Material properties and
design criteria
11
9
General requirements
Types of bridge deck
Elastic methods of analysis
Elastic stiffnesses
Plastic methods of analysis
Model analysis and testing
Examples
General
Loads to be considered
Load combinations
Partial safety factors
Application of loads
Pennanent loads
Transient loads
Example
.ii
2
4
7
11
32
32
55
55
57
58
E~amples
61
61
Chapter 6, Ultimate limit state shear and torsion
65
65
65
Introduction
Shear in reinforced concrete
Shear in prestressed concrete
Torsion  general
Torsion of reinforced roncrete
Torsion of prestressed concrete
Examples
81
83
Chapter 7.
86
Serviceability limit state
l:Qtroduction
Reinforced roncrete stress limitations
Crack rontrol in reiriforced concrete
Prestressed concrete stress limitations
Deflections
Examples
72
75
76
86
86
88
94
96
98
32
33
34
34
35
42
45
45
46
48
52
54
Chapter 8. Precast concrete and
composite construction
102
102
Precast concrete
Composite construction
Example  Shear in composite construction
105
115
Chapter 9. Substructures and
foundations
118
Introduction
Columns
Reinforced concrete walls
Plain concrete walls
Bridge piers and rolumns
118
118
125
126
129
vii
BS 5400 permits the use of plastic methods of analysis.. into codes of practice for the design of concrete structures. In contrast. The introduction of limit state design to the design of concrete bridges constitutes a radical change in design philosophy because the existing design docwnents are written. After tracing the history of limit state design and explaining its tenninology. The two sets of loadings are com· pared in Chapter 3. . Vibration and fatigue 151 151 151 154 Introduction Vibration Fatigue Chapter 13.g. Also it is hoped that it will be of use to undergraduate and postgraduate students taking courses in bridge engineering.__)  . Lightweight aggregate concrete 147 Introduction Durability Strength Movements 147 147 148 149 Chapter 12.__ J  ~=:J ·. finally. the evaluation of elastic stiffnesses for various types of bridge deck is discussed in some detail. Detailing 137 Introduction Reinforced concrete Prestressed concrete 137 137 142 Chapter 11. transverse shear in voided slabs. limit state design has been introduced. .~ix I~~ . the bridge code (BS 5400) in 1978. These examples illustrate the applications of various clauses of BS 5400.in 1978 and. This is due to the fact that the loadings and design criteria were chosen so that. Therefore..~ ._. applications of plastic methods are discussed in " vW . However. and the incorporation of temperature loading into the design procedure. ..129 130 133 Bridge abutments and wing walls Foundations Examples Chapter 10. shear in composite construction. although it is unlikely to change significantly the final section sizes adopted for concrete bridges. the analysis.:. Thus.A. in addition to giving the background to the BS 5400 clauses and suggesting interpretations of them in ambiguous situations. its aim is to give the background to the various clauses of BS 5400. L. design 158 158 158 162 163 164 Introduction Serviceability limit state Ultimate limit state Design procedure Examples Preface Equations for plate 169 Sign conventions Bending Inplane forces 169 169 170 Appendix B... However. and the methods of satisfying them. the reader is assumed to be familiar with current methods of elastic analysis and so these methods are discussed only briefly. bridge engineers have complained that there is a lack of guidance in BS 5400 on the use of plastic methods. These differences are discussed in Chapters 4 to 12. the design criteria of BS 5400. both nationally and internationally. loading and design aspects of BS 5400 are discussed. and to compare them with the corzesponding clauses in the existing design documents. Temperature loading Appendix A. but very similar for prestressed concrete. The present book is an attempt to meet this need. the masonry code (BS 5628). are very different for reinforced concrete. r Chapter 2. Since then it has been used in the water retaining structures code (BS 5337) in 1976. Transverse shear in cellular and voided slabs 171 Introduction Cellular slabs Voided slabs 171 171 171 References 176 183 Index During the last decade. which are concerned with concri:te bridges. a number of bridge engineers have expressed the need for a document which gives guidance in the use of this code of practice. It is hoped that this book ·will assist practising concrete bridge engineers in interpreting and applying BS 5400.. _: ___ ·:. in general. the use of BS 5400 may change design procedures. Compared with those of existing documen1s. In view of the different design methods used in BS 5400. Limit state design in British codes of practice first appeared in 1972 in the building code (CP 110). where it can be seen that some load· ings differ only slightly whereas others differ significantly...:. this book suggests procedures for those aspects of design which are not covered adequately. Thus. Worked examples are given at the ends of most chapters. __. The loadings in BS 5400 differ from those in the existing design documents. principally. bridges designed to BS 5400 would be similar to bridges designed to the then existing design documents. Many bridge engineers have expressed the· view that BS 5400 does not deal adequately with certain aspects of concrete bridge design.. in tenns of a working load and permissible stress design philosophy. e. Clark June 1981 %.
'" 1.. . fpb . A..  average compressive stress in end block bearing stress average anchorage bond stress local bond stress concrete strength at transfer average concrete tensile stress between cracks compressive stress due to prestl'C..Ii_. f. G H . f. A.. !" f. Other symbols are defined in the text. .f. '• .ura! strength (mndulus of n1p1ure) of concrete shear &tress steel stress at a crack at cracking load design tensile strength of concrete maximum tensile stress in end block permissible concrete tensile s1ress in end block cliarac:teristic strength of reinforcement characteristic strength of longiltldinal torsion reinforecment characteristic stn:ngth of link reinforcement fundamental naiural frequency of unloaded bridge steel srress ignoring tension stiffening shear modulus depth of backfill overall depth or thickness bottom flange thiclmess lever arm of cellular slab T ·beam flange thickneJ& minimum and lllllicnum dimensions of rectangle xi .._ '·.. f ! . D D. E... ill Dz.. !... • " '"' F bar spacing distance between centroids of compressive flange and of composite section perpendicular distance from crack shear span b=dili width of interface in composite section torsional inenia..'ls characteristic strength of concrete cylinder compressive strength of concrete hypothetical tensile stn:ss chamcteristic strength tendon stress at failure design stress of tendon when used as torsion reinforcement effective prestress tensile stress due to prcsiress at an extreme concrete fib• characteristic strength of tendon fle. c c. f. A' A. c.. . d. . '· 1: :1 . . centrifugal force F. A" A. steel force force in compression reinforcement tie force F.. acceleration distance measured from compression face of belllll A. f. in shear effective depth of half end elastic modulus. tf.. e.... work done by external loads elastic modulus of concrete elastic modulus of flange of composite beam elastic modulus of s!eel eccentricity initial column eccentricity additional column e«enlricity '"= '·'·· bursting force tensile force in bar at ultimate limit state concrete force...rea of concrete Aef area of flange of composite beam area of tendon area of tension reinfon::cment area of compression reinforcement in beam area of reinforcement in column area of longitudinal torsion reinforcement area ofshear reinfo!Cllment area of 1rnnsverse reinforcement in flange area within median line of boit span. A...nlssion reinforcement in beam depth of concrete in compression effective depth.. compressive force: coefficient drag coefficient lift coefficient cover minimum cover internal dissipation of energy density of concrete plate bending stiffnesses per unit length effective depth: void diameter depth to comp.Ii 'ili" )i~ ~i I ~1 I! E E..'· b.. h "' hmm. A. '· f. F. c. F. . f. "t. f• f.:l\i_ Ii Notation The principal symbols used in this book are as follows. DI" D~I" D1 d d' d._ .. f...
~~ cl l ~ ~ J~~~~~~~~~~~~&clci~~ 11l_..Jl:i'n.a:><If<P ..:: ':t.....:: . t. l:! ~~ :l :l!:.J:f:. I [1 I I II l '~ ..J :~ [] u [] [] n IJ [J 1 I II.J... " ?l~f..'l..£><>i>i"'~..::~ . 'JJJo1J.SJ.~.t'.
A number of subcommittees were then fonned to draft various sections of such a code. The Code consists of the ten parts listed in Table 1. not all aspects of the design and construction of bridges are covered. the background to the Code is given in detail and suggestions made as to its interpretation in practice. .1 ~I :11 i..11. and a significant development took place in 1967. a meeting was held to discuss the revision of British I 2 3 4 5 6 7 Standard BS 153 [l].the ten parts Contents General statement Specification for Joad. at the time of writing.i~ !!l. sufficient docuinents have been published to design con· crete bridges. It should be noted that BS 5400 is both a Code of Practice and a Specification. !I Chapter 1 Introduction The New Code Table 1.1 and. the work of these subcommittees has culminated in British Standard 5400 which will. At the time of writing it is in draft fonn. Hence. significant changes in design practice but. However. The remainder of this first chapter is concerned with general aspects of the Code. the partial safety factors to be applied to each load and the load combinations to be adopted.1. design criteria and methods of compliance. on which many bridge design documents were based [2].s Code of practice for design of steel bridges Code of practice for design of concrete bridges Code of practice for design of composite bridges Specifica1ion for materials and workmanship. At that time. reinforcement and prestressing tendons Recommendations for materials and workmanship.. 9 IO BS 5400 . In addi· tion the subcommittees concerned with the various materials and types of bridges had to produce documents which would be compatible with each other. concrele. exceptions worthy of mention are the design of Design rules for steel bridges are given but reference is not made to Part 3 in this book. Part3 Code format !II' 11 ~ . Part 1 The philosophy of limit state design is presented and the methods of analysis which may be adopted are stated in genera1 tenns.. henceforth. Ii. The author understands that the Code Committee did not intend to produce documents which would result in . concrete and composite steelconcrete bridges of any span. It was suggested that a unified code of practice should be written in terms of limit state design which would cover steel. reinforcement and prestressing tendons Code of practice for bearings Code of practice for fatigue parapets and such constructional aspects as expansion joints and waterproofing. rather. be referred to in this book as the Code. concrete. a11 i:xcept Parts 3 and 9 have been published: drafts of these parts are available. I · I '. In subseqtient chapters. intended that bridges designed to the Code would be broadly similar to those designed to the then current documents. The contents of the individual parts are now summarised.1 Part Background Rules for the design of bridges have been the subject of continuous amendment and development over the years. steel Specification for materials and workmanship. Part2 Details are given of the loads to be considered for all types of bridges. Part4 Design rules for reinforced. prestressed and composite (precast plus insitu) Concrete bridges are given in tenns of material properties..
L.>0. Limit state design Elastic material behaviour The implication of the above developments is that it has been necessary: Permissible stresses It has long been recognised that steel and concrete exhibit behaviour of a plastic nature at high stresses. and of more concern. It is obvious that. the consideration of !he serviceability aspects of design was reflected in the introduction of specific crack control requirements in the Department of Transport documents.4 for concrete Detailed span/depths or calculations for deflection. Required load factor Additional design requirements 140 for beams too for columns f>0..le course.45 fy None for beams 3.50 fy 2. However.SD + 2. it can be seen that.2 shows . Warning against cracking CP 115 (1959) Both elastic and ultimate load methods required Cracking avoided by limiting concrete tension 1.0 for steel 2.2 which summarises the basic requirements of the various structuraJ concrete building codes since 1934. 8 for sieel 2. CP 115 [8] and CP 116 [9].it is based on a permissible working stress philosophy. the safety factor has decreased).6 for concrete Warning against excessive deflections CP 114 (1957) Either elastic analysis or load factor method 210 in tension 160 in compression f.permissible working stress where. Such a design approach was perfectly adequate whilst matetial strengths were low and the safety factor high because the permissible working stresses were sufficiently low for serviceability considerations (deflections and cracking) not to be critical. BE 1173. 2.>0. Part9 The design. Part 10 is concerned mainly with steel and steelconcrete composite bridges but some sections are referred to in this book. At the time of writing. To treat each of these aspects separately. states that the Code will. Thus. Part 9 would replace the Department of Transport's Memoranda BE 1n6 [11] and IM 11 [12J. Specific calculations for crack width required Basis or analysis Steel stress limitation and design (Nfmm~) Elastic analysis. ~se in tum are based on current Codes of Practice for buildings (e. albeit disguised io a working stress format. It can thus be seen that the original simplicity of the permissible working stress design philosophy has been lost by the necessity to carry out further calculations at the working load. Such behaviour exposes undesirable features of working stress design: beams designed on a working stress basis with identical factors of safely applied to the stresses. under a specified loading condition.. ~·'' 1':JkiikHJ L·= ~~· i 1. CP 110 [15]. in dJ. but m = 15 190 in tension 140 in compression f>0. AJ1hough. Current design procedures for concrete bridges are based primarily on the requirements of a series of Technical Memoranda issued by the Department of Transport (e.. implementation is to be phased over an unstated period· Of time. and the capacity of an indeterrilinate structure to redistribute moments cannot be utilised if its plastic properties are ignored. the working stress designer is now in a position in which he is using a design process in which the purposes of the various criteria are far from self evident.. it should be noted that several of the Department's Technical Memoranda have been updated to incorporate 1. This. will be of uniquely calculable values.. ___ ~~. (1934) Development of design standards for concrete structures Before explaining the philosophy of limit state design it is instructive to consider cunent design procedures for concrete bridges and to examine the trends that have taken place in the development of codes of practice for concrete structures in general.2 Summary of basic requirements from various Codes of Practice for structural concrete material from the Code both during the Code's drafting stages and since publication. prestressed concrete code (CP 115) of 1959. BE '2173 and BE In7). CP 114. CP l15 and CP 116).i ·.. was the culmination of these trends and developments.. 2. Essentially. be supplemented by Departmental design and specification requirements. with its introduction into British design practice in CP 110 in 1972. This design process has three distinguishing features .6 for concrete Span/depth ratios given for beams and slabs. but reference is not made to Part 6 in this book. with an initial stage of trial applications of thi. Parts 7 and 8 would replace the Department of Transport's Specification for road and bridge works {IO]. . except by crac~ing and deflection requirements I .g.8 for steel 2. strength. 2 ~ Table 1. for all structuraJ members. reinforcement and prestressing tendons is given.: Code to selected schemes.. the approach is basically one of working loads and pennissible stresses.g. essentially.0 for steel 2.SL or2(D+ L) Warning against excessive deflections CP 114 (as amended 1965) Either elastic analysis or load factor method 230 in tension 170 in compression f . This. 3. 3. which introduced limit state design in combination with characteristic values and partial safety factors. testing and specification of bridge bearing's are covered..n:1e unage aesign ro 11::i j'lVIJ lntroductw11 Part5 Design rules for steelconcrete composite bridges are given and some of these are referred to in this book. permissible working stress material 'failure' stress safety factor Thus stresses are limited at the working load essentially to provide an adequate margin of safety against failure. more attention has been given in building codes to deflection and cracking. due to the inherent variabilities of both loads and material properties. Part 6 The specification of materials and workmanship in connection with structural steelwork are given. with some important modifications which reflect problems peculiar to bridges. the Department of Transport's views on the implementation of the Code are summarised in their Departmental Standard BD 1178 [13]. PartB Recommendations are given for the application of Part 7.0 for columns None As above. In addition. has meant that permissible steel stresses have risen to a level at which the serviceability aspects of design have now to be considered specifically.55 fy 1. that the plastic properties of materials were recognised. Implementation of Code for concrete bridges Highway bridges From the previous discussion. 2. as pennissible steel stresses have increased. it assumes elastic material properties and it is deterministic. Statistical methods were introduced into CP 115 in 1959 to deal with the control of concrete quality. Part 7 The specification of materials and workmanship in connection with concrete. Warning against cracking CP 110 (1972) Limit state design methods No direct limit set. However•. although there are also requirements to check crack widths in reinforced concrete structures and to check the ultimate strength of prestressed concrete structures. In bridge design. with variable modular ratio and permissible sttesses CP 114 (1948} Cod• Ral/way bridges DSIR There should be fewer problems in implementing the Code for railway bridges than for highway bridges. L. but were not directly involved in the design process. Part 4 would replace the Department of Transport's Technical Memoranda BE 1n3 [5] and BE 2/73 [6] and Codes of Practice CP 114 [7].61.g.12. Part 10 Loadings for fatigue calculations and methods of assessing fatigue life are given. it was not until 1957.. limlt state design was considered as a revolutionary design if. 4. it is not possible to be detenninistic and that a probabilistic approach to design is necessary. Critical sections are then designed on a modular ratio basis to ensure that certain specified stress limitations for both steel and concrete are not exceeded. In this respect the most important consideration is that of the permissible steel stress and Table 1. with the introduction of the load factor method of design in CP 114. because British Rail have been using limit state design since 1974 [14]." '' r  3 .3 for concrete More detailed span/depth ratios for deflection. The concept of considering the elastic response of a structure at its working load and its plastic response at the ultimate load was first codified in the The permissible working stress design equation is: stress due to working load:!S.. '~~______J L~ _____. Moreover. Each of these features will now be discussed with reference to Table 1. trial structures are analysed elastically to determine maximum values of effects due to specified working loads. the stresses in the materials. To consider the variable nature of loads and material properties. deflections and cracking).unc.2 shows that. have different factors of safety against failure. at certain points of the structure. and this code may be regarded as the first Bri1ish limit state design code.. CP 110 made it possible to treat each aspect of design separately and logically. Deterministic design The existing design procedure is detenninistic in that it is implicitly assumed that it is possible to categorically state that.e. and to recognise the inherent variability of both loads and material properties in a more formal way. combined with the introduction of highstrength reinforcement.. that the ratio of permissible steel stress to steel yield strength has gradually increased over the years (i.50 fy For columns. but with different steel percentages. if the Code were to be adopted for concrete highway bridges: Part 2 would replace the D~partment of Transport's Technical Memorandum BE 1n1 [3] and British Standard BS 153 Part 3A [4]. To consider more than one aspect of design (e. Table 1. At the time of writing Part 9 is in draft form but some material on bearings is included in Part 2 as an appendix which will eventuaJly be superseded by Part 9. The latest building code.
term is thus adopted in the Code. it can be seen that fatigue is considered not under ultimate loads but under a loading similar to that at the serviceability limit state. thus.amined separately in order to check that it is not attained. Values of y13 are dependent upon the material of the bridge and. typical levels of risk in the design life of a structure are taken to be lo6 against collapse and 102 against unserviceability occurring. Limit state design principles have been agreed internationally and set out in International Standard ISO 2394 [16]. are chosen to give similar levels of safety and serviceability to those obtained at present. in fact. This is because in the former case there is a greater chance of an unfavourable deviation from the nominal value. a probabilistic basis is adopted and.2) and (1. the design load effects can be determined from S* = (effects of Yp YtL Qk) (I . such as wind loads. Limit states 11111 . Number of loadings acting together: the value for a particular load decreases as the number of other loads acting with the load under consideration increases. Loss of equilibrium when a part or the whole of the structure is considered as a rigid body.. Importance of the limit state: the consequences of the effects for which Yf3 is intended to allow are more •1 II . Ultimate limit state This corresponds to the maximum loadcarrying capacity of the structure or a section of the structure.' :. elastic analysis will generally continue to be used for concrete bri_dge design. 1. to the loads in use at the time of writing the Code. the point in the design process. Since statistical data concerning material properties are generally available."lte briflna A"<ign tci R. Different 'acceptable probabilities' are associated with the different limit states. Type of loading: a lower value is used for an essentially uniformly distributed type of loading (such as dead load) than for a concentrated loading because the effects of the latter can be analysed Jess accurately. influences the final value of S*. as illustrated in Fig. or a part of a structure. either explicitly or with a slightly conservative approach. they are discussed in Chapter 3. thus. the trends in the building codes. In limit state design each limit state is eX. at which y13 is introduced. and remedial action required. A section of the structure or the whole of the structure reaching its ultimate strength in tenns of postelastic or postbuckling behaviour. for concrete bridges. shears. but not when it is nonlinear. 1. For concrete bridges the serviceability limit state is. However. Thus ttti chance of collapse occurring is made remote and much less than the chance of the serviceability limit state being reached. in fact. a limit state is a condition beyond which a structure. YtL• is a function of two other partial safety factors: YJt• which takes account of the possibility of unfavourable deviation of the loads from their nominal values. this document forms the basis of the limit state design philosophy of BS 5400 which is presented in Part 1 of the Code and is now explained.2) If linear relationships can be assumed between load and load effects. 3. Characteristic strengths are assigned the general symbol fk and are given. this aspect is discussed in Chapter 12. However. etc. In · addition to the material of the bridge. which takes account of the reduced probability that various loadings acting together will all attain their nominal values simultaneously. 3. essentially. They appear in Part 2 because they are applicable to all bridges. Design life This is defined in Part I of the Code as 120 years.Ilt11 1111 As implied previously. concerned with crack control and stress limitations.l(b)). It is emphasised that values ofyfland yµare not given in the Code. In addition.3) will very often be the one used..(e.. Generally. 2. The structure may reach a condition at which it becomes unfit for use for one of many reasons . ~1.3) give the same value of S* when the relationship be· tween load and load effect is linear. Importance of the limit state: the value for a particular load is greater when considering the ultimate limit state than when considering the serviceability limit state because it is necessary to have a smaller probability of the former being reached. Values of the nominal loads are assigned the general symbol Qk. b.2 that equations (1. Two limit states are considered in the Code. yp. which are discussed later. They arc obtained from the effects of the design loads by multiplying by a partial safety factor Yp. In CP 110 and the Code.. Fatigue failure. This is also the case with BS 5400 Part 4 which. 2. Assessment of whether a limit state is attained could be made on a detenninistic or a probabilistic basis.1) The partial safety factor. which are defined as those loads with a 5% chance of being exceeded. unforeseen stress distribution in the structure and variations in dimensional accuracy achieved in construction. and thus equation (1. For certaia bridge loads._'i' .(b) Characteristic values can be obtained and this. exhibits some modifications introduced to meet the particular requirements of bridge structures. l. However. would become less than completely fit for its intended use. it could also be regarded as the formal recognition of trends which have been developing since the first national code was written. are given in Part 4 of the Code. for concrete bridges. Characteristic strengths The characteristic strength of a. Ill Limit state design is a design process which aims to ensure that the structure being designed will not become unfit for the use for which it is required during its design life. These have been selected on the basis of the existing data and are.fJf) approach. 2. Design load effects The design load effects are the moments.l(a). but no attempt is made to quantify these in the Code. The numerical values are discussed in Chapter 4.emphasised that the tenn 'nominal load' is used in the Code for all loads whether they 3:re derived from statistical distributions or based on experience. It is usual in limit state design to define loads in terms of their characteristic values.. the statistical data required to derive the characteristic values are not available for all loads. Method of analysis: it is logical to adopt a larger value for an analysis which is known to be inaccurate or unsafe. the partial safety factors and design criteria. each limit state is ·examined in order to check whether there is an acceptable probability of it not being achieved. in Part 4 of the Code. for bridges. the loads are defined in terms of nominal values. for these a return period of 120 years has been adopted in deriving the nominal loads. The design load effects (S*) are thus obtained from S* = Y/3 (effects of Q*) = Yp (effects ofy1L Qk) (1. characteristic strengths I I I I I I I I I I I I I J 5% 5% Strength Load (b) Strength (a) Load Fig.l(a). Design loads At each limit state. As is discussed in Chapter 3. statistical distributions are available. However. and could be attained by: This denotes a condition beyond which a loss of utility or cause for public concern may be expected. than for an analysis which is known to be highly accurate or conservative. very similar. It should be stated here that the value of YJL is dependent upon a number of factors: 1. nor that it will continue to be serviceable for that length of time.· i1~ 4 5 . The partial safety factor. design standards for concrete bridges have tended to follow. Y/3• takes account of any inaccurate assessment of the effects of loading. since 120 years is the design life specified in the Code... [ ~ ~ I j Characteristic Characteristic load strength f* What is limit state design? il[i. They are given in Part 2 of the Code because they are appropriate to all types of bridges. which must be resisted at a particular limit state.material is defined as that strength with a 95% chance of being exceeded (see Fig. This is becawe of the reduced probability of all of the loads attaining their nominal values simultaneously. collapse or excessive cracking) and each of these conditions is referred to as a limit state. while written in terms of limit state design and based substantially on CP 110. In the latter case.. but values ofYtLare given in Part 2 of the Code. l. It is. 1. 3.<:: 54. Type of loading: it is obviously greater for a highly variable loading such as vehicle loading than for a reasonably well controlled loading such as dead load. r.. in Chapter 12. values of Yp are dependent upon: I. the serviceability limit state is concerned with the vibrations of footbridges. without adequate and regular inspection and maintenance.3) It can be seen from Fig. a design load is obtained from each nominal load by multiplying the latter by a partial safety factor (yfL)• The design load (Q*) is thus obtained from Q* = YtLQk Characteristic and nominal loads Q* I I I I Serviceability limit state Philosophy of limit state design :on (1.. the Code emphasises that this does not necessarily mean that a bridge designed in accordance with it will no longer be fit for its purpose after 120 years.g..
to look upon Yp merely as a means of raising the global load factor from YJL Ym to an acceptably higher value of which are applied to the loads. load effects and material properties. Indeed. Burt and Goodearl [18] have stated that the latter was 'not statistical but intended to give a margin of safety for the extreme circumstances where the lowest strength may coincide with the most unlikely severity of loading'.)= if!Y=)A. it is assumed that. The YtL values are the same for all bridges.... because a greater number of smaller bridges are constructed. as is shown in Chapter 4.·  = ~. ____ _.. which covers possible weaknesses of the structure arising from any cause other than the reduction in the strength of the materials allowed for in Ym11 including manufacturing tolerances. The values of Ym are dependent upon: load effect 'Y13 (effect of"ffL Otl : The main difference in the approach to concrete bridge design in the Code and in the current design documents is the concept of the partial safety factors applied to the loads. In the case of a beam.. ThE:y argue. consider the beam of Fig. y. since: 1. Importance of limit state: greater values are used at the ultimate than at the serviceability limit state. I . For example.___. applied as a general multiplier to load effects to allow for analysis accuracy. 2.3 Influence of '(... c.should be adopted for the former. 'it is necessary to introduce an additional partial safety factor (y8 or Y13 ) which is a function of the type of construction (steel. The use of yfJ. . 1~ ·+Mid ~ '' :.g. neither y.. Ymz... some of the design criteria are dif· ferent. ... errors in analysis are adequately covered by the capability of the struc· ture to redistribute moment by virtue of its ductility and hence Yp should be unity.. .): ' (d.. . The design resistance (R*) is obviously a function of the characteristic strengths {fk) of the materials and of the par· tial safety factors (Ym): Fig...__. . it could be the ultimate moment of resistance._...:_... y.x . the design resistance of a structure could be the load to cause collapse of the structure. This means large errors in analysis can arise. that this concept is not defensible on logical grounds... In addition to the partial safety factors '/fl. Fig....(b) Loads and load effects important at the ultimate than the serviceability limit state and thus a larger value.. concrete bridges designed to the Code . concrete or composite construction. in early drafts of the Code.oS* (1. where a pro· vision for a hogging moment is required. such as by shear or by buckling. such as in a ductile flexural failure.. For many indetenninate structures. In addition. However. columns in frames) have limited ductility and thus limited scope for redistribution../ .. . An additional requirement is that. l_..'Yra x calculated bending moments The above points were derived from considerations of fraµied building structures.._.. y13 was called y8 (the gap factor) and Henderson. but at section XX the calculated moment is zero and Yp will have zero effect. ' . Parts of certain indeterminate structures (e. _~ .:~~') For a satisfactory design it is necessary to check that the design resistance exceeds the design load effects: R*.. at section YY. There are structures where er:rqrs in analysis will lead to moment requirements in an opposite sense to that indicated in analysis.:.. In addition..' ~'.. for example. Ym).iy. the problems are further complicated by the fact that. Design resistance of a structure or a structural element .... in some situations the design resistance is calculated from (1. In such situations either values of R* or values of the function of fk are given in the Code.. the risks are broadly the same. when considering the ultimate moment of resistance (M. to summarise. strengths.. Logically. the appli· cation of Yp will merely increase the calculated sag· ging moment. in practice.::. it has been included in the derl'filtion of the Ym values or of the functions of fk used to obtain the design resistances R* . they are discussed in Chapter 4. for the sum of the consequences.. Ym• is a function of two other partial safety factors: Ymi.. For example. shear strength) appropriate to characteristic .3 y"Q"' & "ffJ (effect of "ltL Ok) 71 .. concrete or composite)._:J (L9) (LIO) This inequality simply means that adequate Joadcarrying capacity must be ensured at the ultimate limit state and that the various design criteria at the service· ability limit state must be satisfied.. 15 discussed in Chap· ter 4.2 need be con· sidered when using the Code... and Yp should be much larger than the suggested value of about I..) which is mentioned in Part I of the Code. from considerations of framed ·structures.... In view of these problems it seems sensible. However. respectively Ynu• Ymc = Ym of steel and concrete.5) As an example. 1. However....2(a). funotion (f. because the designer is not even sure that he has the correct amount of load on the bridge.. NI· __ . whereas in building design complete spans are loaded. In bridge design. it is not necessary for a designer to consider Yn1 when using the Code because. has been criticised by Beeby and Taylor [17J. design strength = fJ!Ym Verification of Structural adequacy (1. For determinate structures there is no ·inaccuracy. which allows for the nature of the'structure and its behaviour. 3. _ _ ..7) Summary (LS) [function (fk)J!Ym where Ym is now a partial safety factor applied to the resistance (e.. .'True' bending moments . load effects and material properties._ or function (fk. .. which covers the possible reductions in the strength of the materials in the structure as a whole as com· ' I R* (l. there is another partial safety factor (y. However.6) and (see Chapter 5) At each limit state. 2.. when necessary. pared with the characteristic value deduced from the control test specimens. However. . than when it occurs gradually. and the Ym values for a particular material... 4.) of a beam Design strength of a material 6 "~_. .. are given in Part 4 of the Code. which are discussed in the next section. Hence. The partiaJ safety factor.·· w lntroauc11on ~ .g.· o ~·. Yn1 should be greater when failure occurs suddenly... Consequence factor Material: concrete is a more_ variable materiaJ than steel and thus has a greater Ym value. a* Load "itl Ot Linear I..Calculated bending moments .' :..• Yp and Ym• x y It should be stated that the concept of using Yp can create problems in design. Hence. Thus Yp has had a rather confusing and· debatable his· tory! "Ip R* = function (fJ!Ym) R* = M. or to cause a crack width in excess of the allowable value at a point on the structure .3: at the support section it is logical to apply y13 to the calculated bending moment.. the design resistance of a structural element is the maximum effect that the element can resist without exceeding the design criteria. but are equally applicable to bridge structures./· y ... 2 . is a function of two other partial safety factors: y. respectively As = steel area b = beam breadth d = beam effective depth a =concrete stress block parameter toe (y. design strengths are obtained from the characteristic strengths by dividing by a partial safety fac.i. irrespective of whether that material is used in a bridge of steel. 1. Similarly.13 on cOntinuous beams YtL Ym (Ym is defined in the next section).. are the same.. function (Qh YtL• Yp) where fyi fcu = [1< of steel and concrete. The design resistance of a structure at a particular limit state is the maximum load that the structure can resist without exceeding the design criteria appropriate to that limit state.. An example is the treatment of shear. It is emphasised that individual values of Ymt and Ym2 are not given in the Code but that values of Ym• for concrete bridges. it could be argued that y8 was also required for another reason. 2 values: it argues that the total consequences of failure are the same whether the bridge is large or small. because it is necessary to have a smaller probability of the former being reached... tbe Code does not require a designer to apply y. Regarding Yn2• the consequence of failure of one large bridge would be greater than that of one small bridge and hence Yn2 should be larger for the former. Effectof'Yl3"1ftOtl Effect of "ft£ "ltL a* "lf'3 "ltL (a) a* I .~~:. Loed "lt3'YtL Ot {b) Nonlinear ... or the moment which causes a stress in excess of that allowed.4) L. for each type of construction... designs in accordance with the Code and in accordance with the existing documents should be similar. Load effect I Effectof"Y. .... . in bridge design posi· tive or negative parts of influence lines are loaded: thus if the influence line is not the 'true' line then the problem discussed in paragraph 4 above is exacerbated. 1 nor y..... which allows for the social and economic con· sequences of failure.· ·. Thus. which is discussed fully in Chapter 6: R* values for various values of [1< are tabulated as allowable shear stresses...
Part 4 of the Code gives the following guidance on the stiffnesses to be used in the analysis at the serviceability limit state. which deals with steelconcrete composite bridges. Thus the most likely application of such analyses is that of checking a structure at the serviceability limit state. or to Part 5 of the Code.. it is anticipated that analysis at thi serviceability limit state. within the limitations of the effective 9 . The flexural stiffness may be based upon: Ill: ii 1f. Hopefully. Chapter2 Analysis IJi 11 11 i~ ' 11: General requirements II The general requirements concerning methods of analysis are set out in Part 1 of the Code. There is thus no shortterm advantage to be gained from using the Code and. 11 i: 11' 111 The concrete section ignoring the presence of reinforcement. Consequently. However. 1 11!: q 111 111 Serviceability limit state Iii Part 1 pennits the use of linear elastic methods or nonlinear methods with appropriate allowances for loss of stiffness due to cracking. in accordance with the Code. In such cases the designer is referred to the specialist literature. the breadthtolength ratio of the flange.·111 ·te bri~ ·gn to . it should be used consistently throughout the structure.· Although nonlinear methods of analysis are available for concrete bridge structures {19]. The tables were based [24] on a parametric study of shear lag in steel box girder bridges (25]. The transformed section c. the type of loading (distributed or concentrated) and the support conditions. will be identical to current wOrking load linear elastic analysis. they are more suited to checking an existing structure. • '') should be very similar in proportions to those designed in recent years because the design criteria and partial safety factors have been chosen to ensure that 'on average' this will occur. torsional and shearing stiffnesses may be based upon the concrete section ignoring the presence of the reinforcement. r this is because prior knowledge of the reinforcement at each section is required in order to determine the stiff· nesses. the same effects are ·calculated whether the material properties are appropriate to the mean or characteristic strengths of materials. Poisson's ratio for concrete is given as 0. materials. Since the latter are used throughout the Code. Values for the short term elastic modulus of normal weight concrete are given in a table in Part 4 of the Code. Part 5 treats the shear lag problem in tenns of effective breadths. they are con· sidered to be applicable to concrete flanges of composite bridges (26] and. II' 1 2. creep. Hence..2. and it is considered to be unlikely that severe cracking will occur due to these effects at the serviceability limit state. when it has already been designed by another method at the ultimate limit state. and gives tables of an effective breadth parameter as a function of . initially there will be the disadvantage of an increase in design time due to unfamiliarity.1! 1 3. The latter methods of analysis must be used where geometric changes signifi· cantly modify the load effects. The advantage of the limit state format. but such behaviour is unlikely to occur at the serviceability limit state in a con· crete bridge. whichever option is chosen. and not the mean strengths. the values of the latter are detennined by the relative and not the absolute values of the stiffnesses. because when analysing a structure it is the overall response which is of interest.jI. The reinforcement can be ignored because it is difficult to allow for it in a simple manner. However. the moduli of elasticity and shear moduli to be used in determining any of the stiffnesses should be those appropriate to the mean strengths of the materials.onsisting of the concrete in compression combined with the reinforcement on a modular ratio basis. the design time will decrease as designers i ·1 i become familiar with the Code and can recognise the critical limit state for a particular design situation. as presented in the Code. If there is a linear relationship between loads and their effects. It is also stated in Part 4 that shear lag effects may be of importance in box sections and beam and slab decks having large flange width~tolength ratios. It is thus eminently suitable for future development based on the results of experience and res~arch. in which case it is 175 kN/mmz .. except for alloy bars to BS 4486 [21] and 19wire strand to BS 4757 section 3 [22]. Strictly. the Code permits them to be used for analysis.lj~i 1. 11111 8 Axial. is that it does make it easier to incorporate new data on loads. such as Roik and Sedlacek (23]. indeed. methods of analysis and structura1 behaviour as they become available. The elastic modulus for reinforcement and prestressing steel is given as 200 kN/mm 1 . rather than to direct design.. and more specific requirements for concrete bridges are given in Part 4. the longitudinal location of the section of interest. i 111 :11:i I~ "I~ ' . and Appendix A of Part 4 of the Code states that half of these values should be adopted for analysis purposes at the serviceability limit state. The gross section including the reinforcement on a modular ratio basis. . etc. The tabulated values have beeo shown (20] to give good agreement with experimental data.
and voids are introduced H. justify such simplifications. as shown in Fig. This confonns with the current practice of assuming full fixity at the slab and web junctions and using either Pucher's influence sllrfaces [28] or Westergaard's equations [29].1(a)(g) Bridge deck types Solid slabs 'Types of bridge deck General Prior to discussing the available methods of analysis for bridge decks. It is obviously valid to analyse either insitu or composite slabs as thin plates. then a safe lower bound design results. which tends to omit transverse diaphragms. site location and availability of standard sections. it is permitted to assume that the worst loading case for this particular aspect of design occurs in the regions of sagging moments of the structure as a whole. However. although they would be known to have definite values. . in combination with the local longitudinal bending.. one ··. rather than an inelastic solution. or the stiffnesses may be modified to allow for shear lag and cracking. or upon nonelastic distributions of stresses or of stress resultants. as explained later in this chapter.. The choice of a type of deck for a particular situation obviously depends upon a great number of considerations. it is useful to consider the various types of deck used in current practice. When making this suggestion. r~ __. In the latter case precast prestressed beams. The precast beams are often of a standardised form 134. A design approach which is pennitted in Part 4 of the Code. The latter are available for span ranges of 716 m [34] and 414 m (35]. or can be of composite con~ struction. Plastic methods are inferred to be those based upon considerations of collapse mechanisms. As for the serviceability limit state. although it is well established in building codes. and up to about 15 m. are placed adjacent to each other and insitu concrete placed between and over the webs of the precast beams to form a composite slab. for composite slabs using prestressed precast beams. In order to reduce the number of load positions to be considered when combining global and local effects. However.. at aollapse.11 ( . 2. Reasonable service load behaviour is assured. the various crosssections are shown diagrammatically.. Elastic solutions are readily available for most structures. they should also be applicable to concrete bridges. yield line theory and the Hillerborg strip method for slabs). in addition to overall global effects. and would avoid the common problems of interpreting and designing against the torques and twisting moments output by the analysis. li "i") ta) Solid slab I I I I 0000000000 I (b) Voided slab IJ I I I DDDDDDDDD. Part 4 of the Code also permits the designer to modify elastic methods of analysis where experiment and experience have indicated that simplifications in the simulation of the structure are possible. Solid slab bridges can be either cast insitu. infinitely wid~ and support~d on two sides only. ~ . 4. However. An example of such a simplification would be an elastic anaJysis of a deck in which the torsional stiffnesses are put equal to zero. which is dependent upon ductility. In spite of the doubts that have been exp~sed. it is claimed that such an approach cannot be correct because the elastic analysis would generally be based upon stiffnesses calculated from the uncracked section. 3.c I "Hi c= i. effectively. whereas it is known that. with due account taken of any fixity existing between the slabs and webs. is minimised. even if uncracked stiffnesses are used. Elastic analysis at the ultimate limit state Tlie validity of basing a design against collapse upon an elastic analysis has been questioned by a number of designers. this method is not readily applicable to modem practice. which ls also explained later. Prior knowledge of the reinforcement is not required. and the effects of downstand beams or webs are ignored. The reference to another plastic analysis was intended by the drafters to permit the use of the Hillerborg strip method. The basic reason for this is that an elastic solution to a problem satisfies equilibrium everywhere and. the drafters had transverse sagging effects primarily in mind because these are the dominant structural effects in design terms._ . Reasons for adopting the elastic solution based upon uncracked stiffnesses. However. These points are referred to by a number of authors [3033) and only brief discussions of the various types of deck follow. In particular. Although such methods exist for certain types of concrete bridge structure (e. and on the elastic moduli. a simple plastic method could be used for checking a structure at the ultimate limit state when it has already been designed at the serviceability limit state. Solid slabs are frequently the most economic form of construction for spans up to about 12 m. 2. such as span.2. site conditions. Those in Fig. 2. should note that it is perfectly acceptable to use an elastic analysis at the ultimate limit state and an anomaly does not arise. yield line theory. for concrete structures. for reinforced concrete insitu construction.35]. whereas the worse loading case for longitudinal effects could be in regions of either global compression or tension in the flange. if a structure is designed in accordance with a set of stresses (or stress resultants) which are in equilibrium and the yield stresses (or stress resultants) are not exceeded anywhere.1 (f and g) are generally analysed as threedlmensionaJ structures. Although it is anticipated that uncracked stiffnesses will usually be adopted for analysis.1. This method is discussed later in this chapteL The stiffnesses to be adopted at the ultimate limit state may be based upon nominal dimensions of the crosssections. it is envisaged that the vast majority of structures will continue to be analysed elastically at the ultimate limit state. and which is new to bridge design. of reinforced or prestressed construction. Ultimate limit state At the ultimate limit state.g. the worst loading case for transverse hogging would occur in regions of global and local hogging.1 (ae) are generally analysed as twodimensional infinitesimally thin structures. Clark has given a detailed explanation of this elsewhere [27].. 2. except at supports.~ ~'~· r IIIIIIIlll (ii) Beam and slab . It is emphasised that the elastic solution is merely one of an infinity of possible equilibrium solutions. As an alternative to an elastic method at the ultimate limit state.~ 1 (g) Widely spaced beam and slab Fig. 2. the author is not aware of any experimental data which. such as over webs or beams in regions of global transverse hogging. which is explained later. I (cl Cellular slab uuuuu ~ \ (d) Discrete boxes I (f) Box girders Local effects When designing a bridge deck of box beam or beam and slab construction. materials and labour. it is necessary to consider.. the structure would be cracked. and to examine how these can be divided for analysis purposes. Part 1 of the Code permits the adoption of either elastic or plastic methods of analysis. Part 4 states that the local effects may be calculated elastically. it should be used consistently throughout the structure.10 c . Such an approach would be most appropriate to prestressed concrete structures. whereas those in Fig. thus stress redistribution. are: I. _ _. whichever alternative is selected. . it is emphasised that the use of cracked transformed section stiffnesses are permitted. is redistribution of elastic moments. 2. the local effects induced in the top slab by wheel loads. Voided slabs For spans in excess of about 15 m the self weight effecls of solid slabs become prohibitive.Analysis 'I Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 11 breadth concept. at present. with the result that top slabs are. or another plastic analysis may be used. with bottom flanges. and the behaviour of the actual individual plates which make up the crosssection considered. In Fig. Such a simplification would result in a safe lower bound design.. it being thought that this constitutes an anomaly. Problems associated with the limited ductility of structural concrete are mitigated by the fact that all critical sections tend to reach yield simultaneously.
39] as shown in Fig.3 Continuous slab bridge r ~I' " 'I ' !! ~ ! ~ ! to reduce these effects. Thus a voided slab is ortho· tropic.6 Composite cellular slab using box beams m·Precasttop hat beam (a) Bridge cross section Discrete box beam decks can be constructed by casting an insitu tOp slab on precast prestressed Ubeams [35. Analyses which include the effects of shearing deformations are available and are discussed later in this Chapter. The latter are construcled in a similar manner to solid composite slabs. from the reduced area of concrete to be stressed.. 2.n to£' ln·situ concrete f::j'' " """" a. consisting of precast prestressed beams in combination with an insitu top slab. but the need for transverse prestressing tendons through the deck creates site problems.. when analysed by means of a plate analogy.+ au~" dx 'My+ aMy dy ay y Q y+ aa"dv av Fig.6) which can be used for spans in the range 12 to 36 m. flanges. 2. In all forms of cellular slab construction a considerable proportion of the crosssection is voided. and 15 to 29 m. for the majority of practical voided slab crosssections these effects can be ignored.9 Stress resultants acting on a plate element Box girders There is a wide range of box girder crosssections and methods of construction. are Cellular slabs Beam and slab The introduction of rectangular..Ji Fig. This is not strictly correct because the neutral surface is a curved.3. 13 12 . It should be mentioned that the cost of forming the voids by means of polystyrene. The M·beam form of construction shown in Fig. in practice. and precast beams are available which can be used for span ranges of 12 to 36 m. 2. Voided slabs are gen· era1ly used for spans of up to about 18 m and 25 m for reinforced and posttensioned construction respeclively. Strictly. rather than a plane. Hol0s for bottom transverse reinforcement Permanent Packing Fig.7.ydY. but causes greater shear flexibility of the slab. is frequently used for all spans. is also orthotropic. in the ca!ie of prestressed construction. a.9. such decks should be analysed by methods which consider the behaviour of the individual plates which make up the often analysed by crosssection but. 2. they means of a grillage representation. in the case of Mbeams [36]. 2. Elastic methods of analysis General It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the elastic methods of analysis currently used in practice and only a brief review of the various methods follows. 2. in order to prevent uplift at the end supports under certain conditions of loading.. Beam and slab bridges are generally analysed as plane grillages. Maunsell and Partner [38] has the advantage thal no transverse reinforcement or preslreSsing len· dons have to be threaded through the beams. ' :'"' fo•mwock M..J~.' 111 ysis . It is generally necessary to adopt either a thin plate analysis which allows for the effects of shearing deformations. . 2.+ax x ' M1<y + JY iJM. 1J*" . The advantage of such a fonn of con· struction is that it is not necessary to thread transverse reinforcement or prestressing tendons through the beams. The implication of this is that it is not necessarily valid to analyse such slabs by means of a conventional thin plate analysis which ignores shearing deformations. economies arise only from the reduction in the self weight effects. and a beam and slab deck.P*rI Insitu concrete Transverse reinforcement "through holes in beams =··tUb"m Precast beam Fig.8. 2. However. it is reasonable to consider it as a plane. thin wood or thin metal generally exceeds the cost of the concrete replaced. Discrete box beams Fig. It is emphasised that bridge decks are generally orthotropic due to geometric rather than material differences in two orthogonal direc· tions. in the case of Ibeams [34]. Voided slabs can be either cast insitu. Fig. 2.7) which was developed by G. The structural behaviour •of such decks is extremely complex due to the fact that the crosssection consists of alternate flexible top slabs and stiff boxes. in additi9n to the top. voids in a slab obviously further reduces the self weight effects.2 Composite solid slab M"' /Centre span voided isz.8 Ubeam deck M. and. It is often necessary in continuous slab bridges to make the centre span voided. Q1) which act on the element are shown in Fig. If a plate element subjected to an intensity of loading of q is considered in rectangular coordinates x. 2. The presence of voids in a slab reduces the shear stiff. of reinforced or prestressed construction. as mentioned later in this chapter. 2. In addition. and can result in construction problems for insitu cellular slabs due to the difficulty of placing the concrete beneath the voids.. a. M"' M iJM.5 to 2. ness of the slab in a direction perpendicular to the voids.y) and shear forces per unit length (Q.35} (see Fig. twisting moment per unit length (M. Box girders are generally ·adopted for spans in excess of about 30 m and a useful review of the various structural forms has been carried oul by Swann [40J. The precast top hat beam (see Fig. as opposed to circular. The structural behaviour of box girders and methods for their analysis have been discussed by Maisel and Roll [41]. e brid. or to apply an appropriate modification to an analysis which ignores them.. d . 2. reinforced or prestressed and the use of segmental construction.4. There are a variety of standard box beam sections [34. Hence.y which coincide with the directions of principal orthotropy.. 2. heavy cardboard.4 Composite voided slab IV2' Fig. The insitu construction problems can be overcome by using precast prestressed beams in combination with insitu concrete to form a composite cellular slab as shown in Figs. 2. although this effect is not as beneficial as it would be if the beams were connected through the bottom. M 1 ). but has not proved to be popular because of the two stages of insitu (b) Beam detail Fig. some benefit is gained from the torsional stiffness of a closed box section.(b) Composite cellular slab using top hat beams {38] Beam and slab type of construction. but void formers are placed between the webs of the precast beams prior to placing the insitu concrete.7(a).. then the bending moments per unit length (M. Orthotropic plate theory An orthotropic plate is one which has different stiffnesses in two orthogonal directions. in practice. 2. surface but.5 Composite cellular slab using Mbeams Insitu concrete concreting required on site and the necessity to thread transverse reinforcement through holes at the bottom of lhe webs of the precast beams [37].. 2.5 can be used for spans in the range 15 to 29 m [36]. as shown in Fig. The latter include precast or in· situ. or can be of composite construction as shown in Fig.
An alternative approach has been presented by Cusens and Pama [49].y = D. which also uses a fifth order polynomial.. or a matrix stiffness method.. . in such situations..~ r. Sy are the shear stiffnesses per unit length.""' ~ Q1msin~ m"'I L qm(y)sin ~ L (2. it is reasonable for many bridge' decks to assume that one of the shear Stiffnesses is infinite and the other finite: it is then possible to obtain fairly simple solutions to the governing equations. as discussed later.tY torsional stiffness per unit length and S.y 2 8 Mv_ ax ay + af  q (2. The finite strip method was originally developed by Cheung [59) who adopted a third order polynomial for the outof·plane displacement function.... The reader is referred to one of the standard texts on finite element analysis for a full description of the method.. The inplane and outofplane displacements within a strip are considered separately. 2.y (2. a structure is considered to be divided into a number of elements which are connected at specified nodal points. .y. Q. The method is the most versatile of the available methods and. There are a great number of finite element programs available which can handle a variety. that the plate is stiff in shear: it is then possible to combine equations (2. Many bridge decks are essentially prismatic rectangular plates which are simply supported along two edges. it is assumed that S. The following Department of Transport programs are readily available: Series solutions for shear deformable plates If the bridge deck shown in Fig. which are all compatible with each other.8) and (2. :x (. and was subsequently developed by De Fries·Skene and Scordelis [54] into the form in which it is incorporated into the Department of Transport's computer program MUPDI [55].10) k m•> .7) If the plate has finite values of the shear stiffnesses then Libove and Batdorf [44] have shown how it is possible to obtain a sixth ordet governing differential equation. the method is only applicable to right prismatic structures with simply supported ends. at the supports... torques and shear forces of the grillage beams at the joints can be detennined.. = 0. directionx. Finite elements In the finite element approach.. In addition tO the above charts.. ..10 Rectangular bridge deck ~. the structure is idealised as a grillage of interconnected beams...2) to (2.. It is a powerful method. 2.... produced design charts which enable the calcula· tions to be carried out by hand [48].. l:. CASKET [58) is a general purpose finite element program with facilities for plane stress. Although the series solutions are for single span simply supported decks.~~:: IS. Since the grillage method represents the structure by means of beams.. However. D .. Hence the bending moments.~.~~yboundaryconditions (2. together with Rowe.. the section must be pr~smatic because the solution is obtained in terms of Fourier series.6) where D. . involves the introduction of an auxiliary nodal line in each strip and only has the two degrees of freedom of deflection and slope [49]. which ensures compatibility of curvature in addition to deflection and slope.2) a(aw) 8x ax y.)+ "(aw axay r)] (2. Grillage analysis In a grillage analysis. in addi· tion. l) One should note that the equilibrium equation (2. An alternative formulation. these 'degrees of freedom' are the cur· vatures at the strip edges [60]. can be used. In addition. The method is thus particularly suited to the analysis of box girders and cellular slabs since they can be naturally divided into strips. The constitutive relationships in terms of the plate displacement (w) in the z direction and the shear strains (y. In such a case it is possible to combine equations (2. Cusens and Pruna [49] have published a more general treatment of the method which extends its range of application and have also presented design charts for calculations by hand. Such an assemblage of plates can be solved by the folded plate method which was originally due to Goldberg and Leve [53]. ( My= Dy a(aw) ayay Yy  D1 M.6) so that a seyies solution can be obtained. nor for skew decks. and was then developed by Morice and Little [47] who.tt. which implies a linear distribution of inplane displacement across a strip. is then used to calculate the vertical displacements and the rotations aboUE two horizontal axes at the joints. and cannot thus simulate the Poisson's 15 14 .9) STRAND 2 [56) is for the analysis of reinforced and prestressed concrete slabs and uses a triangular plate bending element in combination with a triangular plane stress element: in addition. L____ j L·~~: :r.1 can be considered to be composed of a number of individual plates which span from abutment to abutment and are joined along their edges to adjacent plates.8) Ym(y)sin~ L Q.. The use of a third order polynomial for the outofplane displacement function results in discontinuities of trans· verse moments at the strip edges. beam.. a large number of strips is required in order to obtain an accurate prediction of transverse moments. Hence. 2. can solve almost any problem of elastic bridge deck analysis.3) [_E_(aw ayax _r.. plate bending. is tl.. ~ . =D. The inplane displacement function is a first order polynomial. boundary conditions on the two other edges can be dealt with in the analysis. It is emphasised that simple series solutions cannot be obtained for nonprismatic decks in which the crosssection varies longitudinally. Morley [51] presents design charts which enable solutions to be obtained by hand. intennediate supports can be considered in the same way as that discussed previously for the series solution of plates. However.4) y (2.1) to (2. The beams are assigned flexural lnd torsional stiffnesses appropriate to the part of the structure which they represent.. The folded plate method considers both inplane and bending effects in each plate and can thus deal with local bending and distortional effects. (2. Any Finite strips Elliott [52] has published a computer program which solves the same problem. plane frame.. c=:i : j ~ . q = k m•> .M! ··.of structural forms. in principle. there is a great variety of element shapes and types: the latter include onedimensional beam elements. and are represented by Fourier series longitudinally and polynomials transversely.. D 1 is the crossflexural stiffness per unit length. and The finite strip method is a particular type of finite element analysis in which the elements consist of strips which run the length of the structure and are connected along the strip edges. i.~.e. in addition to using equations (2.. However.. which are assumed to have the same neutral axis as · that of the plate.=S.) D1 :..iditions atx = 0 andL. and the method is only applicable if there are rigid end diaphragms at the supports.. 3. because only compatibility of deflection and slope is ensured. The auxiliary nodal line technique can also be adopted for the in·plane effects. force by the following Fourier sine series. The series solution for bridge decks was originally due to Guyon [45] and Massonnet [46]. two additional 'degrees of freedom' have to be introduced in order to determine the constants of the polynomial. ~'fy) Q. then it is reasonable to consider the deck to be shear stiff longitudinally (S. y. D..5) Qy = Sy'fy "(2. the discrete boxes or the box girders shown in Fig. with the voids running in the span.": . and. plane truss... space truss and space frame elements.. Yy) in thex andy directions respectively are [43] M. 2.7) by making use of Fourier sine series for the displacement (w) and the load (q) as follows (see Fig.·W&&'. it is also possible to apply them to decks which are continuous over discrete supports by using ·a flexibility approach in which the discrete supports are con· sidered to be redundancies and zero displacement imposed at each [49].1) applies to any plate and is independent of the plate stiff· nesses.. (2... this can be overcome by introducing a fifth order polynomial..... This has been done by Morley [51] by representing the transverse shear. A generalised slopedeflection procedure. = Sy =ooor y. Continuous bridges can be considered in the same way as that discussed previously for the series solution of plates... Folded plate method The cellular slab. twodimensional plane stress and plate bending elements.· o· ··o·· ·..4) to give the following fourth order governing differential equation for a shear stiff plate [42] a4w 84 w 8x4 + 2(D1 + 2Dxy) ax2ay2 + Dy 84 w ay4 = q (2. and a second order polynomial is then used for the inplane displacement function..·For equilibrium of the element it is required that [42] ~ _ ax2 2 2 8 M. This approach is used in the ORTHOP pro· gram referred to above. voided or cellular slab. but the bridge must be right and have simple supports at which there are diaphragms which can be considered to be rigid in their own planes but flexible out of plane. berun elements. "~ . computer programs exist for performing series solutions such as the Department of Transport's program ORTHOP [50]. and threedimensional shell elements. However. it is possible to solve equation (2. = oo) but tO be shear defonnable transversely.10 is considered to be a Series solutions w = zw Fig• .10) This representation requires that.2.. and specified two degrees of freedom (vertical displacement and rotation) along the edges of each strip.~~ . because it is not possible to satisfy the skew boundary conditions. . Dy are the flexural stiffnesses per unit length. = Yy = 0. and there are two degrees of freedom (longitudinal and transverse displacements) along the edges of each strip. In conventional thin plate theory.9) These expressions are chosen because they satisfy the simply supported boundary cm. QUEST [57] is intended for the analysis of box girders and uses quadrilateral thin shell elements which consider both bending and membrane stress resultants. 1. Since Fourier series are used longitudinally..
(1v') D = ' 1Dx1 = GI. It was found that the observed load distribution was slightly inferior to the theoretical distribution in the uncracked state.13) s (2. However.36). generally. . if it is desired to specify a finite value of the transverse shear stiffness.s s p<!!. it is about 15% of the value of a solid slab of the same overall depth (h).24) (2.I (2..27) K _Kw (2. GI. E and . 12 + K 1 + K 2 1 s 12 + 4(K1 + K2) + K1K2 (2..~ ') . it should.33) Beam and slab D1 = 0 (2.12 Cellular slab geomerry 5 S1 = 0. the following equations for the stiffnesses gave va1ues which agreed closely with those of the analyses and the experiments.. I· A number of sets of influence su:ifaces have been produced in tabulated and graphical form for the analysis of isotropic plates. finite plate elements or finite strips. 69]. fjl. Second moment Hence.32) Dx = El.. been 'derived experimentally or by means of finite difference techniques. t Discrete boxes (2..n line. 2. and which were checked experimentally.. for practical void ratios.14(a). a shear deformable grillage is fre quently used [61] in which shear stiffnesses. I ~]~~: :t L'..(b) Discrete box geometry It is suggested that the torsional stiffness be calculated by assuming that the 'longitudinal torsional stiffness' is equal to that of the shaded section shown in Fig.26) where Ki= K. Whenever a composite seCfi...18) (2. !'. due allowance should be made for any difference between the elastic moduli of the two concretes by means of the usual modular ratio approach. D Elx . 2.15 ' 'J ..12._'. skew simply supported torsionless slabs (66]. Fig. plates.. skew simply supported isotropic slabs [63.J '·~ Rather than calculate a specific value for the transverse shear stiffness (S.=n .36) Since the 'transverse torsional stiffness' is taken to be zero. be used only for grillage structures. When idealising a bridge deck as an orthotropic plate and using a series solution. (2..11) (2. ~ ' 5 =r.11.19) The author is not aware of any reliable published data on the transverse shear stiffness of voided slabs... a· . it thus seems . tis the box thickness at distance I from an origin.~~ Fig. Thus the 'longitudinal torsional stiffness per unit width' is given by GI.13 (as originally suggested by Holmberg [74)).. is onequarter of the total torsional stiffness per unit width calculated as above. were compared with those predicted by shearstiff orthotropic plate analysis. and skew continuous isotropic slabs [67.s(lv) (2.Gh (2. With the notation of Fig. Clark [75) has demonstrated that D. for a voided concrete slab 1 Plate analysis Second moment Fig. Clark and Symmons [71].25) The transverse shear stiffness can be obtained by con· sidering the distortion of a cell and assuming that points of contraflex11re occur in the flanges midway between the webs as shown in Fig. 2. With the notation of Fig..11) tis .= £(4A~) . it is suggested that the transverse shear stiffness can be taken as infinity for all practical voided slabs.. The shear stiffness can then be shown to be (2. . Kn (2.. (2. the grillage method is a very popular method of analysis among bridge engineers.. 2.. 2.13 Cellular distortion Cellular slab D I. the total torsional stiffness per unit width is also given by equation (2.31) .21) Elliott [52] has suggested the following values for relatively thinwalled cellular slabs having an area of void not less than about onethird of the gross area. 65). which is a reasonable value to adopt for concrete. It was found that. with a dep~h of void to slab depth ratio of 0. 64.=O. but was very similar after the bridge had been extensively cracked due to longitudinal bending.35) whereA 0 is the area within the median line of the box. then approximate calculations carried out by Elliott [72] suggest that. are the elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio respectively of concrete. and the slopedeflection equations.84 (d)'] D. reasonable to ignore the effects of transverse shear flexibility and to take the transverse shear stiffness as infinity.37) ~ D1 =E11 =1f (2.14) ' = CQ. 2.28) 2  K12 K EI. and G is the "shear modulus which is given by E G=2(1+v) 16 i ' •I . The.· Influence surface values are available for rectangular isotropic slabs [28]. where h is the slab thickness.16) (2. 2..2.34) With the notation of Fig.J~ign to pc <:Ar>fJ ratio effects of continua.14 I o. the following stiffnesses are suggested.!.* __ ·te brid~..22) tfav. Voided slab Influence surfaces Solid slab "'""Jsis Eh' 17 .) be modified by applying the relevant reduction factors given by C11sens and Pama [49]. ~ (2.15) ' ''. Elastic stiffnesses . 68. (2. 2.·~ .. = . Gh' Dx. The influence surfaces have. = 12 h Eh'[ 10.1 .on is being considered. as well as flexural and torsional stiffnesses.= G #!( 4A!) (2. the 'longitudinal torsional stiffness' is given by the usual thinwalled box fonnula. modified accordingly.11 Voided slab geomelry D~ Eh' Dx =Dy= ~2(1v 2) ' 1.20) O. for the various types of deck. and the 'transverse torsional stiffness' is zero. Guidance on the simulation of various types of bridge deck by a grillage is given by Hambly [61] and West [62]. Since the model slab had a void ratio which is very close to the practical upper limit in prototype slabs.95 h =12 D1 = vD. experimental deflections and strains.17) (2. 2. it is suggested that the torsional stiff· ness (D. 786. strictly. In design terms. 2.(1v') (d)'] Gh' [ 10.23) .29) K~ f l . for a Poisson's ratio of 0. as well ~s isotropic.s(lv) (2.). fo o[I ·~·.~ . and it has been applied to the complete range of concrete bridge structures (61}. under simulated highway loading.' ·. It is assumed throughout that the longitudinal shear stiffness (S.= h(lv2 ) (2.. are· assigned to the grillage mem. The solid slab value is given by [73] S1 Gh =g S = 24 K.=utT Second moment ~ Second moment of area=/~ ~ ~ ' ' (a) Longitudinal (b) Transverse Fig.) is infinite.14(a).+O. an idea of the significance of transverse shear flexibility can be obtained from the results of a test on a model void· ed slab bridge. t (2... ~ '1 I ) (2.15X6 Gh Elliott and Clark [70] have reported the results of finite element analyses which were carried out to determine the flexural and torsional stiffnesses of voided slabs.. or stiffness matrices. Nevertheless. If lhe sections of top slab which do not form part of the box six:tion are ignored.30) K~ ri. and the iritegration path is the media. The notation is illustrated in Fig. and these are extremely useful in the preliminary design stage of orthotropic. reported by Elliott. ·u. However.12) D1 = vDy (2.. When applied to voided or cellular slabs or to box girders. . D1 = vD1 (2..bers.. hence D XJ =Q 4s (1:.
:.0 4.hj (2. has been given by Hambly [61] an_d West [62J.141 0.~. since a grillage cannot simulate the Poisson effect of a plate.12 + 4 (K1 + K2 ) + K1K2 ( 2 55 · ) where Limit analysis ~ ·~Kw (2.I 1.61) + 3 3 ~) (2. A concept within limit analysis is that it is often not possible to calculate a unique value for the collapse load of a structure: this is alien to one's experience with the theory of elasticity.216 0.' with the notation of Fig.48) Transverse shear area = co or General Q(J" +!.z.. transverse beams can be calculated by dividing the actual beams into a number (n) of component rectangles as shown in Fig... it is unlikely that. underestimates the true torsional inertia because the junction effects. 2. 1: "1 Sx t: {a) longitudinal section Secondmomentofarea=ly 1I 1J S i<~'~>I Sy .52) ' 1 which could be used in bridge design are given. examples of plastic methods of analysis !. The torsional inertia of the ith component rectangle of size b.56) ·=~ (2.Jtf GCy) in the directions of its two sets of beams. Voided slab The inertias of an individual grillage beam should be obtained from the following inertias per unit width by multiplying by the breadth of slab represented by the grilJage beam: the notation is given in Fig.58) ~ ~=T (2.333 I. \.47) Transverse shear area = co Longitudinal flexural = The latter calculation is an approximation and.45) Various writers (39.3 A longitudinal grillage beam can represent part of the top slab plus either a single physical beam..8 2. (2.0 5.291 0.) Di = 0 Table 2.ined. : . 2. The recommendations are given in terms of inertias rather than stiffnesses.:. The following general recommendations· are a combination of those of Hambly [61) and West [62] and of the author's personal views. with the possible exception of yield line theory for slabs. but whichever simulation is chosen the author would recommend calculating the stiffnesses as suggested by the proponent of the chosen simulation. '"''~o' c J ~ ·~'. .57) ~=T r.. 2. differences between the elastic moduli of the concretes in a composite section should be taken into account by the modular ratio approach.(b) Torsional inertia of beam Longitudinal torsional = transverse torsional = (2.186 0. As for orthotropic plate stiffnesses.l:(. . ate. and thus the unique value of the collapse load can be determined._ _______.Jt Torsional= n { lx (2.:·r.50) Flexural = !Ji I1 Longitudinit torsional = transverse torsional = t = nl.~~ __j..0 6. The shear area it taken to be infinity and the flexural and torsional inertias to be. with the notation of Fig. or part of the top slab with a transverse physical diaphragm.na1ys1s B 0. . Furthermore. 62] h:we proposed different methods of simulating a deck of discrete boxes by means of a grillage.5 10.3 1.2 1.. C. 2.~ hI f~ s. Limit analysis is a means of assessing the ultimate collapse load of a structure. and a grillage stiffness equivalent to D 1 does not occur. l~ __ ..) is dependent upon the aspect ratio of the rectangle. 61.19 . Thus limit analysis can be used for calculations at the ultimate limit state in a limit state design procedure.41) Sy = oo (2. where n is not necessarily an integer.11.:. Reference should be made ·to Hambly (61J for more detailed infonnation concerning edge beams and other special cases. is given by l1=kb~h1 b.4 l.39) = Gh3 + 12 4 k" * {b) Component rectangles Grillage analysis _Ely J.'. (2.JtorJy = (a) Actual Fig. In limit analysis. ~ by Flexural ' Transverse flexural=~~ [10.0 2. where the aspect ratio is always greater than or equal to unity and is defined as blh1 or h/bt as appropri. Hambly's recommendations are modifications of those given previously in .46) .84(~)'] (2. L_ _ . "'h.1 Beam and slab (2...63) ~ + h6 3 h g (2. It should be noted that an orthotropic plate has a single torsional stiffness (D.60) It is useful at this stage to distinguish between the terms limit analysis and limit state design. Before discussing the various methods._ _________. ) . are ignored. required to produce a specific stress. (2.l~.42) The torsional inertias (J. West's differ quite considerably when calculating torsional stiffnesses. It is again assumed that the . this is not the general case and. for use with grillage analysis.59) ~ ~=T (2.62) (2. The inertias of an individual grillage beam should be obtained from the following inertias per unit width by multiplying them by the breadth of slab represented by the grillage beam: the notation is given in Figs. ~ .0 7.Jty). or a number of physical beams. Longitudinal flexural = Transverse flexural = (2.281 0..:o"'I M i inertia=.2981 0.:.305 0.51) Torsional= sg ( (2. such methods will be incorporated into design procedures in the near future.. ~ (2.312 0.__.8 3. Longitudinal flexural transverse flexural h' = 12 (2. if present. Jackson [771 has suggested a modification to allow for the junction effects. 2.40) Sy (2.. For certain structures coincidental upper and lower bounds can be obtp.5 2... .249 0. . 2. .154. and ly) of the individual longitudinal and. 1.0 0.9s(~rJ [10. fo fact.38) ' . because this is the form in which the input to a grillage analysis program is generally required.115 0. as mentioned previously.64) ) (2.0 0. at a particular point in a structure.166 0.49) A transverse grillage beam can represent either part of the top slab. .5 1. discussed earlier. D "Y Sx (2.12 and Plastic methods of analysis Introduction 2. then its inertias are given. wherell:S. whereas an orthogonal grillage can have different torsional stiffnesses (GC.196 0.I [76J.IS(a).263 0. In general. However. Where adjacent rectangles join. (2. If a longitudinal grillage beam represents n physical beams.229 0.53) 1 Longitudinal torsional= transverse torsional= 211 (2. all that it is generally possible to state is that the collapse load is between ~two values. Poisson's ratio does not appear in the expressions for the flexural stiffnesses. In this section. The total torsional inertia of a beam is then obtained by summing those of the individual rectangl~ l. it is necessary to introduce some concepts used in the theory of plasticity and limit ·analysis. 2.13.{b)~~eam and slab geometry D =El. for a vast number of commonly Discrete boxes Solid slab The inertias of an individual grillage beam should be obtained from the following inertias per unit width by multiplying them by the breadth of slab represented by the grillage beam. where a single value of the load. It is not clear which is the most appropriate simulation to adopt in a particular situation.258 0.43) b1. Values of k are given in Table 2. (2. this chapter for plate analysis. by h...16(a). but it is not generally necessary to carry out the modification for practical sections [62]. However. h1 The coefficient (/<.::: kb. D l'l.15.!..44) icl Torsional inertia constant for rectangles Aspect ratio k Aspect ratio k 1.16. whereas limit state design is a design procedure which aims to achieve both acceptable service load behaviour and sufficient strength.54) Transverse shear area = 24Kw 12+Ki+K2 .15.longitudinal shear stiffness is infinite.. :. l " 0 h " f1JK Torsional 1 lnertia=Jy Sy (bl Transverse section Fig.. can be calculated.242 ~ Cellular slab Guidance on the evaluation of elastic stiffnesses for various types of deck.'• •I• S.. known as upper and lower bounds to the collapse load. 18 ~. 2. and s8 being the spacing of the tranverse grillage beams.
2. such as are used for the longitudinal beams of beam and slab consttuction. Lower bound methods As has been indicated earlier.65) can be split into two equilibrium equations ~=rxq ax' ~ ayz 20 = (1o:)q . Hence.18(b). because it is necessary to introduce one of the following: complex moment fields including twistii:. "111 ~ . If the beam could be considered to ex:hibit true plastic behaviour.J~WL/12 :::::::::::::. concrete has limited ductility in terms of ultimate compressive strain. It follows [82)" that these can be calculated from rlysis I..17. The above simplicity of the strip method breaks down when concentrated loads are considered. overall equilibrium must be maintained by keep· ing the range of the bending moment diagram equal to the 'free' bending moment (see Fig. As }.. and the fact that bridges are designed for different types of moving concentrated loads. I l' ' 1 Although the Code does not state the fact. As the difference between the ultimate elastic moment and the reduced design moment increases. It should also be noted that the rotation capacity required at collapse is a function of the difference between the elastic moment and the reduced design moment. Thus the slab equilibrium equation (2. If the beam is designed to resist a hogging moment at the supports of J. having a length a little greater than that of the load. } (2. Thus.· .g moments [78). as shown in Fig.. W in Fig. in order to carry the design load of W. which is considered to act as a diaphragm and ·to transfer the load into pure torsion. A further problem in applying the strip method to bridge design is that difficulties arise with slabs supported only on two opposite edges. The expression 'nowhere violates the yield criterion' essentially means that the section strength at each point of the structure should not be exceeded.. A similar argument would obtain if the midspan section were designed for a moment less than WL/24.. with unlimited ductility. instead of designing to resist elastic distortional and warping stresses. as if a rigid diaphragm were positioned at the load: this results in a set of inplane forces in the walls of the box. .65) = q It is further assumed that. ~Wl/12 ~ Rediitributed""' {e) Serviceability conditions 300kNm 200kNm ~ ~ 280kNm (fl Elastic ultimate moment envelope Fig.17(a)(c) Lower bound design of box girder [82J Lower bound design of box girders been suggested by Spence and Morley [82]..o:) q in they direction. It is important to note that neither deformations in any form nor stiffnesses are mentioned when considering lower bound methods. Hillerb_org strip method One inelastic lower bound method... In the following. the load intensity q can be split into components o:q in the x direction and (1 . if the beam is designed to resist the redistri 21 ... but it is possible that it could be used for abutment design as discussed in Chapter 9..7Wll24 IRedistrlbutio~ .N2' w:fl j1Mw• w..18(a)(f) Momem redistribution First.18(d)). The elastic bending moment diagram. W and. There are other lower bound methods available which employ inelastic stress distributions._ Redistributed .. The inelastic lower bound design of bridges is complicated by the more complex: boundary conditions. is the redistribution of elastic moments in indeterminate structures. The designer is free to choose any value of o: that he wishes. m:. It is thus necessary to consider two distinct types of analysis within limit analysis. the amount of redistribution must be restricted. me Wall moments and forces 1~ 11·. These inplane forces are superimposed on the comer moments and warping moments.).67) 2mc = w1b = WwC (2. This was because it was thought that there was a lack of knowledge of redistribution in deep members such as box girders.. _____ . because it satisfies equilibrium. A statically adffiissible stress field is one which everywhere satisfies the equilibrium equations for the structure. and these are now discussed. when there is a reduction i'n moment. 2.. thus. is shown in Fig. which is mentioned specifically in the Code.<. 2.. in terms of stiffness (and. at this stage. it is assumed that.. so that equation (2. The concept of moment redistribution can be illustrated by considering an encastr6 beam of span L carrying an ultimate uniformly distributed load ofW. rather than bridges..66) I Equations (2. ~ ~ . the midspan section must be designed to resist a sagging moment of [(WL/24) + (WL/12).) of the transmission zone is then chosen by the designer and equilibrium of the zone Wl0er the warping forces (wr and Ww) and comer moments (me) considered. jw w. cracking) deteriorates. decreases. then any value of ">. as a whole.. To1a1 ..could be chosen by the designer. it is convenient to think in terms of this difference. in the vicinity of an eccentric concentrated load.. or one of the approaches sug· gested by Kemp [80. instead of WL/12. but these have been developed generally with buildings. namely. outside the transmission zone....1) reduces. and reinforcement designed as described in Chapter 5.WLII2. Moment redistribution A lower bound method of analysis. the restriction to prismatic beams was intended to preclude redistribution of moments in all structures and structural elements ex:cept 'small' beams.ii\ w:jt" ~fw' me (a) A lower bound approach to the design of box: girders has Wb m. the beam walls are subjected to only inplane stress resultants. The design procedure is tO statically replace an eccentric load by equivalent pairs of symmetric and antisymmetric loads over the webs. (d) B'A Twua l'. after initial yield. The Code permits this method to be used for prismatic beams. it could exhibit unsatisfactory serviceability limit state behaviour. 81). 2. = 8£. to a2 Mi + .18(c). Second. The Code states four conditions which must be fulfilled when redistributing moments. but zero or unity is frequently chosen. 2. the beam would behave essentially elastically. the amount of rotation. in which the two dimensional slab problem is reduced to one dimensional beam design in two directions. I Wl/12~Wl/12 WLl24+WL112~WLl/2 {c) Redistribution t<l~B~ A'.68) j! ! I' ii I: IIJi p Ji I I 1< The beam. The amount of redistribution permitted also has to be limited for another reason: although a beam designed for a ?ertain amount of redistribution will develop adequate strength.. A lower bound to the collapse load is the load corresponding to any statically admissible stress (or stress resultant) field which nowhere violates the yield criterion. An upper bound method is unsafe in that it provides a value of the collapse load which is either greater than or equal to the true colJapse load.. The basis of the method is that.. However. and to definite the amount of redistribution as ~ = 1 . (b) = dWl/12 Wl/24 Elastic _.(AWL/12)). because of the limited ductility discussed above. as occuis with slab bridges and top slabs in modem construction.. tD»l' •']. is then analysed. lower bound methods which could be adopted for bridges are described.:_:::t ff"M t ayz ax (2.. then the beam will yield at the supports at a load of I. w l (a) loading t>..Elastic Wl/12 ~Redistributed . coincidental upper and lower bounds have not been detennined. there is a transinission zone. bending and shear in the remainder of the beam.7Wll12 ~asllc•erv1ce ~ 0. in terms of limit analysis... assuming zero self weight. is increased. at any point. 2. Overall equilibrium /E!ast~culti":'a1e 0. The procedure for calcu· lating an upper bound to the collapse load can be thought of in terms of proposing a valid collapse mechanism and equating the internal plastic work to the work done by the external loads. upper and lower bound methods.66) are the equilibrium equations for beams running in the x and y directions. and this limits the ductility of a beam in terms of rotation capacity. which have a peaky longitudinal distribution. (2. A lower bound method is safe in that it provides a value of the collapse load which is either less than or equal to the true collapse load. ID view of the above comments it is considered unlikely that the method will be used in bridge deck design. w. result in a distortional couple.f l ff f f f W1 j ' b {b) t t t Transmission zon~ (c) Web Fig. The length(£.. the behaviour at the serviceability limit state... A should not be so small that the rotation capacity is exhausted. I... This is achieved by the designer choosing to makeMxy = 0 throughout the slab. in minQ. strong bands of reinforcem"ent [79].!l _____ e bridi Iii /1 I I I J I I 111 . any elastic method of analysis is a lower bound method.. Thus.l 1 II \ I ntoi occurring structures. is the Hillerborg strip method [78) for slabs... • An upper limit to ~has to be imposed. which has been permitted for building design for some time. where the tendency is tO omit transverse diaphragms. Thus. since. The antisymmetric loads. for bending and torsion.
redistributed· shear forces.. have been documented by Jones (85] for the genera! case of a simply supported skew slab subjected to either a uniformly dislribu1ed load or a single point load. Jones and Wood [84]. in Fig. This is because. 2. Introduction to yield line theory The reader is referred to one of the specialist texts. since it is the reduction in moment. the Code requires that the moment at a particular section may not be reduced by more than 30%. so also is mn. For a point loiid equation (2. Thus. 2. when this is carried out.. one is generally concerned with poin1 loads."" m1cos 2 '~i I Fig. these regions would be subjected to hogging moments at the serviceability limit state. can be calculated from E ='[If p 6d<dy] D= where en.. to the nonnal to the yield line.___. but. it would be most convenient to consider the point of application of the load P to have unit deflection.:. for a detailed explanation of yield line theory. along which yield of the reinforcement talces place.. each will be designated t:t. Fig. As the neutral axis depth is increased. for prestressed concrete. for prestressed concrete.19 Slab bridge mechanism Upper bound methods carried out for each rigid region between yield lines..70) each line each rigid region ( '[Jm. the service load is in the range 0. . hence. . line loads and uriiformly distributed loads. The resulting set of n simultaneous equations can be solved to give a.. aiid their equations. the deflection at any other point. 2. In practice. a vehicle). this implies that the resistance moment at any section should be not less than (for reinforced concrete) that appropriate to the chain dotted line of Fig.71. it reduces to the total load multiplied by the deflection of its centroid. this condition is always overruled by the second condition which implies that the moment at a particular section may not be reduced by more than 30 or 20% of the maximum moment at that section. Although the above (2.20 Normal moment in yield line 'l: B The use of this equation is illustrated in the examples at the end of this chapter. e. the internal dissipation of energy in the yield lines can be calculated from Upper bound methods are more suitabJ~ for analysis (i. it is often easier to calculate the dissipation of energy in a yield line by considering the rotations (01) of the yield line in the direction of each set of reinforcement.. and they also give the equations for such loadings. but it must be stated that it is difficult to conceive how it can be simply applied in practice to bridges. in the regions AB. to resist 70 or 80% respectively of the maximum elastic moments. The fourth. and the integration for each rigid region is carried out over its area. and final. However. which is important when considering limited ductility. the critical mechanisms have been documented for a number of practical situations. 2. if there are n parameters. It would appear that redistribution in a deck can only be achieved by applying an imaginary 'loading' which causes redistribution. and hence P. of the maximum moment at any section.e. it is possible to use an upper bound method (yield line theory) to design slab bridges and top slabs. each at an angle <!>. However. where ·the ratio of (Y/L y13) at the serviceability limit state to that at the ultimate limit state is in the range 0. In general..76 of the ultimate load and. The values of 70% and 80% originated in CP 110. For example. A major drawback of yield line theory is that the engineer cannot be sure.. the moments due to this imaginary 'loading' would then be added to those of the conventionill loadings. The next stage in the analysis is to equate the external work dope to the internal dissipation of energy. ~ i_. In practice.20. sagging reinforcement would be provided. and span moments increased.~·~~ ~ Analysis uted. at that section. dy and a. however. It is unclear why the CP 110 committee used the moment at any section. there could be a number of parameters.18(e). it is ensured that elastic behaviour obtains up to about 70 or 80% of the ultimate load. Third. or that of others.19. The minimum value of P for the proposed collapse mechanism can then be found by differentiating the expression for P with respect to each of a. and the integration for each yield line is carried out over its length.18(d). I' Yield line l as s s L ' ~ Hogging ~_. for reinforced concrete. and by considering the projections (11) of the yield line in the directions normal to each set of reinforcement. Moment redistribution has been described in some detail because it is a new concept in bridge design documents. for prestressed concrete.6 of the effective depth. expressed as a percentage of the moment at the section under consideration. There is no limit to the amount that the moment at a section can be increased. These calculations are i!lustrated in the examples at the end of this chapter. 2. but were thought to be reasonable. any redistribution of longitudinal moments should be accompanied by redistribution of transverse and twisting moments. and equating to zero. at the service load. the work done by the external loads. is the normal rotation in a particular yield line 1 mn is the normal moment of resistance per unit length of the yield line and t is the distance along the yield line.. the permissible redistribution increases as the neutral axis depth decreases. is inversely proportionaJ to the neutral axis depth. can be caJculated in tenns of ct1• In the slab bridge example of Fig. longitudinal support moments could be reduced. the rotation capacity and.58 to 0.. and to arrange the resuiling equation as an expression for the applied load (P in the example of Fig. in order to maintain equilibrium by satisfying equation (2.: %: .1). A point on the slab is then given a unit deflection. when crushing of the concrete occurs..e. Thus.. which is a function of ct1. The summation in equation (2. For the single load case considered in Fig. The engineer is thus dep"endent on his experience. Granholm and Rowe (86) give guid· ance on choosing the critical mechanism for a simply supported skew slab bridge subjected to a uniformly distributed load plus a group of point loads (i. condition imposed by the Code is that the neutral axis depth must not ex:ceed 0. nor 20%. where p is the load per unit area on an element of slab of side dx. By providing reinforcement. is the deflection of the element. even after he has examined a number of mechanisms. or prestress. Beeby [83] has suggested that the Code limits were not derived from any particular test data. The dissipation of energy is then given by (2. __. although the resulting value of P is the lowest value for the chosen mechanism. for reinforced concrete. It is emphasised that.. The summation in equation (2. by applying an imaginary 'loading' consisting of a displacement of the support. A general point regarding moment redistribution is that. This seems illogical. =' {l:fm101dl1J (2. Beeby [83] has demonstrated that the Code limits on neutral axis depth are conservative. e. and the third condition is intended to restrict the rotation which would occur at collapse. The Code thus requires every section to be designed to resist a moment of not less than 70%.71) Since (h are each functions of a1. In this pattern.18(f)..19) as a function of ct. where i takes the values of one ton. 'existing structure) than for design. If the moment of resistance per unit length of the jth set of reinforcement is m1. 2. calculating the ultimate strength of ari. A possible mechanism for a slab bridge subjected to a point load is shown in Fig. because this does not increase the rotation requirement at that section.19.. .70) is carried out for each yield line.. if the full allowable reduction in moment has been made. once the rotations in the yield lines are known.72) each line c. Yield line analysis of slab bridges Yield line theory cali be used for calculating the ultimate strength of a slab bridge which has been designed by another method.. of the moment. and the rotations in the yield lines. 2. in the direction of the reinforcement. it can be seen that the geometry of the yield line pattern can be specified in terms of the parameter a .5. in moving through their deflections. hence. as shown in Fig. where elastic conditions obtain. in a more general case. It is thus necessary to propose a number of different collapse mechanisms and to carry out the above calculations and minimisation for each mechanism. jfthe concrete crushing strain is independent of the strain gradient across the section. it is not necessarily the lowest value that could be obtained for the slab.. for reinforced concrete. then. and rigid regions between the yield lines. obtained from an elastic moment envelope covering all combinations of ultimate loads. or a unifonnly distrib· uted load. nor 80%.. i.63 to 0.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 buted moments shown in Fig. Similarly. The first stage in the yield line analysis of a slab is to propose a vaJid collapse mechanism consisting of Jines. 2. the amount of permissible redistribution reduces linearly to zero when the neutral axis depth is 0. the moment at any section may not be reduced by more than 90 kNm for reinforced concrete. the shear forces are also redistrib 22 r~· .yield tine p ! l I Sagging yield lines· s m1 L l ' ! Normal to yield line m. The reason for these limits is that the rotation at failure.3 of the effective depth. the limits of 70 and 80% are reasonable. However.69) reduces to the load multiplied by its deflection. and 0.. that there is not another mechanism which would give a lower value of the collapse load. Clark [87] has extended these solutions to allow for different uniform load intensities on various areas of the bridge and for the application of a knife edge load. which is a function of a1.69) is \ '~=: ~. The various possible critical collapse mechanisms.69) ____._. then its contribution to the moment of resistance normal to the yield line is mi cos 2 <f>J· Hence. they can be shown to be conservative by examining test data. the author would suggest designing against the greater of the nonredistributed and . ~ := · 23 . since only sufficient background to afiply the method is given in the following.. a yield line will be crossed by a number of sets of reinforcement.cos2 $. and for a line load. the total normal moment of resistance is given by mn =I m. 2.d~ D . as will be seen. Once the deflections at every point are known. In the Code.18(a). This is because there could be an alternative mechan· ism which would give a lower minimum value of P.g._ (2. when proposing collapse mechanisms: fortu· nately. only a single parameter is required to define the geometry. thus. 2.e. in general.
A coliapse mechanism is proposed.i I 1 . as opposed to analysis. it can be seen... Granholm and Rowe [86] also tested model skew slab bridges and obtain... I k. and the external work done equated to the internal dissipation of energy.... Clark [87] has designed model skew slab bridges by this method and then tested them to failure: it was found that the ratios of experimental to calculated ultimate load were 1.~ ~ &1.<ie mechanisms are not considered explicitly in the literature.. .. . in terms of the unknown moments of resistance m1. 2.. the internal dissipation of energy calculated from equation (2.=:.22(a)(c) Continuous slab bridge mechanisms Id) lo) Fig. the moments of resistance m1 are maximised with respect to the parameters rx. there would also be a hogging yield line at the interior support as shown in Fig..__..._. the calculation procedure is very similar. equating them. 2.=:.Jl) .25% for high yield and mild steel respectively.. u i to B1 . to a safe design if used as a design me!hod.ed values of the above ratio of 0...22(a) and (b). 1I ". Hence.. 72)...69).. and it is usual to choose ratios which do not depart too much from the ratios of the equivalent elastic moments.. When this occm:s. in general.. I r r " • • /® r r® L lol l•l I' \ ' Ii •I Iii i . The amount of transverse reinforcement required to prevent mechanisms (c) and (e) forming can then be calculated by setting up equations (2. 2.. . in terms of the known Joads p...~ialysis. .......I ~ :~ I :1 :I :1I I I( __________'\'_______ _ ..16 for six tests..... 2.15% and 0. . Sometimes this is not necessary. 2...JBeam or web I I .. which define the yield line pattern. similar mechanisms are analysed in {84] and [85] and thus guidance is available in these tf..". As an example. Thus...._[ IC"::_:::::. mechanisms (a) and (b) of Fig. I I 1il ! I '1 \ 1: [i I I' l $ 1\ II 'I I I: ~ •@ fol .. './' .. Although the. When used for design. it will often be found that the calculated amount of transverse reinforcement is less than the Code minima of 0. because of the values of the partial safety factors that have been adopted in the Code.::::: I I (. HenCe.21 would form but._. However. because the equations for one possible collapse mechanism involves only one set of reinforcement.. although yield line theory is theoretically an upper bound method.:::::.'. This procedure is illustrated in Example 2..95 to 1... .. as shown in the examples at the end of this chapter._. Alternatively.'r.__.: bridfi· ./' f .21 involve only the longitudinal reinforcement./ Fig.xts. similar mechanisms to those of Fig.21.·::~:.. . the latter values should obviously be provided.69) and (2.._.1. the external work done calculated from equation (2.!::'::l.. f I 11 lb) (ol {b) Yield line design of slab bridges Although yield line theory is more suitable for analysis... l.. there are an infinite number of possible design solutions which result in different relative values of the moments of resistance.2 at the end of this Chapter.. Transverse beam (c) Cantilever slab remote from transverse beam (d) Cantilever slab near transverse beam Fig..07 to 1.. generally. 2..~=. and maximising the unknown transverse moment of resistance with respect to· the parameters o:1 defining the collapse mechanism.. It should be emphasised that.. l (• . thus. ..2J(a)(d) Top slab and cantilever slab mechanisms 1•1 !! 24 t 25 . .__..ll(a)(e) Skew slab bridge mechanisms authors give general equations for the various mechanisms and loadings.. the designer chooses ratios for the moments of resistance.~iaphragm (a) Top slab remote from diaphragm (b) Top slab near diaphragm I I I . ' 11 I 11 I '.... I @ . if the transverse reinforcement is parallel to the abutments. in each case. . 2.... a local mechanism could develop around the interior piers as shown in Fig.12 with a mean value of 1.08 for eleven tests... It is thus possible to simplify the design procedure because'it is possible to calculate m1 for that set of reinforcement directly... it can be used for the design of slab bridges.72). 2. In practice. I· Ii • . 'Ii :1 Beam or web !/ ~ !'I !' 1: ~ 1:I I I I I I I I I I I I I __ JI 't>d' • 1: I' I i1 1 I 1! 1 ·'=='o.. to result in a safe estimate of the ultimRte load and.25 with a mean value of 1. The possible critical mechanisms which should be examined when assessing the ultimate strength of a simply supported skew slab bridge are those shown in Fig.... .. The values of m1 for the other sets of reinforcement can then be calculated by considering alternative mechanisms. ". '.... in practice...22(c).. In the case of a continuous slab..... as is done when analysing a slab. in~ stead ofminimising the load with respect to the parameters rx..=::. it is very often simpler. a suggested design procedure for simply supported skew slab bridges is to first provide sufficient longitudinal reinforcement to prevent mechanisms (a) and (b) forming under their appropriate design loads. to work from first principles..: I I I I I I I I I \ Fre~edge'.
35 + 20y) + 14.. that would develop this moment.d.. ": + = (165) (!) 2. (~='.: ..]j.4 kNmlm and that they are not less than the required global transverse sagging and hogging moment of resistance respectively.~.1 1 I I I @ I I I Fig.1 0.14.6 + 5. in accordance with yield line theory. The 'design' loads are (see Chapter 3 for details of nominal loads and partial safety factors) @ .5 LS Footway 1..6 A bridge deck consists of Mbeams at 1. .. and it will thus be assumed that the Code minimum area of 0.....15) (1..30 kN/m2 (l. arap et •I• 3. :...3m I ' . the latter value should be provided. ' .. 1 I I ' I I I I @ I @ I/ I I I I I / I I ® I I I I I/ 11@1 1...o/ = 0 :. Q.. .3 Yield line design of top slab !HA ..":" 1/ I ..2m 'Y I D = 2(m 1 I /®1' / i. 7) + 10. the rotations parallel and perpendicular to the beams are (1/y) and (1/0..0 m centres with a I .JL.29 Example 2. y = I.84) = 5. provided that they sum to at least 13.. Such reinforcement would provide sagging and hogging moments of resistance per unit length of 5. This will generally be the case when designing in accordance with yield line theory. / I/ I / / f (0. d(m1 + m2) dy = 0 From which..3m 1· c=1J I 9.n of energy is I o.5) (100) = 165 kN (1.3 + 2y) + (m 1 +mi) (3 0..· r..3 Cocdogowoy I: 1. r' ... thus the mechanism would fonn as shown in Fig..5 Foot· way Analysis / I I ~ y g A tc) Mechanism 2 Fig. Let the sagging and hogging moments of resistance per unit length nonnal to the beams be m1 and m 2 respectively.3) (0.857y ( ....__~.98/y The external work done is I Sagging HA + ~) (1/0.:=J C. 2.35 kN mlm. would be less than the Code minima discussed in Chapter 10 and..... = 54.. .6  + 5.239 m :. some will be required in the obtuse cor· ners to control cracking. The collapse mechanism will be as shown in Fig. <:)._. / I 5 l I W I I ®/ I 30 I }. ..2m0..98/y 3+20y In order to find the value of y for a maximum (m 1 + m 2 ).... <i..4 kNm/m Any values of m1 and m2 may be chosen.3 . to withstand the HA wheel load.O j ..Hogging <:)'1 2(5.2) (112) + 8(1/2) 165.2. ! .33 kN/m 2 i\ I 3. • • .2 kN mlm 30 ~... <i.'. .._.": 5.. o::>• (/) .44._. ~Unitdef!ection I / I I 1 / 11 \@ f~/ / I I I f/ J/ <i.._..f //'ctJ/ . ~ The amount of reinforcement.03 kN/m 2 10.~ ~. H the wheel deflects unity. ·~ ~ \. Dispersal through the surfacing will be conservatively ignored.i'm HA wheel load Self weight Surfacing (say) Total u. (mi + m2) = 13. )  165.65 Traffic lane I 1.5) = 5... 2. "..I Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 0.2) (0. Finally.28(c). 2.16m The contact area of the HA wheel load is a square of side 300 mm (see Chapter 3).· 31 '. . y = 0.... r~.98/y = 165.1.. . It is required to design the top slab reinforcement.0 Hard strip [L:J 3.....0 Hard strip I •I• 3. / (Ll) (1. . .226 m This va1ue is less than 3.j\ / The internal dissipatio.35) (lly) (0. i :1 Hogging yield line forms along upper edge of beam flange : Notlo"'"'°" (a/ Crosssection <i.. . (1[IDl1 5 v! ..28(a)(c) Example 2. m1 + 1n2.l O...t<D ® 1' I I I / / I I .1 ? /.Sagging <i... Hogging 165kN wheal I I <D..._'1 E I . ..____.2) (3.2 In order to find the value of y for a maximum mz.2) + 5. a1though no top steel is required to develop adequate strength..... (m 1 + m 2) (3 + 20y) + 14... .857y NowD = E (b) Mechanism 1 . c. I @ '"" f fI I I / I / I I M 013)] / :..2) respectively.29 in which the parameter y defines the geometry of the mechanism. It is necessary to predetermine some of the reinforcement areas.. .15% of high yield steel is provided in both the top and bottom of the slab in a direction parallel to the Mbeams.. thus.857y .3m 0.58 m.15) (1.3m =:[o. 2.75) (2. / I .f_I ' '( @ . m2 = 33. I ____r/ @ 160 mm thick top slab..65 Traffic lane 3.33 [2(0.3) (y) (1/2) + 2(0..
Combination 2 The loads to be considered are those of combination 1 plus wind loading plus erection loads when appropriate.1' 1r. temperature loads.'~ ~ ·111 General . Load combinations There are three principal (combinations I to 3) and two secondary (combinations 4 and 5) combinations of load. such as those caused by restraint of movements due to changes in temperature. Combination 4 This combination only applies to highway and footway or cycle track bridges.t loads plus a secondary live load with its associated primary live load: each of the secondary live loads discussed later in this chapter are considered indi· vidually.II 11 . Transient loads All loads other than the pennanent loads referred to above are transient loads: these consist of wind loads. slcidding and collision loads. Hence the secondary The loads to be considered are the pennanent loads plus the appropriate primary live loads for highway and footway or cycle track bridges. riominal loads are specified in Part 2 of the Code. traction and braking loads. plus erection loads when appropriate. the primary and secondary highway loadings.. The values are less for reasonably well defined loads. It should be noted that. footway and cycle track loadings. braking.IH'. Combination 1 Loads to be considered The Code divides the nominal loads into two groups: namely. and the primary and secondary railway loadings. Larger values are specified for the ultimate than for the serviceability limit state. loads due to filling materials. than for more variable loads.~ I• ~ I"'' ' ~ 1 II~' r ~ If As explainedin Chapter 1. the term 'load' includes both applied forces and imposed defonnations. the Code. or the permanent foads plus the appropriate primary and se~ondary live loads for railway bridges. ·1.1. Combination 3 The loads to be considered are those of combination 1 plus those arising from restraint of movements. Permanent loads are defined as dead loads. erection loads. together with values of the partial safety factor 'YtL• which are applied to the nominal loads to obtain the design loads. such as dead load. The nominal loads are very similar to those which appear as working loads in the present design documents BS l53 and BE i/77. differential settlement and loads derived from the nature of the structural material. The individual values are not discussed at this juncture. centrifugal. such /"j3 32 . exceptional loads. permanent and transient. Permanent loads Ii~ highway loadings include centrifugal. in. Partial safety factors The values of the partial Safety factor YtL to be applied at the ultimate and serviceability !Unit states for the various load combinations are given in Table 3.' !l Chapter3 11 ~ Loadings '\ ' ~ '. and the secondary railway loadings include lurclung. In the case of concrete bridges. superimposed dead loads. 2. '['i 1111· [. whereas the secondary loadings are the live loads due to changes in speed or direction. Primary highway and railway loadings are vertical live loads. but the following general points should be noted: Combination 5 1. The loads to be considered for highway bridges are the pennanen. The loads to be considered are the pennanent loads plus the loads due to friction at the bearings. due to temperature range and differential temperature distributions. The loads to be considered for footway or cycle track bridges· are the permanent loads plus the secondary live load of a vehicle colliding with a support. nosing. the latter refers to shrinkage and creep of the concrete.
at the ultimate limit state.g. This fact is allowed for by the partial safety . but the Code pennits a return period of 50 years to be adopted for foot or cycle track bridges. when carrying out the structural design of a foundation. ThC value for a live load. for concrete. the onus is placed upon the designer in deciding whether differential settlement should be considered in detail.2 should be adopted because the volume of fill will be known reasonably accurately. In tenns of section design. wind loading does not have to be applied to the superstructure ofa beam and slab or slab bridge having a span less than 20 m and a width greater than 10 m. The latter values are only used when the nominal dead loads have been accurately assessed from the final structure. used solely for applying the highway loading. Funnelling: special consideration needs to be given to bridges in valleys.2 at the serviceability limit state. The tests were carried out in a constant airstream of 25 mis.0 respectively. °where they would have a relieving effect. Highway carriageways and lanes The nominal loads due to fill should be calculated by conventional principles of soil mechanics.~. The minimum gust speed is appropriate to those areas of the bridge where the wind has a relieving effect.. as in combination 1. although the actual numerical values are a little different for some carriageway widt~s. In addition. Traffic lane The lanes marked on the running surface of the bridge are referred to as traffic lanes. The return period: the isotachs are for a return period of 120 years (the design life of the bridge). It is not intended that parts of parts of influence lines should be loaded.factor Yp. ~· . The criterion is that the least 'restoring moment due to unfa~ored nominal loads should be greater than the greatest overturning moment due to design loads. Hence the greater uncertainty associated with the latter loads is reflected in the values of the partial safety factors. should be considered. as is discussed later when these loads are considered in more detail. However. procedures exist in Part 4 of the Code to allow for the effects of shrinkage and creep on the loss of prestress and in certain fonns of composite con· struction.Loadings Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 3. Shrinkage and creep Wind The clauses on wind loading are based upon model tests carried out at the National Physical Laboratory and which have been reported by Hay [93). are considered to be calculable only with a high degree of uncertainty.________.. However.6 to 1. In addition.(b) Influence line loading 1n1. by agreement with the appropriate authority. Such an assessment would require the material densities to be confinned and the weight of. Permanent loads Carriageway Dead load The carriageway is defined as the traffic lanes plus hard shoulders plus hard strips plus marker strips. when the vertical effects of the fill are considered.1. As for dead load. and the exclusion clause is not applicable to these. which was discussed in Chapter 1 and which is a component of Y1v A value of unity is specified for certain loads (e. and the calculation procedure is as lengthy. particularly for the conditions after construction [18].1. superimposed dead load) when this would result in a more severe effect. it is not necessary to consider wind loading in combination with temperature loading.2. 1._ ·~} Shrinkage and creep only have to be taken into account when they are considered to be important. In general the calculation procedure is as follows. re~ .0 to the entire superimposed dead load. and the model cross· sections were very much more appropriate to steel than to concrete bridges. should be considered. ·~ . materials (e. to adopt 'Y/L values of 1. For example.~. and 1..2 and 1. However. which depend upon: l.5 when considering the lateral pressures due to the fill. which is not written in terms of limit state design. etc. due to applying a YtL value of 1.1 for superimposed dead load appears to be rather large. Application of loads The partial safety factor given in Table 3. then the load is 'considered to act with its least possible magnitude. Hence these aspects should be considered under nominal loads. the Code requires that. 24 kN/m for concrete). the values may be reduced from 1.2 for concrete. . The reason for this is to allow for the fact that bridge decks are often resurfaced. In the case of superimposed dead load and live load. a number of overbridges have widths less than 10 m. The maximum wind gust speed and the minimum wind gust speed are then calculated for the cases of live load both on and off the bridge. Obvious situations are where deflections are important and in the design of the articulation for a bridge. could result from applying a YJL value of 1. it is emphasised that. with the result that the actual superimposed dead load can be mUch greater than that assumed at the design stage [18]. the carriageway width is the distanc~ between the raised kerbs. according to the Code. 4. The partial safety factor of 1.l(a). this implies that the arrangement of the loads on the bridge is dependent upon the_ load effect being considered. 3. If raised kerbs are present. If is then the responsibility of the appropriate authority to ensure that the superimposed dead load assumed for design is not exceeded. These are notional parts of the carriageway which are. the traffic lanes in the Code have no significance in deciding . Foundations Filling material The soil mechanics aspects of foundations should be assessed in accordance with CP 2004 [92]. Transient loads Superimposed dead load Notional lanes General · As indicated earlier. The emphasis placed on checking dead loads in the Code is because the dead load factor of safety is less than that previously implied by BE ~Influence Lo• line (b) Correct Fig. and is used with the reduced YJL values of Table 3. such as wind foad in combination 2 or temperature loading in combination 3. and of IO years for erection purposes. due to fill. is less when the load is combined with other loads. Differential settlement In the Code. In practice. Hence traffic lanes in the Code are equivalent to working lanes in BE 1n1. The gust speeds are obtained by multiplying the mean hourly wind speed by a number of factors. particularly when compared with that of 1. it can be seen that superimposed dead load and live load should be applied to the adverse parts of an influence line and not to relieving parts. when the most severe effect on a structural element can be diminished by the presence of a load on a certain portion of the structure. 3 as live or superimposed dead load. 34:: « The nominal dead loads will generally be calculated from the usual assumed values for the specific weights of the . in view of the above. reinforcement to be ascertained. However. these loads should not be applied to those portions of the structure where their presence would diminish the load effect under consideration.. 2.~5 . The values for dead and superimposed dead load at the ultimate limit state can b~ different to the tabulated values. than when it acts alone. 5. the reason· for the large value is that the pressures on abutments. when discussing the YtL values. Influence lines are frequently used in bridge design and.bow live load is applied to the bridge. . The clauses are very similar to those in BE I/77.2 for concrete rather than the values of 1. These aspects are discussed in Chapters 7 and 8.15 respectively given in Table 3. However. However. due to dead load at a particular point of a structure. In addition. and the critical section being considered. as in BE tm.. The mean hourly wind speed is first obtained for the location under consideration from isotachs plotted on a map of the British Isles. It seems reasonable to apply a factor of 1. in reality.5 at the ultimate limit state seems to be high.0: it is emphasised that this value is applied to all parts of the dead load and not solely to those parts which diminish the load effect.75 at the ultimate limit state. etc. to not less than 1.0 m. 3.0 to the entire dead load rather than a value of. In the case of dead load this entails applying a Y/L value of 1.l(a) should not be considered. Overturning of structure The stability of a structure against overturning is calculated at the ultimate limit state. When such assumed values are used it is necessary. In the absence of raised kerbs. the reaction from the soil should be calculated for the appropriate design loads. ' }j. it is necessary to consider the fact that a more severe effect. the possibility of a more severe effelt.05 and l. This is because of the reduced probability that a number of loads acting together will all attain their nominal values simultaneously. such as HA load. the loading shown in Fig. This concept is discussed later. The general philosophy governing the application of the loads is that the worst effects of the loads should be sought. for example. the carriageway width is the distance between the safety fences less the setback for the fences: the setback must be in the range 0. but. They are equivalent to the traffic lanes in' BE 1n1 and they are detennined in a similar manner. as is also the case in BE tn1. the removal of superimposed dead load from parts of the structure.1 fOr steel and 1. <'~' r1 . it seems more logical to treat the fill as a superimposed dead load and to argue that a YtL value of I . It is thus envisaged that in general the larger YJL values will be adopted for design purposes.g.
but they are likely to occur more than once a year [95]. 2.1.8 at the serviceability limit state i~ not clear but."":.. it should be i.::11 1.tW'ji/lgS .1 that the serviceability limit state value is 0. 1:. two aspects of temperature loading to be considered. This means that the final effects are only 80% of those calcu· lated in accordance with BE 1177. which have been calculated theoretically and measured on actual bridges by Emerson {95.: \i. 4. Temperature differences Due to the diurnal variations in solar radiation and the relatively small thennal conductivity of concrete. The approximation bas been shown to be adequate for design purposes by Blythe and Lunniss [99]. The author would thus argue that the movement is the load.:o_(' .1. and the vertical wind load (which is dependent on the gust speed. except for limestone aggregate concrete when it is 7 x 10~rc. in drafts of the Code prior to May 1977. The tables referred to above were based upon data obtained from actual bridges [94].o•c 13. 3.8. Gusting: a gust factor. Emerson [95] has suggested that such an adjustment should also take account of the shape of the cross·section of the bridge..! 3. and is appropriate when there is a heat gain through the top sur· face. It is not possible to think of them in terms of a re'tum period. and a correction has lo be made if this differs from the 100 mm assumed for concrete bridges in the tables. the effects of frictional bearing restraint are considered in combination with dead and superimposed dead load only. effectively.y and the background to the clauses has been described bf Emerson [94. Any stresses or stress resultants which are developed in response to the imposed deformations would then be the load effects. r:. 3. curacy involved in applying them to other crosssections is outweighed by certain assumptions made in the calcu· lation. This again appears to be an inconsistent use Of terminology.S"C {al Posi!iVe 6.. as in BS 153.. from Meteorological Office data and are for a return period of 120 years (the design life of the bridge). when designing expansion joints. were specified. In addition.. 3. 3. longitudirial and vertical wind loads are considered in the following four combinations: I. which is dependent upon the height above ground level and the horizontal loaded length.mf) l. the temperature differences given in the 37 . !'1 . and the other is for negative temperature differences. 95]. The next stage of the calculation is to determine the transverse and longitudinal wind loads (which are dependent on the gus_t speed.. The temperature differences given in the Code were ca!· culated for solid slabs. which adopts the same temperature difference diagrams. 1 Finally the transverse. The resulting movements are taken as the nominal values.o·c o VI E ~ 0 ~IE . from isothenns plotted on maps of the British Isles. the plan area and a lift coefficient).to calculate the nominal loads when the restraint to temperature movement is accom· panied by flexure of piers or shearing of elaslomeric bear~ in gs.!1.(b) Temperature differences for 1 m structural depth are given in the Code {see Fig. . Ji._~ign to . The temperature distrib11tions are composed of four or five straight lines which approximate the nonlinear distributions. The clauses are essentially identical to those in BE In? except that temperature loading does not have to be considered with wind loading. namely.'"Ii l' il 11' In addition the minimum wind gust speed is dependent upon an hourly speed factor which is a function of the height above ground level.3°CL~ (b) Negative Fig. It should be noted that. Regarding the YtL values. Two distributions of such differences s. and the effects of temperature differences through the depth of the bridge.2 in view of the reduced probability of a severe temperature difference occurring at the same time as a bridge is heavily loaded with live load. in general. The coefficient of thermal expansion for concrete is given as 12 x 10~ 6f'C. This is because the resistance to movement of roller or sliding bearings is least when the vertical load is a minimum.s·c_ E ci ~1~ ci c::i VI w 2. First. according to the Code. which have to be multiplied by the YJL values of Table 3. I·.2 are for a depth of 1 m. U.1. 98]. The Code indicates how . The _gust factor may be reduced for foot or cycle track bridges according to the height above ground level.i l'i. The latter is best thought of as that temperature which controls the overall longitudinal expansion or contraction of the bridge.. includes 'imposed defonnation such as those caused by reslraint of movement due to changes in temper· ature'..ioted from Table 3. is applied.•"?le brit'. Transverse alone Transverse± vertical Longitudinal alone 50% transverse + longitudinal ± 50% vertical There are thus less combinations than exist in BE In?. if ihe movement calculated as above is restrained. iii' ~11. These stress resultants are taken to be nominal loads.. 3. The reason for adopting a 'ffL value of 0. but. This is because the Code gfves crosssections for which drag coefficients may be obtained from the Code. respectively. for the design of joints and during erection.O and 1. Coefficients of friction are given for roller and sliding bearings: these are used in conjunction with nominal dead and superimposed dead load to calculate the nominal load due to frictional bearing restraint. different values of the 'overall depth' are used for the two calculations. having moved.. .. for the location of the bridge..<:. the restraining force iS relaxed [18). The effective bridge temperatures are dependent upon the depth of surfacing. h' :t1 . An adjustment should also be carried out for the height above mean sea level. This difference of approach is important when designing a structure to resist the effects of temperature and is elaborated in Chapter 13. !i ~!I Temperature The clauses on temperature loading are based upon studies carried out by the Transport and Road Research Laboratqi. the movement to be accommodated is calculated in tenns of the expansion from a datum effective bridge temperature. at the time the joint is installed.S"C E ~1~ ci c:i E ~1m VI :. The effective bridge temperatures are used for two purposes.2(a).f''' I''. Measurements on box girders [100) and beam and slab (101] construction have shown that the temperature differences are very similar to those predicted for a solid slab of the same depth. The temperature differences depend on the depth of concrete in the bridge: those shown in Fig.2 should be regarded as nominal values and that these effects. It should also be stated that an 'overall depth' is required to determine the exposed area and the drag coefficient. .. and also gives crosssections for which drag coefficients may not be derived and for which wind tunnel tests should be carried out. The values are the same as those in BE In? and are based partly upon [97]. The author would suggest that the nominal loads·are the imposed deformations due lo either internal or external restraint of the free movements implied by the temperature difference. It thus appears that the Part 2 Committee thought it reasonable to reduce each of these by 0. One of the distributions is for positive temperature differences. stress resultants are developed in the structui"~.i ci ~IE \q ci ·3. and that the YJL values should be applied to these to give design loads in the form of design imposed deformations. Temperature range The temperature range for a particular bridge is obtained by first determining the maximum and minimum shade air temperature.2 for the serviceability and ultimate limit states. ' ~ h =overall depth of concrete section h 4 "' depth of surfacing <IE \q ci ow ~1. . '" J 1[. but it is considered that the inac. The Code distributions have been chosen to give the greatest temperature differences that are likely to occur in practice. 36 The minimum and maximum effective bridge tempera· tures can then be obtained from tables which relate shade air temperature to effective bridge temperature. an exposed area and a drag coefficient). severe nonlinear vertical temperature differences occur through the deplh of a bridge. and that any stress resultants arising are load effects. The author would suggest also considering· the latter value for lightweight concrete [96]. multiplied by YJL• should be regarded as design effects.% 'T \. up to the maximum effective bridge temperature and down to the minimum effective bridge temperature. ). Hence movement could take place under dead load conditions and. the restraint to the overall bridge movement due to temperature range.I 'I :JI !1! 11. This part of the calculation is probably the most complex and requires a certaln amount of engineering judgement to be made. Such arguments regarding definitions may seem pedantic but they are important when designing a structure to resist the effects of temperature differences and are elaborated in Chapter 13. The shade aif temperatures may be adjusted to those appropriate to a return period of 50 years for foot or cycle track bridges. There are. and is appropriate when there is a heat loss from the top surface. The isotherms were derived. bu1 this contradicts the definition of a load which. Second.2). •Jr {!.~ i 0 1. values of l. The Code states that the effects of the temperature dif· ferences in Fig.
. ! fl i1 . 'i. . ft j \ ) 1 r1 ~ ~ • l ... I: I ) 'I ' ~} ..I I ~ \ I' I I r.c ) ri ~.
However. as shown in Fig.3 . This is different to BE 1177 and means that. I. each case will have to be considered separately.""' _11:""0 ii The standard highway loading consists of nonnal (HA) loading and abnormal (HB) loading. Thus.j.. or spans BC and DE loaded with loading appropriate to a loaded length of 2L. ~ 1J. Presumably. r r•··•FttJ .. or after. Thus the moment at support B of the four span member of Fig. wind and temperature effects during erection should generally be assessed for 10. 3. The load per metre is always obtained by dividing by the notional lane width and is thus in the range 31. The r ·. or which would alter its iesponse in service from that considered in design. An appendix to Part 2 of the Code gives temperature differences for.1 that.. for a loaded length less th8n 30 m.3. the Code considers the loads as either temporary or permanent and draws attention to the possible relieving effects of the former. etc. the loaded length for calculating the support moment would be 40 m and hence a loading of 26.(b) Influence lines for two spans moment in span BC would be calculated by considering span BC loaded with loading appropriate to a loaded length of L. l I 11i iii1 i1 ' II: 'ifi!' Erection loads At the serviceability limit state.c bri'A '· ign fo. The HA loading consists of either a uniformly distributed load plus a knife edge load or a single wheel load. For multispan members.. fl' \fJ I ~.. for elastic conditions. However."i:fe \!.3 gives the loading per linear metre of notional lane and the load intensity is always obtained by dividing by the lane width irrespective of the lane width. . and are considered as static loads.:~ 11 I I lOr !!. 3. 38 •·:. _The importance of the method of erection. the upper cut~off is now 30 kN/m at 30 m instead of 31.. 3. and the possibility of impact or shock loadings. This value was chosen [18] because it was considered to 'reflect the difference between the uncertainties of predicting HA loading and dead load.. having equal spans of 20 m. Fu. Figure 3.f. this loading does not have to be considered in combination with wind loading.. stream flows. 3.other depths of surfacing which are based upon the work of Emerson [95J..5 kN/m at 23 m. the load intensity can be in the range 7. and by Fl. and is 120 kN per notional Jane. I I I I ' iI ' BS 5400 ' ..0.2 kN/m would be applied.:! I 5  'I I I I I I I I I 0 23 30 50 'fOO 150 250 200 300 350 450 500 loaded length m 379 400 Fig. for a two span continuous member.or:. such as when dead load stability could be Critical.j 'C/C/ /' (al Support B + la) CentreofspanA8 <:::::::::::::? ~ A === + (b) Centre of span 8C Fig.. and measurements have shown that the lowest effective bridge temperature likely to coexist with the maximum positive temperature difference is IS"C [95]. 3dr. a distributed load of 500 NJm2 will generally be adequate. are emphasised._.i.6 to 39 . . waamgs . For snow and ice loading..2. 3.} ~:. As already mentioned.. E ~ ii .i Jr #i N· 0' I' . The above coexisting effective bridge temperatures have been adopted in the Code. ice packs. The validity of representing actual vehicle loading by the formula loading has been demonstrated by Henderson [102].S(a).. The latter has been introduced because of the lack of dependable traffic statistics for long loaded lengths [18].1 was chosen to be between the HA and dead load values.5 to 10. At the ultimate limit state. the 'YfL value for HA loading is 1.5 HA loading component of HA loading is 30 kN per linear metre of notional lane for loaded lengths (L) up to 30 m and is given by 151 (l/L) 0• 05 kN per linear metre of notional lane for longer lengths. for collapse conditions.5 kN/m2 • ._ C>E"~\i.. The designer is expected to calculate nominal va1ues of such loads in accordance with the probability approach given in Part 1 of the Code and discussed in Chapter 1. it is considered that a severe negative difference is unlikely to occur at an effective bridge temperature within 2°C of the maximum effective bridge temperature [95).4. It should be noted from Table 3. l. A severe negative temperature difference can occur at any time of the day.0 kNJmZ compared with the BE 1177 range of 8. 3o ~. it is considered unlikely that a severe difference would occur between about ten o'clock in the morning and midnight on. BC and DE loaded with loading appropriate to a loaded length of 3L: the former is likely to be more severe for most situations.=========I I 9 ___Ll Uniformly distributed load The uniformly distributed Loaded length The loaded length referred to above is the length of the base of the positive or negative portion of the influence line for a particular effect at the design point under consideration. and there is now a lower cutoff of 9 kN/m at 379 m. It can be seen that the two loadings are very similar.4(a). The original basis of these loadings has been described by Henderson [102]. I I I HA loading is a formula loading which is intended to represent normal actual vehicle loading. at the serviceability limit state in load combination 1.and 50year returli.5 would be calculated by considering spans AB and BC loaded with loading appropriate to a loaded length of2L. Thus for a single span member. .j. .. lI\ I I I I~ I I V 25i II II tV I I ! I l I 20 ~ ~ ~ ~ l I I\ \' 1l .. or spans AB.•.9 to 13.....int and Edwards [103]. Primary highway loading General The primary effects of highway loading are the vertical loads due to the mass of the traffic. it is required that nothing should b'e done during erection which would cause damage to the 'Permanent structure. I ~ ~ main body of the Code are for a surfacing depth of 100 mm.(b) Influence lines for four spans  (bl Supports Fig.. Combination of temperature range and difference A severe positive temperature difference can occur at any time between May and August.3 HA unifonnly distributed load r 20m r 20m 1 i._. The Code value of the load is the same as that in BE J/77. Both of these loadings are deemed to include an allowance for impact. periods respectively. Snow loads should generally be ignored except for certain circumstances. Knife edge load It is emphasised that the knife edge part of HA loading is not intended to represent a heavy axle.~~ ~?/'°''\ 1' 31. however. The loading is compared with the BE 1177 loading in Fig. but not less than 9 kN per linear metre. night or year.. 3.. 15 \ J '. but is merely a device to enable the same unifonnly distributedloadingto be used to simulate the shearing and bending effects of actual vehicle loading [102]. the loaded length for the span moment is the span. and the loaded length for calculating the span moment would be 20 m and a loading of 30 kN/m would be applied. a hot sunny day. the HB value of 1.. ~~ Exceptional loads f~ I These include the loads due to otherwise unaccounted effects such as earthquakes. which has a value of 1.
. in which case it can be positioned parallel to the supporting members or. The vehicle can be either wholly in a notional lane. The nominal primary load associated with each load Fe is a vertical load of 300 kN distributed uniformly over the notional lane for a length of 5 m. they do so in a platoon [18].. The nominal load is the same as that in BE 1177 and is given by i . thus. This is more severe ~ Verges. '..41 '. for skew slabs. Wheel load The 1 unit/axle"' tokN/axla .Sm HA loading HB loading is intended to represent an abnormally heavy vehicle. A single nominal point load of 250 kN is considered to act in one notional lane. a variable spacing "".1.1 m wheel pressure + = 1. or can straddle two notional lanes.9~: ¥ + + 0. bas been replaced in the Code by 25 units of HB loading.4N/mm2 .:·"".. Hence. queues of heavy vehicles accumulate behind abnormal loads and. This load is thus very sirnbar to that in BE 1177 for 45 units of loading. The nominal HB loading is specified. The large increase in braking load could be significant in terms of substructure design. the YtL values for HA are the same as those for HB. in terms of units of loading. the knife edge load to be placed in a direction which produces the worst effect. however. 40. Collision with parapets The Code is not concerned with the design of the parapets.0 can be developed under dry road conditions [18]. Loadings ..· BS5400 5001 The secondary effects ofhighway loading are loads parallel to the carriageway due to changes in speed or direction of the traffic. Any number of these loads at 50 m centres should be applied to any two notional lanes. and this is at variance to BE 1177 in which no minimum is specified. with one unit being equivalent to a total vehicle weight of 40 kN. The·change from two wheel loads to a single wheel load may seem drastic. over the entire loaded length.2 kN/m. in general.6(a). in any direction._. This loading is thus different to the BE 1177 load which consists of two 112 kN wheel loads.o. where the adjacent lane carries only onethird HA loading.. are applied.. and the uniformly distributed component is removed for 25 m in front to 25 m behind the vehicle.0 m.·~/ "~~ L. An associated primary load is applied with eachofthe secondary loads.. which should be compared with the BE 1/77 range of 32.9m + than the BE 1177 loading. {b) BE 1177 Only one HB vehicle is. and that the overall width of the vehicle is now given as 3. This clause is thus more precise than its equivalent in BE 1/77... The latter is intended to be a substitute for HA loading and has been introduced because the HA loading no longer increases for spans less than 6.5 m m m HB!oading + + + + .11. which will presumably still be covered by BE 5 [106].. central reserves.15. /Ji:l J4UU This is a radial force applied at the surface of the road of a curved bridge... However. in which case it is positioned in line with the bearings. The knife edge load is geneially positioned perpendicular to the notional lane except when considering supporting members. The nominal load is thus similar to the BE 1177 loading.25or30 m fa) BS 5400 .(b) HB loading has been specified in order to calculate the worst effects at all design points. the Departffient of Transport will issue a memorandum containing guidance on this point. the remainder of the Jane is loaded with the uniformly distributed loading component of HA having an intensity appropriate to a loaded length wlllch includes the displaced length. and in combination with full primary HA loading in that lane. . This is the only occasion when more than one HB vehicle can act on a structure._~ ~r (3. in each case the rules for omitting parts of the HA loading. when they overtake.:. for the loading of verges and central reserves. the most significant difference is that the longitudinal spacing of the centre pair of axles is no longer constant at 6. v. 0.. + + 1.1) \~..r+l50 kN L___.. The HA braking Joad is applied.30 000 . 3.20. etc.2 kN/m. .J_ where r is the radius of the Jane in metres. whjch requires. then it is considered to straddle either the two lanes loaded with full HA. whichever is the greater..25 g and. 3.. the worst effects at an interior support of a coDtinuous bridge could occur with a wide axle spacing.··.) ·~.1 Nlmm 2 . However. The wheel load is considered to disperse through asphalt at a spread to depth ratio of I to 2 and through concrete at 1 to l down to the neutral axis.tn7 loading with which it is compared in Fig. The vehicle is thus considered to displace part of the HA loading in one lane. The reduction in contact pressure results in a greater contact area.. It can be seen that the transverse spacing of the wheels on an axle has been roundedoff to 1.6.5 m. . If the vehicle straddles two Janes. there is a requirement in the Code that all bridges be checked under 25 units of HB loading. The loading was based upon ~sts carried out at the Transport and Road Research Labotittory [104]. since the Code is intended to be applied to any span configuration. when HA loading is applied with HB loading. and not in combination with the others. The full uniformly distributed and knife edge loads are applied to two notional lanes and onethird of these loads to all other notional Janes. in practice. in practice.I j J·Bl!j 6. which were described in the last paragraph.7.i C. ThC'new loading is based upon the work of Burt [105] and is much greater than the BE 1177 loading because of the greater efficiency of modern brakes. One should note that each of the following secondary loads is considered separately.· "' This is a new loading which has been introduced because a coefficient of friction for lateral skidding of nearly 1. Fe . the contact area could thus be a circle of diameter 340 mm or a square of side 300 mm. and when considering skew decks.. outer verges need only to be able to support any four wheels of 25 units of HB loading. or at least 25 units of HB loading.. It is assumed that abnonna!ly heavy vehicles can only develop a deceleration of0. and a 45° angle of dispersion through both asphalt and concrete. :~=r ~·.. The applications are thus identical to those of BE 1177. will be at least as onerous as those of the two 112 kN wheel loads.16. It should be noted from Table 3.~ .· __ . + + Effective wheel pressilre + = 1.1 that. but only with the load transmitted to the member supporting the parapets. This load is much greater than the BE.. but the adjacent lane is still assumed to carry full HA loading. The nominal HA braking load is 8 kN per metre of loaded length plus 200 kN.21or26m 1. the HB braking force is taken to be 25% of the primary HB loading and to be equally distributed between the eight wheels of either the front two or the back two axles. These arrangements of load are different to those of BE 1/77. If it is wholly in a notional lane. ~~eel Et . 3. as it does in BS 153. The nominal loading consists of a single vehicle with 16 wheels arranged on four axles.cmc:re1e or1age aes1gn ro 52. the number of units to be adopted for different types of road are not specified.1 m.1 N/mrn 2 Fig.c~"'="" BE 1/77 oTI012 20 30 40 50 60708o90TOO Loaded length m F1g.. It is envisaged that the worst effects of the single 100 kN wheel load. required to be considered on any one superstructure.~ . but.8"1 .I + 1 unit/axle= 10kN/axle wh~l load is used mainly for local effect calculations and the nominal load is a single load of 100 kN with a contact pressure of 1. As an example. unlike BE 1177.. If the centrifugal load is divided.3 Secondary highway loading Application 700  ~ The accidental wheel loading of BE 1177. The latter point means that it is not necessary to specify a minimum distance of the vehicle from a kerb. 10. or any substructure supporting two or more superstructures. and in combination with primary HA loading. then the knife edge component of HA loading for that lane is completely removed. Skidding HB loading ···1.____. It is understood that the intention of the Code drafters was that the intensity of loading should be 120 kN divided by the skew width of a notional lane when the knife edge loading is in a skew position with respect to the notional lane. The additional primary loading assumed to be acting adjacent to the point of collision consists of any four wheels of 25 units of the HB vehicle.ith a contact pressure of 1. which also shows the BE 1n7 HB vehicle.. . Transverse cantilever slabs should be loaded with the appropriate number of units of HB loading for the type of road in one notional Jane pl_us 25 units of HB in one other notional lane. then the vertical load is divided in the same proportion. or one lane with full and one with one~third HA. as shown in Fig. Presumably. with a maximum value of 700 kN. but the reduced dispersal through asphalt offsets this somewhat when the effective area at the neutral axis is considered. the total load is always 120 kN per notional lane. 600! 4001 General Centrifugal load '·<_:::. 3.Sm 6. The reason for this is that the BE· 1n7 vehicle originated in BS 153. The number of units for all roads can vary from 25 to 45. The reason for the more severe arrangement of the accompanying HA loading is that... and is defined as the load 10 cause collapse of the parapet or its connection to the supporting member.4 N/mm 2 . which can achieve decelerations which approach lg on dry roads [18]. which was intended for simply supported bridges (although. but is less severe for a smaller number of units. as in BE ln7. as is necessary in BE 1/77.5 m. it was also applied to continuous bridges) and the worst effects in a simply supported bridge occur with the axles as close together as possible. perpendicular to the free edges.7 HA braking load Longitudinal braking The longitudinal forces due to braking are applied at the level of the road surface. + 1. The comments on the contact pressure of the HA wheel load and its dispersal are also pertinent to the wheels of the HB vehicle.4 to 52. Each load Fe can be divided into two parts of Fj3 and 2Fj3 at 5 m centres if these give a lesser effect.. The wheel load is applied anywhere on the carriageway. but can be any of five values between 6 and 26 m iilclusive. in one notional lane.9m + + /Wheal + + Effective + 0. 3.
751 kN/m 2 Nominal transverse wind load (5.1. Corrected minimum shade air temperature= 20.3 (5.5 m2 . traffice lanes shoulder 'i Collision with supports "'1! 11'.1 + 2.2. 1 surfacing !0."" 0.J' ~ ~1 i ·> O. 3. In addition.45(5.7 mis This value of Ve applies when there is no live load on the bridge.5 m :.751 x 264 x (±_0. the Code loading is less severe than the BE 1177 loading. d = 0. It has been found [107] that the stress increments due to the dynamic effects of highway loading are within the allowance made for impact in the nominal loading.15 mentioned above.J).07 kN/m 2 .5 m= Drag coefficient (CD) is calculated for the unloaded and loaded conditions.3.3.43 = 4% C0 = 1.613 x 41. Pw = 0. the product Y/L Yp is about 1.4.07 kN/mll Lo'aded. Cn = 1. It is not obvious whether a slab bridge was intended to come under this category. 5.6) to be 12 X lo<'/"C. Footway or cycle track loading i i· \ lj . Unloaded (5.5) = Pv = q A3 CL A3=15Xl7.3 + 11. the notation is in accordance with Part 2 of the Code. Nominal expansion = (36 .s•c. d = 1. Co= 1.9 structural 1.·. is 80% of that mentioned above.04 = 20. to which the various figure and table numbers refer.8 kN Thus PL= 24. tJ. \! tion of bridge supports from possible vehicle collision. q = 0. Fatigue and dynamic loading 1: Fatigue loading is considered in Chapter 12.613 v/ N/m 2 Unloaded.3.751 x 52.0 S2 (Table 2) = 1.2) are (0.5 = 3. d = 2.725 m Wind Since the bridge is less than 20 m span and greater than 10 m wide.04 Loaded. P.3. = 1.5 Central reserve 0.4) is the more severe of: Pw = 0.25 x 0.A 1 =18 m 2 .8 kN Nominal vertical wind load (5. and thus it is not necessary to consider the effects of vibration. 8) = 35°C Height corrections (5.0 S1 (5.3.iI 1 i.2.26 kN orPw+PLL where Pw = 0. S1 S2 :. zero skew and a span of 15 In. It is required to calculate the nominal transient loads which should be considered for a highway underbridge of composite slab construction and having the crosssection of Fig. Cn = 1. 1.3) = P.25 q Ai CD with q = 1. the wind loads will be calculated in order to illustrate the calculation steps.25 q A 1 CD with q = 0. 75 m above the carriageway level or at the bracket attachment point.20m v = 28 mis 0.A 1 = 18 m 2 . The above loads are only twothirds of those in BE 1/77 and the normal and parallel components of the latter have to be applied together. P.2 = 14.3.5 x 0.2 m (Table 4) :. Lanes Carriageway width (3. at the most severe point between 1 and 3 m above the carriageway. In view of the safety factors of 1. 020J Railway loading The railway loading was derived by a committee of the International Union of Railways and its derivation is fully explained in.2.4. with b = 17.3 = 6.l.3.2 = 18 m2 Loaded (5.7 CD = 1.75) = ± 212 kN Loaded.3 (5.(b) K1 (5. with L = 15 m for both cases. The loading for loaded lengths greater than 30 m is thus less severe than the BE 1n1 loading. However. above which the load of 5 kN/m~ is reduced in the ratio of the HA uniformly distributed load.43° Increase CD by (Note 4 to Fig. the nominal load ~s 5 kN/m! for loaded lengths up to 30 m. 5) Increase for superelevatlon.8°C Corrected maximum shade air temperature = 36.7 2/1000 = l.6=264m 2 CL=±0. it would be possible to ignore the effects of wind on the superstructure.5°C respectively. 5) 3 x 1. even allowing for the fact that..a·c 1.3. this loading is more severe than its BE 1177 equivalent.0 kN Loaded. A 1 = 2.3 Hard _~ngs 11.3.6 = 14.J? !Lt Parapet I I i! i.' 0.5"C (a) Positive s.49 for 6 m above ground and loaded length of 15 m.15 m~ l16m ~ concrete 1. 3.75) = ± 149 kN Temperature range Minimum shade air temperature (Fig.4.2(a)(l)(i)).3. normal and parallel to the carriageway respectively.8.2 m (Table 5 (b)) bid= 17.5 m (Table 5 (b)) bid= 17.4. in addition to foot or cycle track 42 loading.5 = 52.7 Verge ~ ~' ~ ·: brid"··:irn ta.0 + 0.29 Dynamic pressure head (5. but it would seem more reasonable to apply the previous '80% rule' to slab .3. The anticipated effective bridge temperature at the time of setting the bearings is 16°C.18m ~2. Numbers in brackets are the Part 2 clause numbers.751kN/m 2. Assume open parapets.5 0.8 Loading example In general.(!_ t:fr. Example In the following example. in addition to a highway or railway..44. 7) = 20"C Maximum shade air temperature (Fig.6 Hard strip If the bridge supports only a footway or a cycle track.1s·c~~ (b) Negative Fig.2. at 0.· ri._J_ __ "'·te '.3. For a foot or cycle track bridge..6/2.4.15. at the ultimate limit state.45) = 24. The bridge is situated in the Birmingham ·area"_ at a site which is 150 m above sea level and there are no' special funnelling.3) = 1.5°C Minimum effective bridge temperature (Table 10) = l2°C Maximum effective bridge temperature (Table 11) = 36°C Take the coefficient of expansion (5.3) Thus Pw + PLL = (0. the Code recommends the provision of protec ' 'i' 0.2.A 1 = 15 x 3. as opposed to the BB I/77 safety factor of 1. The nominal loads for highway bridge supports which should oe considered are the loads transmitted by the guard rail of 150 and 50 kN. d = L.2(b)).5 = 7.25 X 1. for the loaded length under consideration.07 x 264 x (± 0. 1:1 11'1 il.04 mm 43 .1) = 3. P.2.1) and PLL = 0.751 kN/m2 .q = 0.8°C and (1.5 x 1. to that for 30 m.2.3) = q = 0.9/4 = 3..6 m. = q A 1 CD Unloaded. The loading on elements supporting footways or cycle tracks. 3. Maximum gust speed (5.6 mm Nominal contraction= (16 + 12) 12 x to6 x 15 = 5.613 x 35i11000 = 0.9 kN Nominal longitudinal wind load (5.3. 5) Superelevation = 1:40 = 1.9 + 0.0 (Fig.1) = 4 Width of eaCh notional lane = 14.75 Unloaded. Mean hourly wind speed (Fig. Greate"r reductions in loading are permitted if a main structural member supports two or more highway traffic lanes or railway tracks.3.24 (Fig.1) = Ve= v K.751 x 18 x 1. A1 = 15 x l.07 x 18 x 1.·l :. Unloaded. the nominal collision load is a single load of 50 kN applied in any direction up to a height of 3 m above the carriageway.0) (1501100) = 1.2)= 1.04 CD= 1. = I.44 and 1. if the footpath is wider than 2 m.5 x 15 = 37.9. C 0 = 1.16) 12 x Io6 x 15 = 3.9 m Number of notional lanes (3.1) :. an appendix to Part 2 of the Code.dered both normal and parallel to the carriageway.9..1.3. the loading may be reduced further. 3. bridges. Thus.3.9(a). gust or frost conditions. however.3) + (0.6°C' 0. Area A 1 is calculated for the unloaded and loaded conditions. Ve= 41.07 x 18 x 1. 2) = 0.!I .l.25ml }'°'" 1:40fall Fig.5) (150/100) = 0. P1 = 0.0 3 No.5 q A1 Co with q = 0.29 = 50.6/1. It is necessary to consider the vibrations of foot and cycle track bridges as explained in Chapter 12. 751 x 37 .1.3 states thatvc>35 mis with live load. residual loads of JOO kN should be consi. The normal and parallel loads should not be considered to act together.5 x 1.
3.0 kN/m of notional lane (6. L~.l(a).__ __ ~ .g.O = 4..2.67 fcu. 410 N/mmi for hot rolled :=.) are 250 N/mmz for mild steel.85 x 4.8. The shrinkage and creep properties of concrete can be evaluated fronl.____ r ~.003~ Strain (b) Code characteristic Other properties 44 ~ . such as tensile strengths.. ___ ~~. Reinforcement Characteristic strengths The quoted characteristic strengibs of reinforcement ([.8 is replaced by a 3 m wide footway. For design purposes.27 m Chapter4 shown in Fig. because the footway width is in excess of 2 m. data contained in an appendix to Part 4 of .lfr)]». The wheel load (6.36 m It should be noted that both HA and HB wheel loads can be considered to have square contact areas (6. e. The elastic modulus shown on Fig..4 x 104 vr. 9 are Diameter of contact circle at neutral axis ~ [(62. I) in combination with any f0ur wheels of25 units ofHB loading (6. It can be dispersed (6. These values are reasonable when compared with published data [96. In order to demonstrate the calculation of footway loading...l(b) is an initial tangent value.1) in one notional lane.3).1 + 0.2) = 120 kN/notional Jane. Certain other properties.8 x S.1). Thus the intensity is 120/3. in combination with primary HA loading (6.1 N/mm 2 (6. i.2.1 + 0..0035 Strain (a) Actual and idealised Stressstrain curve I The general fonn of the shorttenn uniaxial stressstrain curve for concrete in compression is shown by the solid line of Fig. grade 40 concrete has a characteristic strength of 40 N/mm 1 • Grades 20 to 50 may be used for nonnal w:eight reinforced concrete and 30 to 60 for prestressed concrete.725 = 32.0/3. .~· .25 (4 x 450) = 450 kN equally distributed between the eight wheels of two axles 1.e. However. this loading may be reduced as follows. Longitudinal Material properties and design criteria For a loaded length of 15 m..361 + 0.2..2. The contact area of a wheel is circular with an effective pressure of 1. it will be assumed that the 1.. Actual I I I I I I ==0. and the Code also tabulates secant values which are used for elastic analysis (see Chapter 2) and for serviceability limit state calculations as explained in Chapter 7.2).I   • .2) Contact circle diameter= [(450/4)(1000)(4)/(1. Footway .5)(1000)(4)/(1..2.8.67!~~\ .6. Fig. it is assumed that the descending branch of the curve terminates at· a strain of 0.l(a).9. HA Uniformly distributed load for a loaded length of 15 m is 30.\ ) .725 = 8. and that the peak of the curve and the descending branch can be replaced by the chain dotted horizontal line at a stress of 0. For a single span bridge. 108].4. 4.~.1 + 0..4 kN/m 2 Average intensity = (2 X 4.2) with effective bridge temperatures in the range 15° to 36°C and the negative differences with effective bridge temperatures in the range 12° to 34°C. 0.34 + 0. 4.3.5 m wide central reserve of Fig.1 Concrete Collision with parapet __ JI__ 0._. HB Assume 45 units..2).4)/3 = 3. with a warning that it can be as low as 7 x 1o6rC for lightweight and limestone aggregate concrete.~. J er: Poisson's ratio is given as 0.7.5 kN/wheel. Material properties Stress =O. The positive differences can coexist (5. and through the structural concrete at r : I down to the neutral axis.0 + 1 X 3..2.5 and 6. Thus the intensity is 30. but these properties are included as allowable stresses rather than as explicit characteristic values.0 kN/mll.8 kN/m2 Idealised I I I I As indicated in Chapter 1 material strengths are defined in tenns of characteristic strengths.· .__ __.3) as for HA wheel load. then load per axle is 450 kN (6. Applied with primary HB loading. 3.s"Vt kN/mm 2 I 2.1) 0.5) would not be considered for this bridge..8 m apart. the shortest axle spacing of 6 m is required. Diameter at neutra1 axis= 0.· The resulting Code shorttenn characteristic stressstrain curve is shown in Fig.. The total HB braking load (6.Jt .6. •. The bridge supports both a footway and a highway and the nominal load for a 15 m loaded length is (7.34 m.0035.Sf. 3.002 0.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Temperature differences The temperature differences obtained from Fig.9 = 1. Load on central reserve and verge Load is (6.3) 25 units Of HB. 62.= 361 mm Disperse (6.05 kN/m 2 .6) through the surfacing at a spreadtodepth ratio of 1 : 2..l(b).2 kN/m.(b) Concrete stressstrain curves the Code. but it is a 100 kN load With a circular contact area of 340 mm diameter.:. Skidding Point load of 250 kN (6. In Part 4 of the Code the characteristic cube compressive strength <fcJ of a concrete is referred to as its grade. Approximate properties for use in the design of prestressed and composite members are discussed in Chapters 7 and 8.3.I) is 8 x 15 + 200 = 320 kN applied to one notional lane in combination with primary HA loading.61f0 u I I I Characteristic strengths Parapet collapse load (6. Stress Parabola 0.2.7. acting in any direction.0 kN/m 2 Load intensity on other 1 m = 0. the HA braking load (6.l•)l" 11000 + 0. Knife edge load (6..__.0 = 3.~ . are required for the design of prestressed and composite members. Thus.5. 4.. diameter at neutral axis is 0.1)..3.2) is 0. '. and the coefficient of thermal expansion as 12 x to6rc for normal weight con· crete.9 = 1.4.~ I I I I I II I s. Load intensity on first 2 m = 4.9 = 1.. 4.
4.2 Reinforcement stressstrain cW"Ves 1.6. However. 47 .steel..4 Vt. When analysing a structure.. ~ I I I Fig. When carrying out stress citlculations at the serviceability limit state. value of J.. are design values which include the y. I 4. when the effect under consideration is associated with a limiting stress. examples of this are cracking in reinforced concrete.87fpuf 0.. strictly.. deflection and vibration.!.n criteria Fig.3 for concrete is given for fatigue calculations because it is the strength of a section which is of interest. values appropriate to the various limit states are summarised in Table 4. although y.. Each tabulated value is given as a force which is the product of the characteristic strength (/p.sv. Cracking in prestressed concrete is considered to be a limiting stress effect because..3.(b) Prestressing steel stress!ilrain curves Strain 0..4. and not the mean strengths. The Code characteristic stressstrain curve is the trilinear lower bound approximation to these curves.. should be adopted which should reflect the uncertainty associated with the particular material and the importance of the particular limit state.87fpuf I I I I Tables are given for the characteristic strengths of wire. its overall response is of interest and.15 for steel originated in the Comit6 Europeen du Beton.. l I (a) Normal and low relaxation products Prestressing steel Material partial safety factors n. .15+. 0. values of 1. strand /__. 4.0 for steel are used.. However. is as follows. 4.. The subdivisions of the serviceability limit state are explained later in this chapter when the design criteria are discussed. It should be noted that. 4.5 is adopted in the Code irrespective of the control._':ign to nt"' "'00 Stress 2 ~ ii! !i I I ' ' I: I~ !I Ii ~i '1'1 ~' !. The explanation of the choice of I . when used with the CEB partial safety factors for loads. strand.~i Stress Stress Stress :Ii ' .. l 0.Code characteristic '.3(a).. 4. The y. hence y.... I I I ·t i' __.4(a)(d) Design stressstrain curves for ulri~ate limit state L3 L3 LO Deflection LO LO Fatigue L3 LO ties appropriate to the mean strengths of the materials.jf ii . A value of 1.. a single value of 1..1.. 4. for accurate batching and control..2ookN/mm~ kN/~mi 2x10.. are used throughout the Code it is simpler to use them for analysis.005 Strain Table 4.._. 175kN/mm 2 for bar.:..005 Strain See Fig. it involves a limiting tensile stress calculation." 0.· 7 .strain curves for mild or hot rolled high yield steel and for cold worked high yield steel are shown by the solid lines of Fig.. then a value of y. Ym values of 1.3 for concrete for limiting stress calculations never has to be used by a designer because the stress limitations.._ fpuf= . which is shown chain dotted in Fig.3. ii~' 'I ·1·1 !ld ~i 1~1 !~." terial properties are appropriate to the mean or characteristic strengths of materials. compacted strand and bars of various nominal size. now the Comite EuroInternational du Beton (CEB).5 for concrete and 1.. These values also originated in the CEB [111).0 are specified. They are based upon typical curves for commercially available products. 460 N/mm 2 for cold worked high yield steel. Values I I I I Stress Characteristic strengths The trilinear characteristic stressstrain curves for normal and low relaxation tendons and for 'as drawn' wire and 'as spun' strand are shown in Fig.. to I . 4.. for concrete made without strict supervision.2. The values of 1. Since the latter. except for diameters in excess of 16 mm when it is 425 N/mm 2 ... which chose these values because... nnd desi. For the same reason as above... whereas the CEB Recommendations [110) state that Ym can vary from 1. it is emphasised that the y. value of 1. the values of the latter are determined by the relative and not the absolute values of the stiffnesses.) and the area (Aps) of the tendon.0035 Strain Strain lb) Reinforcing bars (a) Concrete fpuf Strass I Stress I I II 0. The concrete values are greater than those for steel because of the greater uncertainty associated with concrete properties..3 (a) (b) 'As drawn' wire and 'as spun' strand Stressstrain curve .3 (b) See Fig.. 11 I The general forms of the stress. If there is a linear relationship between loads and their effects.Cold worked high yield steel .. 19 wire strand .0 for both steel and concrete for analysis purposes...~ .). for concrete is partially intended to reflect the degree of control over the production of concrete.Mild or hot rolled high yield steel .15 !c) Norma\ and low relaxation {d} 'As drawn' wire and 'as spun' strand prestressing steels Fig. 0... as explained later in this chapter.87fy I I I I Strain I I 200kN/mm 2 forwire 175kN/mm 2 for 19 wire strand I I 0.3 for concrete and J .0 when analysing a section if the effect under consideration is associated with deformations.. ··1 '' ·"'! high yield . is taken to be 1. y. l l I 200kN/mm 2 for wire.. they led to structures which were sensibly the same as those designed· using the European national codes [109].. Consequently the same effects are calculated whether the ma. this value need never be used by a designer because there is not a requirement in the Code to check the fatigue strength of concrete.w . .005 As was explained in Chapter 1. I "de bri • }]aterioipropPrtie.. and 485 N/mmz for hard drawn steel wire. Stressstrain curve / I l I I Tensron ~/~~~~~'!.1 Ym values Limit state Serviceability Analysis of structure Reinforced concrete cracking Prestressed concrete cracking Stress limitations Vibration Ultimate Analysis of structure Section design Concrete St<d LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LS 1. this is governed by material proper46 I l Strain I r l l __. which are given in the Code as design criteria. design strengths are obtained by dividing characteristic strengths by appropriate partial safety factors (y. However. at both the serviceability and ultimate limit state.45fcuf..... 4..2. ~ a1.
2. In view of the fact that it is desirable to ensure that the steel remains elastic under all serviceability conditions. The author would suggest that the approach sug~ gested in the CP 110 handbook [112] could be adopted for flanges which have a topping but are not encased in insitu concrete: the suggestion is that... which would be concerned with vibrations to cause collapse of a bridge. ~ '~"' .002. 10 a 6 4 2 0 10 20 30 50 60 f 0uNlmm 2 40 Fig. Hence. It can be seen from Fig.4 f.1) J'w Hypothetical stress at first observed cracking Concrete stress limitations the Code is gained.3(a) values should be permitted.184 fy for fy in the range 485 to 250 N/mm 1 • Design criteria In this chapter the design criteria are presented and discussed. Compressive stresses in reinforced concrete Compressive stresses in prestressed concrete The limit· value of 1..~ ..3... This stress is f. Serviceability limit state Steel stress limitations ConcrCte stress limitations Cracking of prestressed concrete Cracking of reinforced concrete Vibration Other considerations Deflections Fatigue Durability Table 4.3) by dividing the characteristic strengths (fc.. the precast concrete adjacent to the insitu concrete restrains the latter and controls any cracks which may form.. as explained later in this chapter.1 that the concrete reaches its peak compressive stress..6fpu• for 'as drawn' wire and 'as spun' strand. but methods of satisfying the criteria are presented in subsequent chapters. stress limitations ofO. buckling or overturning is simply that these events should not occur. In the Code this is achieved by specifying allowable stresses which are in excess of the ultimate tensile strength of concrete and are. to increase the limiting stresses of Table 4.) The resulting stresses are of the same order as those of BE 2/73. As explained in Chapter 7. at a strain of about 0... As shown later in this Chapter.. 4. although prestressing steel limiting stress criteria are stated in the Code..5 12 • . the Code criterion.3(a) by 50%.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Material properties and design criteria Design stressstrain curves The Ym values referred to above are applied to the characteristic strengths whenever they appear in a calculation. whenever they occur. are given in the general section of Part 4 of the Code.2 from which. 4.. under such conditions. .... the actual flexural stress at a support of finite width is less than the stress calculated assuming a concentrated support.I.to \. it can be seen that there are a great number of criteria to be satisfied and. 4. It should be noted from Fig.... Hence. Once the concrete starts to crush it is less effective in providing lateral restraint to any compression reinforcement.. 4.5/a 0.f..5 !cu. it will be possible to identify those criteria which would not be critical for a particular situation.. the Code implies that the increased stresses may be used both when a precast flange is completely encased in insitu concrete (such as a composite slab) and for sections fonned by adding an insitu topping to precast beams.4.6 where they are compared with inferred stresses at which cracking was first observed in tests on composite planks reported by Kajfasz. Hence the design stress of compression reinforcement is restricted to the stress equivalent to a strain of 0.. to summarise..5.. nonetheless. These criteria imply that tendon stress increments should be Calculated under live load. by the appropriate values of Ym· The design curves at the ultimate limit state are of particular interest and are shown in Fig.718 fy to 0'... serviceability limit state and other considerations.2 30 40 50 3...· ''C ...u.. compressive stresses are limited to 0. Since such a calculation is not generally carried out in prestressed concrete design.4/. if calculations bad to be carried out for each..v l_ ___ / "". It is thus extremely unlikely that cracking of the insitu concrete would be observed.. the descending branch of the ten· sile stressstrain curve can be made use of. The Code stresses are identical to those in BE 2173 and are given in Table 4.6 Tensile stresses at first observed cracking Tensile stresses in composite construction When flexural tensile stresses are induced in the insitu concrete of a composite member consisting of precast prestressed units and insitu concrete..· Design criteria Rupture Buckling Overturning Vibration o::  It should be noted that this heading does not cover tensile stresses in prestressed concrete.. the design procedure would be extremely lengthy.5 fcu. The stresSes are identical to those in BE '2/73 except that a stress of 0. However..1 to 4.I I I I "'t.. '. some of the criteria ciln be checked by 'deemed to satisfy' clauses. A vibration criterion. This Compressive stresses in composite construction means that there is an indirect check on reinforcement stresses under primary HA loading but not under other loads.· . 4. (b) Transfer Stress distribution Allowable stress Triangular Unifonn 0. Somerville and Rowe [l 13).0001 Strain Fig. 4.....15 + It lies in the range 0. Hence.. The comptession flange of a prestressed precasl beam with an insitu concrete slab is restrained by the latter and placed under a triaxial stress condition. even at the ultimate limit slate.3. but the fact that steel stresses have to be calculated counteracts to a large extent the advantages of the deemed to satisfy rules. compliance with the serviceability limit state vibration criterion is deemed to satisfy the ultimate limit state requirements. it was decided to introduce a separate steel stress criterion. in such circumstances. I . Strain at first observed cracking =0. thus. .: .· (The Code clause actually refers to the stresses of Table 4. It is not necessary to apply the Ym Prestressing steel Since a stress limitation existed for Ultimate limit state Stresst In order to prevent microcracking. 14 "E " z ~ "" ·~ !" Tests\113] Code Codex2. at suppons) 0. The Code values could be obtained from the lower bound to the experimental values by applying a partial safety factor of 2.4/.· . and then starts to crush.l 41• . ~_''.0 The Table 4... different Yp values are given for the crack width and steel stress cp. hypothetical stresses as illus· trated in Fig..lculations and this could cause confusion..fpu). which are covered by 'cracking of prestressed concrete'.. important in design tenns. given in Part 4 of the Code under the headings: ultimate limit state. and tensile strains in excess of the cracking strain of concrete toler· ated. in a composite member designed in accordance with the Code. I _. Each criterion is now discussed.. The criteria are listed in Table 4.4 Table 4.2 that the steel stressstrain curve becomes nonlinear at a stress of O..002 on the d"esign stressstrain curve.. 4.. but.3 to the stresses. 1..3(b) but it should be those of Table 4.33/w(0. The criteria are.. due to vertical restraint to the compression zone from the support.3(a).5. Furthermore.. This is contrary to BE '2/73.. Fortunately. spalling and unacceptable amounts of creep occurring under serviceability conditions.Bfpu> for nonna1 and low relaxation products.4 values are extremely conservative. but the increased stress should not exceed 0. and compressive. thus. and there is thus a possibility of the latter buckling. an increase of only 25% of the Table 4. instead. It is thus pennitted..6 4. is not given. which only permits increased stresses to be used for the first of these situ· ations. as can be seen from Fig... with reference to Fig.. 4.11of}'"T. The stress limitations referred to as 'concrete stress limitations' include compressive stresses in reinforced and prestressed concrete. In addition.~·. deemed to satisfy rules for crack control in slab bridges are given in the Code. It is unfortunate that the introduction of this criterion complicates the design procedure for reinforced concrete for two reasons: 1.3 Limiting concrete compressive stresses in prestressed concrete (a) Serviceability limit state !! ' Loading Allowable stress Bending Direct compression 0. they can be ignored in practice. Hence design stressstrain curves are obtained from the characteristic curves (see Figs.4 concrete Limi1ing concrete flexural tensile stresses in in·situ Insitu concre1e grade Tensile stress (N/mm 1) 25 3. as experience of Table 4. ("'.2 The criterion for rupture of one or more sections.... it was considered logical to specify similar criteria for prestressing steel. and 0. 4.25f. so that cracks which open under the application of occasional loading will close when the loading is removed.4 5. tensile and interface shear stresses in composite construction.. a clause in the prestressed concrete section of Part 4 of the Code effectively states that the criteria can be ignored.. is now permitted iii support regions because such a region is subject to a triaxial stress system. . rm· r l . Steel stress limitations Reinforcement It is explained in Chapter 7 that it is generally only necessary to check cracks widths in highway bridges under HA loading for load combination I..5 Tensile stressstrain curve of restrained concrete ing stresses for the serviceability limit state and at transfer Serviceability limit state / I 16~ • are given in Table 4.Bfy and this stress is. reinforcement. The latter includes those criteria which are not specified in the Code but which are. Ultimate limit state (4.
It is necessary to check that.8 6.B 1.2 0.5 "E E z Fig.0 1. and were based partly upon the 1964 CEB recommendations {I I I]. However./Jcu) should be taken for posttensioned members..8 6.22 1.. This is because more prestress is then required. Cracking of reinforced concrete The design surface crack widths were assigned from considerations of appearance and durability. it is not necessary to carry out a true crack width calculation.36 . the Code gives no guidance on unbonded tendons. whereas the Code allows no increase of the type 2 stresses for a steel area in excess of 0. Beeby and Taylor (123] have shown that the hypothetical tensile stresses should decrease with an increase in depth and.5 50 Umiting interface shear stress (Nlmm') for Type I Type2 0. 2. In Fig. In addition. given later in Table 4. flexural tens He stresses of 0..7 Class I No tensile stresses are pennitted except for 1 N/mm! under prestress plus dead load. This is because the calculated shear capacity of an unreinforced interface cannot be relied upon under conditions of repeated loading as occur on bridges. In view of this the author would suggest that surface type 3 be considered to be applicable to the 'rough as cast' surface used in bridge practice .64 0.6 Hypothetical flexural tensile stresses for Class 3 members (a) Basic stresses Tendon typ< Limiting cr•cl< width (mm) Preiensioned 0.50 I o..0 1. The type of situation where they would be applicable in bridges is where the top slab of a deck consists of precast units spanning between longitudinal beams. In Fig.36 0. and two of these were equivalent to the Code types 2 and 3.45 #cu for pretensioned members. the Table 4. the author would suggest the adoption of the Concrete Society recommendations of 0...45 0. thus.15%. and thus the design stress for the former should be less than that for the latter.( 1' \[ ) . 4./!cu.0 0.8 6.36 /lc1 are permitted for pre.1 5. who tested composite Ibeams in which the steel area across the interface and the shear span to effective depth ratio were varied. but the Code type 2 stresses are very conservative and Class 2 Tensile stresses are permitted but visible cracking should not occur.. and at transfer. Finally.i 1I if'!' ~ I~ ! i' •I !i I r I I I' Ij. it is emphasised that it was not intended that interlace shear should be checked in composite slabs formed from precast inverted T·beams with solid infill.1 0.15% 0 m•d desir>.556 The appropriate partial safety factor to be applied is 1.45 . it should be emphasised that surface type I is not permitted for beam and slab bridge decks because it is always considered Limiting interface shear stresses .54 0.2 j 'r I ' :r Type3* 1. 7. Three types of Rough and no steel across the interface.4 0. have an adequate factor of safety against cracking occurring under the permanent loading which actually occurs in practice. lt can be seen that the Code type 3 stresses are reasonable. they are still extremely conservative for surface types I and 2.38 1.6(a). however.59 0. three surfaces were tested. 0.s ' I 1. and this is not the usual practice for precast bridge beams: the top surlaces of the latter are usually left 'rough as cast'.4 should be more dependent on steel area than the type 3 stresses. only 80% of this value (i.8 ~1000 0. a Class 2 member satisfies the Class l criterion in order to ensure that large span bridges. and it can be seen that they are referred to as hypothetical stresses because they exceed the tensile strength of concre1e and so cannot actually occur. and the author would suggest that (123] be consulted for such members.25 40 ""so 4. The Code increases of 4 N/mm 1 per I% of addi1ional steel..€ •' 3 2 •' • x •• • 2 ~ ~ ~:1 1 o i ~'j I • o.. who calculated the hypothetical tensile stresses present at different maximum crack widths observed in the tests.15 .5 values were essentially chosen to be a little less conservative than' the CP 116 values. 4.3 7. 11 Interface shear in composite construction surface are defined as follows: ~._r:ritt>ria Table 4.e.38 0.0 5. Beeby [119] has suggested that the flexural tensile strength of concrete is equal to 0. ~ ' • 0.ri(I/ propertiP~ Experimental first slip f117] Experimental ultimate [11 BJ 5 • Experimental surface type 2 (118] x Experimental surface type 3 [118] .• "Ez 3r""•' & • .8 5. Smooth and at least 0.45 per 1% of links in excess of 0.4 by 50%. It sbould be noted that tbe steel percentages .15% and a Code detailing rule. and the units act as permanent formwork for insitu concrete to form a composite slab.5 4. .2 Percent steel across interface (b) Experimental ultimate stresses Fig.42 N/mm~ 0.2 3.32 1. 4.2 0.1 0. under dead and superimposed dead load.. The minimum link area of 0. 0. It is understood that the limiting stresses given in the Code for composite slabs were intended for shallow slabs. This is in order to avoid cracking at the ends of members. 4..~: . provided that the permissible tensile stress in the prestressed unit is reduced by the same numerical amount..9 0. because tests reported by Bate (120] indicated that cracks in a grouted posttensioned member widen at a greater rate than those in a pretensioned member.5.0 5.15o/o steel across the interface.3 and thuG design values of the flexural tensile strength should be given by 0.Code surfaca type 3 Code surface type 2 4 4 . for pretensioned and grouted posttensioned tendons. .3 4. It can be seen that the Code stresses are very conservative. It can be seen that the Code approach to interface ~shear design is very different to that of BE 2n3 which is based upon an adaptation of the CP 117 approach [116]. and it is known [114] that the enhancement of the tensile strain capacity of the adjacent insitu concrete increases as the level of prestress at the contact surface increases. I 1. These criteria are thus identical to those of BE 2173. nor 600 mm.3 5..3 6. I. the basic stresses have to be multiplied by a depth factor from Table 4.1 0. At transfer of a Class 2 member. close to tension fare 3. They 51 . 1.1/P.428 &u which compares favourably with the Code value of 0.25 I.8 5.2 Grouted pos1tensioned 0. The presence of additional reinforcement in a prestressed member increases the crack control properties and a higher hypothetical tensile stress may be adopted. wbere/ci is the concrete cube strength at transfer..15% steel across the interlace. However. thus.6(b). The basic stresses are given in Table 4.Nlmm 2 \. because the Code gives limiting hypothetical flexural tensile stresses which are deemed to be equivalent to the limiting crack widths.46 0. These surface types originated in CP 116 and will lead to considerable problems for bridge engineers because the rough surface of types 1 and 3 requires the laitence to be removed from the surface by either wet brushing or tooling..25 Pre· tensioned.25 Stress (Nfmm 3) for concrete grade 30 0.2 (b) Depth factors Depth Factor (mm)~ 200 400 600 800 I. for pretensioned ten· dons close to the tension face. Rough and at least 0.38 0.127 mm (as suggested by Hanson [117}) and at failure./la· and 0.7 Surface type 1 interface shear stresses o. The allowable interlace shear stresses for beam and slab construction are given in Table 4. for which dead load dominates..8 Cracking of prestressed concrete 5 • The criteria for the control of cracking in prestressed concrete are presented in terms of limiting flexural tensile stresses for three classes of prestressed concrete.j1 It is permissible to increase the stresses in Table 4. are based upon the area of tensile concrete and not the gross section area.3 7. No reference is made in the Code to unbonded tendons and. and zero in sagging and hogging moment regions respectively [121). the flexural tensile stresses in a Class 3 member should not exceed the limiting stress appropriate to a Class 2 member. Insitu concrete 25 30 40 so 60 • Increase by 0.8 the test data for a cube strength of about 25 N/mm 2 and the Code stresses are compared at a serviceability criterion of a slip of 0.. ~ ~en to~. were based upon American Con· crete Institute recommendations (115].8 4. The basic stresses were derived from tests on beams by Bate [1201 and Abeles [122}.and posttensioned members respectively.6 O. are based upon the tests of Abeles [122}.3 6.1 5. Jvf. !t: ~te bri.(b) Surface types 2 and 3 interface shear stresses (Jc~ = 25 N/mm') necessary to provide links. The Code surface types 2 and 3 stresses can be considered by examining the experimental results of Saemann and Wasba [118]. Finally.1 0.7 the Code surface type 1 stresses are compared with some test results of Hanson (117] and Saemann and Washa (118].5 4. whlch states that the link spacing in composite Tbeams should not exceed four times the insitu concrete thickness.. and of 3 N/mm' per 1% of additional steel. A Class 3 member has to be checked as a Class I member under dead and superimposed dead load for the same reason as that given previously for Class 2. At transfer.8(a). 3.s Percent steel across interface (a) Experimental serviceability stresses Code 0~ I o.2 i"' 20 "" 40 ~o f.. However. Table 4. Heu· Class 3 Cracking is pennitted provided that the crack widths do not exceed the design values for reinforced concrete. In contrast..
This could obviously cause confusion and it also complicates the calculations. In view of the anomaly so created. e. In fact. strictly. it seems illogical to have a YtJ value of l. y13 should be applied to the load effects (the required moments of resistance) in accordance with equation (1. provided that the requirements of the Code with regard to limiting crack widths.___:. onerous than the BE 1n3 values of 0.25 and 0. are given in Part 4 of the Code. 52. 87] show that it predicts safe estimates of the strengths of actual slabs.ethods of analysis (including yield line theory) except for methods involving redistribution. I. but this is also true of other methods of analysis and. for concrete bridges. or of span to depth ratios. a value of I . the adoption of different y13 values seems to be an unnecessary complication.l + (~10)1200) is quoted. Thus.3I mm is counteracted by the fact that different crack width fonnulae are adopted. Deflection calcula· tions are also important where the method of construction requires careful control of levels.0 for the product Ytl· Yp· yp.7 Design crack widths Conditions of exposure Design crack width (mm) Moderate: 0. 0. essentially. provided that ~ does not exceed 20%. indeed. causes problems in the cal· culations for reinforced and prestressed concrete members for the following reasons: In the case of reinforced concrete. e. The · Code criterion lies approximately midway between these two criteria and is given in an appendix to Part 2 as an acceleration of 0. Furthermore. y13 cannot be greater than 1. In order to simplify the calculations. on this basis. H is suggested in Chapter l that Y/3 could be considered to be an adjustment factor which ensures that designs to the.r Material properties ana aes1gn cnrenu theory. These val· ues are not stated in the Code.15 for dead and superimposed dead load'is stated for all methods of analysis since. and the criterion is disc~mfort to a user of the :_. although it is theoretically an upper bound method. to those for the stress limitation limit state.I should be used. However. tests [86. which differentiates only between different types Of loading. and it should be noted that different design crack widths are assigned for different conditions of exposure.__ ~. L· ''. It should be noted that the formula for YtJ gives values less than 1.83 or 0. ·I Fatigue Vibration It is only necessary t9 consider foot and cycle track bridges..O HB are used for calculating both compressive and tensile stresses in prestressed concrete. as an alternative. and for bearing design.2 for imposed load and is always 1. maxim. !·f\ ! Other considerations wct Very severe (I) Surfaces subject to the effects of deicing salts or salt spray. and the stresses and crack widths so calculated should then be multiplied by the appropriateyp value (LO or 0. stresses and crack widths should be calculated under the design loads. it is obviously necessary to calculate deflections in order to ensure that clearance specifications are not vio· lated and adequate drainage will obtain. and the impairance of nonnal walking due to large amplitude vibrations. the prestressed concrete section of Part 4 of the Code states that compressive stresses should be checked under the same load as that specified for tensile stresses: in other words.91 respectively. Serviceability limit state ~ Ultimate limit state A value of 1.1 HB.10 i I " I . The reason for the proviso is that the value of y13 calculated from the formula is greater than 1. the Code allows.15 for dead and superimposed dead load is a reasonable average value.g. wherefjis the percentage redistribution. as explained in Chapter 7.o: ~ J.20 A specific criterion is not given for deflection in tenns of an absolute limiting deflection.3) when using yield line theory.2). 1. and for top slabs if the latter are pro· tected by waterproof membranes. differenl values of y13 have to be applied to dead loads and imposed loads. for load combination I. durability should not be a problem. thus.1 HB. whilst compressive stress calculations are considered at the stress limitation limit state under a load of 1. 7.83 and 0.5 /10 miss where f.1). e. In the previous paragraph.O HA and J . any analysis should predict the effects with reason· able accuracy. The philosophy of relating the design crack width to the condition of exposure and. ( 1) Sutfaces protected by a waterproof membrane (2) Internal surfaces.1 to 1. which are 1. the adoption of 1. and a sum· mary follows. The derivation of the Code criterion is described fully by Blanchard. an appropriate Yp value is not explicitly stated in the Code but it was the intention of the drafters that it should be unity. These values do not seem entirely logical since the y13 value for an upper bound method should be greater than that for a lower bound method. such a dependence was considered during the drafting stages of the Code. . =~ t.._. are presented. The fact thal. alternate wetting and drying. loads of J . in design tenns. different y13 val· ues are specified for the cracking limit state. because the fonner is theoretically unsafe and the latter theoretically safe. lower bound methods 1 predict even safer estimates of the strengths of actual slabs [126]. Yp should be related to the metll. l for the extreme cases of no redistribution (elastic analysis) and what might be considered as full redistri· bution (yield line theory). It is not clear why stress ranges which are dependent upon bar type have been adopted. This causes problems because. it is explained in Chapter 1 that the effects of the latter have to be multiplied by a partial safety factor y13 in order to . and it would appear more logical for the stress ranges to be dependent upon the type of loading and the loaded length: indeed. It is thus con· venient to introduce the 'i13 values and the design criteria together in this chapter. could have been obtained by modifying the design criteria. The y13 values at the serviceability limit state are all unity except for the following: a value of 0.. it is implied by the author that y13 should be taken to be unity when checking the stress limitation limit state. the very severe exposure condition for roadside structures could prove to be exceptionally onerous.2 and it thus always lies in the range 1. obtain design load effects. Since the maximum pennitted value of ~is 30%.__ .2 HA and 1.25 Surface sheltered from severe rain and against freezing while saturated with water. However.0 HB.91 to the effects of HB loading (or of HA combined with HB) when checking the cracking limit state under load combination 1. as discussed in Chapter 9. minimum covers and minimum cement contents are complied with.2 HA or 1.83 is applied to the effects of HA loading and of 0. it is necessary to apply y13 as indicated in equation (1.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Table 4. '<) ___ . yet values greater than I. is the fundamental natural frequency of the unloaded bridge. The effects of vibrations on humans are closely related to acceleration and. The Code states that. sincey1L(=='ifl•Yp..15 for all"loads and all types of analysis.g. in contact with backfill and to freezing while bridge. s1ress !imitation calculations are carried out for a load of. When using yield line theory. ". However. l i Yts values In Chapter 3 the nominal loads and the values of the partial safety factor YtL> by which these· loads are multiplied to give design loads. but are implied because the Code states a value of 1. The maximum tolerable accelerations were assessed from two criteria: discomfort while standing on a vibrating bridge. i .15 for ~ greater than 20%.15 for dead load. The drafters' reason for including yield line theory with lower bound methods was that.0 HB.1 for all m. or more. when using yield line ·. When considering unwelded bars an equivalent criterion in tenns of a stress range is given in the Code The criterion is that the stress range should not exceed 325 N/rnm 2 for high yield bars nor 265 N/mm 1 for mild steel bars. must now be viewed with some scepticism in the light of research at Munich. These ranges are identical to those of BE 1n3 except that the range for mild steel bars is inde· pendent of bar diameter. roadside structures and marine structures excluding soffits (2) Surfaces exposed to the action of seawater with abrasion or moorland water having a pH of 4. It should be stated that the calculations are no1 necessar· ily as complicated as implied above because.. in which case a valueof[l. In the case of prestressecl concrete.: 53 ~ ('.. Furthermore. for imposed loads. from which Schiess! (124] concluded that there was no significant relationship be· tWeen corrosion and crack width or cover. under a load of LO HA or 1. 0. and to lead to impracticably large areas of reinforcement if applied to piers and abutments.5 or less ~ The relevant criterion is essentiajly that there should be a fatigue life of 120 years. I are permitted for redistribution in the range 10 to 30%.::_:.for these cases. although strictly incorrect.0 HA or 1. Code would be similar to designs to existing documents.od of analysis and quotes a value of 1.) is 1. hence.2 HA or 1.91) to give the design load effects as explained in Chapter I. the effects of different types of load cannot be calculated separately and then added together. and.. tensile stress calculations are considered at the cracking limit state and. thus.um tolerable accelerations were plotted against frequency in order to derive a crite· rion in terms of natural frequency. The values of y13 are dependent upon the material of the bridge and hence. for loads which are essentially unifonnly distributed over the entire structure. The fact that both of these design crack widths are as.g.___~ . Davies and Smith [107]. but are either implied or intended by the drafters.1 when~ is Jess than 10%. It should be noted that some of the values given in the following are not necessarily stated in the Code.2 for HA loading and 1. However._ q! i Deflection are summarised in Table 4. unlike BE 1/73. Hence stresses of different signs on the same member are checked under different loadings. different design crack widths are assigned for soffits.1 Durability A durability criterion is not defined but. the implied values of Yp are 0. This work has been discussed by Beeby [125]. whether subject to condensation or not (3) Buried concrete and concrete continuously under water Severe (2) Soffits (2) Surfaces exposed to driving rain.1 for HB loading at the serviceability limit state for load combination 1 (see Table 3.1 HB. whilst crack width calculations are carried out for a load of 1. 2. indirectly to the amount of corrosion. when the same final result.. for bridge decks. It can be shown that. In addition. but it was intended that a value of I.
If the net tensile and compressive forces are equal. The latter calculation is considered at the stress limitation limit state (y13 = I . the neutral axis depth V. is tedious to use in practice for hand calcu· lations.1) Ey is thus in the approximate range of 0. Small' axial thrusts. when designing in accordance with BE 1/73. as opposed to two calculations. 4.4(a).0035d 0. l. stresses have to be checked at one load level and strength at another. prestressed precast members.1 Strains for a balanced design Fig. crack_widths and strength have to be checked at different load levels. take moments of the forces about a common point in the section to obtain the ultimate moment of resis· tance.. +200000 (5.S?f. 0.lfcu times the crosssect:ional area. Composite Reinforced concrete In accordance with BE 1/73. stresses. of up to O. 4. and there is little warning that it is about to . from Fig. However. Plane sections remain plane. Determine from the design stressstrain curves the steel stresses appropriate to the calculated steel strains. have to be canied out. Fig. A balanced design.= Reinforced concrete beams 0. and thus three calculations.fg.take place. to be adopted. implied by the stressstrain curve of 54 . for a balanced design. 5. con~truction In addition to the comments made above regarding rein· forced and prestressed concrete construction. a modular ratio design is carried out at the working load.1. the neutral axis depth is given by x 4. Thus..2) The tensile strength of concrete is ignored. 4. does not occur. adjust the neutral axis depth and return to step l. Prestressed concrete The number of calculations for designs in accordance with the Code and in accordance with BE 2173 are identical because. The design stressstrain curves are as shown in Fig. at the same load level. to a reasonable accuracy. strength of. Strain compatibility The ultimate moment of a section can be detennined by using the strain compatibility approach which involves the following steps. each at a different load level.4. This is because such a fail· ure can be brittle. I Chapter5 Ultimate limit state . 5. 5. If these are not equal. 5. 2. by reference to Fig.. by 2. and the. three load levels have to be considered for a composite member designed in accordance with the Code. 5. the. hence. the adoption of the rectangu· Jar stress block results in steel areas which are essen· tially identical to those using the parabolicrectangular curve. 3.0) and the load level is thus different to that adopted for checking the stresses in. in which the concrete crushes and the tension steel yields simultaneously. and crack widths are checked at the same load. Calculate the net tensile and compressive forces at the section.4/c. for beams.) is approximately half of the effective depth since. This strain is given. because they increase the calculated moment of resistance [112]. in both cases. If a beam is reinforced only in tension.0035 in the compressive concrete.4(b).004 and. the neutral axis depth is limited to half the effective depth in order to ensure that an overreinforced failure involving crushing of the concrete. the design of composite members is complicated by the interface shear calculation. ' .1 in which ey is the strain at which the steel commences to yield in tension. are ignored. Guess a neutral axis depth and. 3.flexure and inplane forces (.. as shown in Fig.Ct"•~r11t~ ·11 bridge desit!!'! to BS54~ Summary An attempt is now made to summarise the implications of the Code Yp values and design criteria by comparing the number of caJculations required for designs in accordance with current documents and with the Code. is given by considering the strain diagram of_F. 55 .2. with a constant stress of 0.0035 + Ey (5.003 to 0. as opposed to two load levels for a design in accor· dance with BE 2173. determine the strains in the tension and compression reinforcement by assuming a linear strain distribution and an extreme fibre strain of 0. generally. before yield of the ten· sion steel. The Code thus pennits the approximate rectangular stress block.0035 x Assumptions The following assumptions are made when analysing a crosssection to determine its ultimate moment of resistance: d I. 4. Beeby [127) has demon· strated that.. Simplified concrete stress block The parabolicrectangular distribution of concrete com· pressive stress. in accordance with the Code.0 002 y' O.
4f.A. /cub ou=(l.784/y: it is thus conservative always to talce a value of 0.5). the Code restricts z to a maximum value of 0.002.' (5.7 .Sd.Sd.451cut. 0.15ft:Ubd2 + 0.S.4. for Lbeams. (5. for design purposes. The Code limits the application of the design equations to situations in which less than 10% redistribution bas been assumed. it is necessary that (5.bx = 0. as in the Code and Fig. 5. 72/1 . tO rearrange the equations as follows. which is given by tbe lesser of (a) the actual width and (b) the web width plus onefifth of the distance between points of zero moment.72{1 .7 or d'ld z Thus the lever arm can be calculated from equation (5.5) Substitute in (5. rather than to designing a section to resist a given ·moment. impli'es a maximum redistribution of 10%. The formulae are based upon the simplified rectangular stress block discussed previously and their derivations are now presented. Fig. which is discussed in Chapter 2.bh1 (dh/2) (5.3) to (5. = 0. Singly reinforced rectangular beam The stresses and stress resultants at failure are as shown in Fig. This is because the neutral axis depth is limited to 0.A. 0.7'""········. S.bd' Design charts The strain compatibility method described above is tedi· ous for analysis and is not amenable to direct design..A.002 (5.6~) (0.'1 ·L. for Tbeams. 0.5 is the effective flange width.12[.6).95d implies a maximum steel strain of 0. 5..''·'.~ '~ c=. 4.' (dd') + 0. Fe= 0.. the Code restricts the neutral axis depth to a maximum value of O. 5.lf..b(0.871. = 0..1. 5.5~) + 0. = 0. Compression reinforcement is then provided to resist the applied moment which is in excess of the balanced moment given by equation (5. that.72fyA.14) Flanged beams ~ h. 0.5)..As Fig. = 0.5d) as that for balanced design with no compression reinforcement. and checking the adequacy of the flange using (5.A.f<lf.4 or from a table in the Code .r~~ Stress Paraboliorectangular 0.6~) + 0..57 r~~" . = 0.. but can be written more generally as dd' = 73 (0.15). Design formulae As an alternative to using strain compatibility or design charts.4) and (5. (dhj2) i 0. in which case the ultimate moment of resistance can be obtained by taking moments about the reinforcement.16) These equations are given in the Code and can be used for design purposes by calculating the steel area from (5..85 times the span for an end span of a continuous member.8) . 5. /• i Simplified rectangular j i M.4.4[. = 0.0035 (0.3) and solve the resulting equation for F. In addition.4f.z 0.)d fcubd (5.15[.12[.721~.3.10) and (5.. A.4fcu ..12) M.11) are given in the Code.3) However.7) Since a rectangular stl'..A. The strains.2f...z w ~ 11c_ 0 The ultimate moment of resistance sho~ld be taken as the lesser of the values given by equations {5.._ .. /cub '= z = ) z . the Code is generaUy conservative.. the steel area from (5.214 The ultimate mom~nt of resistance can be obtained by taking moments about the tension reinforcement.'.' (dd') 0.11) From which As can be calculated directly. For equilibrium 0.A.5d ~ 0.15) and that assuming the concrete to be critical: .sd(l +ji.A.2 M.. the Code gives simplified formulae for hand calculations.2f.10) From which A/ can be calculated directly.5). The distance between points of zero moment may be taken as 0. It should be noted.41. hence I I '·'"' I ol d'4 1 A.3 Singly reinforced rectangular beam at failure i i j ·• X b ''. a comparison with values obtained from Table 2 of Part 5 of the Code indicates that. It is mentioned in Chapter 4 that the design stress of compression reinfOl'Cement is in the range 0. The ultimate moment of resistance is taken to be the lesser of the value calculated assuming the reinforcement to be critical: M..bd + 0.A. b0. 5.5 Flanged beam at failure M.v to 0. it is possible to derive the following more general version of equation (5.bd' (0. Thus design charts are frequently used and the CP 110 design charts [1281 are appropriate. ~ ~ I I (5. It is not clear why the Code has this restriction.A. From (5.d X12 .bh.2 Rectangular stress block M.0035 Strain Fig. in addition it is assumed that: (5.4) However... ~o.4 Doubly reinforced rectangular beam at failure d'ld M.f~bd' SM.= 0.5~) '. which is appropriate for any amount of redistribution (~) M.7) and. The stresses and stress resultants at failure are then as shown in Fig. hence 56 ____ .87f.81[. but Beeby [1271 has suggested that it could be either that there is evidence that the concrete at the top of a member tends to be less well compacted than that in the rest of the member. 'i !! Equations (5. 0 Fs = 0.d Doubly reinforced rectangular beam  1. for this value.95d.6) O. The resulting effective widths are of the same order as those calculated in accordance with CP 114.72[. 7 times the span for continuous spans. and it would seem reasonable to take a value of 0. S.13) Li It is assumed in the Code that any compressive stresses in the web concrete can be conservatively ignored: this is valid provided that the flange thickness does not exceed half the effective depth.2f. + 0.6~) (0.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Ultimate limit state .6~) (5.10) is incorrectly printed in the Code.0315). d~ 0 0.75d compression reinforcement may develop its yield strain of 0. but they are obviously more suited to analysing a given section.4.' (5. OSI (5.4fo)>d(0.A. The breadth b shown in Fig. = 0.= 0._.A. S. in order that the . the relationship between neutral axis depth and amount of redistribution.4) A .87{. the lever ann (z) is given by 0.. hence (5. 5.5d •and.81[. and hence its design strength of 0. = Fs = O.!§) dh/!2 (5.16).  2.bd(0. The ultimate moment of resistance (Mu) can be obtained by taking moments about the line of action of the resultant concrete force.B710s 0. but it should be noted that the final tenn of equation (5. and tension reinforcement provided such that equilibrium is maintained.4J.75d) ~ b . stresses and stress resultants are as shown in Fig. then.81[.5) are given in the Code as design equations. The equations are again restricted to less than 10% redistnbution.75d) = 0.eSs block is assumed. or that it is felt desirable to limit the steel strain at failure (a maximum lever arm of 0. Prestressed concrete beams Assumptions The assumptions made for reinforced concrete are also made for prestressed concrete.12[.87 f. However.41" Fig.i 1 + 0.d')!0._:~' 1. For equilibrium Fc=F~ 0. The stresses at failure in bonded tendons can be obtained from either the appropriate design stressstrain curve of Fig..lf. or the web width plus onetenth of the distance between points of zero moment. Stres5es Strains Hence the Code states that The procedure for deriving the Code equations for doubly reinforced beams is to assume that the neutral axis is at the same depth (0. Equations (5..A.2fcubd y 0 Section I o.4f"bd(0.flexure and inplane forces OfIP.9) or Mu= 0. from the strain diagram of Fig.718f.5d) (0. In view of this it is best._.' (dd') (5.c"'4"~ ·. at midway between points of zero moment.
45 . 7 General prestressed beam at fail lire flanged beam with the neutral axis within the flange. This implies that no reinforcement is required in the appropriate direction. or of a . to give the total strain. strength of 0..6 Rectangular prestressed beam al failure ment directions do not generally coincide by calculating required 'resistive stress resultants' such that adequate strength is provided in all directions at a point in a plate. The complete set of equations is given in Appendix A to this book as equations A 1 toA8.A.17). It should be noted that all stress resultants are in terms of values per unit length • . 5.+M•") aK 2 = _ 2M ~ 3 xy When considering bottom reinforcement.(A9) to (A16) of Appendix A. who .yK K= MJMxy This value of K is then substituted into equation {5. it is more convenient to make use of equations which give M• x and Af• r directly. Such equations can be derived by noting that the following expressions for M• x and M*r satisfy the yield criterion M\ = M. However.. with reference to Fig. The latter can be obtained by multiplying the design limiting tensile stress of 0..4 fc. including (5.19) to obtain a value of K 0 =M. generally.3 (the partial safety factor incorporated in the fonnula). a linear function ofx. are nonnally concerned with nonrectangular sections.. on the same graph.. In the following..7.22). z= d0. or M"Y' and then calculating the other from the yield criterion.Cv: ·~ridge'• ··?BS"·~~ which gives the tendon stress and neutral ax. However. Strain compatibility The strain compatibility method described for reinforced concrete can be applied to prestressed concret~. My and the twisting moment M:ry shown in Fig./Mxl (5. but the Code statement implies that it is necessary to satisfy the relevant yield criterion. and M• y capable of resisting a particular set of applied moments.. Hence. Hence. so that a negative value of M\ is calculated from the first of equations (5.6. skew slabs).rectangular sections are not generally available.. the extent of which depends upon the length of the tendon. cal· culated from the strain diagram at failure. with reference to Fig.. Although these tables.=0. but these are of limited use to bridge engineers.. This ·is achieved by writing down an equilibrium equation in terms of the unknown tendon stress and unknoWn neutral axis depth...18) M• x and M*y are the moments of resistance per unit length. the walls of box girders)... lim~_JlJ_ate "" . These should be useful to bridge engineers. it is shown how this can be done for plates designed to resist bending. then no reinforcement is required in the bottom in the x direction. fOr top reinforcement M•.20) to give M"r = M1 M2. The latter strain is used to obtain the tendon stress from the stressstrain curve. Hence..M.9.. and another set of equations should be used which can be derived as follows. A combination of Mx. generally. are intended for rectangular sections. for bottom reinforcement \.is depth at failure as functions of the amount of prestress. Hence.b against x for the section under consideration and.. (d.1 1 M•y = MyIMxyl ) (5.81/pu• whilst CP 115 uses an ultimate strength of fpu· Hence. are known to bridge engineers as Wood's equations [133]. 2. The second derivative is a2(M•. a linear function of x: thus fpb is also. and is very similar to the equivalent table of CP 115. and plates are often subjected to both bending and inplane effects (e. + MyMxy(K+ K'" 1) a(M•."2)=0 aK xy K= ± 1 ) (5. M. However.. M1 . The table is based upon the results of tests carried out by Pannell [129].. the failure stress and neutral axis depth depend upon the span to depth ratio. The Code states that allowance should be made for the fact that principal stress resultant directions and reinforce M"x= M.4f. A graph can be plotted of . M" = f.ntorcement In general. 5. Mxy• This could be done by choosing either M• ..21) and (5... a smaUer neutral axis depth has to be adopted because . 3. Fp.yK = MxyK'" 1 = . = M.18) would cause the slab element to yield.. r=xr~.. Design formula The Code gives a formula for calculating the ultimate moment of resistance of a rectatigular beam.1 and K must be of opposite sign and M.. although they were originally proposed by Hillerborg [134]./lcu for a Class 2 member (see Chapter 4) by 1. because they can be applied to a number of standard bridge beams. it is required to reinforce in the x and y directions a plate element which is subjected to the bending moments Mx.IMxrl. calculated in the reinforcement directions. Reinforced concrete plates General The design of reinforced concrete plates for bridges is more complicated than for buildings because. Mxy) which would cause yield of the element.y/\1 = !M. A designer is generally interested in determining values of M\ and M" r to satisfy equation (5. it is possible to adapt them to nonrectangular sections [112].22) Equations (5. but Taylor and Oarke {131] have produced some typical charts for Tsections. It can be shown [132] that the yield criterion is (M".JMx Mx must be negative and thuS this equation is generally written M•y =My+ IM2. Mxy and K must be of the same sign and M.IM. 2. This can be checked by ensuring that the strain at the tension face exceeds the tensile strain capacity of the concrete.O.b Fig. + M•y = M.flexure and in·plane forces .'·:'WI CJ Ultimate . inplane or combined bending and inplane effects.fpb = 0. = fpbAtM Fig.g. The formula is obtained by taking moments of the tendon forces at failure about the line of action of the resultant concrete compressive force. a solution which minimises the total amount of steel at a point is generally sought and. but it is possible for a value of M"" and Af• r so calculated to have the wrong sign. and hence equation (5.. The table is based upon the test data of Bate [120]. These moments· of resistance can be calculated by means of the methods previously described for reinforced con· crete beams.. M\ = 0 can be substituted into equation (5. In order to give warning of failure it is desirable that cracking of the concrete should occur prior to either the steel yielding and fracturing.yK = M.21).17) The tendon stress (fpb) and neutral axis depth (x) at failure are obtained from the tables mentioned previously. If Mx < .IMxyl Thus. the sign convention is such that M• x and M• Y must be negative.b.+M•v) =M (lK.Mxy~ (5.21) When considering top reinforcement. the required values of fpb and x can be read off where the two lines cross. The stresses at failure in unbonded tendons are obtained from a table in the Code which gives the tendon stress and neutral axis depth as functions of the amount of prestress and the span to depth ratio. in bridges. the Code tabulated values of fpb and x can be plotted.19) M•y MyM.g.. who concluded that unbonded beams remain elastic up to failure except for a plastic zone. to a first order approximation. M:ry satisfying equation (5.f. of the reinforcement in the x and y directions respectively. The yield criterion for a plate element subjected to bending only is simply a relationship between the amounts of reinforcement in the element and the applied moments (M"" My.can be derived for skew reinforcement in thex direction 59 58 .yl Thus. Hence. or the concrete crushing in the compression zone. and dividing by the appropriate elastic modulus given in the Code. hence minimum steel consumption coincides with a mathematical minimum and the second derivative should be positive. + M•y) with respect to K and equating to zero. but the prestrain in the tendons should be added to the strain. thus M•. the same concrete compressive stress is used in both CP 115 and the Code. the principal moment directions are very often inclined to the reinforcement directions (e.f. Skew re.18) for known values of Mx. My.22) are for the optimum amounts of reinforcement with reinforcement in both the x and y directions.1 1\ 1 (5. hence minimum steel consumption coincides with a mathematical maximum and the second derivative should be negative.23) Similar equations can be derived for the other possibilities and the complete set of equations. .Sx) (5.21) and (5. Design charts Design charts are given in CP 110 [130] for rectangular prestressed beams. No guidance is given in the Code on the calculation procedure.. 5. To the author's knowledge design charts for non.Sx "' ·.Ac where Ac is. the sign convention is such that M•x and M" y must be positive.20) = Any value of K can be chosen by the designer and thus there is an infinite number of possible combinations of M•... Hence..nforcement A similar set of equations . Ap...+ \M:ryl Bending M*y =My+ IMryl Orthogonal re.Mx) (M"yMy) M2xy (5. 5. the total amount of steel is proper· tional to (M\ + Af•y)· Hence the value of K required to give a minimum steel consumption can be obtained by differentiating (M*. F. the Code neutral axis depths are 87% of the CP 110 values because the Code adopts a design tendon . to maintain equilibrium.Jlf""'"~ Fps=A.
in equations (A17) to (A30) should always be zero or positive. The equations .iiter ductility of a slab compfiled with a beam is neglected in design. for a number of different moment triads (M. Clark and West have designed.1 Prestressed beam section strength It is required to calculate the ultimate moment of resistance of the pretensioned composite section shown in Fig.P~.)lr· It should be noted that the core of the sandwich is assumed to make no contribution to the strength . The provision of reinforcement to resist combined bending and inplane forces is extremely complex. Uppenberg (136] and Hallbjom [137]. 5. Practical considerations Experimental verification The validity of the theory. it is obviously conservative. The va1ues of the latter forces are Combined bending and inplane forces 60 r· !!._:· :_. it is usual to carry out the section designs independently in each reinforcement direction. The initial prestress is 70% ofthe characteristic strength and the losses amount to 30%·. 5. When this is done it is often theoretically possible to decrease the reinforcement area in another direction.T applied at the centroids of the bottom and top outer shells respectively.I Inplane forces ..'co. Such an approach is valid because both equilibrium and the inplane force yield 0 ..r _ M)l+Ny(hf2cT) )IB  160 N)IT =My+ Nv (hl2c 8 ) hcocT Nx)ID = Mx)I + Nxv (h/2  CT) hcncT Nx)IT = .)I). !!. and successfully tested. very similar to those discussed previously for bending and twisting moments. as shown in Fig.. from equation {Al) implies a reinforcement area in the x direction which is less than the minimum. in practice..26) hcBCT Joo .. etc.. Such an approach ignores the interaction of the multiple triads. Insitu slab (S. when a skew slab is prestressed longitudinally. The latter point is intended to emphasise the fact that.. although Morley [139) and Clark [126] discuss the correct section design procedure. " . Theoretically.. Many computer programs are available which calculate M•.. then the minimum area should obviously be adopted in this direction. Multiple load combinations Bridges have to be designed for a number of different load positions and combinations and. However. 5. 5.(h/2c8 ) hc8 cr N. and a set of bending moments and inplane forces.. this can mean that the concrete is overstressed because the principal concrete stress occurs in the failure direction and not neces· "s'arily ·in a reinforcement direction. are statically equivalent to forces N. together with equations for the principal concrete forces per unit length.9. it is possible to reduce the total amount of reinforcement required at a particular point by considering the interactioh of the multiple triads. to resist N.(h/2cT) ··.5 M. Similarly the other stress resultants are N 9... The equations for orthogonal reinforcement are generally referred to as Nielson's equations [141] and the equations for skew reinforcement have been presented by Clark [142].· / . As an example. Conventional reinforcement could then be designed to resist the resulting 'outofbalance' stress resultants by using the equations given in the Appendix..n Nyn N.. which implies that the reinforcement is always in tension. Slabs· are more ductile than beams because the ultimate strain capacity of the concrete in the compression zone increases as the section breadth increases [138]..8.27) (S.uthor would suggest that.. it can be seen that the inplane force N. N)/ 8 .. in addition.. The required resistive forces are designated N*. M... Actual section Fig. 5.. The result is that the prestress is less than that calculated on the basis of a simple beam strip in the direc /i .N)I) and an inplane shear force per unit length (N.for deriving the values of the required resistive forces are given in Appendix A.'~ r . to resistN. have been derived for calculating the force~ required to resist an inplane force triad consisting of two inplane forces per unit length (N. 12001 1080 31No. Failure direction The direction in which failure (i. The principal concrete stresses can be obtained from the latter by dividing by the plate thickness. Clark and West [146] have given guidance on the resultant prestress to be expected in skew slab bridges. reinforcement area per unit lengtb multiplied by the design stress of the reinforcement. 8 and N.. it is difficult to imagine how the beam clauses can be applied to a general case.29) Equations (A17) to (A30) can be used to design reinforcement. in the bottom. in practice.. model skew slab bridges have been designed by the equations and successfully tested by Clark [126].. In such situations it is necessary to increase the reinforcement area to the minimum specified in the Code. etc. Thus.r 0 0 0 0 0 N. However. has been confirmed by tests on slab elements. calculated from equations (Al) to (Al6}.. Morley and Gulvanessian (144] have extended the method to include the possibility of the core contributing to the strength.Ultimnte limit state . .·''··. Al. if the value of M•.. yield) of a slab element occurs can be determined from theoretical considerations.__.. the author would suggest that the e~sting practice of designing the sections in the individual steel directions be continued. hence.. In addition. 'due allowance should be made in the distribution of prestress in the case of skew slabs'. etc. With reference to Fig.+N.1 tion of the prestress... calculated and added algebraically to those due to the applied loads. but it is simple and conservative. It should be noted that it is required that the values of IV*'. they should be resolved into the failute direction and the section design carried out in this direction. ''" __ ]' ~·~· 2 Equivalent sandwich . If the centroids of the outer shells are chosen to coincide with the centroids of the reinforcement layers. However. +t t t t t t\+t t t t t t + )~10 Fig.15. M)I. These equations are known to bridge engineers as Armer's equations [135].(A17) to (A30) .v (hl2c 8 ) hcncT "'f 15 125 60 Foi"rriWOrk Precast Mbeams E~~ ~ac:On~:e5s./ &@ ~"''· 5. then equations (A17) to (A30) for inplane forces can be applied to the above two sets of inpliine stress resultants... are generally adopted.5. From Table 21 of the Code . Regarding section design for prestressed slabs.2mm (S. N.   M.· reinforced sections. However. M•y or Af• a for each triad and then output envelopes of maximum values of M• . + N. to provide the area of reinforcCment in they direction implied by equation (A2).28) (S. in the top. have been calculated from equations (Al) to (Al6). it will sometimes be fouild that the reinforcement areas are Jess than the Code minima discussed in Chapter l 0.. criteria are satisfied: thus a safe lower bound design results. Prestressed concrete slabs Examples i " i ( l The Code states that prestressed concrete slabs should be designed in accordance with the clauses for prestressed concrete beams.. at each design point. The sign convention adopted for the forces is shown in Fig.e.M. some of the longitudinal bending component of the prestress is distributed in the form of transverse bending and twisting moments. Morley and Gulvanessian [144] have considered the problem of providing. a minimum area of reinforcement in a specified direction but have not presented explicit equations. """"''.:" r~·61 '=~ . and the bending moment M. etc. Strictly. and the gre. although they do describe a suitable computer program.>.~_.. Minimum reinforcement When reinforcement is propornOned in accordance with the required moments of resistance. The interested reader is referred to the work of Morley [139] and Kemp [140] for further infonnation on such procedures. and the reinforcement area in they direction can then be less than that implied by equation (A2). The validity of the equations have been confinned experimentally only for situations in which all of the reinforcement yields in tension [141. ...._ . in which the concrete is not critical. due to the prestress. model skew solid [146] and voided [147] slab bridges by such an approach.)1 8 and. The a.9 Example 5.\.8 Equivalent sandwich plate Equations. this error can be ignored because under. Such an approach has been suggested by Morley [145]. upon which equations Al to AI6 is based.24) hc8 cT (5.8 . in the above example..8..flexure and inplane forces Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 and in a direction at an angle ct measured clockwise from the x direction. N. c.)I).of the section.25) low relaxation strands (S. The equations for carrying out such calculations have been presented by Morley (139]. The precast and insitu concretes are of grades 50 and 40 respectively. A design solution is usually obtained by adopting a sandwich approach in which the six stress resultants are resolved into two sets of inplane stress resultants acting in the two outer shells of the sandwich.)I + N. c. The author would suggest that the prestress should be considered as an applied load at the ultimate limit state. Multiple load combinations could be considered by the approaches of[139J and [140]. and are equivalent to the appropriate. once M•. 143]. An extended set of equations which includes the possibility that compression reinforcement may be required has been preseilted by Clark [142].
4 x 40)103 = 3840 C: = c.81!.4 0..139 + 1(0.11 (the effective breadth is the actual breadth since the distance between points of zero moment would be at least 20 m).1391 = 3.87/p. 5..9 + l.4 x 50)103 = Code table approach Centroid of tendons in tension zone is at d from top of slab. in the top of the slab.4 x 50)103 = =: (400 x 124) (0... M".465 MNm/m Top reiriforcement From equation (AS) 0. thus take moments about neutral axis y.l0.. C1 Ca = 62 .01 L:::::=::==i®@ ' 20 Strain x 1Cl3 Ap... 7 = 4022. (816) (254)103 = 207 Cs (270)(146.484 + l0.9 + 1.:.. S.~&~'.13) Top reinforcement M 11 = 2. reinforcement is required only transversely.9) (1) + 1. It can be seen that the intersec· tion occurs atfptf0.3) = T2 = (14) (138.12.§)nm. when orthogonal reinforcement is used.1 0. 10. 5. I· I 1 i~t I· 400 1 I.1% of the value calculated using strain compatibility.ti.3 ) = 2765 Ta = (15) (138.7) (1424 x 10.87/pu) (/ptJ0. the latter expression iii plotted together with the Code Table 29 values.159 MNm/m The design applied moment triad. M•.0140 The tensile forces in the tendons are T1 = (2) (138.01 x /2 = €. :::. at the ultimate limit state.<. and longitudinally.1.1 T2 (2765) (921)103 = 2547 Strain compatibility approach 49/339) + (4. where the total strains at the tendon levels and the tendon stresses are X 103) .2 mm low relaxation strand E1 • Fig.!. :.' Fig.139 (1) 2  M1 = Orthogonal reinforcement Bottom reinforcement From equation Al M'.484 MNm/m M•x = 2.0 andxld = 0. 5.6 0. + 816 + = 0.: \ 0...560+1.139 Obtain the requited moments of resistance in the reinforcement directions. 5. 1424 (fptJ0.>0.584 M• ". 5.11 Strain distribution kT = kC.le limi•' .12 Graphical solution L_ 1500 0.< 0. Hence/pt> = 1424 N/rnm 2 andx = 314 mm.13 it can be seen that ~ = 135° Bottom reinforcement From equation (A9) M" 11 = 2.81fpu.0035 + (4. In the following the equation numbers are those of Appendix A.01 x 10 ~ The design stressstrain curve for the tendons at the ultimate limit state is given in Fig.0035) (200 x 103 ) = 700 N/mm2 x 921/339) 1424 N/mm 2 8i = (0.·..xld)d from equation (A8) .99(xld) 1286 Skew reinforcement From Fig. = 2.. fp1> = 797 From equation (A6) 39 l: = 6648 kN m Mxy = 0.4 x 40)103 = (300 x 45) (0.'.195 MNm/m M· = 1.244. 5.91 = 3.139l0. = 822 = 187 (270) (121. M"' 11 == 0 and calculate M" Y from equation :.239 M"'. BS S. = 2951 (2963) (996)W' Ci (3840) (214)103 c. fle. __!e_ 1.484.5)10' = d = (14 x 1260 + 15 x 1310)/29 = 1286 mm T2 +Ta =Ci +Ca +Ca + C• 194 0. 7) (0.. 5.139(1) 11/2 I = 0. 4~al and error the neutral axis depth has been found to (194) (49)HJ3 = 10 be Q~.10. I (300 x 170) (0.O kN :. 5.fp..7)'(1424 x 10. 7 mm 2 = (0. in the obtuse comer of a reinforced concre~ skew slab bridge is (with the axes shown in Fig.605 MNm/m It should be noted that reinforcement is required In each direction in both the top and bottom of the slab when skew reinforcement is used.139(1) I 11/2 1 = 2..9 971 0 Aps = 138. = 1. C2 and Ca are as calculated for the strain compatibility approach and C4 (400 = x 99) (0.5)103 = 40 c..99(. in the bottom. The strain distribution is thus as shown in Fig..3 ) = 2963 ~T = 5922kN The compressive forces in the concrete are calculated for zones 1 to 4 of Fig. :. l 1. .0035 Ta (2963) (971)103 = 2877 3 Ci (3840) (239)10 = 918 c.900 MNm/m or Apsfpt>= (3840 M'.8 x/d T2. Ci.0035 j<g4_~}!1!D:_ ________ ~ 1400 ii .2 Fig.7) (100 x 10.3 mm 2 . = 2. 7) (1637) == 802 N/mm 2 10 3 = 4..) = 797 + 1.3 Box girder wall "'A wall of a box girder.9+ 1.. c.. ·• . Ta. 5. However.2 Slab For equilibrium..M". he. 250 mm thick.= OandcalculateM•11 5. (992) (62)103 62 = ~ = 6641 kN m fi = (0.484)! = 1..336 MNm/m From equation (AIO) • + 10. prestrain in tendons = 8021200 1 <DV 49~ 45• :0.1 . =2.80(x/d) (A3) In Fig.99x :.9! ·I ~ 0..484.5 0.87fpu.13 Skew slab axes 15 x 1 ol y 921 10 :.< 1600 z •ill 1~~J~!!rrim 1200 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1000 600 600 400 0 ll 200kN/mm 2 \ ~ I 10.10 Design stressstrain curve for 15.0035 Code Table 29 I t l 0. X ~.00569 I = 227 .139(1)1 11/2 1 = 3. and ignoring T1 :. 124 •I Fig.0121 ' 5 Section equation O..3 = (0. c. = 0.7 0.427 MNm/m From CUJUation (A14) M* • =~ (11/2)' .484 + 2(0.9) (1) + l..0035 x 971/339) + (4..9)'1!. 1.384 (792) (49. fp.139(1)~ + 0.3 M"'y = 1. :dge d. if the latter are (a) parallel and per· pendicular to the abutments and (b) parallel to the slab edges.xur~ ""· ·11pWw· •'"' •.9)2/(2..t.87fpu = 0.5)103 = 33 (816) (229)103 This value is within 0. fp. 5.B7fpu 33'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •·. = From equation (A13) 1.91 = 1. = 227 .l(0.!..J0.0135 10" 3) = 0.139 MNm/m Aps = 29 x 138.:.139(1) (li/2)' 11/2 I = 5. and with the centroid of the reinforcement in each face at a distance of 63 ."... where 816 270 992 l:C = 5918 kN 0.9 + 1.01 fa 2 = 1424 N/mm x 10~) = 0.) = 797 + 1.r.4 x 50)103 = 792 kN Moments about the neutral axis T2 (2765) (946)103 = 2616 r. 7 = 1637 N/mm 2 Effective prestress = (0.4 x 50) (400) (< 215) wherex is the unknown neutral axis depth and + 1.0 x 103/138..• (0... 270)10 3 + (0. / = (1200 x 200) (0._ __ .484 + 2(0.L+.Con[ "E .
. as explained later...._. This diagram has four distinct regions within each of which a different mode of failure occurs: region 1.. calculations have to be carried out.. ·! ~.=" \ ___. .0 kNm/m My = M..•. Thus The design rules for flexural shear in beams are based upon the work of the Shear Study Group of the Institution M....:_. corbel action or crushing of a compression strut which runs from the load to the support.. From equation (Al 7) N/mm~ ·~ Introduction of Structural Engineers [148].er= h/2c8 = 65 mm From equation (A17) h.1 (be). \. where appropriate.l(a).. = K&f' V. '""'__. K _1 (V') ( "•) lid d .15 = 217 N/mm 2 Bottom concrete compressive stress = 0.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 60 mm from the face.. for a particular concrete strength and steel percentage.y = 1.... with the exception of inter* face shear in composite construction..24) to (5. in N/mm units N....... flexure. in accordance with the Code..~·" ~~ ~ ~'~ .) and the ratio of shear span (ap) to effective depth (d) is of the form shown in Fig. a flexural crack develops into a shear failure crack.. [150]. and thus differs from the Code approach of designing at the ultimate limit state. first. and the calculation procedures for each are v~ry similar.__. region 3.. ~=· 65 ~ ". in practice. ________/ .. it is obviously safe to propose a· design method which results in the observed bending moment at collapse (Mc) always exceeding the lesser of the calculated ullimate flexural moment and the . then M.·~:)...8 are calculated. 6. to study test data from beams with shear reinforcement. The latter document is written in terms of permissible stresses and working loads.. is subjected to the following design stress resultants at the ultimate limit state N..8 = 1397 NyB = 485 NxyB = 182 Chapter6 Axr = (1315/217)10 3 = 6060 mm 2/m From equation (Al8) N•yr = 115 + j158l 273 N/mm Ayr = (273/217)10 3 1260 mm 1/m From equation (Al9) F~r = Bottom reinforcement 211581 = 316 N/xqm Top concrete compressive stress = 316/120 = 2. 5.. the relationship between the ratio of the observed bending moment at collapse (Mc) to the calculated ultimate flexural moment (M.29) cr=c8 =60mm Top reinforcement h/2. ..av ' Now. to study test data from beams without shear reinforcement and. In addition. .0 kNm/m 24. as at present. 0 .. as. from equations (5.. . The data from beams without shear reinforcement indicate that.. These modes are illustrated in Fig. = Kbd2 Background where K is a constant. '· . Yu and Regan [149] and by Regan In this chapter..24) to (5.y = 340 kN/m M..:.__ "'~.r = 1157 + llSBI = 1315 N/mm  cr = 130 mm The statically e.. · . are carried out at the ultimate limit slate.. 64 The general approach adopted by the Shear Study Group was. 250 N/mm 2 and fcu = 50 N/mm 2 The design stiengths are Concrete From equation (A21) = 1397 + (182) 2/(1397) = 1421 N/mm = 1421/120 = 11. the Code methods for designing against shear and torsion for reinforced and prestressed concrete construction are discussed. region 4.c8 N'.quivalent stress resultants in the outer shells of the sandwich plate of Fig.. ~~ .r = 1157 Nyr = 115 N.... However. It should be nbted that. the ultimate flexural moment is given by Shear in reinforced concrete Flexural shear .> ~~=. The design of prestressed concrete to resist shear is car* ried Out at the ultimate limit stilte in accordance with both BE 2/73 and the Code.~~ C" ..4 x 50 = 20 N/mm Ultimate limit state ._ .. has been described by Baker..\ ..shear and torsion = (5091217)10 3 = 2340 mmt/m Ay8 Design reinforcement in the x and y directions iffy = ..a.:&:. }' ..... region 2.____. 6. then.29).. The particular problems which arise in composite construction are not dealt with in this chapter but are presented in Chapter 8... :.. diagonal tension causing splitting along a line joining the load to the support..M" =K&f' M. 1 From the design point of view. Design against torsion is not covered in the Department of Transport's current design documents and.:.. beam is Ve.. all shear and torsion calculations. Such an approach can be developed as follows: if the shear force at failure of a point loaded. = 240 kN/m Ny = 600kN/m N.. ~~ {"=·'~•·'"".. punching shear.6 kNm/m N' •B = 1397 + 11821 = 1215 N* xB < 0. ~ Beams without shear reinforcement Mc=V.8 N/mm2 2 This is less than the design stress of 20 N/mm 2 In equations (5. With regard to shear. moment when the section attains its calculated ullimate shear capacity. which are identical to those of CP 110. for a constant concrete strength and longitudinal steel pen:entage. the procedures for design* ing shear reinforcement in beams differ between BE I/73 and the Code. N\ 8 = 0 and calculate N* yB from equation (A20) ' N*yB = 485 + 1(182) /(1397)1 2 = 509 N/mm FcB Reinforcement = 250/1.6 This is less than the design stress of 20 Nimm=.~.. for both flexural shear and. either CP 110 or the Australian Code of Practice is often referred to for design guidance.. The background to the rules. = 166.yr = 158 N. it should be noted that BE 1/73 requires shear calculations for reinforced concrete to be carried out under working load conditions as opposed to the ultimate limit state as required by the Code.. ....
15 (the value for reinforcement at the ultimate limit state) to f1 v. the Code pennits only 50% of the shear reinforcement to be in the form of bentup bars.Id 1/. 6. t(a)(e) Shear failure modes in reinforced concrete bo=• Hence.4) V = Ve+ fy..4) and (6.. In fact the Ve values can be considered to be.Cor>'"'.jbsv) (6. This is because the latter contributes to the shear capacity of a section in the following two ways: L (e) Region4 2.2) where v = V/bd and V is the shear force at failures. 6. A Stirrup stress '.00 2.v is the characteristic strength of the shear reinforcement. In order to minimise the stress redistribution.Jbs.75 0. by controlling crack widths which.85 0.4(b) should be used in which the compression struts join the centres of the bends of the lower and upper bars. 6. The latter equation appears in the Code.7~/~~~~ Flexure  t/ $/ ~I $/ if I / '.5 because the shear resistance of a section is dependent upon both materials. and Aw and s. ..a is chosen in the Code to coincide with the inclination of the elastic principal stres.25 0. However. Compression strut d' I •2 Fig.. Hence if V jbd is chosen to be the slope of the chain dotted line. This was confumed by the Shear Study Group who. The reason for this is given later in this chapter. It is not necessary to apply a material partial safety factor to the tabulated Ve values because they incorporate a partial safety factor of 1. f. a constant shear stress does not act over such an area.6) 0. the stresses gradually increase as shown in Fig. influence the amount of shear force which can be transferred by the interlock of aggregate particles across cracks. It is worth mentioning that Pederson (153] has demonstrated the validity of considering the compression struts to be at an angle other than that of Fig. Theoretically. 6. the greater the difference between 8 and the inclination of the elastic principal stress (45°) when a shear crack first forms.. o: = 90° and equation becomes ~(6. that equation (6.2 Shear design diagram Table 6.vJbd = Asvfyv (sin rx +COS rx) (d ./ f f '°'$""""'~} ol (a) . <c (b) Bentup bars Load Fig~ 6. 6. the longitudinal steel area to be used is that which extends at least an effective depth beyond the section under consideration. mq ./ ~ b<i' ~~rr· .d'""'d.55 0.55 0. This approach is identical to that of CP 114 and it is not clear why.50 1. In view of the limited amount of test data obtained from beams with bentup bars used as shear reinforcement and because of the risk of the concrete being crushed at the bends. after which. the Code committee retained it. for vertical stirrups.45 0.e.87/.15 for flexural resistance. are the area and spacing of the shear reinforce· ment. The Code value of 425 N/mm 1 is thus conservative.9{) 0..35 0.3) whereo: is the inclination of the shear reinforcement (stirrups or bentuP bars).00 Design shear stresses (v0 N/mms) crack Flexural cracks Flexural failure 20 2S 30 . Fina1ly.) (6. Aggregate interlock can contribute 33 to 50% of the total sheat'capacity [152]. For vertical equilibrium along section AA and assuming that only the excess shear force is resisted by the shear reinforcement: (v . hence equation (6. MJbd 2 ).35 0.5) It can be seen that equations (6.1) It is thus convenient to replot the test data in the form of a graph of (MjbtP) against (ajtf) as shown by the solid line . 6. subsequently.95 0.. in reality. Fig.4(a}. ~=(~:i)(7) (6.> 3. then the assumed shear failure plane intersects the longitudinal 67 .6) can be applied to either inclined stirrups or bentup bars.40 0.25 was reasonable for shear resistance when compared with the usual value of 1. For design purposes it is necessary to apply a material partial safety factor of l. Reference to the table (see Table 6. but it is merely convenient to choose a sheai area of (bd) and to then select values of Ve such that the allowable values of the moment to cause collapse fall below the test values. with fyv restricted to a maximum value of 425 N/mm 1 • This is because the data considered by the Shear Study Group indicated that the yield stress of shear reinforcement should not exceed about 480 N/mmz in order that it could be guaranteed that the shear reinforcement would yield at collapse prior to crushing of the concrete. (Arjbsv) (6.00 The code contains a table which gives values of Ve for various concrete grades an~ longitudinal steel percentages. Mu ~~ ! I I I I I :2: 3 ! 4 s .9{) 0. It should be noted that when using Table 6. Beams with shear reinforcement When the nominal shear stress exceeds the appropriate tabulated value of ve it is necessary to provide shear rein· forcement to resist the shear force in excess of(v..~BS 5tr.1f1 .3. An appropriate Ym value would lie between the steel value of 1. in tum.60 0. It was decided that a value of 1. 6. 6.s (45°). The justification for designing reinforcement to resist only the excess shear force is that tests indicate that the stresses shear reinforcement are extremely small until shear cracks occur..4(a).4(a) shows that if the shear strength is checked at section AB.. (A. then V jbd can be considered to define an 'allowable shear' line which separates an unsafe region to its left from a safe region to its right. equations (6.8).85 0.5} can then be rearranged as: Asv = Sv b(v  As~ = b(v .and from test data respectively are in good agreement. 7) _0.. Indirectly. The Code assumes that d . can be deri~ed by considering the truss analogy shown in Fig. the shear resistance of the shear rein· forcement is additive to that of the section without shear reinforcement (i.2) which have been obtained theoretically.1) can now be seen because the term V jbd is the slope of any line which passes through the origin. Ve) (6. the CP 1l0 committee and.1 ~ :1 Ci I .1.Jd I ~0. The significance of equation (6. by dowel action [151] which can contribute 15 to 25% of the total shear capacity {152].4) forcemenl has to be designed to resist the entire shear force when the BE 1173 allowable concrete shear stress is exceeded..35 0. Although this is theoretically correct. and twothirds of the shear force when the allowable concrete shear stress is not exceeded.:. design resistances obtained from equation (1.00 (cl Region 2 .81fyv (sin rx +cos o:) (6.. The dashed line is that calculated assuming that flexural failures always occur (i.I l I .vc) s.50 0.3 Influence of shear reinforcement For the case of vertical stirrups.d')lsv (6. provided that shear reinforce· ment is designed in accordance with the chosen value of 0./'/.btf). Bottom steel I I I Carried by concrete I IOOA. v..(b) Truss analogy for shear Fig.1) shows that Ve is only slightly affected by the concrete strength but is greatly dependent upon the area of the longitudinal steel. Furthermore V jbd can be considered to be a nominal allowable shear stress (ve) which acts_ over a nominal shear area (bd}.Jit stat.hd). the Code states that when using bentup bars the truss analogy of Fig. the greater is the implied amount of stress redistribution between initial cracking and collapse. Ulti1. in the above derivation.. the inclination (8) of the '?ompression struts can be assumed 10 take any value.35 0.4(b). obtained a good lower bound fit to test data in the form: m V =Ve+ 1.5} and (6. of Fig.e. and the chain dotted line is a line that cuts off the unsafe side of the graph (those beams which fail in shear) and can thus be considered to be an 'allowable shear' line._ idge d~· .. It is implied. This approach differs to that of BE 1173 in which shear rein Stirrups Bentup bar I { \A://\f I 6 {: 45' I Flexural cracks (d) Region3 I I I I I Concrete grade Shear failure Bond splittin / A (a) I I bd . It is emphasised that_. A theoretical expression for As. Hence. 66 o a B Directly.Genera! relationship {b) Region 1 Jr and .2.15 and the concrete value of 1. 6.o.70 0. an examination of Fig./ •.3} can be rearranged to give v c Ve+ fyv (sin rx + cos o:) (A. by adopting the terminology of Chapter 1. originally.95 1.80 0.:Httlog T a..25 and are thus design Values.65 0.
They found that the ratios of the experimental nominal shear stress to that given by 0. For greater depths..::=. Ve Shear at points of contraflexure Short shear spans An examination of Fig. In order that the presence of shear rein 68 "" . unsafe. Hence. However. in more general circumstances... shear reinforcement should be provided and designed. Although. A situation can arise in which. Thus although V.Jd less than 2.(but not greater than 4. essentially. It should be noted that all of the test specimens were beams. although some oneway spanning slabs with no shear reinforcement were also considered. the aggregate particles. Slabs General The design procedure for slabs is es:.. It is also necessary to specify a maximum spacing of stirrups in order to ensure that the shear failure plane cannot form between two adjacent stirrups. when the support conditions and/or the loading are nonunifonn... generally. it was based upon a limited number of trial calculations which indicated that it was conservative.5 to 4 and thus were.ushing of the web concrete.. beams. A_. The logic behind the above rule is not clear. for the situation described above... The rule should be interpreted in a similar manner for other relative values of V. Taylor observed that there is a reduction in shear strength for large beams but that the minimum stirrups required for beams should take care of this. 75 If. Thus the resolved area and.inimum value of (d d') when<¥= 90" and.j' Ultimate limit state . However._. as for beams. bas been included in the Code.. it is not clear whether the same Ve values can be applied to slabs.. The Ccide thus gives. such as near to free edges. It is not certain whether it can also be ignored in bridge slabs.0019b and O.1 should be the area of the longitudinal steel which extends at least an effective depth beyond the section under consideration. then the dowel action tears away the concrete cover co the reinforcement and the contribution of dowel action to the shear strength is lost because lhe reinforcement can then no longer act as a dowel.75 N/mm 2 imposed by the Code is to allow for the fact that shear cracks in beams of very high strength concrete can occur through.. about 15 to 25% of the total shear strength [151. the suggested approach should be reasonable.75 N/mm 2 ) which is a design value and incoxpm. Maxim. and to carry out the shear design calculation for the shear forces acting on planes nonnal to each flexural reinforcement direction.um shear stress (v11 ) It is shown in the last section that the shear capacity of a reinforced concrete beam can be incre·ased by increasing the amount of shear reinforcement. This spacing was also shown. The increase in shear reinforcement in regions of contraflexure was the subject of criticism during the drafting stages of the Code and in order to mitigate the situation an empirical design rule. However.5 Ve but is less than v.·oncrete tJrtage aesign to J:j. 6. Vh and of bottom and top reinforcement. The slabs had breadth to depth ratios of about 2. eventually a point is reached when the shear capacity is no longer increased by adding more shear reinforcement because the beam is then overreinforced in shear. in Table 6.. to be conservative by plotting shear strength against the ratio of stirrup spacing to effective depth for various test data. is further assumed that (d . The reason for this is that tests have shown that the shear strength of a member increases as its depth decreases. but instead.~..4(a) shows that the spacing s. in which case the stirrups would not contribute to the shear strength. it is necessary for the stirrups to enclose all tbe tension reinforcement because the latter contribules.rvative in some circumstances.. shear reinforcement should be designed to resist (a) V'.. a maximum nominal flexural shear stress of 0. Furthermore.75 . the author would suggest that it would be safer not to adopt the rule in practice. A conservative alternative procedure.. Relevant test data have been collated by Taylor (155] and are summarised in Fig.entially idpntical to that for beams and was originally proposed for building slabs designed in accordance with CP 110. from considerations of the available test data. = 250 N/mm 2 (mild steel) and 425 N/mmz (the greatest permitted in the Code for high yield steel for shear reinforcement).5 in terms of the shear strength (Yu) divided by the shear strength of an equivalent specimen of 250 mm depth (V2so). The implications of this are rtow discussed. which increases as ·the overall depth decreases provided that the overall depth is Jess than 300 mm.44 N/mm=.(2dla.ff~u· The enhanced stress has been shown to be conservative when compared with data from tests on beams loaded close to supports and on corbels [112]. ved per unit length).. __ ._]. the enhanced stress should not exceed the maximum allowable nominal shear stress of 0. '' ~ ::. None of the above problems is considered in the Code. Clarke and Taylor [154] have considered data from beams which failed in shear .by ci.. However.3.. 75 . Such a beam fails in shear by crushing of the corcrete compression struts of the truss before the shear reinfOrcement yields in tension. hence.. However.·.l]c.. '·.. :__. because the area of top steel is less than the area of bottom steel. wide beams. It is not possible at present to state whether the values are appropriate to bridges because of the lack of data from tests on slabs subjected to the stress conditions which occur in bridges. Minimum shear reinforcement If the nominal shear stress is less than 0. it is necessary to provide a minimum amount of shear reinforcement.. a· minimum va1ue of 0.OOI 12b respectively: these values have been rounded up to 0.. A decision then has to be made as to whether to design against the peak shear force or a value averaged over a certain width..~tes a partial safety factor of 1.(S...hould not exceed [(dd') (1 + cotix)].002b and 0. more shear reinforcement is required than when the calculations are carried out in accordance with BE 1173. for example.". it is ignored for design purposes. as shown in Chapter IO when discussing bar curtailment. mainly. Hence the requirement mentioned previously that the value of As in Table 6. In view of this.. would be to consider only the absolute maximum shCar force and to use a value of Ve appropriate to the lesser of the top or bottom steel areas. If the nominal shear stress exceeds 0.1. in those re· gions of slabs where a flexural shear failure could possibly occur. The latter suggestion of considering beam strips in each of the flexural rein· forcement directions can be shown to be. across their widths. 152].. in a table. uniform and the design procedure generally involves considering oneway bending in orthogonal directions parallel to the flexural reinforcement.2 reveals that for short shear spans (ajd less than approximately 2) the shear strength increases with a decrease in the shear span.. Hence it is reasonable to consider slabs as wide beams. . were in the range 1. It is probably reasonable to apply the l'e values to building slabs because the design loading is. However. Taylor suggested that code allowable shear stresses should be reduced by 40% if the depth to breadth ratio of a beam exceeds 4. and it is explained in Chapter 7 that. The Shear Study Group originally suggested.1 were derived from the results of tests on..87 fyv As. the area of top steel is less than the area of bottom steel and the maximum shear force (Vs) associated with a sagging moment exceeds the maximum shear force (Vh) associated with a hogging moment.5.. Thus the Code requirement is conservative. This argument is not strictly correct. . of the flexural reinforcement which is of importance in terms of shear resistance. this situation also arises in building slabs. Shear reinforcement When the nominal shear stress exceeds Ii.. In view of this. Ye. bridge slabs can be thick. Unfortunately.. an enhanced value of v.. __. An additional problem occurs when the flexural reinforcement is not perpendicular to the planes of the principal shear forces because it is not then obvious what area of reinforcement should be used in Table 6. with a ve value appropriate to the top reinforcement. This level of safety is considered to be adequate and the provision of shear reinforcement is not necessary in such situations.0012b in the Code so that each is equivalent to 0. by a sagging or hogging moment in order to determine the appropriate area of longitudinal reinforcement.d'):::!0.~..75d.shear and torsion ::!4UU tension reinforcement at a distance equal to the effective depth from the section AB. in the form of dowel action. which takes account of the minimum area of shear ·reinforcement which has to be provided. it can be shown to be unconsi._. strictly. values The values of v..2 with a mean value of 1.. Such a ratio could be exceeded in bridge beams and the webs of box girders.5 v""' the factor of safety agalnst shear cracking occurring is greater than twice that against flexural failure occurring. when considering stiffness. whereas the Code applies the enhancement factor to slabs. due allowance has been made for dead load shear forces. A problem arises near to points of cpntraflexure of beams because the value of v~ to be adopied is dependent upon the area of lhe longitudinal reinforcement. the area of steel should be considered at a distance of half of the lever · arm beyond the section under consideration. Furthermore..)bs. in general.. essentially. where large principal shear forces can act at large angles to the flexural reinforcement directions.1 may be enhanced by multiplying by a tabulated factor. Enhanced Ye values The basic Ve values of Table 6. to simplify the Code clause. rather than around. Figure 6. The value of 0. 6.. = 0. which would reduce the number of calculations.. Finally. equal to 60 lb/in1 (0.Jsv = 0.414 N/mm1 ) in order to ensure that the shear reinforcement would increase ·the shear capacity. in which the allowable shear stress is not dependent upon the area of the longitudinal reinforcement. forcement may enhance the strength of a member. AsJbs. the appropriate v"" value could be much less than the values appropriate to the steel directions. it./l.87 fy. with a Ve value appropriate to the bottom reinforcement and (b) the lesser of Vhand 0. reinforcement areas resolve in accordance with cos~o:... The upper limit of 4. If either of these procedures is adopted then. there is no experimen!al evidence to justify the approaches suggested above._... the value of"~ to be considered with Vh could be less than that to be considered with Vs..~n . is greater than Vh. These points are raised here to emphasise that the values of ve and ~were derived with buildings in mind.i the form of aggregate interlock [152]. The flexural reinforcement should be resolved into a direction perpendicular to the plane of the critical shear crack.1.! om~' r··~~ <~ A possible 'engineering solution' would be to design against shear forces averaged over a width of slab equal tof twice the effective depth. The greater area of shear reinforcement calculated from (a) and (b) should then be provided. This is because it is the stiffness. > 1). It is thus necessary to consider whether the design shear force is accompanied. It can be seen that the Code values give a reasonable lower bound to the test data for overall depths less than 500 mm. which is given by v. . the Code does not require minimum stirrups to be provided for slabs unless more than I% of compression steel is present: this did not cause a problem in the drafting of CP 110 because building slabs are generally thin..:69 ~:"<< . where o: is the orientation of the reinforcement to the pe'rpendicular to the critical crack. Hence for fy. The required amount of shear reinforcement ...) is adopted for a.8 V. experimentally. it is necessary that it should raise the shear capacity above the shear cracking load.0012b for high yield steel is also the minimum value given in CP 114. It should also be noted that shear forces in bridge slabs can vary rapidly. f'""~'~"""' !"""'+·'·""> F''"'." . If the tension reinforcement is' not supported by being enclosed by stirrups. However.. It can thus be seen that it is always necessary to consider the maximum shear force associated with a sagging moment and the maximum shear force associated with a hogging moment. Thisexpressionhasani. Hence a smooth crack surface can result across which less shear can be transferred ii. The design rule implies that. however.02 to 3.90. It was observed that the test data exhibited a reduction in shear strength for a ratio greater than about LO (149].. to resist the shear force in excess of that which can be resisted by the concrete (. the allowable nominal shear stresses (vc) are very conservative for short shear spanS.... f"»•'"""' ('·~ .. rather than the strength.5 applied to feui hence the effective partial safety factor applied to the nominal stress is . it could be the latter which results in the greater amount of shear reinforcement.
7 Failure surface Alternative failure c"i. It should be noted that most of the tests were carried out on simply supported square slabs under a concentrated load and there are very few data for slabs loaded with a concentrated load near to a concentrated reaction.5h4 1. Furthermore. it is reasonable to apply the solid slab clauses and to consider the she"ar force to be resisted by the minimum web thickness.(b) Punching shear perimeter 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Overall depth mm Fig. the anchorage of stirrups could not be relied upon. and the area of concrete..sl e::.~. 6..0 to 4. it is necessary for the reinforcement to be placed at a distance of about 0. With regard to transverse shear.• . it bas always been necessary to calculate the moment (M) transmitted by the slab and to increase the design shear force (V) by the factor (1 + 12.v)(0.5h I 1..• • : : . CP 110 also requires the same amount of reinforcement to be provided at the critical perimeter distance of 1. at present. It can be seen from Fig. the perimeter was chosen so that the same Ve values could be used for both flexural and punching shear. Ve is not reduced but the design shear force is increased by 25% to allow for the possible nonsymmetrical shear distribution.. Fig. in building slabs. it is not clear whether it is reasonable for slabs subjCcted to loadings which cause principal shears which are not aligned with the flexural reinforcement.S M/Vl). This was because the design approach was to take the design shear force to be that acting when all panels adjacent to the column were loaded and..1.5h to I. for flat slabs having lateral stability and with adjacent spans differing by less than 25%.8) to be placed at a distance of 0. • ~"'"'" . 6. the tabulated values of Ve should be reduced by 20%. and shear reinforcement is consequently considered to be ineffective in such slabs.. 6. by the CP 110 clauses. Voided or cellular slabs gested by the CP 110 committee because it was felt that. either arrange the voids so that they are at points of low transverse shear force or use their own design rules. Ve This design approach is probably reasonable for building slabs for the reasons· discussed previously: however. CP 110 requires the shear reinforcement calculated from equation (6. The test data referred to when discussing the 0. CP 110 allows one to adopt the average of the reinforcement areas in the two directions and tests carried out by Nylander and Sundquist [1S7] in which the ratio of the steel areas varied from I. which were written with building slabs in mind._ v= 1..7). it was necessary to make an allowance for the non~symmetrical shear distribution which would occur if patterned loading were considered.f f Critical  Support or load t z11111'l'l1111Z" __. Possible approaches to the design of cellular and voided slabs to resist transverse shear forces are given in Appen· dix B of this book.1. It is emphasised that the specified surfaces do not coincide with the failure surfaces which occur in tests.~·~~ 1. where I is the longer of the two spans in the direction in which bending is being considered. When averaging the reinforcement areas in the two dir~tions. However. The Fig. 7). It would also appear to be reasonable for bridge slabs. However. It is understood that this decision was made by the CP 110 committee because it was considered to be in accordance with normal practice for building slabs..75d for beams because the latter value was considered to be too restrictive for building slabs. However..37S . iL II The critical shear perimeter for both situations is given as I . The presence of shear reinforcement obviously strengthens Ucri• 71 . in 1976.. If the slab does not have lateral stability or if the adjacent spans are appreciably different. The Code clauses are based very much on those in CP 110. t Shear reinforcement · (bl Plan Fig. 75d value for beams suggest that a spacing of d should be adequate for both beams and slabs./Iu. The former clauses are concerned with the punching of applied loads through a slab. Maximum shear stress The maximum nominal shear stress in slabs is limited to 0. In fact.: ""0.6(a). The maximum stirrup spacing for slabs is the effective depth. 'Shear stresses in solid sfabs under concentrated loadings' and 'Shear in flat slabs'.__. 7 that.Ultir"'''' · "<it statP f • •• $ I• rltical section Support (a) Elevation • • ! 1 z'\'i\ } \ r Reinforcement .8) where (:EAsv) is the total area of shear reinforcement and is the length of the perimeter: This equation can be derived in a similar manner to equation (6. hence twice as much shear reinforcement as is theoretically required has to be provided..01 • "Oridge· lo>·. Regan quotes only three tests of such a nature and reports satisfactory prediction. This is greater than the maximum spacing of0. as occurs near to a bridge pier. . in order to ensure that the shear reinforcement crosses the failure surface. the area in each direction should include all of the reinforcement within the loaded area and within an area extending to within three times the overall slab depth on each side of the loaded area...• .. 70 Punching shear Introduction Prior to discussing the Code clauses for punching shear.1 justify this approach. thus. It appears that such a conservative approach was proposed because of the limited range of shear reinforcement details covered by the available test data [1S8].6. This fact can cause problems when code clauses are applied in circumstances different to those envisaged by those originally responsible for writing the clauses. as appropriate. Subsequently..···70 BS·"'"'·.7Sh.Sh from the face of the load. CP 110 clauses Punching shear in CP 110 is considered under two separate beadings: namely. A constant allowable design shear stress is assumed to act over this area. the maximum nominal shear stress in a slab less than 200 mm thick is limited to fu Ve and not to 0. if this is correct. and these clauses are now summarised. The perimeter was chosen so that the allowable design shear stress could be taken to be the values of Ve given in Table 6. Hence.. It is generally the case that the flexural reinforcement in the vicinity of a concentrated load or a column head is different in the two directions of the reinforcement. 7. ·it would also be the rJiSe for top slabs of bridge decks but not necessarily for deeper slab bridges. A possible design approach for such situations is suggested earlier in this chapter. Minimum shear reinforcement Unlike beams. at present. 6.8 Influence of shear reinforcement question then arises as to what area of reinforcement to adopt for determining Ve from Table 6. is the length of the perimeter multiplied by the slab effective depth.5 I _I(.87fyv) U. H the actual nominal shear stress (v) on the perimeter exceeds the allowable value of fu Ve• it is necessary to design shear reinforcement in accordance with 0. The author would suggest that. 1. 6. The reason for considering the reinforcement within such a wide band is that the actual failure surface extends a large distance from the load as shown in Fig.. The reduction of Ve by 20% was thus intended to allow for patterned loading [112J.375 lfcu• which is half of that for beams. These tests essentially modelled a pair of columns with line loads on each side as could occur for a bridge. in the original version of CP 110 it was stated that.4 N/mm2 ~ (U. when considering longitudinal shear. by comparing with test data. with Ve replaced by S. Hence." Cc. It was found that the punching strength was essentially independent of the reinforcement arrangement.S times the slab overall depth from the face of the load or column as shown in Fig. 6. it is considered that shear reinforcement cannot be detailed and placed correctly in slabs less than 200 mm thick.. that the original CP 110 clauses were reasonable. 6.Sh.J ~vfuvc (6.:·• . it is not necessary to provide minimum shear reinforcement if the nominal shear stress is less than fu Ve.':::'. It is understood that this was originally sug No specific rules are given in the Code for designing voided or cellular slabs to resist shear.5 Slab enhancement factor should be calculated from equations (6. whereas the latter are concerned with punching at columns acting monolithically with a slab. deemed to be providing shear resistance. of the ultimate strength.. Regan [1S6] has shown.6) or (6. designers. it should be stated that most codes of practice approach the problem of designing against punching shear failure by considering a specified allowable shear stress acting over a specified surface at a specified distance from the load.B perimeter Code i t. the flat slab clause was amended so that.Sh • Test ····<rand·· ~Act~~~:~:"" H • o. The validity of considering the reinforcement in a large band has been confirmed by the results of tests carried out by Moe [lS8] in which the same area of reioforcement was distributed differently.
Ultimate limit state  shear and torsion
Concrete bridge design to BS 5400
a slab in the vicinity of the shear reinforcement and can
thus cause failure to occur by the formation of shear cracks
outside the zone of the shear reinforcement as shown in
Fig. 6.8. CP 110 thus requires the shear strength to be
Flexural
shear
~
I .........
(a) Shearfailures
i',.
(b) Shearforce {VJ
(c) Bending moment (M)
(M.)
v '
d/2
1<1
~~
(d) M/Vdiagram
Fig. 6.9(a)(d) Shear failure modes in prestressed conerete
""""
In regions un"cracked in flexure, a shear failure is caused
by web cracks forming when the principal tensile stress
exceeds the tensile strength of the concrete. In regions
cracked in flexure, a shear failure is caused either by web
cracks or by a flexural crack developing into a shear fail·
ure. Hence, it is necessary to check both types of ~ailure
and to take the lesser of the ultimate loads associated with
the two types of failure as the critical load.
I
I
'I
Ii:
I'
I'
I
vc
0
The ultimate shear strength in this condition is designated
VCD• and the criterion of failure for a section with no shear
reinforcement is that the principal tensile stress anywhere
in the section exceeds the tensile strength of the concrete.
If the principal tensile stress is taken as positive and equal
to the tensile strength of the concrete, then for equilibrium
/.. = Vc0 AJl/b
•nd
f, = ifcp + fb)/2  Jifcp + fb) 214 + //
=
zy
/ff
Flexural shear
Beam failure modes
Two different types of shear failure can occur in prestressed concrete beams as shown in Fig. 6.9.
72
+ ifcp + fb)f,
V CD = shear force to cause web cracking
= second moment of area
I
b
= width
Ay = first moment of area
fcp = compressive stress due lo prestress
fb
= flexural compressive stress
/ 1
= shear stress
f, = tensile .strength of concrete.
~
~:..:::,;·
,!'::'""'""
...
r=~·~~
"'""""" ·~'~'\
"~=·)
V ~  0.037 bd
= 0.61 bh
It?+ o.8tJi
V"  0.037 bdff,. + V(M/M)
.·~
i.... •.,,~,J
L.J___ '""
;...,,"'···
._ ..=~J
.,
M, = (f,
+ fp1)I/y
where fp 1 is the tensile stress due to prestress at an extreme
fibre, distance y from the centroid. ACIASCE Committee
323 [163] originally suggested that, in Imperial units,f, =
7.5 Rcyt and the Australian Code (160] subsequently
·.~ reduced this to 6 ./!c11 m allow for shrinkage cracking,
repeated loading and variations in concrete quality. If the
latter expression is converted to S.I. units, it is assumed
that fcyl = 0.8 fcu and a partial safety factor of l.5 is
applied to fcu., then the Code design value of 0.37
is
obtained. Again, only 80% of the prestress should be taken
to give a consistent partial safety factor. Hence, the fol·
lowing design equation, which appears in the Code, is
obtained.
11cu
M, = (0.37
llc,. + 0.Bfp,) fly
(6.12)
Ile ..
(6.10)
~···j
(6.11)
It should be noted that, in equation (6.11), d is the distance from the extreme compression fibre lo the centroid of
the tendons.
·
If the modulus of rupture of the concrete is f,, then the
cracking moment is given by
(6.9)
V.,. = 0.6bd !fcy 1 + M/(MIVd/2)
ffo" + M,l(MIV  d/2)
It is obviously cons~ative' to ignore the d/2 tenn, in
which case the following equation, which appears in the
Code, is obtained.
, A shear failure can occur in a prestressed beam by a flex·
/ ural crack developing into an inclined crack which eventually causes a shear failure. The position of the critical
flexural crack, relative to the load, varies, but it has been
shown [159] that it can be assumed to be at half the effec.
tive depth from the·Ioad.
Sozen and Hawkins {162] considered the loads at
which a flexureshear crack formed in 190 tests and
showed that a good lower bound to the shear force (V,.,)
could be given by the following empirical equation in
Imperial units
In the above equation,
Shear in prestressed concrete
(6.8)
Sections cracked in flexure
combining the equations gives
CD
/ft+ fcp/1
Reynolds, Clarke and Taylor [161] have compared. equation (6.9), without the partial safety factors, with test
results and found that the ratios of the observed shear
forces causing web cracking to VCD were, with the excep·
tion of one beam which had a ratio of 0.68, in the range
0.92 to 1.59 with a mean of 1.13.
When inclined tendons are used, the vertical component
of the prestress should be added to V CD to obtain the total
shear resistance. However, the Code only permits 80% of
the vertical component to be added in order to be consis·
tent with equation (6.9).
Sections uncracked in flexure
v
= 0.67 bh
The above simplification was originally introduced into
the Australian Code (160]. It should be noted that it is
unsafe for Ibeams to consider only the centroid but this is
mitigated by the fact that, for such beams, /b!Aj = 0.8 bh
as opposed to 0.67 bh. However, for flanged oeams in
which the neutral axis is within the flange, it is considered
to be adequate to check the principal tensile stress at the
junction of the web and flange. This simplification again
originated in the Australian Code [160].
Tests on beams of concretes made with rounded river
gravels as aggregate have indicated [1601 that/,= 5./fcy1
(in hnperial units). However, the Australian Code adopted
4./fcy1 in order to allow for strength reductions caused by
shrinkage cracking, mild fatigue loading and variations in
concrete quality. If the latter value is converted to S.I.
units and it is assumed that fcyl = 0.8/cu• then f, =
0.297 /[,,,.. A partial safety factor of I .5 was then applied
tofcu to give the design value of 0.24 /!c,. which appears
in the Code.
Since a partial safety factor of jf3 is applied to J;,
partial safety factors of {jf.5)1 and ji5 are implied in
the first and second tenns respectively under the square
root sign of equation (6.8). In order that a partial safety
factor of (jI3) 2 is implied for both terms, it is necessary
to apply a multiplying factor of 1//f3=0.8 tofcp· This
results in the following equation, which appears in the
Code
/\
i:
The clause in the Code which covers punching shear is
identical to that in CP ilo which covers 'Shear stresses in
solid slabs under concentra!ed loadings'. Hence, the modi·
fications in CP 110 which allow for nonuniform shear
distributions in flat slabs are not included in the Code.
Instead, whether punching of a wheel through a deck or of
a pier (integral or otherwise) is being considered the design
procedure is to adopt the CP 110 perimeters and the Table
6.1 values of Ve (modified by S,. if the depth permits), and
to design shear reinforcement using equation (6.8).
Such· an approach is probably reasonable when considering wheel loads or piers which are not integral with the
deck. However, when dealing with piers which are integral
with the deck, and thus nonsymmetl}' of the shear distribution and moment transfer should be considered, it
could be that a modification, similar to that for flat slabs in
CP 110, should be made to either the vc values or the
design shear force. However, this has not been "included in
the Code and the implication is that the effects of nonsymmetry and moment transfer can be ignored.
Further problems, which are pl'.Obably of more importance to the bridge engineer than to the building engineer,
are those caused by voids running para11el to the plane of a
s1ab and by changes of section due to the accommodation
of services. These problems are not considered by the
Code.
Some tests have been carried out by Hanson (159] on
the influence on shear strength of service ducts having
widths equal to the slab thickness and depths equal to 0.35
of the slab thickness. He concluded that provided the
ducts were not within two slab thicknesses of the load
there was no reduction in shear strength. However, it is
not clear whether such a rule would apply to slabs with
voids as deep as those which occur in bridge decks.
;;>~
VCD
!
BS 5400 clause
·~·"""""'~'
principal tensile stress is a maximum at the beam centroid,
in which case fb= 0, and, for.a rectangular section, /b/Ay
= 0.67 bh. Hence
i'
crack
checked also at distances, in steps of 0.75h, beyond I.Sh
and, if necessary, shear reinforcement should be provided
at these distances.
The minimum amount of shear reinforcement implied by
equation (6.8) has to be provided only if v > S.vc and is
very similar to the amount originally proposed for beams
by the Shear Study Group.
As is also the case for flexural shear in slabs, the maxi·
mum nominal punching shear stress should not exceed
0.375 /10 ,.
where M, is the cracking moment and M and V are the
moment and shear force at the section under consideration.
If this equation is transformed to S.I. units, it is assumed
that fcyl = 0.8 fcu and a partial safety factor of 1.5 applied
tofcu• then
In order to simplify calculations, it is assumed that the
11
A minimum value of Ve, of 0.1 bd
is stipulated in the
Code. This value originated in the American Code as, in
Imperial units, I. 7 bd ./Tc11 • The reason for this value is
, not apparent but if it is converted to S.I. units, it is
assumed that/.,,. 1 == 0.8/cu and a partial safety factor of 1.5
is applied to fcu, then the Code value is obtained.
The majority of the beams for which equation (6.10) was
found to give a good lower bound fit had relatively high
levels of prestress, with the ratio of effective prestress to
tendon characteristic strength (/p./fpu) in excess of 0.5.
These beams were thus representative of Class 1 or Class 2
beams, but not necessarily of Class 3 beams which can
have much lower levels of prestress. A modified expres·
sion for Ver was thus derived for Class 3 beams which
gives a linear transition from the reinforced concrete shear
clauses (jp,Jfpu = 0) to the Class 1 and Class 2 formula
(equation (6.11)) when fp,/fpu = 0.6. In view of the two
terms of equation (6.11) it was proposed (161] that for
Class 3 members.
(6.13)
V.,,=A+B
where A depends on material strength and is analogous to
the shear force calculated from the Ve values of Table 6.1,
and B is the shear force to flexurally crack the beam. Both
A and B are to be determined. The tenn, A, was written as
a function of Ve and the effective prestress (/pc)
A = (1  nfp,Jfpu) Vcbd
L:_..:lf,j
,...
c·"
::._:._ __j
,··~
~~13
c_:
·idge elf.
Conr·
.,,as S"~"
~uttirr"
where n is to be determined. This function was chosen for
A because it reduces to the reinforced concrete equation
when/pc= 0.
Equation (6.11) can be expanded to the following by
using equation (6.12)
v., _
0.037 bd
/Jo" + 0.37 /f_ yIV
M + M2Y
M
(6.14)
where Mo = 0.8fp, lly is the moment to produce zer!J stress
at the level of the steel centroid. It is thus convenient to
write the term, B, of equation (6.13) as Mo VIM and V.,,.
becomes for reinforced and all classes of prestressed
concrete
Ver= (1  nfµ/fp,,) v}Jd +MoVIM
(6.15)
Forreinforcedconcrete,fl!<' = M 0 = 0 and hence Ver= vjJd,
which agrees with the reinforced concrete clauses. In order
that equations (6.14) and (6.15) for Classes 1 and 2 and
Class 3 respectively agree. for fp)fpu = 0.6, it is necessary
!hot
0.037 bd
I V
/Jo"+ o.37 4" ;; M
.
~ (1  o.6n) ,J>d
A shear failure is unlikely to occur if M/V > 4h and thus
it is conservative [161) to put MIV = 4h. It is further
assumed that d == h, fly = bh 2!6 (the value for a rectangular section), fcu =.·so N/mm 2 ; Ve= 0.55 N/mm 2
(i.e. 0.5% steel) and thus n = 0.55. Hence, the following equation, which appears in the Code, is obtained
Ver= (1  0.55 fµ,/fp,J v 0 bd +MoVIM
(6.16)
In view of the large number of simplifications made in
deriving this equation, Reynolds, Clarke and Taylor
[161] compared it, with the partial safety factors
removed, with observed Ver values from 38 partially prestressed beruns. Tue ratios of the experimental ultimate
shear forces to V.,,. were, with the exception of one beam
which had a ratio of 0. 77, in the range 0.97 to 1.40 with a
mean of 1.18. The exceptional beam had a cube strength
of only 20 N/mm 2 and a high amount of web reinforce·
ment.
The total area of both tensioned and untensioned steel in
the tension zone should be used when assessing Ve from
Table 6.I; and, in equation (6.16), d should be the distance from the extreme compression fibre to the centroid of
the steel in the tension zone. The total area of tension steel
is used because the longitudinal steel contributes to the
shear strength by acting as dowel reinforcement and by
controlling crack widths, and thus indirectly influencing
the amount of agglegate interlock. Thus any bonded steel
can be considered. The Code also implies that unbonded
tendons should be considered, but it could be argued that
they s~ould be excluded because they cannot develop
dowel strength and are less effective in controlling crack
widths.
When both tensioned steel of area A•«> and characteristic
strengthfpu{r)and untensioned steel of areaAs(u}and characteristic strengthfyL<u)are present,fp,/fpu should be taken as,
by an~ogy, the ratio of the effective prestressing.force (P1)
divided by the total ultimate force developed by both the
tensioned and untensioned steels, i.e.
74
Pjl(As(r) fpu(1)
+ A.r(u) fyL(u) ).
It will be recalled that the d/2 term which appears in
equation (6.10) was ignored in deriving equations (6.11)
and (6.16). An examination of the bending moment and
shear force diagrams of Fig. 6.9 reveals that the value of
MIV at a particular section is equal to the value of
(MIVd/2) at a section distanced/2 from the particular section. It is thus reasonable to consider a value ofV.,,.calculated from equations ·(6.11) and (6.16) to be applicable
for a distance of d/2 in the direction of increasing moment from the particular section under consideration.
Finally, contrary to the principles of statics, the Code
does not permit the vertical component of the forces in
inclined tendons to be added to Ver to give the total shear
resistance. This requirement was based upon the results of
tests on prestressed beruns, with tendon drape angles of
zero to 9.95", reported by MacGregor, Sozen and Siess
[164]. They concluded that the drape decreased the shear
strength. However, since, except at the lowest point of a
tendon, the effective depth of a draped tendon is Jess than
that of a straight tendon, equations (6.11) and (6.16) do
predict a reduction in shear strength for a draped, as compared with a straight, tendon. It is not clear whether the
reduction in strength observed in the tests was due lo the
tendon inclination or the reduction in effective depth. If it
is because of the latter, then the Code effectively allows
for the reduction twice by adopting equations (6.11) and
(6.16) and excluding the vertical component of the prestress. Hence, the Code, although conservative, does seem
illogical in its treatment of inclined tendons.
Shear reinforcement
The shear force (Ve) which can be carried by the concrete
alone is the lesser of V co and Ve•· If Ve exceeds the applied
shear force {V) then, theoretically, no shear reinforcement
is required, However, the Code requires nominal shear
reinforcement to be provided, such that 0.87 fy.A~Jbsv
~ 0.4 N/mm2 , if V ~ 0.5 V.,. These requirements were
taken directly from the AmeriCan Code, Thus shear reinforcement need not be provided if V < 0.5 Ve. In addition
the Code does not require shear reinforcement in members
of minor importance nor where tests have shown that shear
reinforcement is unnecessary. The CP 110 handbook
[112] defines members of minor importance as slabs,
footings, pile caps,and walls. However, it is not clear
whether such members should be considered to be minor
in bridge situations and the interpret<J.tion of the Code
obviously involves 'engineering judgement'.
If V exceeds Ve then shear reinforcement should be provided in accordance with
Asv
S:
VV.,
=o.S7fyvdt
(6.17)
where d, is the distance from the extreme compression
fibre to the centroid of the tendons or to any longitudinal
bars placed in the corners of the links, whichever is the
greater. The amount of shear reinforcement provided
should exceed the minimum referred to in the last paragraph. Equation (6,17) can be derived in the same way as
equation (6. 7).
· J state
'and:
The basic maximum link spacing is 0. 75 d,, which is the
same as that for reinforced concrete beams. However, if V
>LS Ve, the maximum spacing should be reduced to
0.5 d,: the reason for this is not clear. In addition, for any
value of V, the link spacing in flanged members should not
exceed four times the web width: this requirement presumably follows from the CP 115 implication that special considerations should be given to beams in which the web
depth to breadth ratio exceeds four.
age shear forces over a width of slab equal to twice the
effective depth, and to carry out the shear design calculation for the shear forces acting on planes nonnal to the
tendons and untensioned reinforcement. A similar
approach, for reinforced slabs, is discussed elsewhere in
this chapter.
Maximum shear force
The Code specifies a different critical shear perimeter for
prestressed concrete than for reinforced concrete. The
perimeter for prestressed concrete is taken to be at a distance of half of the overall slab depth from the load.
The section should then be considered to be uncracked
and Yeo calculated as for flexural shear. In other words, the
principal tensile stress at the centroidal axis around the
critical perimeter should be limited to 0.24 ffcu· It should
be noted that Clause 7 .4 of the Code refers to values ofV«>
in Table 32 of the Code whereas it should read Table 31.
If shear reinforcement is required, it should be designed
in the same way as that for flexural shear.
The above design approach is, essentially, identical to
that of the American Code [168) and was originally
proposed by Hawkins, Crisswell and Roll [169). They
considered data from tests on slabcolumn specimens and
slab systems, and fouod that the ratios of observed to cal·
culated shear strength (with material partial safety factors
removed) were in the range 0.82 to 1.28 with a mean of
1.06. The data were mainly from reinforced concrete slabs
but 32 of the slabs were prestressed. In addition, the
specimens had concrete strengths and depths less than
those which would occur in bridges. However, the author
feels that the Code approach should be applicable to bridge
structures.
Finally, the reservations, expressed earlier when dis·
cussing reinforced concrete slabs, regarding nonunifonn
shear distributions and the presence of voids are also
applicable to prestressed slabs.
Punching shear
In order to avoid premature crushing of the web concrete,
it is necessary to impose an upper limit to the maximum
shear force. The Code tabulates maximum design shear
stresses which are derived from the srune formula
(0. 75 /!c,,) as those for reinforced concrete. The shear stress
is considered to act over a nominal area of the web breadth,
minus an allowance for ducts, times the distance from the
extreme compression fibre to the centroid of all (tensioned
or untensioned) steel in the tension zone.
Clarke and Taylor [154J have considered prestressed
concrete beams which failed by web crushing and found
that the ratios of observed web crushing stress to the Code
value of 0. 75 ./l., were in the range 1.04 to 4.50 with. a
meanpf2.13.
It has been suggested by Bennett and Balasooriya
[165) that beams with a web depth to breadth ratio in
excess of ten could exhibit a tendency to buckle prior to
crushing: such a ratio could be exceeded in a bridge. However, the test data considered by Clarke and Taylor [154)
included specimens with ratios of up to 17; and Edwards
(166] has tested a prestressed box girder having webs with
slenderness ratios of 33 and did not observe any instability
problems. It thus appears that·web instability should not be
a problem in the vast majority of bridges.
It is mentioned previously that a reduced web breadth,
to allow for ducts, should be used when calculating shear
stresses. The Code stipulates that the reduced breadth
should', be the actual breadth less either the duct diameter
for urlirouted ducts or twothirds the duct diameter for
grouted ducts. These values were originally suggested by
Leonhardt [167) and have subsequently been shown to be
reasonable by tests carried out by Clarke and Taylor
[154] on prisms withducts passing through them.
It should be noted that when checking the maximum
shear force any vertical component of prestress should be
considered only for sections uncracked in flexure. This
again defie.s statics but is consistent with the approach to
calculating V~ 0 and Ver•
In the introduction to this chapter it is stated that, accord·
ing to the Code, torsion calculations have to be carried out
only at the ultimate limit state.
An implication of this fact is that it is necessary to think
in terms of two types of torsion.
Slabs
Equilibrium torsion
The Code states that the flexural shear resistance of prestressed slabs should be calculated in exactly the same
manner as that of prestressed beruns, except that shear
reinforcement is not required in slabs when the applied
shear force is less than Ve. This recommendation does not
appear to be based upon test data and the author has the
srune reservations about the recommendation as those dis·
cussed previously in connection with reinforced slabs.
For design purposes, it would seem reasonable to aver
In a statically determinate structure, subjected to torsional
loading, torsional stress resultants must be present in order
to maintain equilibrium. Hence, such torsion is referred to
as equilibrium torsion and torsional strength must be provided to prevent collapse occurring. An example of
equilibrium torsion is that which arises in a cantilever
beam due to torsional loading.
It is assumed in the Code that the torsion reinforcement
provided to resist equilibrium torsion at the ultimate limit
Torsion  general
Equilibrium and compatibility torsion
75
Ultimate limit state  shear and torsion
Concrete bridge design to BS 5400
..............
.................1
~ .............
'
.!
'..,
...........
'..,
A~
F,12.
designing reinforcement to resist the maximum torque,
reinforcement, which is present and is in excess .of that
required to resist the other stress resultants associated with
the maximum torque, may be used for torsion reinforcement.
Compatibility torsion
Combined stress resultants
The Code acknowledges the fact that, at a particular point,
the maximum bending moment, shear and torque do not
generally occur under the same loading. Thus, when
·~·''"'
r·,
~
r1""'~
11'>..
Methods of calculating elastic and plastic distributions of
torsional shear stress are available for homogeneous sections having a variety of crosssectional shapes, including
rectangular. The calculation of an elastic distribution is
generally complex, and that of a plastic distribution is generally much simpler. However, neither distribution is correct for nonhomogeneous sections such as cracked structural concrete.
In order to simplify calculation procedures, the COde
adopts a plastic distribution of torsional shear stress over
the entire crosssection. It is emphasised that such a distribution is assumed not because it is correct but merely for
convenience. The Code. also gives allowable nominal torsional shear stresses with which to compare the calculated
plastic shear stresses. The allowable values were obtained
from test data,
It can be seen that the above approach is similar to that
adopted for flexural shear, in which allowable nominal
flexural shear stresses, acting over a nominal area of
breadth times effective depth, were chosen to give agreement with test data.
The plastic torsional shear stress distribution is best calculated by making use of the sandheap analogy [171] in
which the constant plastic torsional shear stress (v1) is
proportional to the constant slope ('IP) of a heap of sand on
the crosssection under consideration, In fact
(6,18)
v, = T'l'y/K
where T is the torque and K is twice the volume of the
heap of sand.
The plastic shear stress for a rectangular section can thus
be evaluated from Fig, 6.10 as follows
Volume of sandheap= (hm1,/2)(hmax)(1j1h,,,,,/2)
t
.  (2)(1/6)(h••)(h,,,,,,12)('1>h.,,,12)
1
(1/4)\V h min (hmax  hm1./3}
~
'·~'
,..,,.,~~
...
~....1
··"''..,,,
c==:i
~·..
1'
b
I
I
I
I
J45"1>:.
y,
I
r\1
·I
(a) Crosssection
Fig. 6.12(a),(b) Space truss analogy
is considered which, theoretically, could fonn at any
angle. However, for design purposes, it is considered to
form at the same angle (45°) as the initial cracks in order
that the amount of stress redistribution required prior to
collapse may be minimised. The failure surface assumed
by the Code is shown in Fig. 6.12 together with relevan!
dimensions.
If the two legs of a link have a tolal area of Asv and the
links are spaced at Sv, then y 1lsv links cross a line parallel
to a compression strut on a larger face of the member. If
the characteristic strength of the link reinforcement is fy••
then the steel force at failure in each larger face is
(6, 19)
Torsion reinforcement
Torsional shear stress
I
{b) Elevation on a larger face
This equation is given in the Code.
Rectangulai;~ection
I
I
v, ""h2 m1n (hmax  hmm13)
Torsion of reinforced concrete
Ii
x,
2T
to prevent collapse occurring by designing more flexural
and shear strength than would be necessary if torsional
strength were provided, The explanation of this is that a
stress resultant distribution, within the structure, with zero
torsional stress resultants and which satisfies equilibrium
can always be found. Since such a distribution satisfies
equilibrium it leads to a safe lower bound design [27}.
Although a safe design results from a stress resultant
distribution with no twisting moments or torques, it is
obviously necessary, from considerations of compatibility,
for various parts of the structure to displace by twisting.
Hence, such torsion is referred to as compatibility torsion,
The torsion which occurs in bridge decks is, generally,
compatibility torsion and it would be acceptable, in an
elastic analysis, to assign zero torsional stiffness to a deck.
This would result in zero twisting moments or torques
throughout the deck and bending moments greater than
those which would occur if the full torsional stiffness were
used.
In the above discussion it is implied that either zero or
the full torsional stiffness should be adopted. However, it
is emphasised that any value of torsional stiffness could be
adopted. As an example, Clark and West [170] have
shown that it is reasonable, when considering the end
diaphragms of beam and slab bridges, to adopt Only 50%
of the torsional stiffness obtained by multiplying the elastic
shear modulus of concrete by 11 (see equation (2.43) ).
Finally, although it is pennissible to assume zero torsional stiffness at the ultimate limit state, which implies
the provision of no torsion reinforcement, it is necessary to
provide some torsion reinforcement to control any torsional cracks which could occur at the serviceability limit
state. The Code assumes that the nominal flexural shear
reinforcement discussed earlier in this chapter is sufficient
for controlling any torsional cracks.
("'"''"""'·
i'!'K; I I
I
Thus, from equation (6.18),
In a structure which is statically indetenninate, it is
theoretically possible to provide no torsional strength, and
___ ,J
I
1
'·
Fig. 6.11 Torsional cracks
state is adequate to control torsional cracking at the serviceability limit state,
: '
F,12'
13
Fig. 6.10 Sandheap analogy for rectangular section
,,
,,
,,
~
76c'
Stirrup
Compression strut
'..::
/
Design H the applied torsional shear stress calculated
from equation (6.19) exceeds a specified value (vfml,,) it is
necessary to provide torsion reinforcement. One might
expect v1,,,1n to be taken as the stress to cause torsional
cracking or that corresponding to the pure torsional
strength of a member without web reinforcement. In fact,
it is taken in the Code to be 25% of the latter value. Such a
value was originally chosen by American Concrete Committee 438 [172] because tests have shown [173, 174] that
the presence of such a torque does not cause a significant
reduction in the shear or flexural strength of a member.
The rabulated Code values of Vrmr,, are given by
0.067 If~., (but not greater than 0.42 N/mm 2 ) and are
design values which include· a partial safety factor of I.S
applied to fcu• The formula is based upon that originally
proposed by the American Concrete Institute but has been
modified to (a) convert from cylinder to cube strength,
(b) allow for partial safety factor and (c) allow for the fact
that the American Concrete Institute calculates v1 from an
equation based upon the skew bending theory of Hsu [175]
instead of the plastic theory,
If v, exceeds v1,,,1n. torsion reinforcement has to be pro·
vided in the form of longitudinal reinforcement plus closed
links. The reason for requiring both types of reinforcement
is that, under pure torsional loading, principal tensile stresses are produced at 45° to the longitudinal axis of a beam.
Hence, torsional cracks also occur at 45° and these tend to
form continuous spiral cracks as shown in Fig. 6.11. It is
necessary to have reinforcement, on each face, parallel and
normal to the longitudinal axis in order that the torsional
cracks can be controlled and adequate torsional strength
developed.
The amounts of reinforcement required are calculated by
considering, at failure, a space truss. This is analogous to
the plane truss considered for flexural shear earlier in this
Chapter. In the space truss analogy, a spiral failure surface
·~
~
l··iiJJH
~
~~
'··.;J
F, ~ f,J,A,j2)(y,I•.)
Similarly, the steel force at failure in each smaller face is
Fx = fyv(A,ft) (x1!Sv)
The total resisting torque is
T= F,,x 1 + FxJ1
= fy.,A$ 11 XJY1IS.,
(6,20)
At the ultimate limit state,fyv has to be divided by a partial
safety factor. of 1.15 to give a design stress of 0.87 fyv·
Hence, in the code, / 1 ., in equation (6.20) is replaced by
0.87 fyv· Furthermore, the Code introduces an efficiency
factor, which is discussed later, of 0.8 in order to obtain
good agreement between the space truss analogy and test
results. Hence, in the Code, equation (6.20) is presented
"
Aw> _ _ _
T
Sv" '"""
(6,21)
0.8xJY1 (0,87fyv)
The force Fy is considered to be the vertical component
of a prineipal force (F) which acts perpendicular to the
failure surface and thus F = F1 ,/2. The principal force
also has a horizontal (longitudinal) component Fl./2
which, from above, is equal to F,. A force of this magnitmie acts in each larger face and, similarly, a horizontal
(longitudinal) force of magnitude F:r: acts in each smaller
face. Thus the total horizontal (longitudinal) force, which
tends to elongate the section, is 2(F:r: + Fy). This elongat·
ing force has to be resisted by the longitudinal reinforcement: if the total area of longitudinal reinforcemenl is A~L
,._;.
~_,
__,_l'>:.J
,,
''
__
,
:____ _________/
c:=:
,12_
~
. a design maximum nominal torsional shear stress (viu) of 0.(b) Diagonal torsional compressive stresses and it has a characteristic strength Ast.. The latter limitation is intended to control cracking at the serviceability limit state in large members where the two other limitations can result in large spacings. In order to prevent premature spa1ling it is necessary to restrict the link spacing and the flexibility of the portion of longitudinal bar between the links. ciency factor has to be introduced into equation (6.~·~ .. Otherwise. As is also the case for flexural shear.(b) Torsional siz.75 //cu or 4.rL ~Asv(=.o. If a partial safety factor of 1.. The nominal stress which could be attained with this factor was 0.. in the Code.e effect [1781 1....8) for small sections and to determine reduced nominal maximum stresses for the latter by considering test data. the junction effects make the calculations rather tedi· ous and the Code thus permits a section to be divided into its component rectangles which are then considered irufi. is obtained. for example. 6. As shown in Fig. {d) Reinforcement Jl'ig. This va1ue is tabulated in the Code with an upper limit of 4. It is mentioned elsewhere in this chapter that an effi.13(a). be detailed so that the individual rectangles are tied together as. irand b • !a) Sections before spelling "" dit stat.(hnuu h3m1n) The above considerations imply that an anomalous situ· ation arises in the treatment of flanged sections for the • following reason.75 N/mm~ In the case of small sections(>i 1 < 550 mm). 75 (y 1/550) N/mm2 • T..20). such as that shown in Fig. Tests reported by Mitchell and Collins [176) indicate that the link spacing should not exceed {x1 + y 1)/4 nor 16 times the longitudinal comer bar diameter. if the nominal shear stress is high.h' •'") '5:. This alters the path of the torsiona1 shear flow and can be considered to reduce the area of concrete resist· ing the torque. Diagonal thrust Maximum torsional shear stress (a) Elevation :omponents of agonal thrusts The space truss of Fig...22). It is emphasised that the Code requires that both of the following be satisfied: 2. ciency factor.20) in order to obtain agreement between test results and the predictions of the space truss analogy. which were tested by Swann [177} and reinforced with steel having yield stresses in excess of 430 N/mm 2 .~1'o BS • IJ~. a greater reliance is placed·upon the ability of the concrete in compression to develop high stresses at high strains than is the case for low nominal stress.8 was a reasonable value to take for the effi. In order to fonnulate a simple design method which takes the above points into account..idgr i...21) and (6. The manner in which the section is divided into rectangles should be such that the function '5:.13. The size effect is explained by the fact that spelling occurs at the comers of a member in torsion as shown in Fig.22) The detailing of torsional reinforeement has been considered by Mitchell and Collins [1761 and the fol· lowing Code rules are based very much on their work. in genera]. it is justified by the fact that some beams.12 consists of the torsion re. However.92 lfcu.)(x1 + Y1) Sv yL Detailing (6. It should be noted that the stress is the same as the design maximum nominal flexural shear stress. Diagonal compressive stresses occur in the concrete between torsional cracks.92 /Tc~ had to be modified by multiplying by (y 1/550) for sections wherey 1 < 550 mm. failed at ultimate toiques slightly less than those predicted by the Code method of calcula· tion [178].Hence the design stress of 0.. Having established a nominal maximum "' a. then no torsion reinforcement is required in that rectangle. the torsional shear stress should not exceCa 0.5 is applied to /cu. in Fig.n) is maximised. 75 jfcu6'1'550) or 4. the section should be divided so that the widest of the possible component rectangles is made as long as possible as shown in Fig.(h.. This implies that. Consideration of tests carried out on beams with a max:i· mum cross·sectional dimension of about 500 mm indicated that 0.. It was found that the stress of 0. 6.75 . A.15(b) and (c). the stresses in the inclined compression struts be~ tween the torsional cracks 6f Fig... it is necessary to limit the compressive stresses in the struts to prevent the struts crushing prior to the torsion reinforcement yielding in tension. Thus.15(a) for a Tsection.mrn. 6. The reason for considering large sections was that these are least affected by comer spalling. Swann 781 found that the efficiency factor decreases with an increase in the nominal plastic torsiona1 shear stress at collapse and also decreases with a decrease in specimen size.. L. and such stresses Ilear the edges of a section cause the comers to spall off as shown in Fig. it was decided to adopt the same efficiency factor (0. Swann (178] essentially chose an efficiency factor to give the same design maximum shear stress for torsional shear as for flexural shear. vidually.:. Torsion reinforcement If the nominal torsional shear stress in any rectangle is less than the 1Jppropriate v1m1n value discussed earlier in connection with rectangular sections. 6.15(d). The total torque (T} applied to the section is then apportioned among the component rectangles such that each rectangle is subjected to a torque: Total= bb. An examination of equation (2.  Ultii.fyL = 2(F. Thus. 6.13. However. However. strains necessary to mobilise the yield stress of such high strength steel resulted in a reduction ·in the efficiency factor mentioned earlier and discussed in the next section of this chapter. 6. 4 b ~ 11IT A I"' ~ (b) fdealisedhr>bw (cl ldealisad hr< b.. The dependence of the efficiency factor on stress is explained by the fact that.c~:.and Isections Torsional shear stress The plastic shear stress for a flanged section could be obtained from considerations of the appropriate sandheap. ~. the longitudinal comer bar diameter should not be less than the link diameter../f. this effect is more significant for a small than for a large section. The reason for this was that the large concrete 78  11 • A ' • • / stress and an efficiency factor for large sections./J.. inforcement acting as. + Fy) = As/yv(X1 offyL + Y1)fsv Thus... 6.Ji3. Maximum torsional shear stress The maximum nominal torsiona1 shear stresses discussed 79 .43) shows that the division into rectangles and tbe apportioning of the torque is carried out on the basis of the approximate elastic stiffnesses of the rectangles. a1so has to be multiplied by this ratio.15(a)(d) Torsion of Tsection T(h.l(a)) it is to be expected that the efficiency factor should decrease with an increase in nominal stress.. This is achieved by limiting the nominal tor· sionaI shear stress. the nominal torsional shear stress in each rectangle is calculated using equation (6. In view of the strainsoftening exhibited by concrete in compression (see Fig. In addition.14. 6..:~·~~""·.. However.. 6._:·:.. Swann [178] proposed that the efficiency factor should be chosen to be a va1ue which could be considered to result in an acceptably high nominal stress level in large sections. 6.. at high nomina1 stresses... The Code specifies these spacings and also states that the 1ink spacing should not exceed 300. 75 .tensile ties plus concrete compressive struts. The total (flexural plus torsional) shear stress (v + v1) should not exceed 0.19) based upon plastic theory. and should .14(a). the derivation of the limiting values in the Code is connected with the choice of the efficiency factor applied to the reinforcement in equation (6. }' !a) Actual (b) Sections after spelling Fig.11 are also high. 4. reinforeement for each rectangle should be designed in accordance with equations (6.. 6.75 N/mm'.ff. 0 fi mars spa!I (b) Section Fig. The characteristic strength of all torsional reinforcement is limited to 425 N/rnm 2 primarily because such a restric~ tion exists for shear reinforcement.
24) It can be seen from equation (6.~ N. The two sets of equations are (a) equations (6...:. . ·.I Q.18 Tendons as torsion reinforcement I The code essentially assumes that prestressed concrete members can be designed to resist torsion by ignoring the prestress and designing them as if they Were reinforced.87fyL The reason for having two sets of equations is that (6.1..o(b v. 6._.25) S.shear and torsion Median line t[gf Stress .. It should be noted that the Code adopts for Ac the area of section subjected to flexural compressive stresses instead of simply the flange area. strictly. ..21) and (6. _L. A. po~o~'"'"'''' b 2d) h. it is necessary to ensure that the additional tendon strain. the design ultimate stress A = AJe<>v + IAcv.. Thus values of v1.19(a). . flexural loading is also generally present.... hi.....=2Ao h..oAo __T_ where hwa is the wall thickness at the point where the shear stress v. tions.81fyL Q. 'f Tl2h.16(a)(c) Torsion of box section h.21) and (6.23) Equation (6.25) and (6._.22) were originally intended for beams of relatively small cross·section and they can be over· conservative for large thin·walled box sections in which x1 is greater that about 300 mm [179}.. theoretically.~ . then torsion reinforcement must be provided.~Ao (0. 6..=·""'  _... by Swann and Williams [179}.v 1 2 + I • b Box girder notation Box sections Torsional shear stress The elastic torsional shear stress distribution is easily calculated for a box section. Asv and AsL should be calcu· lated in accordance with the equations for reinforced concrete presented earlier in this chapter. ~~· ·. 6.~ Mx My M. Swann and Williams [179] have tested model reinforced concrete box beams under pure torsional loading and found that the observed ultimate torques exceeded the ultimate torques calculated from either set of equations.. +Ji. The mathematical expression used is identical to that for the sandheap analogy for plastic torsion (equation (6.. to achieve an efficiency factor of 0. "~··. ++(a) Author's criterion 0. It has been mentioned that the greatest pennissible characteristic strength for conventional torsion reinforcement is 425 N/mm 2 • This value was chosen ~ause the large yield strains associated with higher strengths reduce the efficiency factor in equation (6.26) may be reduced by AJC<>j 0. .nA 0 (6. the design yield strain is 0.22) which were derived. for thinwalled boxes whereas it could be argued that many concrete box sec· tions are not thin.. With reference to Fig. FtiJ.26) ·'.21) to less than 0.16 1Uld by ignoring the slight curvature of the membrane (so that a section through the membrane has straight edges). __..._. The consideration of a box girder subjected only to tor· sion is rather academic since. . from equation (6.. Thus...00185. If the nominal torsional shear stress at ·any point exceeds the v...v) due to flexure over the crosssectional area (Ac) of one flange..8. for a thickwalled box from ~L ~ Asv fyv (perimeter of Ao) s. The validity of this approach to design has been con fumed by the tests of Swann and Williams [ 179] and is consequently pennitted by the Code.23) is.16..res1. .21) and (6...1 Sha~e~ 0area W >j Stress Tendon design curve Curvature (glected Idealised tendon curve { j<hwo (c) Section through membrane al XX I Idealised reinforcement curve lthw0 !2 (a) Crosssection (bl Median line and enclosed area Ao Fig..'J.. ~·. The design of torsion reinforcement is complicated in the Code by the fact that two sets of equations may be used and the lesser of the amounts so calculated may be provided.23) that the nominal tor· sional shear stress at a point is dependent upon the wall thickness at that poinl and thus varies around a box with nonuniform wall thickness. . but with the reinforcement assumed to be concentrated along the median line of the box walls and with the efficiency factor taken to be 1... 6.u.17.o· v. for solid rectangular s·ec.25) and (6.26): this was to be expected since the models were large in the sense that they were models of large prototype sections. Thus a compressive inplane force of AJcav acts in conjunction with an inplane shear force of Acv1• Hence. Maximum torsional shear stress The maximum nominal torsional shear stresses discussed in connection with rectangular sections have been shown to be reasonable for box sections by the tests of Swann and Williams [179].._.8 when using tendons as torsion reinforcement.resultants on entire crosssection (bl Stress . with the notation of Fig. be applied to sections other than boxes but the Code limits the reduction to box sections only.i. ! h. equation (6. Ny N.. Maisel and Roll [41] have shown that the error(6v1).~10t:1 I i h.__ ___) j_.. There is thus an essentially constant compressive stress (f. (6.ltants at a point Fig.17 /J.. This implies that the amount of reinforcement calculated from equation (6.__:__ . 6..! . Strain Strain Fig. from equation (A17)._ values discussed earlier in connection with rectangular sections.. with bridges specifically in mind. = T'\jl/2hA 0 = T12h.....0.·WHI ~ ~ ~ : L __ _. 6.Concrete bridge desi!J11 to BS 5400 Ultimate limit state . does not exceed the yield strain of other reinforcement in the section having a characteristic strength of 425 N/mm 2 • If the latter is conservatively asswned to be hotrolled. who carried out tests on model prestressed concrete box beams. required to mobilise the tendons' ultimate strength. The above equation can be derived by applying the membrane analogy [76] in which the variable elastic torsional shear stress is proportional to the variable slope (ip) of a membrane inflated over the crosssection. The validity of such an approach has been checked._. Hence. the so ___ _ ''  I (6.y + IAcv.:._._.26) below which were also derived from the space truss analogy. is determined andAo is the area within the median line of the section as shown in Fig... the slope at a particular point is '1' = hlhwa =J0.._. 2 !""···~~ '~ (b) Lampert's criterion II Element subjected to x N v la) Stress .n calculating v. and the volwne under the membrane is Thus.22) or (6.(b) Combined slressresultants amount (A) of longitudinal reinforcement required is given Torsion of prestressed concrete by (0. It was also found that equations (6.81/yL)A = AJcav (6.87/yv) where h = height of membrane. 6....18)) butK is now twice the volwne under the membrane.23) is.87 X 425/200 000 = 0. Hence.18)..00185 Torsion reinforcement in connection with rectangular sections should not be exceeded in any individual rectangle.. from the space truss analogy and (b) equations (6. the Code requires the nominal stress to be calculated from the standard fonnula for a thinwalled closed section [76]: v.j General O< ri ==:=J . in practice. ... Yimino v.22) were more conser· vative than (6. and that the Code also refers to a stress f1 c which should read fyL· The reductio·n in longitudinal steel area due to the effect of flexural compressive stresses could.<~"'"' ·.81f1 L.~._.
1 would be appropriate for design.Yp)F. = 1.lbd = (3 + 1)/2 = 2 From Table 5 of the Code. Nominal applied shear stress = v = 540 x 10 3/(300 x 600) = 3 N/mm 1 From Table 6 of Code or 0.22(a). then they can be replaced by a force F1 situated at (j. Segmental construction In segmental construction it is not generally convenient to provide continuous longitudinal conventional reinforce· men. 3%(d=9SOJ 6/25 ' r f100 Fig.J:J \ I I I ICrltical jperimeterl I I A _j I I '' ' .23 is subjected to a shear force of 0. the depth of a web.0. The drafters took fy to be 460 N/mm 3 (the greatest value likely to be used) although it exceeds the greatest value (425 N/mm2 ) permitted for torsion reinforcement.k. design stresses but the stress increment necessary to raise the stress from the effective prestress to the design stress. Design shear reinforcement with a characteristic strength of 250 N/mm 1 • The initial prestress is 70% of the characteris.19(b}.t.07 . Swann and Williams [179] give a numerical exam· pie of such a calculation.22. 15100/8.0.75h perimeter. Hence the stress increment in the Code should be 400 N/mm 2 • In conclusion... the above approach of considering the stress resultants at points of the cross· section would be acceptable. 75 d = 450 mm.5)(1100) = 1650 mm The critical section is shown on Fig. If the longitudinal steel capacities required in each flange and web of a segmental box beam are as shown in Fig.21 Example 6. say.75 N/mm 2 Vu> v. Iiistead..87 fpu• thus. o. 6.Sh = (I .75h from the loaded area. the Code stress limits are stress increments and not design stresses. and then to superpose the effects of any local actions. the design stress is limited to the. For example. From Table 32 of Code or O./fcu. Examples 6. fpd = fp• + 460 N/mmz. 6. in order that excessively large strains would not develop in one type of reinforcement prior to yield of the other. The concrete is of grade 40.. maximum allowable shear stress = Vu = 4. This method is probably very suitable to small sections but for large sections (and particularly for box beams) it could be considered desirable to vary the reinforcement over.).87 /P" and (/~ + 460 N/mm 2 ).3 Flexural shear in prestressed concrete Vu Area of tension reinforcement A. Each point would generally be subjected to both inplane and bending stress resultants and thus the sandwich method discussed in Chapter 5 ~ . tic strength and the losses amount to 30%.. ~ F1CY2 . m. 6.20.. The critical perimeter is at 1.. vu = 2../Jc.~<. Now check on perimeter at (LS+ 0. 75 N/mm= Only take half for slab.. Cr" ~1 1~ ~  i·· to BS . However..64 From Table 5 of Code.88 N/mm: From equation (6.fl'~= fy where fpd is the tendon design stress at ultimate. moments should be taken about each web and flange in tum to give four inequalities.87 fpu·and (see Fig. !.. 6. Zp).2 Punching shear in reinforced concrete '' i (/pa) for the tendons should be the lesser of 0. 6.k.18(a)) f~ plus the stress increment equivalent to a strain increment of0. o. "ind. 75 .78 = l720mmi/m.15 MNm at the ultimate limit state. the resulting limiting stresses are not included in the Code.Yi)+ F3(y2  y3) + F4(yz .38 N/mm 3 > v. it is often simpler to calculate the necessary total ultimate capacity of tendons situated at predetermined positions such that their centroid is at. Hence.. 6. 6.= 2950 mm:i IOOA)bd = (ICIO X 295QY(300 x 600) = 1. 6.22 to resist punching shear if the characteristic strengths of the steel and concrete are 425 and 40 N/mm 2 respectively and the column reaction at the ultimate limit state is IS MN.lesser of 460 N/mm 2 and (0:81fpu .oreover.F1 yP. Thus loogituctinal tendons in excess of those needed forf!exure have to be providetl. Alternative design methods The Code method of design of a section subjected to a general loading is to consider the stress resultants acting on the entire crosssection. It is then necessary to consider the stressresultants acting at various points of the crOss· section as shown in Fig. obtained from the four inequalities is the total ultimate tendon capacity which must be pro· vided. 6.15h = (2)(600) + (2)(1200) + (211)(825) = 8780 mm Thus on l.87)(425) = 15 100 mmi This amount of reinforcement must be provided along a perimeter I.07 N/mm 2 From Table 6 of Code or 0.(yP. Asv _ 300(3. The Code refers to 'other design methods' without specifically mentioning any. Design the slab shown in Fig. where/p•is the effective prestress in the tendons.Sh from the loaded area and also along a perimeter 0. It should also be mentioned that it is inconsistent to apply a partial safety factor to fpu but not to fr.. the author would suggest that the alternative criterion illustrated in Fig. Although the above argument seems logical. F.4)(14 000)(1000)/(0...y4) anA 6.. L fpd .18(b)) . I• Predetermined position (yp Zp) of centroid of tendons • 300mm Ult•·· •I / .The specification of such stresses seems to indicate that a criterion suggested by Lampert [180} and by Maisel and Swann [181] was misinterpreted by the drafters. and their centroid needs to be at (Y.F1 Z = T. d = (3 x 980 + 1 x 1060)/4 = 1000 mm Nominal applied shear stress. but must provide for at least 0. however. for example. 6.. Hence. 6. Thus the total ultimate capacity of the tendons needs to be F. Average 100A. as shown in Fig. ' .9 MN with a coexisting moment of 3.F. allowable shear stress without shear reinforcement Ve = 0. The suggested criterion was that tendons and conventional reinforcement should reach yield at about the same stage of failure of the section. and thus the second limit should be ifP~+ 400 N/mm 2). 12 mmstinups(21egs)at75 mmcentresgive3. o.87 X 250 · mm mm The pretensioned box beam shown in Fig. A simplified version of such an approach has been described by Swann and Wil· Iiams {179} and Maisel and Swann [181]. = T. as stated in the Code. Length of perimeter= (2)(600) + (2)(1200) + (211)(2475) = 19200 mm Nominal applied shear stress = v = 15 x lOG/(19 200 x 1000) = 78 N/mmi v < Ssvc.75Yt = 2. f). where: F.00 .1 Flexural shear in reinforced concrete Design stirrups of 250 N/mm 2 characteristic strength to resist an ultimate shear force of 540 kN applied to the sec· tion shown in Fig. ' ' ' E E g "" (a) Plan 1%{d"' 1060) •• • • •• ~ . Length of perimeter at 0.2 The largest value of F. fpd should be taken as the lesser of 0..fp. thus no need to provide more shear reinforcement.Ssvc = 1.. l 8(a) is more logical.(b) Example 6.·~ ·bridge F.5h perimeter provide 15 100/14 = 1080 mmf/m. maximum allowable shear stress Vu = 5.02 mm 2/mm. on 0.19(a).3 N/mm' 83 82 . The concrete is of grade 50 and the section has been designed to be class 1. allowable shear stress without shear reinforcement Ve = 0. In this case F1 must be such that the capacity of each flange or web exceeds the appropriate value of F.00185.12 N/mm 2 Thus shear reinforcement required...95 N/mm 2 From Table 8 of Code.00 Vu v . v = 15 X 106/(14 000 x 1000) = 1.95 = 0. 6... 7).. by taking moments about web2 U>2 .25h. Slab y dit StC'" (b) Section AA Fig.88) = 2 92 '/ Sv 0.20 SegmenUll box beam ' '' . 75 .ir The stirrup spacing should not exceed 0. The Code states that the line of action of the longitudinal ekingating force should coincide with the centroid of the steel actually provided.F1 Y = T. maximum allowable shear stress = = 4. zfi.4 N/mm 3 From equation (6. It thus appears that the limiting stresses given in the Code are not. In practice.21.\. Z)..F1 and each summation is for i = 1 to 4. :. fpd cannot exceed 0. Porimote> = (2)(600) + (2)(1200) + (2•)(1650) = 14000 mm 'Average' effective depth. 75 jf. I I I I A Flg.8) LAsv ~(0. This implies that (see Fig. 6. and they also present the results of tests on two model segmental box beams against which the above method of calculation was checked. ________ . 6.
maximum allowable shear stress v..64 (425/425)(530 and 4 x 125 = 500 mm Provide 12 mm stirrups (2 legs) at 175 Compressive stress at centroidal axis = 3780 x 108/478175 = 7. in this context. The top flange areas may be reduced by... = v..5 mm V" .34 N/mm 2 Ve.26).90..9 X lOe) (2. to resist an ultimate torque of 290 kNm which coexists with an ultimate.43 x 106 mm3 Neutral axis is 510 mm from bottom fibre . bd where b = total web breadth = 250 mm d = effective depth of steel in tension zone = 945.24 Example 6. ( O..26 mm'/mm. 6. = 610 X 106/(829 250 X 0.25). 460 N/mm1 • Thus...= 0. 5...64 mm'/mm ...M•..87 x IP~ The rectangular box section shown in Fig. The longitudinal torsion reinforcement could be provided (a) = 1. y1 = 1140 mm. 6.should not exceed the least of An end diaphragm of a beam and slab bridge is.!. thus torsion reinforcement required..n~~~~~n~1~~ation zone.99(425/425)(2 x 1070 I~ 11 II ·n·· . > v + v.....25 Example 6. = 610 x 10~/(0...22).12 N/mm1 > 0.21). 113 (0. A.... = 1. y 1 = 1130 mm (see Fig._ _ _J ..641)10 6/(0.8 X 530 X 1130 X 0.meur U"U i!Il Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 I• 900mm """\ 125 . 75 shear stress Shear reinforcement v1. Area within median line Ao = (1220 . It is emphasised that.142) b 6.u = 4. The bottom flange could be reinforced with 4 No.87 fpP ..80 + 2.10) 1147 N/mm 1 • The area of longitudinal conventional reinforcement would be. For each flange...45 = 2.j . The Code requires the lesser of 460 N/mmz and (0...87X 425) = 1. 6. the nominal torsional shear stress in a flange is 2 X 290 X JOG 6001 (1200 _ 600/3) = 1. = 4.. the Code would not pennit a design stress of 1147 N/mm 1 to be adopted for the tendons.x..~~ x to9 \ :..91)(1. links should be provided such that It Area=478175mml Bottom fibre modulus= 125.5)10• .Jsv = 290 X 10 6/(0.8¥. Vco = (0. define b and d to be used to calculate the flexural shear stress which acts only in the webs. _!<. i. 7)(0.99 mm 2 /mm. The minimum cover is 25 mm. in accordance with the Code. the area of longitudinal prestressing steel with an effective prestress of 802 N/mm~ would be.. .067 /!cu.k.js. 6.3 84 ~IN' 125mm Assume x 1 = 825 mm.24) Nominal flexural shear stress = v /50 + (0.. Cracked in flexure __ From equation (6.61 Nhnmi 11t~rr• ·1 'J = 696 x 10 3 N = 0.91 + (3780 x 10 3 x 368/ · ) From equation (6.19).Aiufpu= 227... The above reinforcement should be provided in addition to any flexural and shear reinforcement. From Table 21. •I 150mm 34N°15..(5. ~"""" __ =~ .shear force of 500 kN. required area of longitudinal reinforcement is 728mm Uncracked in flexure Effective depth {di of 125 mml Fig.2mm ...23 MNm F ti (6 I l) rorn equa on · ' Yer= (0. Design suitable torsion reinforcement.... Assume b = 2 x 125 = 250 mm.696 MN. thus torsion reinforcement required.94 N/mm 2 From Table 7 of Code allowable torsional shear stress without torsion reinforcement Vtm1tt= 0.. links should be provided such that ···.. I ) 0. ..42 N/mm 2 v.125) = 829 250 mm 2 From equation (6..00586 at which the stress is (see Fig.87 X 425) = 1..0 kN Effective prestress = (34)(0.1145mm From equation (6.45 N/mm 2 For one web.74 N/mm 2 From Table 7. from equation (6..8)(7. Allowable strain in_crement = 0. thus section big enough. 610 x 106/(2 x 125 x 829 250) = 2.~f. The Code does not. 7)(227) = 3780 kN ~ ~: b=600mm Fig. A:L = 1.15) =· 500 X 10 3/(600 X 1144) = 0. If the latter were to be used. A coexisting bending moment produces an average flexural compressive stress of 20 N/mmz over the flexural compression zone which extends to a depth of 300 mm below the top of the section.37 /SO+ 0. 12 mm diameter stirrups (2 legs) at 100 mm centres give 2. 151 ~ 2 " ~ ~ 4 No.. = 0 + 2.67)(250)(1035) x /(PO)' + (0.87 X 425/1147)(2 X 1070 = 1180 mm~ + 2 X 775)/2 Thus provide either 1835 mm 1 of conventional reinforcement or 590 mm 2 of extra prestressing steel in each flange..23 E:itample 6.5 Torsion in prestressed concrete v"" = maximum allowable A.10). d = 1145 mm. From equation (6. Shear capacity without shear reinforcement Ve is lesser of VC(>and V.0) .80 N/mm' and flexural shear stress in flanges v1 = 0..91 N/mm 2 Allowable principal tensile stress / 1 = 0. 825 by conventionaJ reinforcement or by additional prestressing steel. = (0.9......_.70) 64t x 10 3 N 0. __.js. (530 + 1130)/4 = 415 mm (b) 16 x 32 = 512 mm (c) 300 mm 1O mm stirrups (2 leg~) at 90 mm centres give 1.e.73 N/mm 2 From Table 7 of Code or 0.2313.. 6.75 N/mm 2 viu > v + v.. The effective prestress in the tendons is 860 N/mmz.4 Torsion in reinforced concrete = =ax~ i ..lbd /Ta.. thus total strain = 0. 74 mm 2 /mm If 40 mm cover to ·main" steel then d. Although the Code does not permit one to do so.K.158 MN Thus use V.) = 2 x From equation 6..70 N/mm1 !....19 mm 2/mm + 1130) = 2720 mm 2 A 4 . Ve= Yeo = 0... I From Table 7 of Code or 0.00185 (see text). must be'at least O.~.641 MN 150mm AsL = 1. 5... total shear stress= Vw + v"" = 0. x 1 = 530 mm. no advantage could be taken of the larger ultimate strength of the tendons.24 If"" = 1. 85 .... :..75 x 971 = A... crac!Ulig moment 1s · 104')= (0.js. considered as a rectangular reinforced concrete beam. which is adequate for the transverse torsion reinforcement..8 = 2.21). /!""' 425) = 802 N/mm 2 Strain atfpe= 0.87 x 425) = 9330 mm 1 aod 20(900 x 150 + 2 x 125 x 150)/1147 = 3010 mm 1 Thus no torsion reinforcement is required in the top flange. for design purposes./ = 2.26). links should be provided such that A 4 js. _. from equation (6... 6. Assumed = 1144 mm.150)(900 ._.125 low relaxation <V•~<Vf< 3 ll.4Z N/mmz v1 > v. the nominal torsional shear stress is Distance of centroid of all tendons from bottom fibre / (16 x 64+ 16 x 115 + 2 x 984)/34 = 142mm Eccentricity = 510.4 N/mm\ O.99 mm 2/mm Provide links such that A.25 MN V.. ' [ riir>I ___ _! !·.~ +2 or. >V.4 maximum allowable sheaf force v. = 530mm • T'' 150 LJl!lmafe l!ffllf ..641 MN mm centres. as written.. E E § ~ " 150  Flexural shear stress in webs v.1n.0 mm· ( . From equation (6. x 1140 x 0.. = 0.JIUU: .45 N/mm 2 and in a web is v + v1 = 2.17)...1.99(0. it would be logical to calculate a design stress as follows (see stressstrain urve in Fig. it would seem reasonable to reduce the area of longitudinal torsion reinforcement in the flexural compression zone in a similar manner to that permitted for box sections.25 is subjected to an ultimate torque of 610 kNm and an ultimate vertical shear force 230 kN.8 x 19.142 = 368 lJllll J Prestress at bottom fibre = 7. E E 1035 ~ ······1.iAl.. maximum spacing is lesser of 0.>v1m11. f"'=''"' From equation (6.. The concrete is of grade 40 and the minimum cover is 30 mm.. respectively 20(900 x 150 + 2 x 125 x 150)/(0. thus section big enough.•• . o._ 19.__. ___ .3)(250)(945. allowable torsional · rem · ' oreement Vsm1n = shear stress WI·thout tors10n l).J' NI ..94 = 3. x1 and y 1 are as assumed. Design torsion reinforcement.. 32 mm give 3220 mm 2 (l bar in each comer) Stinup spacing.23)...696 MN .037)(250)(1035 . The concrete is of grade 50 and the characteristic strengths of the prestressing steel and the torsiona1 reinforcement are 1637 N/mmi and 425 N/mm' respectively. 25 mm bars (giving an area of 1960 mmz) or 5 additional tendons (giving an area of 694 mmi)...fpe) = 564 N/mm' to be adopted.5 ! Fig. 12 .87 x 250 x 971) = 1. x 775)/2 = 3670 mm 2 AsL = 1... 600 mm wide and 1200 mm deep.87 x 250) 175 250 x From equation (6.00401 vi/= 610 x 10 8/(2 x 150 x 829 250) = 2. total shear stress = v1 + v. having a characteristic strength of 425 N/mm~.23 mmZ/mm V )> 1. s. = 230 X 10 /(250 x 1145) = 0. 75 N/mm 2 v1.
.. will be of the same sign as £. Tbls decrease results fmm the development of further cracks and the gradual breakdown of bond between the reinforcement and the concrete. should be used when carrying out crack width calculations..  'G! .. then calculate the stress in an ith layer of reinforcement. "' ~... The permissible design value could be taken to be the Class 2 prestressed concrete limiting stress of 0. stresses should not exceed 0. the steel force per unit width is Fig. 4... Tbls theory generally considers a cracked section and ignores the stiffening effect of the concrete in tension between cracks (tension stiffening).. where 0 is discussed later.. If the slab is cracked on one face only and in one direction only....1 is a measure of the tension stiffening effect and can be seen to decrease with an increase in load above the initial cracking load.... test results [183] indicate that. associated with interface shear and tensile stress in the insitu concrete of composite construction. Compliance with the vibration criterion is discussed. the total resolved steel force in the n direction is If the principal stresses in a slab do not coincide with the reinforcement directions.). by comparison with the previous equation. the concrete compressive stresses in reinforced concrete should not exceed 0. (see Chapter 4). If the slab is cracked in two directions on the same 3. Serviceability limit state )' load / . conventional modular ratio theory is mentioned. If £1 is again taken to be zero. =A. r I ! I. it overestimates stresses and strains as shown in Fig." 0 Introduction As explained in Chapter 4. Therefore. e. are £. permissible crack width. sin o:1 cos o:.. the criteria which have to be satisfied at the serviceability limit state are those of permissible steel and concrete stress.1 Tension stiffening F1=A1fi Slabs If N such layers are considered.) of reinforcement per unit width in the n direction. at the serviceability limit state. The Code permits tension stiffening to be taken into account in certain crack width calculations (as referred to later in this chapter). Consider each set of cracks in tum and calculate an equivalent area of reinforcement perpendicular to these cracks.eabilih: "··'··state Load Chapter 7 creckad stiffness N>··.. £. £11 y. >> e.. to assume that then and t directions will very nearly coincide with the principal strain directions.. assume cracks to form perpendicular to the direction of that principal stress.. sin cx1 cos3 cx1) The force F.8/..y. the above limitations should be' applied only to axial or flexural stresses.2).. Where a principal tensile stress exceeds the permissible design value. and could take 87 .) to give the actual strain (e.5 !cu• 6. Using the equivalent area of reinforceffient. · 2 2 e. interface shear in composite construction and vibration. will be less than the true value. = k A 1 cos4 tX.. Thus Yn1 =o and the third term in the brackets of the above equation can be ignored..1) 2. 7.. These values are of the same order as the value of 15 which is generally adopted for design purposes at present. Reinforced concrete stress limitations General As discussed in Chapter 4. ·:i ~~" · "·'. a longtenn modulus should be adopted. N Es L A 1 (e.. and the expression for A.. then £._. the author would suggest that. referred to axes perpendicular and parallel to a crack (see Fig. Although it is not stated in the Code.. Tension stiffening In the above discussion.. "reduces to N A. £1 will be of opposite sign to e. Thus F. Hence the strain (e1) calculated ignoring tension stiffening should be reduced by an amount (ei... = ~ A. the Code does state that a longtenn modulus... cos2o:.. and the fact that all structural Codes of Practice have hitherto adopted a longtenn modulus.'c 1·<J . but it is not clear whether one is permitted to allow for it in pennissible stress calculations. cos4 .1 + E.. together with other aspects of the dynamic loading of bridges. inclined at an angle CY 1 to the direction perpendicular to the cracks..Crack I I . Compare ft with the permissible value of 0. can be considered in tenns of an equivalent area (A. face./ ..." ! I I I .. If the slab is cracked in two directions on opposite faces.. 7( N~I Cracking teristic strength of 60 N/mm 2 • The Code is not explicit as to whether these short term moduli should be used when calculating stresses or whether they should be adjusted to give long·term moduli. In practice. 2.. . the longterm modular ratio calculated from the Code would be between 13 and 16.8/. The difference between lines AB and OC of Fig.. 7. In view of this requirement./!. from f 1 = Of. at stresses of the order of the steel stress limitation of 0.5fcu and the reinforcement.. n B Actual Calculated on .· . = L F1 cos2 rx1 . in Chapter 12.. the author wopld suggest the following procedure: N F. 7 . N 4 A. If the calculated stress in the equivalent area of reinforcement is f. In this chapter. There are now three cases ·to consider for a slab not subjected to significant tensile inplane stress resultants: 1.. calculate the stresses in the direction perpendicular to the cracks by using modular ratio theory.. sm rx1 cos ex. The calculation of the equivalent area of reinforcement (step 3 above) is explained by considering a point in a cracked slab where the average direct and shear strains.__k. . .. sin 2 rx1 cos2 tx. the calculated value of A. (7... The steel stress is thus /. F1g.. As the Code gives no guidance. The additional criteria...N/mm 1 ) and the modulus of elasticity of the concrete.45 . the tension stiffening effect is negligible..1). 7. Since a relatively weak concrete having a characteristic strength of less than about 40 N/mm• is generally adopted for reinforced concrete." /' .. I. hence. y..8/y. and it is necessary to calculate a value from the stated modulus of elasticity of the reinforcement (200 k. it seems to be reasonable to ignore tension stiffening when carrying out stress Calculations. it is extremely difficult to calculate accurately the concrete and reinforcement stresses./ / /c Ith steel layer ... However. by Mohr's circle 2 £1 = E... However. If the steel area per unit width is A 1.J trs ·1 N.· .. axial and flexural stress calculations will involve the application of conventional elastic modular ratio theory... However. a modular ratio is not explicitly stated in the Code. equal to half of the short term value... and of crack width in both reinforced and prestressed concrete construction are presented. 3./ . for stress calculations in accordance with the Code... Compare the extreme fibre concrete compressive stress with t)le allowable value of 0. 5. It is thus conservative to use equation (7 . I. sin <x1 cos 3 tX1 ) It is reasonable. Short term values of the latter modulus are given in the Code and these vary from 25 kN/mmt for a characteristic strength of 20 N/mm' to 36 kN/mm 2 for a charac 86 ... sin 1l"1 . Thus it is not necessary to consider flexural shear or torsional shear stresses at the serviceability limit state. Hence. + e... The strain in the direction of an ith layer of reinforcement at an angle CY1 to then direction is." . . are presented in Chapter 8.=EiEi tx. Es£. tensile or compressive.... Assume the section to be uncracked and calculate the four principal extreme fibre stresses caused by the stress resultants due to the applied loads..2 Cracked slab I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ Stress Strain where Es is the elastic modulus of the steel. 7 . (cos o:1 + . methods of satisfying the criteria of pennissible steel and concrete stress..
and considering only·surface strains E.2) is used. superimposed dead and highway loadings. dead load + This design loading is given. In design. 7. although some guidance is given by Jofriet and McNeice [184]. the clauses concerned with crack width calculations appear much later in the Code under the heading: 'Spacing of reinforcement'. At the cracking load. the design loading is more likely to be achieved on a bridge than on a building.1) is used to evaluate An and as (cos2 o:.cr is the steel stress at a crack at the cracking load and / 1 is the steel stress at the load corresponding to the strain e1• For an axially reinforced and loaded section it is obvious that Ac =< bh where b and h are the breadth and overall depth respectively. together with pedestrian loading.89 c. however.. giving an average of 1. it is thus· conservative to assume e. Structural members are not generally subjected to uniform bending over any great length.As o.. the crack widths return to their Values under permanent loading provided that the reinforcement remained elastic during. thus the probability of the stiffness being as low as is assumed in calculating the strains is low.53 = 0. where f. essentially. fem is obviously equal to the tensile strength (ii) of the concrete. it was decided to check crack widths under full HA loading but the partial safety factors were altered so that the design load became: The above reduction in probability will be less dramatic in bridges because the latter are subjected to repeated loadings which cause crack widths to gradually increase during the· life of the bridge. the Code permits the strains ignoring tension stiffening to be reduced. In all crack width calculations the Code requires the elastic modulus of the concrete to be a longterm value equal to half of the tabulated shortterm value. I.ability limit state Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 any va). the resulting design load was: The specified design loading under which cracking should be checked is./e. However. are design sulface crack widths and are derived from considerations of appearance and durability.'JG~0. hencef1 = 0. i. the application of the occasional load.sin2 a:.x)IEs Asfi(h . The exceedence level in practice is much less than 20% and. 7 are not exceeded midway between the bars under the specified design loading. the reinforcement will reniaia.. = Kbhf. are given in the genera! design section of Part 4 of the Code.32 for dead load and 1..A. and discussed in Chapter 4. As an approximation. 25 units of HB loading with associated HA loading should be considered. Hence.. 186. .. At first sight it may appear very liberal to permit 1 in 5 crack widths to exceed I Crack width Fig. These will be few in number compared with the total population of cracks..'. the average steel and concrete forces are given by: Ns = E. Guidance on the stiffnesses to be adopted in the calculations also appears under this heading._.4 • The main reasons for this reduction in probability are: 3. The probability of exceedence that bas been chosen in the Code is 20% (i. ~. If.25% of high yield steel to be provided to control restrained shrinkage and early thermal movement cracks. for buildings. the full nominal loading. = Kbhhaftl E. (as opposed to the above approximate values of zero and1) as described in [184]. referred to previously. 0.e. Io which No of cracks .. = 1.elastic.8/. However../1 In order that strains at any depth (a') from the compression face can be considered the above expression is modified to e. 1 in 5 crack widths greater than the design value).2 (superimposed dead load) + Subsequently. The design crack widths given in Table 4.3 Crack width distributions for nominally identical beams Crack control in reinforced concrete Statistical approach I I 2.Em= E1 Ac:fcn/E.. In certain situations. This additional loading was introduced to comply with the requirement of Part 2 of the Code that all bridges should be checked for 25 units of HB loading. which are discussed later in this chapter.sin2 o:1) if equation (7.= Acft:m where fcmis the average tensile stress in the concrete between the cracks.of the material properties are used..87f)l. it is asswned that the presence of nominal Jinks control the widths of such cracks. N=Est 1 A.2) '"' It is implied in equation (7 . with the requirement that the wheel load should be excluded except when considering top flanges and cantilever slabs. I ~ the design value..'] __.73 for HA loading. But N=N..0 (HA) + 1. By implication the stress transformation factor. Eu= :r ~ :=J . it has been estimated [182] that the chance of a /lpecified width being exceeded by any single crack width will lie in the range 103 to 10. for flexure. Cracks due to applied loadings which cause axial and flex. Acf. Hence. At one time the drafters considered that 50% of HA loading should be taken to be pennanent. at the sex· viceability limit state. as discussed in Chapter 6.Service. If each beam is subjected to the same loadlng and the widths of aU of the cracks within the respective constant moment zones are measured. In addition.fm/f. 88 . r'. it is logical to define the design loading as that which can be considered to be virtually permanent rather than that of occasional but more severe loads.. However. for spans less than 6. it is found that the reinforcement stresses are excessive.lie.x) where x is the neutral axis depth. it is cracking induced by applied loading that is used as a basis for design in the Code. The only crack widths that need to be calculated according to the Code are those due to axial and flexural stress resultants. \ \ ""' Width exceeded by n% of cracks \ \ I I . Finally. ~ L______. if equation (7.f. 7. This is best achieved by initially considering an axially reinforced cracked section (having a concrete area of A~ and a steel area of As) which is axially loaded. At higher loads. it would oe. Loading Since the widths of cracks are controlled primarily for durability purposes.be that the 30 units of HB loading should be applied to top flanges and cantilever slabs. a mean or somC other value? It is not possible to think in terms of a maximum crack width but it is feas· ible to predict a crack width with a certain probability of exceedence. tests [183.6 (HA) 1. In the Code. the Code clause concerned with reinforced con· crete walls requires that any relevant earth pressure loadings should be considered in addition to dead.A. It should be noted that the Code gives a different method of ensuring that the crack widths are not exceeded for each type of structural element.. This is because. referred to earlier in this chapter should be taken as cos2 o:. flexural shear and torsional shear cracks ___ 0.tmAs N. when using the above approximations with reinforcement inclined at more than 25°. In addition. Stiffnesses f==J.0 (pedestrian loading) Crack control in the Code . .. cracking is generally checked under HA loading only and the values of (Y/L Yp) at the ultimate limit state are l. advisable to estimate a more accurate value of E.IE.2 (suPerimposed dead load) + 1..~ .5 m. The bar spacing should not generally exceed 300 mm.3.5 m. 7. dead load and superimposed dead load. although the maximum width of crack measured on each of the two nominally identical beams may be very different the crack widths exceeded by a certain percentage of the results are quite similar. ~ ____. At a crack all of the applied force (/{) is carried by the steel. General . and should be such that the crack widths in Table 4.. Little enor is involved in adopting the above approximations for An when the reirtforcement is inclined at less than about 25° to the perpendicular to the cracks.. It is found that.. in the general design section of Part 4 of the Code. after the passage of occasional severe loads.0 (pedestrian loading) Although the design crack widths and loadings.. In order to calculate crack widths it is necessary to decide on an interpretation of the design crack width: is it a maximum. (a' .I. it is necessary to define an effective area (Kbh) of concrete in tension over which the average stress fem acts.ural stress resultants are controlled by limiting the spacing of the bars. then distributions of crack widths can be plotted as shown in Fig. For this reason.le.:. the Code does require at least 0.+N. r . cos2 a:.A. with the exception that the latter document refers to 30 units of HB loading for loaded length less than 6. it would seem reasonable to design such slabs for the more severe of the local effects of the HA wheel load or 25 units of HB loading.2) that reinforcement inAn = do not have to be considered explicitly since. .3% of the gross concrete area of mild steel or 0._ ··1 f'·~ 1. the design crack widths are defined as those having a certain probability of exceedence. (cos2 o:1 .) clined at more than 45° to the n direction should be ignored. Beam1 Beam2 }: A. which is the same percentage as that adopted in the building code.' .53. However. Hence a modular ratio of about 13 to 16 would be used to calculate the strains ignoring tension stiffening. CP 110. considerably less than 20% of the crack widths in a bridge should exceed the design value if the design is carried out in accordance with the Code formulae. + Acfcm . It is thus necessary to determine the strain Eis in Fig. __ · _. It is not clear whether top flanges and cantilever slabs should be loaded with 25 units of HB when they span less than· 6. However. The above loadings are very similar to those in BE 1173. Since the limiting reinforcement stress is 0. The implication in BE 1173 appears to. These percentages are rather less than those suggested by Hughes [185] and should be used with caution. General approach Although cracking due to such effects as the restraint of shrinkage and early thermal movement is a significant practical problem.. it is unlikely that £.\ I Maximum crack width I " (7 .5 m. + I.. for a flexural member.. When the appropriate partial safety factors were applied. This approach is identical to that adopted in BE 1173. < le.57/r t> . Es Et As= E~c.c.. 7 . The precise value of e/en to adopt is very difficult to detennine. and thus the only cracks in a member which have any serious chance of being critical are those close to the critical sections of the member. This can be illustrated by considering two nominally identica1 beams having zones of constant bending moment. 1871 indicate that fem reduces in accordance with dead load + 1. This is greater than the 'average' loading which occurS for a significant length of time. lower bound estimates. the formula used to calculate the 'l in 5' crack width is applicable only to the constant moment zones of specimens tested under laboratory conditions. it is reasonable to assume that.
2000 and 4000 load applications respectively. due to the large number of variables to be considered. the Code simply states that the longitudinal bar spacing should not exceed 150 mm and the transverse bar spacing should not exceed 300 mm. it is worth mentioning that the reason for having bar spacing rules is to avoid canying out specific crack width calcuJations. the advantage of quoting bar spacing rules is lost and little extra effort is· involved in carrying out a complete crack width calculation by.nilr.3) Beeby [189] has shown that equation (7. for defonned bars.4) is very similar to the equation in BE 1173. = 1. to a certain extent.12. (h. They found that there was an average difference of only 13o/o between the crack control perfonnances of plain and deformed bars. For example. However.3acr Em However.... 7.. Jn addition.5(a). it is known that.3 for defonned bars and 3. It is thus suggested that the bar spacing rules should be interpreted with 'engineering judgement'. in the latter document the constant is not 2. The bar spacings requiied to control crack widths to the design values were then determined. a value of mean'Plus 0. is of the order of 60%.m 2 • Thus I e.58E8 = 1.7atr £. [186] and [187]. 2. for HB loading. bar spacings Jess than 150 mm would be forced upon the designer because of the large amount of reinforcement that would be required to satisfy the ultimate limit state criterion. Beeby and Taylor [190] have carried out tests on 133 reinforced.S(a). it is a reasonable value to adopt in practice. 7 . they would generally be greater than the Code values of 150 and 300 mm. 126] and voided [71] slab bridges indicate that.67 atr Em where a"' is the perpendicular distance from the point where the crack width is to be predicted to the surface of the nearest reinforcing bar. at the same steel strain. however. Bar spacing tables based upon this exercise did appear in some drafts of the Code. 7 . for which / 1 = 0. 'I Tests carried out by Stevens [188] indicated that.1 view of the fact that crack widths are calculated only at positions mid~way between bars where the bar type has the least influence.. Consequently an exercise was carried out [191) in which a range of solid slab bridges was designed at the ultimate limit state either by yield line theory or in accordance with elastic moment fields..it . the tension stiffening formula in the Code is obtained as Em= £1  1. Bridges are subjected to repeated loading and it is reasonable to assume that such loading reduces the tension stiffening. however. Finally.1. the author would suggest that 'longitudinal' be interj. There is thus evidence to suggest that equation (7 . applying the general procedure suggested by Clark [192. and thus it is not necessary to have separate crack width formulae for the two types of bar. An examination of [191] shows that if bar spacings were to be calculated for single span slab bridges. These values apply to continuous slabs in addition to single span slabs and.SSf.3) was originally derived with buildings in mind and thus the effects of repeated loading were not considered.. However.4. but at approximately the quarter points of the void spacing as shown in Fig... Tests on model solid [87.reted as primary and 'transverse' as secondary in order to avoid excessive cracking in certain situations. Thus. E1 (7.. the difference between this value of f 1 and the 'correct' value for the Code is negligible.842 standard deviations is exceeded by 20% of the population. under short tenn loading.6.2bh(a' . Base et al.3) overestimates tension stiffening. Thus cracks propagating from the outer face should initiate at the quarter points. An actual crack pattern is shown in Fig. in which case the loadstrain relationship is as shown in Fig...fii"to BS ~"tVV' .3) provides a reasonable lower bound fit to the instantaneous results of Stevens and a reasonable average fit to the latter's results obtained after long term loading of two years' duration. the author would suggest that.C0:.c.f/0.::_·Vridgellz:c. is Solid slab bridges /Actual ?''J '• = Kbhf. 7. However. except for elastically designed slabs having· skew angles greater than about 30" and yield line designed slabs having skew angles greater than about 15°.. reported by Rao and Subrahmany!in [186]. The Code values should thus be used with caution if the skew angle exceeds these values. however. Cracks due to transverse bending The stress raising effects of the voids result in the response of a voided slab to transverse bending being very different to that of a solid slab. However. tension stiffening is not taken into account for beams and it is thus assumed that Em"' E1. (b) The peak stress on the outer face does not occur at the void centreline..416 Wm. the Code limits the spacing of longitudinal reinforcement to 150 mm which is the same as the value for solid slabs. The BE il73 value of 3. It is mentioned previously in this chapter that the probability of exceedence adopted in the Code is 20%. the tension stiffening. 7. implicit in the tension stiffening fomula in the Code is the assumption that / 1 = 0. on average. it was found that.t =stress tangential I to free surface j ofvoid orsoffit (a) Elastic stresses in a quadrant Side face J t Soffit JI (b) Crack pattern [194] Fig.tlf"l. in view of this.x)IE. This point is particularly valid in 90 Calculated on cracked stiffness ·! 3 103/AAh At one stage in the drafting of the Code. on the inside of the void.. since the Code requires stress calculations to be carried out at the serviceability limit state. Clark .0. 91 .. The standard deviation of the crack width population at any strain was found to be 0. From present design experience. Crack control calculations Beams Base.56/y). in solid slabs. test results. as an interim measure./A. found that the distributions of crack width were Gaussian and that.te Loadt / I Kf..2bh(a' .) could be predicted by wm = 1.. concrete beams. Hence .5(b).842 X 0. a large proportion of the data required for a crack width calculation would already be calculated. The value of 3.416) l. thus the design crack width is given by W = (1 + 0. Thus.3ac.3 for deformed bars by 13% and rounding up (190). the latest CEB tension stiffening equation [110] is in reasonable accord [187] with the data presented in [183].(b) Cracks in voided slabs Slab bridges with longitudinal circular voids Cracks due to longitudinal bending The spacing and widths of cracks due to longitudinal bending are very simi· lar to those occurring. It can be seen that the tension stiffening effect is a small proportion of the actual strain and can be ignored. it should be remembered that the design crack widths specified in BE 1n3 and the Code are also different.3 N/mm2 • emphasised that this constant bas the dimensions of N/m..8 for plain bars. Hence the following Code equation is obtained w = 2.fibility li"m.. the Code implies that the spacing of the transverse bars in the region of an interior support of a slab bridge continuous over dis· crete columns could be 300 mm.. that the first crack should initiate.x)fy Hence.58fy· This is because the fonnula was originally derived for CP 110. ·i However. There is a lack of experi· mental data in this respect and. Finallf.. it was possible to produce such rules only for single span solid slab bridges.8 was obtained by increasing the value of 3.4 Tension stiffening: high steel percentage (7.x) 10. The drafters anticipated that when designing in these situations in accordance with the Code..'. Jn a Gaussian distribution. = 2.3).and Speirs [183] and Clark and Cranston [187] show tension stiffening values about onethird of those of Stevens and of those predicted by equation (7. It is here.5(a). in some situations.A. it might be sensible to adoptilie CEB recommendation [110] that tension stiffening under repeated loading should be taken as 50% of that under instantaneous loading.3 but is 3. 7 . 50% and 40% after 1000. Consequently.r·. as a proportion of the instantaneous value. equation (7. with the same precautions as discussed for solid slabs.. Equation (7. This spacing was not checked for voided slabs by either calculation or experiment.x)fy I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I Strain Fig. in the Code. Read. These values are reasonably consistent with the CEB value. Cracking Oue to transverse bending in voided slabs has been described in some detail by Clark and Elliott [194] and their findings can be swnmarised as follows: I. The theoretical predictions were confirmed by tests on transverse strips of voided slabs. but it was eventually decided to simplify the bar spacing rules considerably. for example..afla' .x) .) (h x) It 1..3 is appropriate to the 1% exceedence level [190]. in such situations the transverse bending moments could be large enough to cause excessive cracking if the bar spacing were not considerably less than 300 mm. which is a much more severe criterion than the 20% level adopted in the Code. albeit at a different design load to that for the crack width calculation. However. stress normal to line of symmetry a~"' = ·····.. it was hoped to prepare simple bar spacing rules which would obviate the need to cany out crack width calculations. a longitudinal bar spacing of 150 mm does not control the crack widths to the design values unless the reinforcement is used at a stress less than the maximum permitted in BE 1173 ( 0.2 x 10. Linear elastic analyses indicated that: (a) The peak stress occurs at the crown of the void as shown in Fig.58/y is correct. 193].4) The reason for ignoring tension stiffening in beams is that it is envisaged that reinforced concrete bridge beams would be heavily reinforced. the mean crack width (w.
Tests {87.3) and (7. then Em<= 0.001 and a design value ofw of0..7 x 0. Furthermore.. .f that at the ultimate limit state..8 q. 7. to a unit width of slab perpendicular to the cracks. Thus. Beeby [196] has investigated cracking in slabs spanning one way and found that there are two basic crack patterns (see Fig. Beeby [196] proposed a theory which adequately predicts the properties of the two patterns and their interac· tion. Cm w= value simply complies with the general maximum bar spacing given in the Code.. the following crack width equation. 126. the tension stiffening effect is significant and should be calculated from equation (7.~ l + K (ac. In such cases.6): 1. equatiOJ. £.6(a)... which resu.Fig.'tflf/200 X·l!i1 l :T Hence. Equation (7. for a skew bridge in which the transverse reinforcement is parallel to the supports and such that it makes an angle (a:) to the perpendicular to the crack.5) can be applied.. The latter ·~=:J !.. the Code requires that the area of transverse reinforcement should be the lesser of 1000 mm 2/m or 0. A bar spacing rule for tension flanges was derived by noting that. for HA loading. with A_. since such flanges are subjected to particularly large stress concentrations.5) reduces to w = 3ac. Transverse reinforcement in flanges Wben drafting the clauses for crack control in flanges. in the case of a right bridge or of a skew bridge in which the transverse rein· forcement is perpendicular to the beams or webs.. such as that shown in Fig.. The appropriate values of K1 and K 2 are 3 and 2. equation (7. ~ . \Longitudinal beams/webs A. · <. the rein· forcement would be perpendicular to the service load cracks. The latter value was introduced to avoid excessive amounts of reinforcement in slabs with very thick flanges. equation (7 .. equations (7. These fonnulae are too complicated for design purposes and thus Beeby [182] reduced them to the following single design fonnula w= (c) Skew bridge.2 mm (see Table 4.. Since the strain is very nearly constant over the depth of a flange.._ This study showed that equation (7.· . Thus the major principal moment in a flange would act very nearly per· pendicular to tbe longitudinal beams or webs.. . allowing for tension stiffening. if cracking did occur due to an unexpected severe loading situation. equal to the area of transverse reinforcement per unit width.7% of the minimum flange area. It can be seen from Fig. __KC.+ c r a c k pattern 2 7 ' ' ' (a) Pattern 1 " {a) Right bridge (b) Crack pattern 2 superposed ·on crack pattern 1. _____. cellular slab and box beam construction it is first 9~~. .1. __ . for Em= 0... 192] on slab bridges and slab elements indicate that. orthogonal transverse reinforcement = 0.7).a~·'c'"'•o. with no cracks passing completely through the flange. as shown in Fig.. in such cases.£h1:l ==i ' JJJ! ~ ~) ~ ~ ~1 93 . In fact..racks in a slab acting as a flange would not fonn in the same direction and. as mentioned earlier in this chapter. the neutral axis depth (x) for the· flange tends to infinity.. it was necessary to have at least 1% of transverse reinforcement in the flange. it is reasonable to assume that the cracks are perpendicular to the principal moment direction.7(c).=== ..1) is adopted in the Code because the drafters had top flanges primarily in mind and it is most likely that these will be cracked on one face only and in one direction.. The thickness of each layer would be equal to twice the relevant cover plus the bar diameter. the tension stiffening could be reduced by · repeated loading. In the case of predominantly compression flanges. since the longitudinal reinforcement would generally Longitudinal reinforcement in flanges Although it is not clear in the Code.5) cannot be applied directly. they would be very nearly parallel to the longitudinal beams or webs.5(b).5) was derived from tests in which the reinforcement was perpendicular to the cracks... although. This maximum bar spacing is given in the Code for predominantly tension flanges together with a value of 300 mm for predominantly compression flanges..~= + .5) 1+2 (hx} £1 It should be noted that the strain. it is unnecessary to calculate the spacing of the longitudinal reinforcement in a flange because a simple bar spacing rule is given. equations (7._' . The latter criterion was intro· duced to discourage the use of large diameter bars if thin flanges were adopted..lts in a bar spacing of about 150 mm. This reinforcement should be calculated as a percentage of the minimum flange area. Fig. The general problem of crack control when the reinforcement is 1lOt perpendicular to the cracks has been considered by Clark ___ .. a't the serviceability limit state. is used because it is considered that slabs are relatively lightly reinforced and have loadstrain relationships similar to that shown in Fig. 7 . 7 that. respectively. which is given in the Code. (192]. ' Flanges In order to discuss crack control in the flanges of beam and . is obtained (a Cm.x) where Cm.2). . the design load at the serviceability limit state is about 70% o.~. In addition. There is no reason to assume that the c.7 X 0.. it is necessary to limit the spacing of the reinforcement.3).should not exceed the solid slab value of 300 mm nor twice the minimum flange thickness. A pattern controlled by the proximity of the reinforcement. 7 . However. ac. thus.87/yf200 x lo1 If it is assumed that e:..3) and (7. ..Cm...___ .8 X 0. which predicts the tension stiffening effect. has not been checked for reinforcement which is not perpendicular to the cracks.. formulae for predicting the widths of cracks at any point on a slab were derived.. This suggestion is simi· lar to that recommended by Holmberg {195}. Clark and Elliott [194] have suggested that. 2.001.5) is applicable provided that the crack width calculation is carried out in a direction perpendicular to the crack and that all of the reinforcement should be resolved to an equivalent area of steel perpendicular to the crack. The Code states that the spacing. However. This minimum reinforcement percentage requirement is given in the Code for predominantly tension flanges. for the 20% probability of exceedence adopted in the Code.:~' ~~ . a reasonable upper limit to Cm is 0. Hence. slab.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 / Serviceability limit state Reinforcement .7(a)(c) Cracking in flanges (h ... it may be preferable to consider the minimum flange thickness as having two critical layers: one layer would be adjacent to the outer face and the other adjacent to the crown of the void.. 7. and each layer would be provided with a minimum of 1% of reinforcement. in general temis. together with an upper limit of 1500 mm 1/m. = U... the reinforcement would not yield suddenly and a controlled crack pattern would ""'"'" In addition to the above limitations on the area of trans· verse reinforcement.(b) Plan views of crack patterns in solid slab The tests indicated that in order to obtain a controlled crack pattern.. tive area of reinforcement perpendicular to the crack by using either equation (7.. Hence. Hence.. l) or (7 ..n) (7. 7.n) 2 Transverse reinforcement Crack due to local transverse bending A pattern controlled by the deformation imposed on the section.necessary to consider. " Crack pattern 1 Crack pattern 1 t::= A. These values were chosen because the tests reported by Clark and Elliott [194] indicated that the moment at which such steel would be stressed to 230 N/mm 2 would he greater than the cracking moment of the section._ .l (7 .3).. It is first necessary to calculate an effec. ·'' ___..and. is the minimum cover to the tension steel and K1 and K2 are constants which depend upon the probability of exceedence of the design crack width. skew transverse reinforcement (b) Skew bridge. thus 3ac. 7. = 67 mm. In view of the complex stress state in the concrete between the cracks. 7. it would be advisable to ignore tension stiffening when considering such arrangements of reinforcement. it was assumed tbat the effects of local bending in the flanges would generally dominate the transverse bending effects. cracking in slabs..
decreasing linearly to 0% for an initial prestress of 50% of the characteristic tendon strength. The latter procedure is an approximate method of allOwing for the progressive loss of prestress which occurs as the tendon forces are gradually transferred to the concrete. The Code talces such an approach and also distinguishes between the two exposure conditions (see Table 4. the relationship between c~p of concrete and the stress to strength ratio is of the fonn shown in Fig. be parallel to the longitudinal beam or webs. the limiting hypothetical tensile stresses of Table 4. = A.. A study of Beeby and Taylor's work indicates that it is reasonable to assume that a reduction of steel area from Aps to Ap• cos•o: results in a reduction of the hypothetical tensile stress from. test data indicate such a dependence for large bar spacings. then the equivalent area of prestressing steel perpendicular to the crack is A"'" cos 4 a:. However. The Code losses are essentially the same as those of BE '1173 except for the reduced loss which may be adopted if the initial jacking force is less than 70% of the characteristic tendon strength. 7) is appropriate.6(a) were calculated from test data by assuming eiastic uncracked behaviour. it should be mentioned that. then · it is obvio'usly reasonable that the wall should be considered as a slab for crack control purposes. for posttensioning and pretensioning.g. another clause essentially states that these· can be ignored because it is not necessary to calculate tendon stress changes due to the effects of applied loadings. the relaxation loss should be taken as 8% for an initial prestress of 70% of the characteristic tendon strength. theoretically and experimentally.6(b) should not be modi fied. One would expect tension stiffening in slabs to depend upon the bar spacing and. Loss due to elastic deformation of the concrete The elastic loss may be calculated by the usual modular ratio procedure.ions do not coincide.1) suggests that if the area of prestressing steel per unit width is Ap.. limiting values of prestressing steel stresses Severe exposure This condition includes surfaces in contact with backfill and is thus appropriate to the back faces of retaining walls and wing walls. Any additional conventional reinforcement should be considered in terms of an equivalent area of inforeement perpendicular to the crack by using equation (7. to be adopted for walls subjected to a severe exposure condition. Their theoretical expression for the hypothetical tensile stress is a function of the area of prestressing steel perpendicular to the crack. although probably applicable to slabs in which the prestressed and nonprestressed steel are parallel to the principal stress direction. in general. However. by definition. ~""'':'"tJility Ii. the approach adopted for cracked Class 3 beams. In the absence of experimental data. 7) which are applicable to a wall. it should be noted that calculations for walls were not carried out to check specifically that the spacings of 150 and 300 mm would be reasonable.1). and the latter value used to calculate the neutral axis depth and the strain in a direction perpendicular to the cracks. but this appears to be a mistake because no losses are given in Part 8. The design crack width is 0. for slab bridges. regarding skew reinforcement and repeated loading. because the section is actually cracked in practice. creep is directly proportional to stress for stress 4. in order to overcome the effects of friction. However. respectively. although reinforcement is generally provided in the side faces of deep members to control cracks for aesthetic purposes. the 94 and concrete compressive and tensile stresses are given. for posttensioning and pretensioning. it is used only for slabs.5) should be used. These values were based upon tests on plain cold drawn wire (112]. Since such large spacings are unlikely to occur in a bridge. for an initial load equal to the jacking force at transfer.. after 1000 bouts duration. cos 4o: where A. The reasons for these recommendations are the same as those discussed previously in connection with walls. Thus the author would suggest that. re ~·~·e ing force may be increased to 80% of the characteris1ic tendon strength. it is not necessary to do this in bases because they are generally buried. If a very severe exposure condition is appropriate. when the prestressing tendons are at an angle a to the major principal stress directions.6(a) should be multiplied by cos2 a. is area of transverse reinforcement per unit width. Although a Class 3 member is. Thus the author would suggest that. fiu to fhi cos'a:. but the calculation of tensile stresses in Class 3 members requires some comment.1).3).8.. This is because the hypothetical tensile stresses in Table 4. If the final limiting hypothetical tensile stress is less than the appropriate limiting tensile stress for a Class 2 member. hence. Equation (7 . then apply the bar spacing rules. Se. However. they would not be applicable to slabs in which these direct. Hence the Code permits the bar spacing rules for slab bridges. for an initial force of 60% of the tendon strength: this force is roughly the average tendon force over four years [197].3) and (7. Prestressed concrete stress limitations Beams In Chapter 4. when designing Class 3 members. It is permissible to do this because the hypothetical tensile stresses in Table 4. ~ good practice not to stress the concrete to its allowable limit in compression. The above requirements are essentially identical to those of BE 2173. This value is taken because it is approximately equal to the relaxation. Test data are not available for such situations and the author would suggest the following interim measures which are based upon consideration of equation (7.. and that 'slab components' (e. Thus the actual compressive stress could exceed the allowable compressive stress from Table 4. respectively. Columns If tensile stresses occur in a column.2 mm which is also the value for soffits. the section will be uncracked and should be treated as a Class 2 member.1) reduces to A. 3. should be replaced by A. The bar spacing rules for slab bridges are appropriate only to the severe exposure condition and it is thus necessary to cany out crack width calculations for walls if the exposure condition is very severe. should be considered. a cracked Class 3 member is considered in exactly the same way as an uncracked Class 1 or 2 member. approximately. indeed. 7. although prestressing steel stress criteria are given in the Code~·. the Code also gives shrinkage strains of 70 and 100 microstrains.. Hence. the reservations expressed earlier. cracking in Class 3 members. However. equation (7 . It is emphasised in Chapter 4 that. for a humid exposure condition of 90% relative humidity.3). Thus equation (7 . These values are identical to the CP 115 values. However. This equivalent area should be used to calculate the increase of hypothetical tensile stress which is pennitted when additional reinforcement is present. it would be I· Beeby and Taylor [123] have studied. For posttensioned construction. for stress calculation purposes. or. whereas. say. Slabs In an oncracked slab {Class 1 or 2). after four years. Concrete stresses can be calculated by applying conventional elastic theory.4). for a particular conciete. 1. then the column should be considered as a beam for crack control purposes and equation (7. Before discussing this statement. provided that the stressstrain curve of the tendon does not become significantly nonlinear above a stress of 70% of the characteristic tendon strength. respectively. 95 . 2.5 times the slab depth. then the loss of pre· stress in the tendon should be taken as the relaxation.nkage of concrete Losses in prestressed concrete For a nonnal exposure condition of 70% relative humidity the Code gives shrinkage strains of 200 and 300 microstrains. It is obvious that 'engineering judgement' is required when checking crack widths in bases. the tension stiffening equation can be applied to flanges. It can be seen that. In drafting the Code clause on crack control in bases it was intended that the various components of a base should be checked for cracking in accordance with the most appropriate of the procedures given for other structural elements. its exposure condition is classed by the Code as very severe. the elastic loss may be calculated either.. I. it is considered to be uncracked for the purposes of calculating stresses. Very severe exposure A leaf pier is an example of a wall subject to the effects of salt spray. would not. exactly. Loss due to shr. 2. and it is at an angle o:to the major principal stress direction. It should be noted that a disadvantage of the above approach to design is that. The Code also refers to losses given in Part 8 of the Code. Bases Except for the statement that 'reinforcement need not be provided in the side faces of bases to control cracking'. in conjunction with equation (7. of 150 and 300 mm. in the Code. the actual compressive stress exceeds the value calculated for an uncracked section. If a moderate or severe exposure condition (see Table 4.iO BS 54'Uii' .4) used. spread footings) should be considered as follows. the jack According to Neville [198]. conventional elastic theory can be applied in the usual way to calculate the principal concrete stresses. in which hypothetical tensile stresses appropriate to an uncracked beam are calculated. The relevant clause states that the method of checking crack widths depends on the type of base and the design assumptions. It was intended that 'beam components' should be checked by applying equation (7 . Elastic losses calculated in accordance with the Code will thus be identical to those calculated in accordance with BE 2/73. HenceA30 in equation (7.. Initial prestress Loss due to creep of concrete In order that excessive relaxation of the stress in the tendons will not occur. Fillally. cracked at the serviceability limit state. by considering the tensioning sequence. be correct for cracked Class 3 slabs.3(a) although the calculated compressive stress might not.5). then apply equations (7. tests reported by Clark and Cranston [187] show that the influence of bar spacing is insignificant provided that the bar spacing does not exceed about 1. Code is rather vague regarding crack control in bases.6 were calculated from test data for beams and.ConC'fe'ie"'i/fidge tfeSfrih. • Walls If tensile stresses occur in a reinforced concrete wall. by multiplying the final stress in the concrete adjacent to the tendons by half of the modular ratio. the nonnal jacking force should not exceed 70% of the characteristic tendon strength. Loss due to steel relaxation If experimental data are available. The depth factors of Table 4. the tension stiffening equation is not dependent upon bar spacing because it was derived from tests on beams. of 150 and 300 mm for longitudinal and transverse reinforcement.
25 for steel moving on steel bearers fixed to the concrete."""'""J . ·::tD l____:__ ___ . respectively.25 for steel moving on lead. For other than long continuous construction. is thus reasonable.7t 1. However. The values of specific creep strain are identical to those in BE 2173 and CP 115.__. with a stress of 1 N/mm 1 at the centroid of the tension reinforcement. provided that sufficient prior knowledge of the concrete mix and.. It is emphasised thal $does not. where circumferential tendons are used. for lightly reinforced and doubly reinforced sections.30 for steel moving on steel. the Construction Industry Research and Information Association has now assessed aU of the available experimental data on K and µ.8 Creepstress/strength relationship 1. Creep Fig. . 1. . generally. 96 Tensile stresses in cracked concrete 0._j .. 7 . tension stiffening is allowed for by subtracting a 'tension stiffening strain' from the reinforcement strain calculated by ignoring tension stiffening.. · The Code gives the following values forµ: ""0. the losses due to friction in the jack and anchorages and to tendon movement at the anchorages during transfer.20 for steel moving on steel and lead. Jn view of this.. by a factor of about 2. 97 l~~ ~:. The Code giv~ a factor. 3.  .. rather than the whole. An appropriate value of qi can be determined from the data given in Appendix C of the Code.Kx + µxlr. The Code thus gives methods of calculating both short and long term curvatures in Appen· dix A of Part 4. the creep coefficient ~referred to in Chapter 8 is identical to the creep coefficient cp referred to above.~ _ _.. but a value of 17 X 10..4 may be used when the duct former is rigid or rigidly supported. He found that the Code values are conservative and are particularly conservative._.. at the level of the centroid of the tension reinforcement.55 N/mm • The latter value was again derived from the test results of Stevens (188]. as shown in Fig. The author presumes that a value of 20 x 104 would be adopted for rigidly supported ducts. 0. The calculation for the uncracked section is straightforward.. Calculate the curvature (£. Calculate the extreme fibre strain (£. Shortterm curvature The shortterm elastic moduli for concrete. per N/mmz. the calculation for the cracked section is more complicated because of the need to allow for tension stiffening. Parrott (204] gives a graph for estimating shrinkage. to calculate rotations in the design of bearings. 7 . Allen gives equations which aid the above calculations for csctangular and Tsections. 1n concrete 1 N/mm 2 {short·lerm) 0. 0.. For pretensioning. second. compression is allowed for by dividing the shortterm elastic modulus of the concrete by (1 + $) where$ is a creep coefficient..___. The above requirements are identical to those of BE 'lJ73 but it should be noted that the Code also states that half of the total creep may be assumed to take place in the first m. 2. the CP 110 handbook (112] gives a table of$values which may be used in the absence of more detailed information. Thus the CP 110 handbook [112] suggests a value of 300 x 106 for a section less than 250 mm thick and a value of 250 x 10. However. which involves little error: Finally. 0.. by which the above specific creep strains sho~d be multiplied._.. ~ . Hobbs [206] has compared the Code values of Po with these data and also with an additional set of data. in practice.i) ·Where P"' = p0 = r.6 X 40/f.values and has recommended [200]: ~o.. as in CP 115. Longterm effects of creep are allowed for by 11sing an effective elastic modulus for the concrete which is less than the shorttenn modulus. per N/mm=. Deflections Loss due to friction in duct " 2. The tabulated values are based upon empirical equations derived by Branson (205) from two sets of test data.. In fact. Since $ depends upon many variables. r~ ·'' ri . and which gives good agreement with test data [206). which are tabulated in the Code. to specialist advice. which varies linearly from unity at a stresstostrength ratio of onethird to I .. as suggested by Allen [203].. ~ Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Stress Strength general value of K of 33 X 104 per metre. However. The stress of 1 N/mm 1 was derived from the test results of Stevens {188] which are referred to earlier in this chapter. 0. Other losses The Code does not give specific data for calculating the losses due to steam curing nor. ·. . 3. 7.which creep can be considered to be proportional to stress. If the compressive stress anywhere in the sectiop. l 1· Shrinkage curvature The Code gives the following expression for calculating the curvature ('iJs) due to shrinkage.6 and 36 X 10s X 40/f. This factor is less than that indi· cated by tests [198] on uniaxial compression specimens because.. The CP 110 handbook [112] implies that the neutral axis should be calculated from the stress diagram of Fig.55 for steel moving on concrete.9 by employing a trialandenor approach. It is mentioned elsewhere in this chapter. in the form of an allowable deflectioll or spantodepth ratio... Values of the coefficient p0 are given in a table in Appendix A of the Code.. 7.. In the above. of a crosssection which are subjected to stresses in excess of onethird of the cube strength. 3. Hobbs suggests an alternative procedure for calculating shrinkage curvatures.45 for steel moving in smooth concrete. Calculate the neutral axis depth (. when caJculating deflections. curing conditions are known.25 and 0. as is also the case for 4>.. The free shrinkage strain can be determined from the data given in Appendix C of the Code. ea is the free shrinkage strain and p0 is a coefficient which depends upon the percentages of tension and compression steel. the lesser of 48 x io·s and 48 X 10.8. These values are the same as those in CP 115 and were originally suggested by Creasy [202]. should be used to calculate the shorttenn curvature under imposed loading. the free shrinkage strain depends upon many variables.~. for example. the following µvalues are recommended in the Code: 1. losses occur due to friction in the duct caused by wiintentional variations in the duct profile ('wobble') and by curvature of the duct.x) ignoring tension stiffening. to strength ratios less than approximately 0.~ p···~ level of centroid of tension !.. For posttensioning. As an alternative.''"' VU... it is necessary to calculate deflections in order. 2. Instead reference is made.n = K = prestressing force at a distance x from the jack prestressing force in the tendon at the jack radius Of curvature of duct wobble factor coefficient of friction of tendon. beloW.. The Code limit of onethird..10 for steel moving on steel rollers._..9. The Code adopts the conventional friction equation [199) P1 = P0 exp(... The larger of the two curvatures is then adopted. from its shortterm 2 value of 1 N/mmz to a longterm value of 0.onth after transfer and threequarters in the first six months. The handbook also indicates how the shrinkage develops with time. . However.jx). In posttensioning systems. AK value of 40 x 104 per metre for long continuous construction because it has been suggested [201] that the Code value of 33 x 104 underestimates friction losses in such situations. 2. As an alternative..9 Tension stiffening for curvature calculations µvalues of 0. the K values given in the Code.6) '11s = Po £c/d where d is the effective depth. a cracked section. 7.. it is parts. an uncracked section and. ·1J In the absence of specific test data.25 at a ratio of onehalf (the greatest allowable ratio under any conditions). Creep in The following general procedure is suggested in the Code for calculating the longterm curvature: ~. it is simpler to adopt the following procedure. a simplified method of obtaining <P is given by Parrott [204]. The procedure is to calculate the curvature assuming. is not given...55N/mm 2 (long·term) Fig. CaJculate the extreme fibre concrete compressive stress due to the applied bending moment.3. the Code gives a . 0.)by dividing the stress by the elastic modulus of the concrete (Ee)· 4... General It is explained in Chapter 1 that there is not a limit state of excessive deflection in the Code since a criterion. exceeds onethird of the ci:lbe strength at transfer... The Code gives va1ues for the specific creep strain (t:reep strain per unit stress) of: 2.3• J.6 for thicker sections. the specific creep strain should be increased as indicated by Fig.. the lesser of 36 x 10. that when calculating crack widths in flanges. in posttensioning systems. Shrinkage is allowed for by separately calculating the curvature due to shrinkage.<J···· ~ "'·'····~·"" I<' r. (7.f~ 1 is the cube strength at the time of transfer.. 3. . in this chap· ter. Longterm curvature General calculation procedure The curvature calculated above would increase under longterm loading due tp creep of the concrete. However. The longterm curvature can be calculated by following the same procedure as that given earlier for the shortterm curvature. Creep of the concrete in tension iSo allowed for by reducing the tensile stress in the concrete. but. a different approach· is adopted: a triangular distribution of tensile stress is assumed in the concrete below the neutral axis.I reinforcement first. refer to the same coefficient as it does in Chapter 8. ·~· [C~ompressive stresses ·· The above values of K and µare identical to those in CP 115 and were originally based upon the test data of Cooley [199].. which is based upon theory rather than empirical equations.
L .3)(6.9 X 10 6)(62.0) + (43./ Longitudinal steel Y16200 Curvature 2·..1)(0.2).0) = 8.2 Example 7.5 kNm/m Examples x acr = /50" + 48 1 . The longitudinal global stresses under the HA wheel load and superimposed dead load are: Top = 0.3)(31. Add the shrinkage curvature..91) = 31.22)(1.67 +1.83 = 9. Total nominal moment = 7.5).12 Example 7.3)(1.03)(1. If the inplane force is conservatively ignored. soffit strain allowing for tension stiffening is E.51 N/mm1 <15 N/mm' soo •I Es· Fig.8 l l.2.8)/0.x) + (54 x)] :..15 .."' ..2)/0. Use a longtenn value of 28/2 = 14 kN/mm 2 for both cracking and stress calculation (Clause 5.7 7.9 kNmlm Critical moment = 60..0)(1. 7. Extreme fibre stresses due to nominal local moment = ±(7..20 7.8 x 425 = 340 N/mm 2 for steel in tension or compression._e~~.8 x 10 6)(85.12.2 Maximum tensile stress in reinforcement occurs under the HA wheel load..42 1060 1060 +8.094 mm Stresses From Table 2 of the Code. + (6.39)12 = 133 kN/m. The Table 7.viunoent Short term permanent Creep due to permanent Transverse steel Yl6100 Short term Shrinkage transient 1\.3 mm.30 .03 kNm/m.45)(1.78 10. . . 7 .5 X 30 = 15 N/mm• for concrete in compression.3..6 kNm/m Critical moment= 31. allowable crack width is 0. 7)(1.2. .3 2 ) = 0.20 mm..0)(1. ~ ' •'•( = 6.3). Detennine the prestressing force and eccentricity required to satisfy the serviceability limit state criceria.0)(1.3)/0.1)(1.x) 62.45 0.2)(0.nd (14..8)(1.5.1. Midway between the beams..8 kNm/m.94 N/mm 2 Bottom= 0.45)(1. Permanent ( if Cracking / / .8)/0.x = Longitudinal compressive stress in slab (N/mmi) + (13.3 Bottom 0.39 N/mm• These are equivalent to an inplane force of 200 (0. 3.0) = 20. about the neutral aXis is given by: (1/3)(1000)(62.2)(1.0)(1.3.0) + (0.. .10. respectively. given in Table 7 .6 kNm/m Area of bottom steel = area of top steel = 2010 mm 2/m If elastic neutral axis is at depth x. This difference is the curvature due to the transient design loads.9 kNm/m 45 HB design moment = (0.328 x 10~ = 64 N/mm 2 compression Both<340 N/mm 2 Due to longitudinal effects Maximum compressive stresses occur under 45 units ofHB loading. Calculate the difference between the instantaneous curvatures under the total and permanent design loads.9 kNm/m From crack width calculations. Nominal load effects (a) Local moments (kNmlm) Lo•d Transverse Longitudinal Superimposed dead °"'' HA wheel 0.24 .8)i (kNm/m) Top 'Superimposed dead HA HA wheel 45 HB units 25 HB units 98 0.328 X 10 9 mm 4/m Bottom steel stress = (14.:J. The limiting stresses are 0.24)(Ll)(l. Assume section to be uncracked and ignore reinforcement.(1.l(a) act together with the global effects given in Table 7 J(b).0) + (0.0) + (1.94 ...94 + 0.0) + (0.2) = 0.l. Area of bottom steel = area of top steel = 1010 mm 2/m.83) = 17.3)(2010)(89.0) I 0.45)(1..14 N/mm 1 Net top fibre design stress is (0.2)(1.2)' + (13.25 + 0.56)(Ll)(0.o 45 HB units 25 HB units 0.1.328 x 10" = 238 N/mm 2 tension . Due to longitudinal bending The longitudinal bars are in a region of predominantly compressive flexural stress and thus the Code maximum spacing is ~00 mm.0) + (7.0) + (6.4 From Table I of the Code.14 = 0.1)(1.. Calculate the instantaneous (i.8) = 9.22 10. .3)(IOI0)[(136 ..3)(10.5 N/mm 2 <15 N/mm• Steel stresses are _ (14.3)(1010)(85.2)(1..33 = 0.1 E~ample 7.0)(1.tCJD.33)(1.63 0.65 x 10 3)(6)/(200) 2 = ± l.65 5.3.0) = 10.. and 0.90 I. 7... The above procedure is logical and its net effect is illustrated in Fig.0. 70 x 104 ) 1 + (2)(61.8)(1.83 kNm/m.1)(1.2mm Second moment of area.22)(1. crack width is w = (3)(61.61 6..Proii"<?G. Prestressed concrete A bridse deck is constructed from the pretensioned Ibeams shown in Fig...64 162 HB + Associated HA 99 . 7. Each design load effect will be calculated as nominal load effect x 1JL x y13 .7)! + (14.83) + (6.3)(60.25 +7...2)/0..14)(1.22)(1.11. and a moment of [(0.48 }so 10.4 Maximum crack width occurs midway between bars where the distance (ac. then by talcing first moments of area about the neutral axis: .0)(!. If elastic neutral axis is at depth x and is above the top steel level (l/2)(1000) xi = (l4. Each beam is required to resist the moments. (!/2)(1000) x' (b) Global effects Lo•d characterislic strengths of the reinforcement and concrete are 425 and 30 N/mm 2 .2)(1.0 0. Assume that the losses amounc to Table 7.J 1.0)(1. shorttenn) curvatures under the total design load and under the permaDent design load.4 .. 7.0) + (II.3 2 + 3.40)/(200 .1 Reinforced concrete The top slab of a beam and slab bridge has been designed at the ultima1e limit state and is shown in Fig.0 6..9 x 10 8)(24. It is required to check that the slab satisfies the serviceability limit state criteria under load combination 1.2)(1.3)/(2010 X 425) Total i. 4.e. the local bending moments given in Table 7 .45)(1.0 7.0 43.11 Example 7.. The effects due to HB include those due to associated HA.3/6 = 1.bi/if)' • '.22)(1..56 o. This exceeds the actual spacing of 200 mm.. Design data Moment (kNm) Stress (N/mm 1) Nominal Design Top Bottom ~Load Superimposed dead °"'' HA 477 477 135 949 949 +J. /.2)(1.2)(1.7 mm and is above the top steel.o~~...24 3.0) = 60. due to nominal loads.60 0.3)(2010)(152 ..32_8 x 109 = 124 N/mm 2 Soffit strain ignoring tension stiffening is e1 = (1241200 x 10 3 )(137. Calculate the long•tenn curvature under the permanent design load.2 + 1.2)(1000)(200)(10. 7. 7 .0 23.51 X 10..25 2. under load combination l. for each of the three classes of prestressed concrete.149 x 109 = 88 N/mm 2 < ~ N/mm2 7.0) + (10.2)(0.) to the nearest bar is given by 175 900 From equation (7 .2)(1.9 x 10 8)(89.39)12] (200z) l0. Fig. Modular ratio= 200/14 = 14.3 . Add this value to the longterm curvature under the permanent load. Second moment of area = (I/3)(1000)(50. the design load effect is a moment of (9.14 3. _.9!) + (23.J / Fig.61 + 0.0) + (10./ .51 x 10. x = 50.33 0.0) + (0. Details of these partial safety factors are given in Chapters 3 and 4.3)(2010)(24.3)(60.2.26 ==· moment General Cracking 25 HB design moment = (0.10 Calculation of long term curvature 1. = 9.149 x 10 9 mmi/m Bottom steel stress = (14.3)(2010) (< .62.2)' + {l4.55 1. shorttenn elastic modulus of concrete = 28 kN/mmi. I = 0.38) = (14. Limiting values Due to transverse bending HA design moment = (0..8/89. Due to transverse bending HA design moment = (0.6 x 10$)(89.328 x IO" = 11.8 = 61.328 x 10" mm 4/m Maximum concrete stress = (60.JllU}Jt:\.70 nrate 1500 From equation (7. x = 62.2 mm.
3 . 89. together with the extreme fibre stresses which they induge.66 Pe Assuming the same eccentricity (440 mm) as that adopted for Classes 1 and 2: P = 3127 kN (i. i~ ~ ~ ~ ~' .6(b) this book) to give a final stress of 4.C.l ~ ~·~.4 .66 Pe .217 X 103 e) = 11.. = 5 24 20 x 103 e) = 13.~ .2. for the given section and loading. If the prestressing force before any losses occur is P and its eccentricity is e.HB + associated HA load = (1060)(1.3. then at the top and at the bottom again the tensile stress at the bottom fibre under the full design service load. ·~·~ __ _ .1 = 475 zso . 475 250 0. is the tensile stress at the bottom fibre under the full design service load..l'· Class 3 C""'2 Top .11 x 1015. the allowable compressive stress at transfer for any class of prestressed concrete is 0.8 N/mm1 has to be multiplied by 0.5 x 40 = 20 N/mm 2 • The usual sign c.217 x 103 e) = 10.91) = 1060kNm Hence HB loading is the critical live load._ . consideration would also be given to altering the crosssection.2 mm ·from soffit). and 1 N/mmi at transfer or under a service load condition of dead load alone.494 X 10 5 = P(I . Second moment of area = 4.~.13 x 10 1+ 3 •67 :. particularly with regard to transfer stresses. The different classes of prestressed concrete have been catered for by merely altering the prestress but. The resulting stresses under the various design loads are given in Table 7.S +9.89P 0.3. r"">t f'"'_.<''••···· i:!:. are the transfer stresses.1 +10. 73 .:oncrete bridge design to BS 54()() 11 %at transfer and finally amount to 34%.4 +14.5·24 . of the beam would need to be checked.3.S +11. The critical stresses. + 5. the section should also be checked at 0.onvention of compressive stresses beitlg positive and tensile stresses being negative is adopted.6 +10.. Hence . The concrete is of grade 50 and.656 X 103e) 0.0)(1. . ... The critical stress.3. 3.2 +20..2 final prestress dead load superimposed dead load HB + associated HA load IQQ. a Class 3 member must be treated as if it were Class 2 and thus the allowable stress is 2. 2.3.9N/mm'.89Pe + 0.0 +0.0 +13. Under the design service load.11 x 101 + 9. Hence I . 83% of that for Class 1) The resulting stresses under the various design loads are given in Table 7.7811. are given in Table 7 .2 mm. 1.83) = 949 kNm ·. 2.. 77% and 93% of those for Classes 1 and 2.4.. The allowable tensile stresses in the concrete are: I. The resulting stresses under the various design loads are given in Table 7.7 + 0. zero. :. respectively). It will be assumed that no conventional reinforcement is present and thus the hypothetica1 stress cannot be increased. The section is 900 mm deep and the stress of 5.~~~ : )I .e..5 N/mm 2 • From Table 25 of the Code.2 N/mm 2 (from Table 26 of the Code or 0.o.1)(0.75 (from Table 28 of the Code or Table _4.0) = 477 kNm Superimposed dead load = (135)(1.0 x 10 7 mm 3 From Table 24 of the Code.6 + 0. P = 4087 kN and General Area = 475 250 mm2 Centroid is 529. P(l The allowable tensile stresses in the concrete are zero under the design service load. In addition other sections along the length. ' Under dead plus superimposed dead load.8 N/mmi for a design crack width of 0.4._J i~fii (~  . At transfer. The design moments. 2.1 + 1. P(l the ultimate limit state. Under dead plus superimposed dead load. The design moments are calculated as nominal moments x 'ltL x yp.J.64 0.6(a) of this book is 5.9 N/mm 2 (from Table 26 of the Code or 0.241. is Table 7.35= 475250 The allowable tensile stresses in the concrete are: 0. 3. Class 3 2.3·2 = 475 250+ 9. P(l + 5.4 +1.64 + 5.11 x 10 1 . and are Dead load = (477)(1. at transfer.132 x 10 6 Assuming the same eccentricity (440 mm) as that adopted for Class I: P = 3378 kN (i.45 /Tc.45 .l + 9.8 + 2./J.66 P :.478 x 10 8 In an actual design.. for the given section and loading.11 x 10 1 mm 3 Top fibre section modulus = 13. the allowable compressive stress for any class of prestressed concrete is 0. zero. the concrete strength is 40N/mm 2 • Solving simultaneously e = 440 mm (i.304 x 10 8 General comments The critical stress. "' .2){1.3 +10.z +15.33 x 50 = 16. At transfer.2 + 0.89Pe 9.217 :.. the basic hypothetical tensile stress from Table 27 of the Code or Table 4.66 P 0.89P ' Class 2 Class 1 ' Serviceability limit stale /! Under the design service load.e. Design stresses Stresses (N/mm1 ) Design load Class 1 Transfer PS+DL PS+DL+SDL PS+DL+SDL+ll PS DL SDL LL = = = = P'''" Bottom Top Bottom Top Bottom 1.35 N/aun 2 .e.1.. The losses have been assumed to be the same for each class but they will obviously be different because of the different prestressing forces.819 x 10 10 mm 4 Bottom fibre section modulus= 9.1 .1 + 7.0 + 2.2 mm from bottom fibre.). 3.2)(0.2 + 8.3 Example 7 .f1Hm:. for the given section and loading.0) = 162 kNm HA load = (949)(1. in practice.2.ll.
In order to assume such a strut and tie system it is first necessary to preclude a shear failure.a (i. {a) Strut and tie A corbel is defined as a short cantilever bracket with a shear span to depth ratio less than 0.6. otherwise shearing of the comer of the corbel could occur as shown in Fig.) in the reinforcement must equal this horizontal component of the concrete compressive force. The distance av is taken to be from the outer edge of the loaded are.. Clarke [208} has shown by tests that this method is safe. 8. in acCordance with the clauses covering the shear strength of short reinforced concrete beams.3)./ F. The force (F. bX cos 2 f3 (c) HorizontalforcesatAA Fig.l(b))... as cos ~instead of cos2 ~· The area of reinforcement provided should be not Jess than 0. This requirement was detennined empirically from the test data. ~·:n Chapters Corner shears Mein reinforcement Precast concrete and ·composite construction 1.. ·v A F. as shown in Fig. in the spirit of a lower bound design method. The method assumes. .4 !cu bx cos2 Corbels ~ The horizontal component of this force is • Bearings (b) Horizontal links Fig.(b) Corbel detailing Fig. upon which the design method is based. In the latter case the bearing area of the load should not project beyond the straight portion of the bars.l(b) and (c).5. i} for precast members are considered as part of this chapter.Jd values of up to 1.Barsto anchor links Horizontal links 3 d v Precast concrete H The design of precast members in general is based upon the design methods for reinforced or prestressed concrete which are discussed in other chapters..4 fcu and considering equilibrium at the face of the supporting member.5 times their depth. This is done by proportioning the depth of the corbel..2(a). in which case cot f3 = ajO..I xi ~I I / / _/ P. ·•e and "ite con·. The Code states that the above design method is applicable for ajd < 0.3. 8. The calculations are carried out at the ultimate limit state.4/cu bx cos2 f3 F1 = 0. Horizontal rather than vertical links are required because the tests.e.I(a). However. 8.. at the face of the supporting member. 8. ~·A xc .2(a).3 Nib (8. • Theoretically no reinforcement. In view of this the CP 110 handbook [112] suggests that. Fe COS~ = 0."' otoo1. o>Z~ ~ The Code gives design rules for two types of bearing: cor· bels and nibs. the tensile force (F.2) A neW value of f}can then be calculated from ·· =F.4% of the section at the face of the supporting member.The implication is thus that.d _l. the most conservative position of the line of action of V) to the position of the nearest vertical leg of the links in the supporting member.3) This procedure can be continued iteratively. (8..4fcubxcosf3 Uok .. other than that referred to above. However.. showed that horizontal Jinks were more efficient for values of a. if ajd ~ 0. 8. Nibs The Code requires nibs Jess thiin 300 mm deep to be designed as cantilever slabs at the ultimate limit state to resist a bending moment of Vav (see Fig.sinf3 F1 =H+Fccosf3=H+Vcot{3 0.6. the test data indicated that the depth of the corbel at the outer edge of the bearing should not be less than 50% of the depth at the face of the supporting member. in order to prevent a local failure under the load..&:J and the compreSsive force in the concrete is giv~n by 102 IV (b) Determination of~ Fc=0.1). /· I di~ _.. 11 supporting For equilibrium. at outer edge of loaded area) Imaginary compressive strut (8.x/2) j 00 V('. incorrectly. thus member dx/2 I f3. 8. Bearings and joints (a) Local bearing failure Steel F 1 "' ·F. is required.. Detailing of the reinforcement is particularly important in small nibs and the Code gives specific rules which are ~nfinned by the test results of Clarke [208].6.4.I) Somerville [207] suggests that f3 can be detennined by assuming a depth of concrete x having a constant compressive stress of 0. 8. 8. An iterative procedure is suggested in whichx/d is first assumed to be 0. Finally. but that an equilibrium strut and tie system of design is more appropriate for nibs which project less than I .4f~.l(a)(c) Corbel strut and tie system cot f3 = aj(d .. 8. 103 . having a total area equal to 50% of that of the main reinforcement.0. It should be noted that both Somerville [207] and the CP 110 handbook [1121 give the last term of equation (8. the corbel should be designed as a flexural cantilever._+.. the equilibrium strut and tie system shown in Fig.. The design method proposed in the Code is based upon test data reviewed by Somerville [207]. 8.) to be resisted by the main tension reinforcement can be determined by considering the equilibrium of the strut and tie system as follows (the notation is in accordance wjth Fig. as a compromise.. 8. The latter position was chosen from considerations of a strut and tie system in which the inclined compressive strut is as shown in Fig. to be provided as shown in Fig.2(b).. ~· ~· 0 ~ecast ~ . the test data showed that the design method based upon a strut and tie system was applicable to a. the method can be applied to corbels havingajdvalues of up to 1.6 (see Fig.Jd < 0. the Code also requires horizontal links... It is important that the reinforcement is adequately anchor®: at the front face of the corbel this can be achieved by welding to a transverse bar or by bending the main bars to fonn a loop.2).
. the Code design method assumes the equilibrium strut and tie system. .6 0.. they must cross the line of action of the reaction Fv. but the original test data is not readily available. a halving joint may be reinforced with vertical links as shown in Fig..4 fcu can be resisted. Such reinforcement should also be designed to resist any horizontal forces.5 /cu (8... have also to be carried out. Ultimate limit state Flexure The flexural design of precast elements can be carried out in accordance with the methods of Chapter 5.5(a)) and the other involving vertical links (Fig.15 has to be applied to fyv and hence the Code equation is obtained.5(b) [212]. (c) Strut and tie system Fv i= Asv (0. The Code recognises that extremely high bearing stresses can be developed in certain situations: an example is in concrete hinges [210]. and half by friction between the links and bars.6) It should be noted that. However. 8.0.. then a triaxial stress state is set up in the concrete under the bearing area and stresses much higher than 0... the ciause on halving joints was written when 4v" was in CP 110 and was not subsequently 3ltered when Vu(= 0. theoretically.•~»: "'"""'"'~·.=.:..87 fyv) COS 0 Halving joints are quite conunon in bridge construction and the Code gives two alternative design methods at the ultimate limit state: one involving inclined links (Fig. which is based upon tests carried out by Reynolds (212]. without excessive slip. such as those for interface shear stresses.).Concrete bridge tksign to BS 5400 fb 2. 8.. Williams (209) has reviewed all of the available data on bearing stresses and found that a good fit to the data is given by f. = o.2 0. 8.5(a). the anchorage length of the main tension reinforcement (l. Tou I I I I I \ dl Code Potential failure crack \ \ \ Williams 1205] \ \ \ \ tension reinforcement...b) given in the Code is only half of that which would be calculated by applying the anchorage bond stresses discussed in Chapter 10.:. and thus it is desirable to incline the links at 45°. Normally one would assume that such transfer occurs by bond. ~~ __ ~. it would be prudent in practice to limit the reaction at the joint to the maximum allowable shear force for the reduced section (with an effective depth of do). Part 9 has not been published and thus the Department of !C)i """""'*'' P. ~. For equilibrium. · .5 applied to fcu.• is con:ipared with the Code equation. Reynolds suggested [212] that. If the bearing area is welldefined and binding reinforcement is provided near to the contact area. the methods of Chapter 5 may be applied to the entire composite section provided that horizontal shear can be transmitted. ." (y. the latter expression. The Code emphasises that. but can ·also be applied to prestressed concrete.0 . For the latter to occur the links must be wired tightly to the main bars. was the maximum allowable shear stress in a beam and was thus equivalent to Vu. This equation was obtained from a recommendation of the Comite EUropeen du Beton.Tie Oink) YpolYo Fig. presumably.Jy.4 Bearing stresses F. 8.5J In Fig.Strut (concrete) o 0.. the vertical component of the force in the links must equal the reaction (Fv)· Hence Fv = A..5(a). discussed in Chapter 4.bd0 .rvfyv cos 9 where A~v. it would seem prudent to design horizontal reinforcement to resist the moment at the ~root of the half end cantilever.0·"'' C8. However..{yv and 0 are the total area. shown in Fig. cqmposite construction refers to precast concrete acting compositely with insitu concrete.~~· .~ 'c. 8.75 /f. Inclined links I I 1. However. Finally. The vertical links should be designed by the method described in Chapter 6 and anchored around longitudinal reinforcement which extends to the end of the beam as shown in Fig. but because additional calculations._ ·~"·~~. 8. The Code gives the following equation for the limiting bearing stress (fb) at the ultimate limit state " 1.6(b).. with a partial safety factor of 1.5(b) )... At the time of writing. the Code gives a value of Fv = 4vjJd0 • The reason for this is that.4 0. characteristic strength and inclination of the links respectively. Bearing stress Normally the compressive stress at the ultimate limit state between two contact surfaces should not exceed 40% of the characteristic strength of the concrete. 4v. 8.>5 ~' · '~ . shear and flexure calculations have to be carried out for both the precast unit and the composite meipber. in order that the inclined links may contribute to the strength of the joint. ·•.•'"""'"< Fe. The adoption of such a value of 8 is implied in the Code.. although his tests showed that it is possible to reinforce a joint so that the maximum allowable shear force for the full beam section could be carried. Transport's Technical Memorandwn on Freyssinet hinges [21 lJ will. . instead.. for example. _. This limit was suggested in order to prevent overreinforcement of the joint and. Horizontal reinforcement to resist moment at root of half end cantilever plus any horizontal forces Main terision reinforcement (a) Inclined links ' ·'~ ~ 1.18f. One might expect that the above limit would imply Fv = v. 8. (8.S(a)(c) Halving joint ..5(c).. which occurs in the final version of CP 110 and the Code. be used in the interim period.. The division of the force transfer into bond and friction was not based upon theory but was an interpretation of the test results. .. hence.. but the Code assumes that the transfer occurs in two ways: half by bond with the concrete.4) l + 2ypJYo where Ypo and Yo are half the length of the side of the loaded area and of the resisting concrete block respectively._.u) was introduced (see Chapter 6). any value of 8 may be chosen. in a draft of CP 110. the horizontal component of the tensile force in the inclined links has to be transferred !o the bottom main Halving joints ___. to ensure a ductile joint.0 Vertical links 0.::.5 As an alternative to the inclined link system of Fig. It can be seen that the latter is conservative for small loaded areas... ensure that excessive slip does not occur. across the interface of the precast and insitu concretes. Since only half of the force has to be transferred by bond. 'he crack which initiates failure forms at about 45° as shown in Fig.. This document permits average compressive stresses in the throat of a hinge of up to 2!cu . 8. General In the context of this book.. However.4. Very often in bridge construction. The design of composite construction is complicated not only by the fact that.5 Precast concrete and composite construction 1: ~ '. 8. Composite construction Fig. the precast concrete is prestressed and the insitu concrete is reinforced. Each method is presented in the Code in terms of reinforced concrete..8 1. A partial safety factor of 1. The criteria for interface shear stresses. the design of which will probably be covered in Part 9 of the Code._ ''"""""°' . Inclined links When inclined links are used. The various calculations are now discussed individually. '~JilJ . In the case of a composite member. . MinirTium end cover to main tension reinforcement (b) Vertical links Horizontal reinforcement in half end The Code does not require flexural reinforcement to be designed in half ends.
where/.16) with Composite slab In order to comply strictly with the Code when calculating Ve. ::i . or all steel in tension zone: as appropriate. seems reasonable except.Aj/lb.f. whether or not the section is subjected to hogging bending. in which areas of plain "insitu concrete which develop principal tensile stresses in excess of the limiting value are ignored.ldyc I . tr. on substitutingf1 = f 1. Mc= Mb (1 . 'This approach is thus similar to that for prestressed concrete. is Ffecast cOncreteam a situation the reinforced concrete insitu flange might be cracked. lt is not clear how to calculate Ver in such a situation although the author feels that the restraint to the insitu concrete provided by the precast beams should enable one to apply the prestressed concrete clauses lo the entire composite section. which would be present in the flange. 8. suggested by Reynolds.37 ffcu.f. This is because the adjacent prestressed concrete restrains the insitu concrete and controls the cracking [l 13]. In this context db is measured to the centroid of all of the tendons. at the serviceability limit state and vertical shear at the ultimate limit state causes a minor problem in the organisation of the calculations and introduces the possibility of errors being made. The shear stress in the precast member at the level of the composite centroid is f~. to apply the prestressed concrete clauses to the composite section because the insitu flange would be in compression. /lc.7) Finally. The shear stress at the level of the composite centroid.8fp1 . Provided that the latter stresses are not exceeded. The shear force (Vci) due to self weight and construction loads produces a shear stress distribution in the precast member as shown in Fig. oat the centroid of the composite section. the author would suggest that it is adequate to check only the principal tensile stress at the centroid of the composite section. 8. when the section is subjected to hogging bending. Clarke and Taylor./ . The general Code approach differs from the approach of BE 2/73. The above suggested approach is slightly different to that of BE 2173. = 0. and db and d 1 are defined in Fig. It thus seems reasonable to include the insitu flange as part of a homogeneous section. and it could be argued that the insitu concrete should then be ignored.ffcu. When the prestressed concrete clauses are applied to the composite section. for the serviceability limit state. b andAy refer to the composite section. However. 8. JO) db is measured to the centroid of all of the steel in the tension zone.. 1. When carrying out the Vco calculation../2 . The appropriate Code clause merely states that the design rules for prestressed and reinforced concrete should be applied and.(b) Composite sections (vcbdb + va(i. The design of a precast element to resist vertical shear can be carried out in accordance with the methods described in Chapter 6. the author would suggest that the fol. when the section is subjected to a hogging bending moment.+ f cp/.6(a)(d) Shear in composite beam and slab section Shear It is not necessary to consider interface shear at the ultimate limit state because the interface shear criteria discussed in Chapter 4. The design value of the compressive stress at the bottom fibre due to prestress and the moment acting on the precast section alone is The total shear stress distribution is shown in Fig. This effect is discussed in Chapter 4 in' connection with the allowable flexural tensile stresses in the insitu concrete. 7(a). the total shear capacity (Vco) is given by Vea= V01 +Va which on simplification gives equation (8. It is emphasised that the suggested pro· cedures are tentative and that test data are required. However.).1) (8. are intended to ensure adequate strength at the ultimate limit state in addition to full composite action at the serviceability limit state. the author would suggest that it be included for the same reasons put forward for including it in beam and slab composite construction.8 is explained in Chapter 6. the insitu concrete above the beams should be ignored.6(c)... Class 3: (a) Calculate M 0 from (b) Replace the tenn (d Hence .I (a) Beam and slab b1l2 1: f~ b. lo.75b(db /f. Classes I and 2: (a) Replace equation (6.tinn (8. Equation (8.b + d1 Hcu. respectively. it would be conservative to ignore the cracked insitu flange and to carry out the calculations by applying the prestressed concrete clauses to the precast section alone .Ybl/yJb) f.. However.~(b).the preStress be fop· (The factor of 0.+'.24 /fcu.6(d) and the shear stress at the level of the composite centroid is (J.8) . it is suggested that the maximum allowable shear force should be calculated from v.f. the author would suggest either of the following two conservative approaches.8fp1) /dye where the subscripts ·b and c refer to the precast beam and the composite sections respectively and M 11 is the moment acting on the precast beam alone. Ignore all of the insitll concrete and apply the pre.b + 0./Jcu. = Mb(l . as proposed by Reynolds..$ii The above calculation would be carried out at the junction of the flange and web of the composite section if the centroi~ weri to occur in the flange (see Chapter 6).. In such 2.8) is derived as follows. The latter fact reflects the lack of appropriate test data. (8.· Hence.7(a).Jb) + 0.. 8.37. which are being drafted at the time of writing.. it is reasonable.8)..24 . vcl _lb[~ Aj .71 t.37 ffcu. 0. The additional shear force ( Vcl) which acts on the composite section produces a shear stress distribution in the composite section as shown in Fig. =If.b + 0..Mbyi)Ib)ldyc f. where Vcb and vci are the nominal shear stresses appropriate to !cub and /. and the calculations will be carried out at the ultimate limit state. However.Mb)li/lb Thus the additional moment. 2. Clarke and Taylor (161] that V"° for a composite section should be determined on the basis of a limiting principal tensile stress of 0.12) 1 + (J. + /'$) 2 + 0. where the subscripts b and i refer to the precast beam and insitu concrete respec1ively...9) which can be derived in a similar manner to equation (8. The fact that interface shear is checl . the insitu and precast concretes should act compositely.. I ·+·i~:!o~~ t.yJ).fs] (8. The above approach.. (b) Replace the term (vcd) in equation (6. due to Va. However. Thus it is necessary to consider only vertical shear at the ultimate limit state. 8 of . Shear stress duetoVa (d) Total shear stress F1g.= Ma+Mb But f's=Vr:i.jy.. 8.. in view of the lack of test data.b f q. and rearranging Ma = (0. and by aggregate interlock across the cracks./1..11) with (db /lcub + d.. It is understood that in the proposed amendments to CP 110.8 fp. no consideration is given to whether the insitu concrete between the beams is cracked. 1.+t. the principal tensile stress in the prestressed units should not anywhere exceed 0. +f's)• Let the compressive stress at the level of the composite centroid due to self weight and construction loads plus 0. applied to the composite section to cause cracking.. When calculating Ver. 107 . when subjected to hogging bending. it will be assumed that the pr~ast units are prestressed and thus the problem is one of determining the shear capacity of a prestressedreinforced composite section when it is flexurally uncracked (V ct>) and also when it is flexurally cracked (Ver)· The tenninology and notation are the same as those of Chapter 6. the interface shear criteria are different to those in the Code.12) with M. a significant amount of shear can be transmitted by dowel action of reinforcement.. It is thus best to consider the problem from first principles.. However. 106 Precast prestressed beams with an insitu reinforced concrete top slab to fonn a composite beam and slab bridge. It could be argued that. the principal tensile stress at each point in the precast beams should be checked. J (b) Slab Fig. stressed concrete clauses to the precast beams alone.Mbyi)Ib The additional stress to cause cracking is (see Chapter 6) 0. the insitu concrete could be flexurally cracked before the precast concrete cracks. There are two general cases to consider: I.12 +. for the composite section. db is measured to the centroid of all of the steel in the tension zone. In the following. is This stress should not exceed the limiting value of J./!cu (see Chapter 6).8fp1 . The total moment is the cracking moment: M. I ' Coriiposite beam and slab It is suggested by Reynolds. the design of a composite section to resist vertical shear is more complicated and there does not seem to be an established method. Finally.wing amendments be made.8fp. possibly. /<J'c. when insitu concrete is placed between precast prestressed units. 0. as explained in Chapter 6. When calculating Ver• which is the shear capacity of the member cracked in flexure. ) Precest j (a) Section (bl Shear stress (c) due to V0 .'+ f..24 .) in equation (6.8) (0..CC?rltTti"iiiuNdge A'filiillb BS 51rvui I Insitu .. Clarke and Taylor [161] . if the member is subjected to sagging bending.) Then the major principal s~ss at the composite centroid is given by /1 = + Jr Centroid of tendons..). Precast prestressed beams with insitu concrete placed between arid over the beams to form a composite slab.r. 8.
83 and 0...0 HB and. ~ . would be more logical 1han the existing procedure. Compression._.7(b). General It is mentioned in Chapter 4 that the stresses which have to be checked in a composite member are the compressive and tensile stresses in the precast concrete. and it could be argued that (YtL Y/3) should aJways be taken to be unity. 8. hence (8... where b1 is the effective breadth of insitu concrete above the interface and h• is the depth of insitu concrete or the depth to the neutral axis if the latter lies within the insitu concrete.'.. and the necessary equations are given by Kajfasz..2 and 1... r.f . the two concrete components act compositely. Thus the self weight of the precast unit and the insitu concrete should be considered in propped but not in unpropped construction. but those parts of the latter in which the allowable stress is exceeded are not included in the composi_te section.. much of the movement of the latter due to creep and shrinkage will already have taken place.. The shear force per unit length which has to be transmitted across the interface is a function of the normal forces acting in the insitu concrete at the ultimate limi1 state. which will be considered to be distance l from the point of maximum moment.~%.91 for HA and HB loading respectively...1sd(b. to be part of the composite section. 8. though illogical. which are essentially identical to those in the Code. However.. different Yp values have to be applied wheil carrying out the various stress calculations... It is necessary to ensure that.:?J)\~:J A plastic calculation at the ultimate limit state which considers the total design load at the ultimate limit stale. In conclusion. Hence. two calculations should be carried out: 1. the stress calculations are complicated by the fact that different load levels have to be adopted for checking the various stresses. is intended to ensure that both the correct serviceability and ultimate limit state criteria can be satisfied by means of· a single calculation. If the adjacent precast unit is not pre· stressed then the flexural cracks in the insitu concrete should be controlled by applying equation (7 .. in order to be thorough. It can be seen from the above that. Y13 should be unity at the serviceability limit state.2 HA or 1. This procedure..loadings.. It is necessary to ensure adequate horizontal shear s!rength at the ultimate limit state. there will be a tendency for the insitu concrete to shorten relative~to the precast unit..12) to be the shear force due to the total design load at the serviceability lllnit state. as mentioned previously in this chapter. 8. are being redrafted at the time of writing. In the Code it is explicitly s'tiited that they are stresses at the contact surface. hence.= 0. + b. I. I.. In addition.4fi. This is because.. positions : / I I I I I II position I HB ..0 HA or 1. h/bc l However..0 HB when designing fo accordance with BE 'l173..83 and 0._Original 1 I ~bt (8. 8. ~"" ~~. Since the insitu concrete acts compositely with the precast unit. It is conservative to assunle that the normal force is zero at the point of minimum moment. For the usual case of a prestressed precast unit acting compositely with insitu reinforced concrete.4 fu (see Chapter 5) is assumed at the point of maximum moment.b~. Finally. This procedure. no. It is understood that the new clauses will require the calculation to be carried out only at the ultimate limit state by considering the total design load at this limit state.13) A Technical Report of the Federation Internationale de .. of the concrete 10 one side of the interface = second moment of area of the transformed composite section b~ = width of interface. It is emphasised that the allowable flexural tensile stresses of Table 4. which may have been overlooked by the drafters.J free shrinkage of insitu concrete = creep plus shrinkage of top of precast concrete = creep plus shrinkage of bottom of precast concrete "" Stresses Strains Fig. For the latter ..91.. la Pr6contrain1e [213) suggests that the average shear stress should be distributed over the length l in proportion to the vertical shear force diagram. the Yp values to be 0. + b1) wide should be calculated from v.i ____ _____:_. Hence.0 except for stresses in prestressed concrete when it is 0.4j. then the maximum normal force is 0.. The allowable flexural tensile stresses in the insitu concrete are inteipreted differently in the Code and BE 2173. 2. The above suggested approach is different to that of BE 2173 in which a modified form of eguation (6..8 Interface shear at ultimate limit state Serviceability limit state 2. HA . when it takes the values of 0. .1. Compressive and tensile stresses In terms of limit state design.. It is possible to calculate the stresses from considerations of equilibrium.. The difference between the elastic moduli of the tWt1 concretes should be allowed for if their strengths differ b}r more than one grade. thus the average interface shear stress is vh v Vh = 0. Hence an interface shear force of 0. It is explained in Chapter 4 that the value of Yp implied by the Code is unity for aU stress calculation under any load except for HA and HB loading.:~~ Pre cast I I +=======!:. ·"~"·~·.._. the interface shear clauses in CP 110. the compressive and tensile stresses in the insitu concrete and the shear stress at the interface between the two concretes.4). The latter forces result from tbe total design load at the ultimate limit state. it is necessary to check interface shear stresses for two reasons. Apply the reinforced concrete clauses to the entire composite section. are defined in Fig. An elastic calculation at the serviceability limit state which considers only those loads which are applied after the insitu concrete hardens.1 HB (because YtL is I ... = first moment of area. bi h1 must be transmitted over a distance l (see Fig..__) 'i·. This is achieved by taking V in equation (8.0) as compared with 1.4fc11 b. Differential shrinkage (8.. In neither the Code nor BE 2173 is it necessary to calculate the flexural tensile stresses in any insitu concrete which is not considered. if adopted..1. despite the aliowable tensile stresses in the Code and BE 'l173 being identical..11) I where bi. The values quoted above can be deduced from the assumption that it was the drafters' intention that. it is suggested that the maximum allowable shear force for a section (b.11) is adopted for Ver Minimum Maximum moment moment section section Fig. This suggests that.. and b. although it is not entirely clear what value of Yp should be adopted for HA and HB loading. 8. perhaps.9 Differential shrinkage plus creep where 2. When insitu concrete is cast on an older precast unit. at the serviceability limit state. the drafters intended the Code design load to be 1. the lauer restrains the movement of the former but is itself strained as shown in Fig.9. ff. as discussed in Chapter 4. The tensile stresses in the insitu concrete have to be checked under a design load of 1. = horizontal interface shear stress = shear force at point considered s.. about the neutral axis of the transformed composite sec1ion. Since shear stress can only be transmitted across the interface after the insitu concrete has hardened.83. %1~~~Wt04f.. the following values of Yp will be assumed. there is an important implication of this intention. ~· ·.·j':i. 108 ··"I . whereas in BE 2173 they are applicable to all of the insitu concrete. If a constant flexural stress of 0.1 respectively and Yp == 1. in general.0 except for stresses in prestressed concrete when it is 0. stresses are developed in both the insitu and precasl concretes as shown in Fig.. l :. tbb Interface shear stresses vh = VSjlb~ "' EJ Ebr Compressive and tensile stresses in either the precast or insitu concrete should not exceed the values discussed in Chapter 4.4 for insitu concrete are applicable Only when the insitu concrete is in direct contact with precast prestressed concrete... Y/3 is unity for all stress calculations except for the compressive and tensile stresses in the prestressed concrete. 0 Finally.i.Precast concrete and composite construction Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 2.J ..h/b. Such stresses can be calculated by applying elastic theory to the precast section or to the composite section as appropriate. This argument also throws some doubt on the actual intended values of Y/3 to be adopted when checking interface shear stresses. whereas none of !he shrinkage of the insitu concrete will have occurred.8).ii!I •. Somerville and Rowe [113]. at any time after casting the insitu concrete.12) :.4 fcu b. It is emphasised that the actuaJ values to be adopted for the various stress calculations are not stated in the Code. 8.0 HA or 1. at the serviceability limit state it is reasonable to calculate the interface shear stress by using elastic theory.1'.9.t! •!? k?i~ . ~ _.91 respectively. b1 h. the Code does not require these two calculations to be carried out: instead a single elastic calculation is carried out at the serviceability limit state which considers the total design load at the serviceability limit state._ Tension " Average interface shear stress= v.. the loads considered when calculating the interface shear stress at the serviceability limit state should consist only of those loads applied after the concrete has hardened... for the purposes of stress calculations. ~ o._..
lO(a).. One beam was provided with bottom reinforcement in the diaphragm and could thus transmit a significant sagging moment. An alternative form of connection in which the ends of the precast beams are not supported directly. has been described by Pritchard [214) (see Fig. Kriz and Hognestad thus proposed that the precompression be ignored provided that the reinforcement does not exceed" 1. a net sagging moment at the connection will generally be developed. The most difficult part of a differential shrinkage calculation is the assessment of the shrinkage strains of the two concretes. A multispan bridge formed of precast beams can be made continuous by providing an insitu concrete diaphragm at each support as shown in Fig..(b) Contjnuity in composite construction It is emphasised that the above calculations need to be carried out only at the serviceability limit state since the stresses arise from restrained deformations and can thus be ignored at the ultimate limit state. hence.co. Hence.'.10. then the increment of creep strain ( l>Ec) in time &t is given by &" ~ (jl E)&~ (8.. if_ data from tests on the concretes and precast units are not available.e. In addition. The derivation of this factor is discussed laler in this chapter. 8.ll(a). Moment redistribution Flexural strength The Code permits the effect of any compressive stresses due to prestress in the ends of the precast uni~s 10 be ignored when calculating the ultimate flexural strength of connections such as those in Fig.. I. would occur. cracking permitted at the serviceability limit state.. Hence. since there is no restraint to the rotation. should always be considered as Class 3 and. about 0. 8. Somerville and Rowe [113].. the stresses induced by the restraint to differen· tial shrinkage are relieved by creep and the Code gives a reduction factor of 0. at collapse. the CP 110 handbook [112) suggests that the ends of prestressed units. The tests showed that no difficulty should be experienced in reinforcing the crosshead to ensure that a flexural failure. Since this sagging moment exists when no imposed loading is on the bridge.64 fcyt) and three percentages of continuity reinforcement (0. 8.66 and 2.6 for the differential shrinkage strain. Consequently.. Shrinkage and creep The deflection of a simply supported composite beam changes with time because of the effects of differential shrinkage and of creep due to self weight and prestress. and. Although it is not stated in the Code. The reinforced concrete connections contained no shear reinforcement. as shown in Fig. at the Portland Cement Association in America [215. In addition to the ·above tests. the diaphragm restrains the rotation at the end of the beam and bending moments are developed as shown in Fig... the ends of a simply supported berun rotate as a function of time. Since the section in the vicinity of the ends of the precast beams is to be designed as reinforced concrete. as in Fig..42/cy1 and 0.is. The Code does not give values of Y/L and Yp to be used when assessing the effects of differential shrinkage at the serviceability limit state. consequently this region should be given consideration in the shear design. but it would seem to be reasonable to use 1. which is of particular interest in design. they are treated less rigorously but with sufficient detail to illus. A positive rotation occurs at the end of the beam because of creep due to prestress and thus a sagging moment is developed at the connection. 8.ll(b). . the Code implies that these stresses should not exceed the allowable stresses. ·10'BS 54f}u . The test results indicated differential shrinkage strains which varied greatly..ero... first. A bridge formed by either of the above methods is statically determinate for dead load but statically indeterminate for live load. 8.32 !cu)· Although the Code does not quote these criteria. one by flexure of a precast beam and one by interface shear..z~. by analogy with stress and strain &'i' ~ (M/EI)&~ (8. The sagging ifioment is relieved by the fact that negative rotations occur as a result of both differential shrinkage and creep due to self weight. But. 8. 8". The actual failures were as follows: thirteen by shear in the precast beams.~':. 10. consisting of preten· sioned beams with solid insitu concrete infill. rre~~:~~~e%ent ransversely prestressed insitu concrete cross head {b) Beams embedded in crosshead FJg.. This means that no tensile stresses are permitted in a Class 1 member: this seems rather severe in view of the fact that any cracks in the insitu concrete will be remote from the tendons. It was found that. In the following analyses. trate the derivation of the relevant formulae in the Code.. They carried out tests on continuous girders with three levels of prestress (z. This value was based upon the results of tests on composite Tbeams reported by Kajfasz. second. given in Chapter 4. if the ratio of creep strain to elastic strain at time t is (i and the stress at time r is/.. no bending moments are developed in the beam. 8. moment redistributions causing a reduction of support moment of about 30% could be achieved. it is almost certain that tensile stresses will be developed at the tops of the precast beams. is often necessary. with some tendons passing through the ends of the beams.)..15) The effects of creep and shrinkage are discussed in detail in reference [220). The design rules for reinforced concrete can be applied to the diaphragm. to resist shear. He thus suggested that this approach should be used to predict the support moment.irJA~~::~..10. and thus. whereas the other beam had no bottom reinforcement. who tested fifteen halfscale models. on piers but instead are embedded in a transversely prestressed insitu concrete crossbead. Mattock (220) tested two continuous composite beams for a period of two years. Kriz and Hognestad [215)..lO(a). 8. The 'rate of creep' approach. but none of the specimens failed in shear in the connection. but the value quoted in the Code is a reasonable value to adopt for design purposes. In order to examine the influence of creep and shrinkage on connection behaviour. be continued.49% reinforcement. bottom reinforcement.14) where E is the elastic modulus. Creep due to prestress The general method is illustraled here by considering the two span continuous beam shown in Fig. as shown in Fig.5%.~iie ·consrr•icrwn Shear strength Introduction Tests have been carried out on Jlalfscale models of continuous girders composed of precast Isections with an insitu concrete flange and support diaphragm. Insitu concrete 1 Continuity reinforcement Positive moment connection required for longterm effects Pre cast beams Pier fa) Beams supported on pier • Support b Precast Mbeams ! r. in the case of a beam made continuous by providing an insitu concrete diaphragm. Thus flexural cracks could form at the top of the beam.11 Longterm effects developed at the connection. c_oiiCTeuf7ind co1f1Iiil. For beam and slab bridges in a normal environment the Code gives a value of 100 x 10. and the stress due to prestress does not exceed 0. It thus seems to be reasonable to redistribute moments in composite bridges provided that the Code upper limit of 30% for reinforced concrete is not exceeded..IO(b).12. 8. good agreement between calculated and observed flexural strengths of continuous connections involving inverted Tbeams with added insitu concrete has been reported by Beckett [217). they will generally be met in practice. It was found to be safe to ignore the precompression in the precast concrete except for the specimens with 2. which is adopted in the Code. . The latter beam cracked at the bottom of the diaphragm after about one year and the behaviour of the beam under its design load was adversely affected. the end of a precast beam which is to form part of a continuous composite bridge.ricJ8 e .lO(a) has been investigated by Mattock and Kaar [218). The provision of bottom reinforcement has been considered by Mattock (220). it should be remembered that the end of the beam will be subjected to hogging bending. assumes that under variable stress the rate of creep at any time is independent of the stress history. which is defined as the difference between the shrinkage strain of the insitu concrete and the average shrinkage plus creep strain of the precast unit. it is mace convenient to work in terms of moment fM) and curvature ( t1J ). which cause hogging moments to be Final f i Initial/ (a) Simply supported M ~ (b) Continuous Fig.83. and the creep strains of the pre:~ast unit. including the precompression was negligible except for the highest level of prestress. Nevertheless. Mattock found that the observed variation due to creep and shrinkage of the centre support reactions could be predicted by the 'rate of creep' approach [198).lO(a).. 8. 113) of ignoring differential shrinkage effects in composite slabs. as shown in Fig.. Kaar. This recommendation is based upon the results of tests carried out by Kaar. ~f"fe7. The beam has constant flexural stiffness and 111 . and thus the insitu concrete diaphragm or crossbead bas to be designed to resist the hogging moments which will occur at the supports..ii / Support p ""'~· l The shear strength of continuity connections of the type shown in Fig. Sturrock [219] tested models of continuity joints which simulated the type shown in Fig. it was intended that the current practice (6.49). but consideration should be given to the following points. When designing. In the continuity problem under consideration. These strains depend upon many variables and.IO(a).0 for each. 8. 0. If the beams are prestressed.43. 8. for the appropriate class of prestressed member. 8.. 216]. ignoring and.a~#. when used as shown in Fig. 110 r· Continuity ' ! .4 fcyt (i. rather than a shear failure in either the joint or a precast beam llway from the joint.. it was found that the difference between the flexural strengths calculated by. The explanation of this is given in Chapter 13 in connection with a discussion of thermal stresses.!ast Serviceability limit state I I I Crack widths ll{ld stresses in the reinforced concrete diaphragm can be checked by the method discussed for reinforced concrete in Chapter 7.. estimated values have to be used. Finally. together with the usual top reinforcement needed to resist the hogging moment under imposed loading.10 (b)).
If it is required that the precast beam and the flange s1ay the same length. Mattock [220] suggested that ~cc should be taken as ·2.14. ' Specific creep Time(tl Fig.~~"" + f= .e. In time Ot.exp (~)}is designated <j>1 . i. it is completely general and is applicable to any_.<~ ___ .thus (P•. and the change of the shrinkage stress be Of.~) + (P~) (<o ..25) Hence. when t = 0. cement content. . these rotations would change due to creep by (2MU3El) 8~ (8.· ._. 8. it is necessary to apply to the centroid of the flange a 1ensile force of Hence. for span 2. Also in time Ot.. the curvature1. is El+ f= <xp (. In practice the value of ~cc is likely to be between 1..16) and of span 2 would be k5')> = k (ME[)5~ (8. = K(<. for any continuous beam. The creep factor~ is dependent upon a great number of variables. Thus the net potential change of strain.11 and the restraint moment at the internal support be M....25MU3E[) and (8. 8. at any time t. EqAq ·'""' . in general. This factor is referred to earlier in this chapter in connection with lhe relief of differential shrinkage stresses. is the shrinkage stress (E£_.. 'fl ~ ~ ' . thus _. The rotation due to M if the spans were simply supported would be ± 2ML/3EI with the negative and positive signs being taken for spans 1 and 2 respectively.where the subscript b refers to the precast beam. then$ = 0.. J3 = O./f) 6•. and not from the time of prestressing. The net moment applied to the composite section and which produces a curvature of the composite section is.' . At time t. with respect to the precast beam and composite centroids respectively. Maximum curvature=..87. If ~ is calculated from the data in Appendix C of the Code..__ . This value implies that the creep factor <!>1 to be applied to the restraint moment due to creep is 0.43. . if the beam were cast and prestressed as a monolithic continuous beam.  LShrinkage Md is the hogging restraint moment which would occur if 1 '·"\ ''~·~ . If the limiting value (~.15. ~ ComposUe centroid ·····~·1··~I Precast ·····r··centroid Tendon . it should be remembered that its value should be based on the increase in creep strain from the time that the beam is made continuous by casting the insitu concrete. due to creep is examined. let this stress bef. K OF= 0£_. This moment will be designated Mr Hence dM ~ +M=MP The solution of this equation with the boundary condition u.24) where K is a constant.· . it is assumed that the relationships between cieep strain per unit stress (specific creep) and time. In the analysis which follows..Precast concrete and composite construction Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 that. and between shrinkage strain (£.5 and 2.) of j3 is again taken as 2.14 Specific creeptime and shrinkagetime Shrinkage Before considering the effects of shrinkage on the restraint moments of a continuous beam. the restraint moment would change by OM.20) (.= KO~IE curve~ The solution of this equation with the boundary condition that. .. At time t. so that. In time Ot.)~ and its curvature to change by(Pe. using equation (8..14) e.. the restraint moment due to the combined dead loads of the precast beam and insitu concrete applied to the coni1'osite seclion._____. let the curvatures associated with these moments be 1. A more rigorous proof is given in reference [220].21) (+ 2bML/3E[) Since the two spans are joined at the support.5.exp(~)] jc ~rr= / M =. In time Ot.18) and ( + 2MIJ3E[)5~ (8. If the two net changes of rotation are equated and the resulting equation rearranged.<P (8.1Jwill increase due to creep by Otjl. tdiffl the beam were cast as a monolithic continuous beam. provided that the appropriate value of Mp is used...~ ~' '.. due to this change. In time t after casting the insitu concrete. lheir net changes of rotation must be equal. .IEJJ1>) ~.\Ir ~ = O. age at loading.. f = EE' _!i ~ Consider a piece of concrete which is restrained against shrinkage so that a tensile sluinkage stress is developed. the eccentricity used should be that i:eJative to the centroid of the composite section.. This is explained as follows.· f""••<=~  Although equation (8. and for a parabolic profile k = 'lL/3..· .· . The prestressing force is P and the maximum eccentricity in each span is e.87. _:___. have the similar forms shown in Fig. 8._ span arrangement. In the absence of more precise data..· . Unfortunately. + M = 3kPe d~ 2 The right hand side of this equation is the sagging restraint moment which would result.fli~ 0< Ede. and the adoption of the average value of 2 for ~"" implies a maximum error of 10% in the value of 4>1.13 Effect of creep on composite section Creep due to dead load By an analysis similar to that Shrinkage (t. . Stress resultants app!iedto composi1e section Stress resultants applied to precast section Net stress resultants applied at compos"ite centroid Fig..41.i~I:~ :=:=:=:~=:==:=)= Pe~f3 Pebr.. which results in a change of shrinkage stress. using equation (8.. In order io maintain compatibility between the two concretes it is necessary to apply an axial force of p~ and a moment of P..f = 0 is .19) and (8. the expression [1 . Differential shrinkage The general method is again illustrated by considering a twospan continuous beam which is symmetrical about the internal support. and. For design purposes...'8'£~~~.· centroid Potential creep strains (8... there would be a potential creep strain of (f/E)O~.22) M= Mp4>1 l Fig.16). Hence.) which would occur in the absence of creep multiplied by the creep factor qi.of the prestressing force relative to the centroid of the composite section.P. by summing expressions (8. For the twospan beam considered in the last section.. since tjl.... the change of stress is d~ K. The rotation. the relief of shrinkage stresses. (8.23) M=M.e composite section must be in a state of internal equilibrium... the change in end rotation of span I at the internal support would be k8')> = k (P•IE[)5~ (8.· 7 · .17). using equation (8.22) has been derived for a twospan beam.17) where k depends upon the tendon profile. Hence. at the ends of spans I and 2 respectively would be (8.19) Also in time Ot.13. let the increase of shrinkage be Ot. Hence the eccentricity to be used should be that. (8..r """ L equal spans.) and specific creep (~IE) strain given above. creep of the precast concrete will cause the axial strain of the precast beam to change by (PIA. Hence the maximum prestressing moment in each span is Pe.24) (f/E)8~ 6f = EB•. In lime Ot.. 8. the expression f=&. and the change (Otjl) of curvature in time Ot can be calculated by considering Fig.M = Ois 'i<. watercement ratio.t>~ to the precast beam. Appendix C of Part 4 of the Code gives data for the assessment of the following effects on ~ : rela'live humidity. the restraint moments at any time can be obtained by calculating the restraint moments which would occur if the beam were cast and prestressed as a monolithic continuous beam and by then multiplying these moments by the creep factor il>1. Consider the composite beam shown in Fig. However.18) and (8. 8. F""'_. there will be a constant curvature ('ljl) imposed throughout the length of the beam.) = P«~ Hence.. whent = 0. it is now necessary to apply a cancelling force of P~ and a cancel· ling moment of Peb~ to the composite section.~ M = M. The above analysis implies that the prestress moment (Pe) should be calculated by considering the prestressing forces applied to tbe entire composite section. ij> 1 can again be taken as 0. in the absence of creep. The eccentricities of the prestressing force P are el> and e. The insitu concrete is initially unstressed and thus does not creep. the basic data required to assess these effects are not generally known at the design stage... 8. thickness of member and time under load. cp 11j3 is designated$ . the differential shrinkage strain will change by OE. f= K [!  In the Code. one is interested in ~cc• which is the value towards which ~ would eventually tend. Due 10 the differential shrinkage between the precast beam and the insitu flange. the shrinkage stress. = K~IE and OE.. ~"'~ / f'"' ""~~~=.21).. thus (8.24) efL d~ J__ .:__.. The net change of rotation for span 1 is obtained by summing expression (8.~)] ~ Hence. d~ Hence. [1 . For a straight profile k = L. at any time t.20). the following differential equation is obtained !!M._ l'f'">'·I·""°' ~~ .:r.12 Effect of creep on continuous beam lnp = Potential Precast In the Code. where ')>8~ = (P•IE[)5~ If the spans were freely supported. it can be shown that the restraint moment due to creep under dead load is given by (8. Md is a hogging moment of magnitude (wL 1/8) where w is the total (precast plus insitu) dead load per unit length.) and time..
•~bridge""'·· ....19 X JQ" ]24.. watercement ratio. 0.$ (8. Appendix C of the Code gives data which enable the effects on 114 Combined effects of creep and differential shrinkage The net sagging restraint moment due to creep under prestress and dead load aiid due to differential shrinkage can be obtained by summing equations (8.JEJ where the EI value is appropriate to the composite section.nd en. The calculations need to be carried out only at the serviceability limit state since the restraint moments are + + + t60 ~ Fig.6X 10' 115 . The composite values are based upon a modular ratio of 0.24) dM dj}+M = 3 K 2 EqAcfac~nt Ji The solution of this equation with the boundary condition that. Using equation (8.· Force applied Force applied to insitu flange to composite section  6F §I  Net stress resultants applied at composite centroid ' where A<f and Eq are the area and elastic modulus respectively of the flange concrete. Hence M = (Mp . are: 1. 8. ' to~ BS J:"Allf\ r·d:ast C""'''•<"· <J.86 for centre support. Four spans: I. identical to that presented earlier in this chapter for creep due to prestress.(• E A a ) [l .9 and 8. equation (8.23) and (8.24) M='. Thus b'ljl = bFace.1 Nominal values of stress resultants Code notation The notation adopted in the Code for the creep factors is confusing.775.26) has been derived for a twospan beam.. the overall beam length 25. Thus care should be exercised when assessing a creep factor from Appendix C of the Code for use in composite construction calculations. .5 m and the nominal' values per beam of the critical shear forces and moments at the support and at quarterspan for load combination 1 are given in Table 8.16 Composite beam crosssections due to imposed deformations and can be ignored at the ultimate limit state.Ma$ (8. For design purposes..27) is completely general and is applicable to any span. Reference [36] gives section properties for the precast and composite sections.29 for first internal supports.27 for first internal supports.16.2. results in the following differential equation dM 3 de ~+M=2EqAqa~1 dfl.s Using equation (8... arrangement.26) Ed/ff EctAcfaci:nt $ (8.29) Examples of these calculations are given in [113].centroid Potential shrinkage strain ·r·. ~ = 0.28) for an internal support. The characteristic strengths of the shear reinforcement to be designed and of the precast and insitu concretes are 250 N/mm 1 .M = 0 is M= t Ee/Act aunt 1[ 1 .1. 8. Equation (8.ant is 3/2 for a twospan beam with equal span lengths.. Appropriate values for other numbers of equal length spans . Three spans: I... The total tendon force after all losses have occurred is 3450 kN. the main body of Part 4 of the Code uses fl. thickness of member and time. Although equation (8.775.2 Section properties Property Precast Area (mm') Height of centroid above bottom fibre (mm) Second moment of area (mm') 393450 First moment of area abo11e composite centroid (mm') Firat moment of area above interface {mm3 ) 44. This is because the latter· value allows for the creep strains of the precast ~m whereas.43 for $. In general the value of Ma calculated from equation (8. would eventually tend.28) needs to be multiplied by a constant which depends upon the span arrangement.22)..15). when carrying out the restraint moment calculations.26) shows that the const.. 3. 2.Md)$1 . (8. 0<> qi and 41 1 in the same sense as they are used in this chapter. can be taken as Values for unequal spans would have to be calculated from first principles. The span is 25 m.2 for both internal supports. c. these are summarised in the upper part of Table 8. The Code again assumes a value of 0.Shear in composite construction A bridge deck consists of pretensioned precast standard MS beams at 1 m centres acting compositely with a 160 mm thick insitu concrete top slab. in this chapter. when differential shrinkage calculations for beam and slab bridges were discussed. the restraint moment at the internal support is M and it changes by bM in time Bt. Hence a moment bFacmi is effectively applied to the composite section and this moment induces the curvature 'ljl..0 x 10• 71. 8.exp(fl. Finally.. the creep and shrinkage effects are treated independently (compare Figs. has been given the symbol~ (or f3~cafter a Jong period of cime).55X IQ• 116. it is now necessary to apply a cancelling compressive force of OF to the composite section. the differential shrinkage strain can be assessed: a typical value wo1dd be about 200 x 10~ 6 • This value is much greater than the recommended value of 100 X 10s quoted earlier in this chapter.27) where M. The notation adopted for the creep factors is also referred to in Chapter 7 in connection with the calculation of longterm curvatures and deflections. [216] and [219). Appendix C of Part 4 of the Code adopts the symbol$ for the creep factor which.i.4 x 10• Composite 454 642 65. Table 8.. If at time t.. is the hogging restraint moment which would occur in the absence of creep. . However.· "' .!E_J = 0EsEqAcfau. Table 8. This is approximately correct for a large number of spans (5 or more) but it will underestimate the restraint moment foi beams with fewer spans. one is interested in ediff• which is the value towards which e.. it should be noted that the Code states that M. I.8 which is only slightly different to the correct value of0.)] Mes= (8. then an analysis. Five or more spans: 1.. This force has an eccentricity of a«ni with respect to the centroid of the composite section. 8.~r. whent = 0.15 Differential shrinkage + ~ 0 M + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + g ~ ++ ++++ +'I"++++++ ~ Support Quarter span Fig. Design reinforcement for both vertical and interface shear at the two sections.exp(~)] 2'"3"efef«nt ~ shrinkage of the following to be assessed: relative humidity.0 for all other supportS. Hence.27) with due account being taken of sign. Es= O. Four tendons are deflected at the quarter points and the tendon patterns at midspan and at a support are shown in Fig. const1 1 6ts I " Insitu flange centroid " Composite._. 50 N/mm 1 and 30 N/mm:i respectively.""'j"' ·~"' Precast ··.. La•d Example . Since the composite section must be in a state of internal equilibrium. Quarter span Support Shear force Moment Shear force Moment (kN) Se[fweigh1 163 Parapet 27 Surfacing 29 HB + associated HA 332 (kN) (kNm) 0 0 0 81 14 15 763 132 135 0 196 1333 (kNm) Section properties The modular ratio for the in·situ concrete is j30150 = 0. cement content. or M=M.
and thus the minimum amount of steel of 0.55 x 10'/642 x 65. thus the maximum link spacing is the same as at The section must now be considered to be cracked in flexure.2 x 1..11).15) + {332 x 1.0) + (332 x 1.3 x 1. of equation (6.037) (160) (1111 Stress at composite centroid due to the moment = 795 kN P"·' v x 160)/31 = 89 mi. At support Design shear force at the ultimate limit state is " Design moment at ultimate limit state acting on· precast !.7). distance of centroid of tendons in tension zone from soffit is (15 x 60 + 12 x 110)127 = 82 mm. in the above calculations..J9 x JO') 17. V> Ve.19 x 10 9 ) = 3.1 x 1.15%.7)._.07) (1.. 10 mm links (2 legs) at 390 mm centres give 403 mm 1/m. 7 N/mm 2 is..1 x 1.. Sv 0 . Asv _ S:.73)10·• = 763 x 1.7)' + (0.45 x 109 ) (454.70 N/mm 2 is 9 (124. thus maximum link spacing is lesser of 0. ! i :•_.0) + (14 x 1. 130 .75 x 1.15 = 112 kN = 290 kN .454)/(65..15) + (196 x 1.2 x 1. one would normally estimate the build.15% is all that is required./50 + 442 (2860/3413) = 421 kN Stress at composite centroid due to prestress v.07 N/mm2 . although the support would lie within the transmission zone.15) + (15 x 1.2 x 1.15 It is not necessary to consider the section cracked in flexure at the support and thus the ultimate shear resistance of the concrete alone is Vc=V«l=684kN Design sh.I c<~ /50 + the support (= 640 mm) 10 mm diameter links (2 legs) at 500 mm give 314 mmi/m .'' ~v ~.48 N/mm 1 ~ (0.3).8 x 17.63 Nlmm• Again only Type 3 surface can be used and IO mm links at 350 mm centres would be required.8) (6.0) = 590 kN (163 x From equation (8.8 Ve (Clause 7 .0.75) (160) (1118 = 1034 kN 9 Ve= V«t = 402 kN Total stress at composite centroid to be used in equation (8.45 The cracking moment is given by equation (8.0 x 1..75 x l. of the sections above the composite centroid and above the interface are also required.454 x 124.55 x 10$) (160) U6 x 10 6 x v". 10'1393 450) + (3..55 X 10 ) (160) 116XIOG X ( j(I.0.87 x 250 x 1270 However.49° Vertical component of inclined prestress = (4131) (3.) is the lesser of V«l and Ver and thus (3. Vc0 = Vc 1 + Vc2 = 112 + 290 = 402kN He> 0. Thus use 10 mm links (2 legs) at 350 mm centres which give 449 mm 2/m At quarter span (81 x 1.4. = (15 x 60 + 14 X 110 x = (3.0 x 1. 0..14)3.45 x lOG/393450) (3.24 .....0) = 329 kN At support.= 2860 kNm M1 = (1053 At quarter span (172 x lOa) (44.15) + (135 x 1.3 X I.54 N/mm 2 2 402 mm /m V l> 1.25 N/mm 2 (see Table 4.55 x 10') (300) 6 ) = l.2 x 1.7)1 + (I.. = 1034 + (0.454)/(65.1) 442kN Ver = (0. suggested in . about the composite· centroid.~ ~. The allowable shear stress for Type 2 surface is 0.0) + (196 x 1.19 x 10 9 ) + (0..45 x !O') (4542J4}(642454)/(65. interface shear stress is 11 h _ (590 x 10 ) (71._. Additional shear force (V"2) which can be carried by the composite section before the principal tensile stress at the composite centroid reaches 1.55 x 10 9/642 2860 x 10 8 Nmm ..8Vc.12).8) (66) = 172 kN = V where 0. Finally. ~ 117 .. Thus. v.684)108 (0. thus the stress at the composite centroid is due only to the prestress and is fip = (3.8) (195 .' \: '""""1""'"'"' )= '· V> I. but the laitence must be removed from the top surface of the beam. this chapter Shear stress at composite centroid is = 459 kN v Design moment at the ultimate limit state is Centroid of tendons from soffit +2 x db = 1200.8) (66) ~ 1087 kN Maximum design shear force = 795 kN.4 x 10 6 )/(65. (0..87 x 250 Interface shear Total design shear force at serviceability limit slate is 1.45 x 106/393 450)  (3. = distance from extreme compression fibre of composite section to the centroid of the.49)10 3 = 66 kN Net design shear force on precast section = 225(0. i I i. 10 6 ) x (1 .../50 = 1.4) (160)103 0.3.19 x 10 9 ) (160) = 0. thus section is adequate. A. in practice.ib~~fai) .15 = 225 kN ( /(1.4 x 10 8) = N/ 0 ·73 mm 2 (65.75d.Precast concrete and composite construction Concrete bridge del5ign to BS 5400 The first moments of area. BE 2173 requires a reduced value of prestress to be adopted· but the Code does not state that this should be done. lowest tendon 1270 mm ~~ . Stress at extreme tension fibre due to prestress is ~ 2 145 mm /m Ve 1 = 81 x 1.82 = 1118 mm M = 1053 Design shear force at the ultimate limit state acting on the precast section alone is (124. = 952 mm and 4 x 160 = 640 mm.___ ..04 = 1.8 is the partial safety factor applied to the prestress (see Chapter 6). Allowing for vertical component of inclined prestress.AyYib f. __ _ .3 x 1.37 l30 + 0.0) + (15 x 1.6 x 10 (124.5).2 x 1.54) 124.. Shear stress at composite centroid is f.0 x 1.4 N/mm2 (0. s. The allowable shear stress for Type 3 surface is I.10) ! d1 = 130 mm vh = 0...J9 6.0 x l. . = 0.0) + (29 x 1.. = (0.2 x 1._ . in equation (8.2 x 1. and calculate the shear capacity in accordance with the estimated pre· stress.38 N/mrns (see Table 4. However.14 N/mm 2 1. · .0) + (27 x 1.5) and this cannot be increased by providing links in excess of the required minimum of0.. ~ Vl.. minimum links must be provided such that V >Ve.2 x 1. xyp Vci = 163 x 1.38 N/rnm 2 x JO') Allowable principal tensile stress (see Chapter 6) = f.87 fyvdf . the full value of the prestress has been taken ac the support.75 x 1.up of prestress within the transmission zone. Thus provide (0. thus links are required such that \ = (112 x 10 3)(44.15) + (1333 x 1.45 x JO') (45489) (454)/(65.38) (1.19 x 109 ) (160) Additional shear force (V"2) which can be carried by the composite section before the principal tensile stress at the composite centroid reaches 1.15) + (29 x 1.04 N/mmi (tension) v.89) (642.1) VVc 0.I) 3413 kNm From the modified form./30)10"' Total design shear force at serviceability limit state is \" .l 6 N/mmz Type 1 surface is not pennitted for beam and slab bridge construction.8) (5.. from equation (8.48) 10a . This amount of reinforcement exceeds that required for vertical shear.ear force is = 1053 kNm '· A. 70 N/mm 2 • Design shear force at the ultimate limit state acting on the precast section alone is nominal value xy1r.2.15) (300) (1000)/100 = 450 mm 1/m 2 ='29~mm /m This exceeds that provided for vertical shear.7) is f~ 130 /30)10" 3 + Ultimate shear resistance (V.19 x 10 9 ) 5.7).. thus links are required such that Ill (442:~402)106 A. These have been calculated and are given in the lower part of Table 8. Vc0 =Vc1+Vc2=225+459=684kN = 225 + (132 x 1.Vertical shear At support Centroid of tendons from soffit = (15 x 60 + 12 = 214mm x 110 + 2 x 1080 + 2 x 1130)/31 There is no applied moment acting. d. °' A. because uncracked Maximum allowable shear force l: jl p 1! .87)(250)(1270) section alone lnclination of the four deflected tendons = arctan (970/6500) = 8.45) (sin 8.87 f.n = 1053 x 106 (642 . + (27 x = 112 + (14 x 1.
The effective heights have been derived mainly with framed buildings in mind and do not cover.4) indicates that.45 /cu· Similarly Fig. The slenderness ratio appropriate to a particular axis is defined as the effective height in respect to that axis divided by the overall depth in respect to that axis. This reduction leads to the Code fonnula for an axially loaded column: N = 0. design rules for pile caps. Thus a coltnnn can be considered as a member with an aspect ratio not greater than 4. generally. it will be possible to indicate the most likely critical limit state for a particular situation. A column is considered to be short. generally. If the areas of concrete and steel are A 0 and A. For symmetrically reinforced rectangular or circular columns. It should be noted that. but a wall is defined as having an aspect ratio. 4. the latter equation does not appear in the Code. data given by Timoshenko [225] indicate that.ling mode. since comp~iance with the serviceability limit state criteria is assured by applying deemed to satisfy clauses. partially restrained in direction at one or both ends Unbraced or partially braced. the approach that is adopted in this chapter is.. The column and wall clauses of CP 110 were derived with this approach in mind. 75 fy for the steel stress..3).0035. design rules. which ~llows for lateral deflections. 4.02.. apparently. It is possible for slender columns to buckle by combined lateral bending and twisting: Marshall [224] reviewed all of the available relevant test data and concluded that lateral torsional buckling will not influence collapse provided that.4 indicates that.4) Axial load plus uniaxial bending When a bending moment is present. is.15 0. more analyses are required for a design in accordance with the Code because of the requirement to check stresses and crack widths at the serviceability limit state in addition to strength at the ultimate limit state.lubstr1ww•~. .A" (9. Effective height The Code gives a table of effective heights {l~). restrained in direction at one end. The Code adopts an average value of 0. In ad Definition dition. If the slenderness ratios are not less than 12. General which are based upon those of CP 110. lateral deflections at the serviceability limit state. was based upon a table in CP 114. then. consequently. Some of these aspects are discussed by Lee [222].1) Cranston also suggested the following limit for columns for which one end is not restrained against twisting.. the column is defined as slender and lateral deflection has to be con· sidered by using the additipnal moment concept which is explained later.·· . by a nonlinear analysis. columns. The design of the latter will also take longer because. to give the background to the Code clauses and. This can be achieved by designing bracing or bearings to resist all lateral forces.. This is illustrated in Fig. The CP 110 clauses were derived for buildings and. for unbraced columns (which frequently occur in bridges).). by about 10%.. Instead. as experience in using the Code is gained. the compressive stress in the concrete is 0... then the axial strength of the column is N = 0.784/y (see Chapter 4). are given. 9. in a particular plane. respectively..02. thus. if lateral stability to the structure as a whole is provided in that plane. the column and wall clauses in the Code are also more relevant to buildings than to bridges. for design purposes. in tum. the compressive stress in the reinforce· ment is the design stress which can vary from 0. This work formed the basis of the CP I IO clauses for slender columns.plained later in this chapter. the types of column which occur in bridge construction. the Code states that a column is braced. In doing this.75 J. the reader is referred to [221]. obtained from equation (9. In CP 110. In view of this. allowing for the Code requirement that stresses and crack widths at the serviceability limit state should be checked.ipported ends.. It would thus appear necessary to consider each particular case individ· ually by examining the likely buck.3) The Code recognises the fact that some eccentricity of load will occur in practice and. but it would seem prudent to apply a similar limit to bridge columns. This limit does not appear in the Code. In the above discussion of slenderness limits. Braced. walls (both reinforced and plain) and bases.1 Lateral deflection !1 ~j :i I Introduction Columns The Code does not give design rules which are specifically concerned with bridge substructures. Indeed. on plan. This limit is stipulated because Cranston's study did not include col Ultimate limit state Short column Axial load Since lateral deflections can be neglected in a short column.. partially restrained at other Cantilever 0. first. at a strain of 0. and this limit has been adopted in the Code for cantilever columns.1. more onerous than that implied by equation (9. Slenderness Nmits A column is not defined in the Code.. The overall depth should be used irrespective of the cross· sectional shape of the column. these structural elements are treated in genera1 terms only. greater than 4. restrained in direction ac both ends Braced. 100 b1/h (9.0035 (see Chapter 4). the design charts of Parts 2 and 3 of CP 110 119 . abutments and wing walls.751. An analysis. it would be difficult to produce a table covering all situations. 9. which did not originate in CP 110. CP 110 sug· gests a slenderness ratio limit of 30 for unbraced columns. the Code requires a minimum eccentricity of 5% of the section depth to be adopted. which is here summarised in Table 9. However. many columns used for bridges are tapered: for such columns.0 1.1 Effective heights of columns Column type l/I. since allowance for it is made by reducing the ultimate strength. 72/.Ac + 0. This complication is mainly due to the fact that it has not yet been established which limit state will govern the design under a particular set of load effects. However. l". thus. to discuss them in connection with bridge piers.718 fyto 0. iindff"'""""'"'s umns having a greater slenderness ratio. but a minimum value of O. it is only necessary to check the strength at the ultimate limit state. The table. for a full description of the various types of substructure and of their applications.. and thus the effects of its lateral deflection can be ignored. Presumably. It is not clear why the Code adopts the average value for columns.1 to braced and unbraced columns.. collapse of an axially loaded column occurs when all of the material attains the ultimate concrete com· pressive strain of0. 118 Ultimate. between designs carried out in accordance with the current documents and with the Code~ 'will be noticed in the design of substructures and foundations. The author anticipates that the greatest differences in section sizes and reinforcement areas. at this strain. it is con· servative to calculate the slenderness ratio using the aver· age depth of column. in view of the variety of different types of articulation which can occur in bridges.4 f"A + 0. and whether the articulation of the bridge is such that the col· umns are effectively braced or can sway. three possible methods of design are given in the Code: 1. as ex. limit on I.. unless it is intended to consider. bas Jed to a complicated design procedure.45 fc. 10 .1. 250 b1/h (9. for beams (see Chapter 5). which is intended only to be a guide for various end conditions. if the slenderness ratios aPPropriate to each principal axis are both less than 12. I N ! === . This. from which the substructure clauses of the Code were derived. The limiting slenderness ratio is taken as 12 because work carried out by Cranston [223] indicated that bt1ckling is rarely a significant design consideration for slenderness ratios less than 12.. is based u1xm a similar table in CP 110 which. specifically.Asc (9. the Code requires that /0 should not exceed 60 funes the minimum column thickness. consideration should be given to the way that movement can be accommodated by the bearings.2) In addition.. The fact that the CP 110 clauses have been adopted in the Code without.. The design stressstrain curve for the ultimate limit state (see Fig. are given for columns. thus. is not required at the serviceability limit state and. It is not necessary to calculate the moment due to this eccentricity. in tenns of the clear height (!. and. for simply si. Cranston [223] suggested that this limit should be reduced. 500 b2/h where h is the depth in the plane under consideration and b is the width.t Chapter9 ii Substructures and foundations ii Serviceability q' Fig.5 . to /0 Table 9._ 1 Reference is made in Table 9.1) and.0 2. the flexibility of the column base (and soil in which it is founded). excessive lateral deflections can occur at the serviceability limit state for large slender· ness ratios. it is implicitly assumed that the column has a constant cross· section throughout its length.67 !.
represents the full axial load carrying capacity given by equation (9. Thus. about the major and minor axes respectively. 9. (b) Section ABC N= Fc+F.4(a). which are described in the next section. require a 'trial and error' design method which can be tedious. Such a diagram is shown in Fig. where. only nominal reinforcement is required if the axial load does not exceed the value of N given by equation (9... 130] may be used. Mw M"' M. designing it as a beam to resist the moment Mu from equation (9.4 Bimdal bending interaction diagram ~0.h/2) = F.A. when the axial force is present (9.3 it can be shown that.4(b). Which is less than the yield strain of 0.. and the Code gives equation (9.=Fc+~F. the area of reinforcement and/or neutral axis depth modified. The procedure is obviously tedious and is best perfonned by computer. the strains. is a function ofNIN. or a set of design charts. when e > h/2..11) and then . Axial load plus bia:xial bending If a column of known dimensions and steel area is analysed rigorously. it is first necessary to assume a reinforcement area.the value given by equation (9.)"n =I (9. For equilibrium Strains Fig.121 "' . However. as a beam. at this limit.3.13) where A~ and Ab are the required areas of tension reinforcement for the column section and a beam respectively.. If the depth of concrete in compression is de. where d ' is the depth from the surface to the reinforcement in the more highly compressed face. it should be noted from this equation that. the Code permits a simplified design method to be used in which the axial load is ignored at first and the section designed as a beam. then calculate A. •"''· M + N(d.7).. from equation (9. 9. 0. i. These charts were prepared using the rectangulaf .z.72f. where N~.. (9.8) is not less than the actual design moment.. the stresses in the various steel layers can be determined from the stressstrain curve . assuming an axial load N.tion 3. 9. Guidance on applying this procedure is given by Allen [203]. 1··~· Fe Stress resultants F.d') + F. Appropriate values are tabula1ed in the Code. d.12) In the absence of the axial force N. the Code does not allow de to be taken to be less than 2d '. it can be seen that a computer. = 0.dj2) (h/2 .e. however.0035 i Pt<in h 2.. M. considered as a beam. the strains at all levels are then defined. However. I I • i i i Section elevation 11 ~ A.reducing the area of tension reinforcement by (N/0.r:i (_.4fcu • My Actual f.s Eccentricity (e) =MIN= (h/2) . When designing a column subjected to biaxial bending. These values can be compared with the design values and. If M is Jess than the actual design moment.72 fy. . by the tensile design stress of 0.12).9) The righthand side of this equation is the ultimate moment of resistance (M. • c±J ·I fj ! i • • i r A.5) For equilibrium N = 0. is required for the efficient design of columns subjected to an axial load and a bending moment  Section plan M = 0_.. The design procedure is thus to assume values of de and h2 . as shown in Fig.6)._. The required design moment is obtained by taking moments about the tension reinforcement.4 fcubdc 17' + 0.ition d.(d.8) where Fb ·is the tension steel force required for the section .(WZd. Hence.d.~ F$=FbN The area of tension reinforcement is obtained by dividing F.9). parallel to the MxMy plane.. The shape of the diagram in Fig.1 and A. WhenN exceeds.parabolic stressstrain curve for concrete and the trilinear stressstrain curve for reinforcement discussed in Chapter 4. Mux and M. (d.. if deficient.!2) ~ •.h/2 = h/2 ._}_fl~lJ . the section can be designed by. d .The axial load and bending moment that can be resisted by the column can then be detennined.10) in the form M.14) a:. __ _ :. then by using the simplified rectan 11 If force equilibrium is considered. A strain compatibility approach (see Chapter 5) can be adopted for any crosssection. Values . ~=M+~~ ~·~ Now. The Code gives fonnulae for the design of rectangular columns only. to resist the increased moment (M.72 fr .dc=h2e (9.2.) [128.1 >""·· .. 9. as in Fig. similar fonnulae could be derived for other crosssections. Allen [203] gives useful advice on the use of the design charts. N = 0. = M + N(h/2.3).1 ' :~ 1 ~i i I t..2 Plain column se1. The formulae.di.4fc.).11) ~ :L.6). serious errors in the required quantities of reinforcement should not arise by assuming that the stress is always 0.1£) (9..=Fb (9. Hence. gular stress block for concrete with a constant stress of 0.. At failure of a reinforced concrete column. and check that the value of M calculated from equation (9.4 f.4{b) varies according to the value of NINsu: but can be represented approximately by (M)M~)"n + (M)M". 1 ~J. Hence.~ Muv M.A~t + fs2Aa (9._'· .j given by the lefthand side of equation (9.A.3(a). it is necessary to design reinforcement. Hence. the Code specifies the more conservative limit of e = h/2 . the assumed values of de and fa should be modified and the procedure repeated.(b) Reinforced column section Code formulae + (~)"• (~)"" M.d') F..0035.81 f.: Consider an Uflreinforced section at collapse under the action of an axial toad (JI) and a bending moment (M). stresses and stress resultants are as shown in Fig. 9. Stresse. 9. 1 N i:1.3.d '. 9.6) should not be used fore> h/2. However.Fs o• Fs= (Fe+ F's)N and. first.6) Hence. When the eccentricity is large (e > h/2d2 ) and thus the reinforcement in one face is in tension. (9. N"' Fig.(d. An example of their use is given by Allen [203]. through the diagram for a par· ticular value of N!Nuz would have the shape shown by Fig. by taking moments about the column centre line.. From Fig. the strain in the more highly compressed reinforcement is 0. 9.NI0. II I' I _______ ___ij :.87 /. It should be noted that the Code now takes the design stress of yielding compression reinforcement to be its conservative value of 0. Idealised 4n j (a) Biaxial interaction diagram M.4 f~b (h.Substructures and foundations Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 ! ?M N >/1<e =MIN l [HI Q.. Although the Code fo_nnulae are for rectangular sections only.de) 0.00175.002 (see Chapter 4)..~ _. An area of reinforce· ment is first proposed and then the neutral axis depth is guessed. Fig. the section can be designed._. :.. are the maximum moment capacities for bending about the major and minor axes respectively. 2 from equa· tion (9. from Fig. Hence. A section.'. it is possible to construct an interaction diagram which relates fail· ure values of axial load (JV) and moments (Mx. These equations are difficult to apply because the depth (de) of concrete in compression and the stress (h 2) in the reinforcement in the tension {or less highly compressed) face are unknown.. 9. 9.).) of the section when considered as a beam. equation (9. Since the extreme fibre compressive strain is 0. 9.72fy In conclusion.) (9.hence As = Ab .72 f..3.7) + 0."bd.87 f.4f<WI E!ev.2 feubdc (h . N is negative.
. prior to material failure taking place (223].!=Ne.8 Effect of unequal end moments Total moment Fig.1w .21). but they can be significant in the design of slender columns. that it is unconservative to assume a 1riangular distribution.. eadd = 1.4M2 (9.6.e. instability is ignored initially and. However. to resist the axial load N and the total moment M. = M + (Nh/1750) (l. as shown in Fig. 9.I I.15).aa) which is additional to the primary (or initial) moment (M1).\~:I '\. Cranston (223] has suggested that the initial moment.dd = l~j8 122 '" 'Pu = (0.dd = l~J12 e.4 M 1 + 0.25.0.6 Curvature distributions M. in order to simplify the calculation for a braced column. for a balanced section in which the concrete crusbes and the tension steel yields simultaneously. The additional moment concept used in the Code is based upon that of the C. the total design moment (M1) is given by I /' M ' '• Actual .Conservative . 123 . Mux and M. tempera· ture movement). Hence. it is unlikely that a reinforced concrete column will fail due to instability. I M.18).dd = Ne<UM (9. For a column bent in double curvature. Minor axis bending If h is taken as the depth with respect to minor axis bending.!h) (9. However. Hence.! ~'llbstrl'"'. should not be taken to be less than 0. the Code requires the total moment to be taken as the sum of the additional moment and the maximum initial moment.0.. These deflections are small for a short column and can be ignored. The distribution of curvature for a colomn subjected to an 8. from Fig.. 9.15) e.0035 l.16) (9.87 x 460/200 x 10 3 = 0. the curvature is less than that given by equation (9.6.18) (9.0035 l.8. for design purposes. M 1 is taken to be negative. equation (9.5 Additional moment I~ of Nro:.5.6 M2 but M 1 <: 0.05h.63h.0030. and conservative to assume a rectangular distribution.20) If this curvature is substituted into equation (9. the additional eccentricity and.hes1i>n·10 BS 14. Hence."~~r r N N I I I I I . may be taken as M 1 = 0.jh) 2 (1.xial load and end moments is shown in Fig.xis bending A column which is loaded eccentrically with respect to its major axis can fail due to large additional moments developing about the minor axis. 9. This is because the slenderness ratio with respect to the minor axis is greater than that with respect to the major axis.E.00 ~ lePJ10 M..23) where M 1 and M 2 are the smalier and larger of the initial end moments respectively. respectively: e.. The additional eccentricity is the lateral deflection.B.21) It should be noted that for a slenderness ratio of 12 {i.19). the total design moment. To be precise. should never be taken to be less than M2 • For an unbraced column. a reasonable value to adopt would be: It is now necessary to consider the possibility of an instability failure as opposed to a material failure. and the latter can be determined if the distribution of curvature along the length of the column can be calculated.!h) 1 is taken as the greater of the effective heights with respect to the major and minor axes. If these maxima do not coincide. Eu= 0. where it can be seen that the lateral deflections increase the eccentricity of the load and thus produce a moment (M.17) 'lilu can be determined if the'· strain distribution at collapse can be assessed.g. 9. the maximum additional moment occurs at the same location as the maximum initial moment. Such a situation occurs when the moments at the ends of the column are different. Hence. Code [226] allows for this by reducing the curvature obtained from equation (9.17) and (9. M. It is then necessary to check that the lefthand side of equation (9.E. + M&dd l ~M. for very slender columns.. hence..19) It also assumed that d=h. it is necessary to assess the additional eccentricity at collapse. Cranston (223] suggested that. then the following expi:ession for the lateral deflection (or additional eccentricity) is obtained eQdd = (hf1750)(l. d N N Loading Initial Initial eccentricity moment Additlonal eccentricity Additional moment Lateral Moments deflection Fig. the curvature is given by e1 and e. by any one of the methods discussed earlier for short columns.21). then the additional eccentricity is given by equation (9. (226] in which the shortterm concrete crushing strain (Ew) is taken as 0. In Fig. The deflections and their effects are illustrated in Fig. General approach When an eccentric load is applied to any column.00375 + 0. In order to allow for longterm effects under service conditions. but which can sway under lateral load or imposed deformations (e. so that the curvature is obtained finally as ~. Hence. eadd Mt= M.14) does not exceed unity.22) M.. but for the maximum permitted slenderness ratio of 60. It should be noted that M.) to be less thanM 2 • In such a situation. Since the characteristic strength of the reinforcement is unlikely to exceed 460 N/mm 2 . which is obtained from equations (9.Go)l.002)/d = 0. in order to allow for the nominal minimum initial eccentricity of0. In such a situation. It is possible for the resulting total moment (M . is given in the Code as (9.5. (9..00375. The actual distribution of curvature depends upon the column crosssection.15) is obviously con· servative..7 Collapse strains for balanced section _J Thus. Hence. :M~. 9.1 uiid fo"~.7.it is obviously necessary to design to resist M 2 and thus M. ~ M Slender columns \ . For these two distributions the central deflections are given by. eadd= O.00575/d (9.=M1+ Madd where (9. the additional moment can be very significant in design terms. Major a.. I  I I e~dd I e. The C. the strain distribution is as shown in Fig.19) by the following empirical amount l/50 000h 2 ~ ~ Fig.B.=Ne1 M. 9. Since the section design is carried out at the ultimate limit state.1 can then be calculated from first principles or obtained from the design charts for uniaxial bending..OSh.:re11<.v. the strains are less than their ultimate values and. where 'lilu is the maximum curvature at the centre of the column at collapse. £8 can be conservatively taken as 0. This can be very conservative for certain bridge columns which are effectively fixed at both the base and the top. the extent of cracking and of plasticity in the concrete and reinforcement. Oridgl!. lateral deflections occur. 9. The strain (£$)in the reinforcement is that aPPropriate to the design stress at the ultimate limit state. one should determine the position where the maximum total moment occurs and then calculate the latter moment.. ~ (0. 9. where the total moment is a maximum. Unless the slenderness ratio is large.00575 lj50 OOOh)lh (9.d ~M2 T 1.05 Nh.. just slender)..rJ4 are the initial and additional eccentricities respectively. it can be seen.002. hence. the latter strain has to be multiplied by a creep factor which Cranston (223] suggests should be conservatively taken as 1.Unconservetive ·j)'I I Fig. 9. The column should then be designed. It is thu's' necessary to consider the mode of collapse.Jh)2 (1. 9.:.
and has an area of at least 0. Thus a wall should be designed for a moment per unit length of at least 0.i mm.5 fc.26) where le is the greater Of lu and la:r Biaxial bending When subjected to biaxial bending. an elastic analysis should be carried out.. \1'._. then a wall is considered to be unbraced and its slenderness ratio should not exceed 30. should then be designed as a slen· der column of unit width. in the plane of the wall.Ji where nw is the maximum load per unit length.00351. Jn fact. or a stress of about 200 N/mm 1 •. This definition thus covers reinforced concrete abutments. ' ~: : '.41. """""'T"""" Short walls General Hence. In terms of the Code. as given by equation (9. Each section along the length of the wall should then be designed to resist the combined effects of the moment per unit length at right angles to the wall and the compression.Ac + (0. This rule ensures that deflections will not be excessive. a nominal minimum eccentricity of 0.. a column should be designed to resist the axial load N and moments (M. N.jb)' (! .IO(a)(c) Stress comparison wnn. ~ ·. The total moments about the major and minor axes respectively are M.9 the column should be designed for biaxial bending to resist the following moments When considering bending perpendicular to an axis in the plane of a wall. = (Nb/1750) (l.. the Code pennits the column to be designed to resist the axial load N and the following total moment about the major axis.. Fig. Hence. J25 .0035 IJb) (9.dfj. These values are more severe than those for columns because walls are thinner than columns.4) implies a maximum steel strain of about 1000 x 10.. = M. the serviceability limit state will be critical. Stresses At the serviceability limit state. 9. a safe lower bound design would result. = Mry) such that equation (9.4). = M. for design· ing against combined bending and in·plane forces. + (Nh/1750) (l.. the minor axis. as ex· plained in Chapter 2.48/.. and lu and lay are the effective heights with respect to these axes. Slender walls The forces and moments acting on a slender wall should be determined by the same methods previously described for short walls.4). the compressive stress in the concrete has to be limited to 0. The limiting value of 0. (c) Limiting stresses at ultimate limit state I i.Jh)' (10..jb) (9. it is conservative to design the column solely for bending about the major axis. the slenderness ratio limit may be iii. if the area of reinforcement exceeds 1%.I _a_ Nf"A x Substructures and foundations . Walls should be considered as slabs for the purposes of crack control calculations.Ac. + (Nb/1750) (l.4% is greater than that specified in CP 114 because tests have shown that the presence of reinforcement in walls reduces the insitu strength of the concrete {227]. the slenderness ratio of a braced wall should not exceed 40. greater than 4. 9.4fcu). for a braced column with h >3b.87fJ. it can be seen that. it is necessary to check crack widths by considering the column to be a beam and by applying equation (7. are subjected to bending should be considered as slabs and designed in accordance with the methods of Chapters 5 and 7. 9. primarily.TCo 0. extent that one face is in tension. The above slenderness limits were obtained from CP 110 and were thus derived with shear walls and infill panels in framed structures in mind.y are the initial moments with respect to the major and minor axes respectiVely. 9.)' M.. A short wall has a slenderness ratio less than 12.4% of the crosssectional area of the wall. Serviceability limit state Stresses The comments made previously regarding stress calcu· lations for columns are also appropriate to wa11s.0. but. 8 fy· Thus. in order to simplify design. the reinforcement stress in Fig. this stress is equivalent to about 0.6 ... They are thus not necessarily applicable to the types of wall which are used in bridge construction.. + (Nh/1750) (l.. If lateral stability is not provided to the structure as a whole. in sucllsituations..05 n. the stress conditions at the ultimate and serviceability limit states will be as shown in Fig. However.2 le..27) M. serviceability is likely to be the critical limit state for a column with a large eccentricity of load. Hence. .c This value generally exceeds the design resistance at the ultimate limit state. For high yield steel.Jh)' (1. Crack widths Analysis JL J Eccentric loads If the load is eccentric such that it pro· duces bending about an axis in the plane of a wall.00351.jb)' (10.5 fcu and the reinforcement stresses to 0.0. described in Chapter 5.ij ~. the design resistance at the serviceability limit state is. In general.ar) ~0. ' (a) Section o. Cranston [223] has shown that. Crack widths The Code considers that if a column is designed for an ultimate axial load in excess of 0.25) where Mu: and Mry are the total moments about the major (x) axis and minor (y) axis respectively. The design could be car· ried out either by considering the section of wall as an eccentrically loaded column of unit width or by using the 'sandwich' approach. under axial loading. the wall should be designed on a unit length basis to resist the combined effects of 1he axial load per unit length and the bending moment per unit length. any distribution of tension and com· pression. a plain concrete wall can be stronger than a wall with a small percentage of reinforcement. usually. and the details of the Code requirements are discussed in Chapter 7.05h should be assumed. with regard to concrete stress.4).IO(b) is limited to much less than 0. which is in equilibrium with the applied loads could be adopted at the ultimate limit state since. a reinforced concrete wall is a vertical loadbearing member with an aspect ratio. . ~~ . Walls with greater slenderness ratios are considered to be slender.jb) (9.0. Ultimate limit state Reinforced concrete walls Limiting stresses at serviceability limit state Fig. equation (7. wing walls and similar structures which.~ ···. when crack control is considered.)h) (9.28) where Mu and M. The following discussion is concerned with walls subjected to significant axial loads. due to the fact that either the limiting compressive stress or crack width could be the critical . Hence. Definitions Retaining walls. it can be seen that ultimate will generally be the critical limit state when the loading is predominantly axial. studies should be carried out with a view to establishing guidelines for identifying the critical limit state in a particular situation.. Serviceability limit state General The design of columns in accordance with the Code is complicated by the fact that it is necessary to check stresses and crack widths at the serviceability limit state in addition to carrying out strength calculations at the ultimate limit state..10. with reference to Fig.. Slenderness The slenderness ratio is the ratio of the effective height to the thickness of the wall. 9. the reinforcement is assumed to contribute to the strength._.' r . = M. since a column could be subjected to salt spray..00351. for an axially loaded col ._. The Code states that this analysis may be carried out assuming no tension in the concrete..Concre1e bridge design to BS 5400 . When the loading is eccentric to the. Axial load An axially loaded wall should be designed in accordance with equation (9. per unit length of the wall. ~0. or tension.00351.J is much less than that at the ultimate limit state (0. Summary Ultimate is likely to be the critical limit state for a column · which is either axially loaded or has a small eccentricity of load.24) M. or by using the 'sandwich' approach. For smaller axial loads. design criterion. However. M. If the load is also eccentric in the plane of the wall. The portion of wall.r.14) is satisfied.25 fc. subject to the highest intensity of axial load.9 Major axis bending 1:c . but the slenderness ratio should then be calculated with respect to. it is unlikely that flexural cracks will occur. The design could be carried out by considering each section of the wall as an eccentrically loaded column or tension member of unit width.5 {cuE/Ee)A. on plan.Sfcu x (b) h M. and thus deflec· tions are more likely to lead to problems. The Code requires that forces and moments in reinforced concrete walls should be determined by elastic analysis. = 0. the slenderness ratios should not result in any further design restrictions compared with existing practice. = M. Hence.creased to 45.7. it is likely that. Since the average concrete stress at the serviceability limit state (0.___. and thus crack control could be the critical design criterion for columns with a large eccentricity of load. ___. the allowable design crack width could be as small as O.8 f. = Mw M. It appears that..Jh) (9. Since the design load at the ultimate limit state exceeds that at the serviceability limit state. From Table 4. to detennine the distribution of the inplane forces per unit length of the wall. + (Nh/1750)(1Jb)' (1.
12500h. lower values of Aw are adopted than for concrete grades 25 and above..d and ea respectively.. ' and fr Substr '"' '"' {bl Braced (c) Unbraced Fig. are also applicable to plain concrete walls.30) The above assumption of zero eccentricity at the base of a braced wall is based upon considerations of walls in buildings [112].:. the clause could be applied.28 to 0.g. and may be considered to provide rotational restraint if one of the following is satisfied: I. A lateral support could be a horizontal member (e.. A deck has a bearing width of at least two·thirds of the wall thickness.O to 0. The following design rules for walls can also be applied to columns.2ea) A..29) is replaced by (0. is a coefficient to be discussed. The clauses.12(a)(c) Lateral deflection of a slend~r watl coincide with the line of action of the axial load per unit length ofwall(n. Forces Members. It should be noted that the Code mistakenly gives the additional eccentricity as l. any reinforcement is not assumed to contribute to the strength.). the eccentricity and distribution of load along the wall should be calculated from statics. the in ten· tion in the Code is. I I I I CJ IJ~ / i r I I I / I (0.. The definitions of 'short'. It is not clear why the Code requires A. Hence the depth of concrete in compression is 2(hl2e. Unbraced.0• or 2. e. ner as a slender column. at the top.as shown in Fig. The Code clause concerning horizontal loading refers to shear con· nection between walls and was originally written for CP 110 with shear walls in buildings in mind.. This is because of the difficulty of controlling the quality of low grade concrete in a wall.2e. the Code states that the vertical load transmitted from a deck may be assumed to act at onethird the depth of the bearing area back from the loaded face. This is because the base of the wall and the structural member(s) bearing on the wall restrain the wall against lengthwise expansion.:) = h2e. of an abutment an eccentricity could exist at the bottom of the wall as shown in Fig. The reason could be to ensure that the value of Aw does not exceed 0. When calculating the distribution of load (i. . which is at an eccentricity of e.12(a). ·r. If e. 9. .... The additional eccentricity (e 0 ) is taken. Concrete strength. Ratio of wall length to thickness. because 0. no laterally spanning structure at top Braced against lateral movement and rotation Braced against lateral movement only 2.4 when the aspect ratio is I.. Hence..ST 1. The biaxial effect decreases with distance from the base or bearing member and. presumably.. the eccentricity of loading is assumed to be zero.. Thus the eccentricity varies linearly from zero at the base to e...0T 1.. for example. to be l~f2500h.Jew (9. to be reduced. Hence. The static reactions to the applied horizontal forces.5 • f. the author would sug. 'slender'. 2. which transmit load to a plain wall. in equation (9. a deck on each side of the wall. concerned with slenderness and lateral support of plain walls..J. at collapse....0 0. as indicated later. laterally spanning structure at top Unbraced. where le and h are the effec· tive height and thickness of the wall respectively. greater than 4.8 as the length to thickness ratio reduces from 4 to l. or a deck is connected to the wall by means of a bearing which does not allow rotation to occur. 127 . increases as the height to length ratio decreases. at the same level. The wall supports. the member should be considered as a plain concrete column. l/l. For concrete grades less than 25.) <. = (h2e. essentially. 2._i ' Plain concrete walls '" '" General I h I 112e.g. 2. The centroid of the stress block must \ (a) Bracedcode nw nw nw Fig.2.4e. Similar increases have been adopted in the Code.11 Eccentrically loaded short wall at collapse Ultimate 'limit state :. where I. The lateral support and the wall are detailed to provide bending restraint. In the case. may be considered simply supported in order to calculate the reaction which they transmit to the wall. empirically. a higher value of Ym is adopted for low grades than for high grades.5. CP 111 pennits an increase in allowable stress which varies linearly from 0%. at a height to length ratio of I . the axial load per unit length of wall). The reduction coefficient varies linearly from l. thus. The concrete stress distribution at collapse of an ecceotrica1ly loaded wall is as shown in Fig. the following forces: I. 3. at a ratio of 0. If the aspect ratio is less than 4. Ratio of clear height between supports to wall length.. Tests reported by Seddon [229] have shown that the stress in a wall at failure increases as its height to length ratio decreases. \ \ I I l If the load is eccentric in' the plane of the wall..o:. the concrete should be assumed to resist no tension. The concrete is assumed 10 develop a constant compressive stress of Ve .e. on plan. when the ratio of wall length to thickness is less than 4 (i. 9. A slender wall deflects laterally under load in the same man· .5 or less. the average stress. distance between centres of support / 0 "" distance between a support and a free edge In order to be effective.'fidge ~oinM tO BS <:}(111 1 . a state of biaxial compression is induced in the wall which increases its apparent strength above its uni· axial value.e.. It is tabulated in the Code and depends upon the followi?g: I. also to apply the requirement to decks which transmit load to a wall through a mechanical or rubber bearing. When considering eccentricify at right angles to the plane of a wall. which provide lateral stability to the structure as a whole..12(b). The effective heights given in the Code are summarised in Table 9. Slender braced wall At the base of a wall.~) I e. a deck) or a vertical member (e.6e:x + e0 ) .5% of the total ultimate vertical load that the wall has to carry. However.6e. 3. for example.. but. Thus the maximum possible value of nw is given by n.. 10 connected semimass abutments.75* or 2. 126 I I Axial load plus bending normal to wall Short braced wall Tbe effects of lateral deflections can be ignored in a short waJI and thus failure is due solely to concrete crushing.. 9.2 Effective heights of plain walls Wall type "· ~:~ral I I I " e. 1 + 0. the following equation is obtained for the ultimate strength of a slender braced wall: nw = (h . which are given earlier in this chapter for reinforced concrete walls.. If a number of walls resist a horizontal force in their plane. which can be developed in a wall." (9. The lateral deflection increases the eccentricity of the load and the Code takes the net maximum eccentricity to be (0. "· A plain concrete wall or abutment is defined as a vertical loadbeariag member with an aspect ratio.4 is the value adopted for reinforced concrete columns and beams. 2. 9.1. In order to preclude failure by buckling the slenderness ratio of a plain wall should not exceed 30 [229]. other walls).. 9.6e:x+e0 ). to 20%.5. It appears from the CP 110 handbook [112J that this requirement was originally intended for floors or roofs of buildings bearing directly on a wall.·rr...29) The coefficient Aw varies from 0. were taken directly from CP 110 which in tum were based upon those in CP 111 [228J... when the wall becomes a column). the distributions of load between the walls should be in proportion to their relative stiffnesses. a lateral support to a braced wall must be capable of transmitting to the structural elements. . 'braced' and 'unbraced'.Co. However. If the eccentricities at the top and bottom are e.. certain design stresses need modification. i I I Table 9.11.
129 i.6 e.. stresses at the serviceability limit state and. The net eccentricities..Jcu (9. it is necessary that l. if appropriate. in accordance with the Code.13. This means that some columns. ··l c·i.6 e. as shown in Fig. Bridge abutments and wing walls The design of abutments and wing walls in accordance with the Code is very different to their design to current practice. the· effects of applied deformations can be ignored under collapse conditions. it is necessary to check that the total shear force does not exceed 0. it was intended presumably for shear walls bearing on a footing or a floor. at i:he top and botto'm of the wall are e. This is because <i.) + 0. all design aspects are considered under working load conditions.25% of high yield steel or 0. either the limiting concrete compressive stress at the serviceability limit state.3% of mild steel should be provided both horizontally and verti· cally. Crack widths at the serviceability limit stale. n. whereas the Code critical slenderness ratio is 12.Jh should exceed 4.Jh exceeds 6. in equation (9. V= Nhfle Bridge piers and columns In order that V does not exceed 0. In the latter. it is likely that ultimate will be the critical limit state for a column. Crack control Flexural cracking Reinforcement... each under a different design load. Although the effects of applied deformations can be :rn. The Code requires the least restoring moment due to unfactored nominal loads to exceed the greatest overturning moment due to the design loads (given by the effects of the nominal loads multiplied by their appropriate 'IJL values at the ultimate limit state). The~ calculations are concerned with strength at the ultimate limit state. have to be carried out for the following five design aspects: I. Strength at the ultimate limit state. r _.4).3% should be used with caution. the required amowit of reinforcement may exceed the maximum amount permitted by the Code. Thus it appears that the design criterion was taken to be shear friction with a coefficient of friction of 0.= (h2e. CP 114 allows for slenderness by applying a reduction factor to the calculated permissible load for a short column. Use of the latter concept requires more lengthy calculations.29) by each of these eccentricities. The Code requires every section of the wall to be capable of resisting the load at each of these eccentricities. or 0. The Code is thus conservative in this respect. crack width at the serviceability limit state. and is given by N(h/2 + h/2)= Nh.:r1) Vcw Slender columns and piers The Code states that excessive deflections will not occur in a cantilever wall if its heighttolength ratio does not exceed IO.a + e. Hence. at least 0. Hence..the permissible load has to be checked under working load conditions. In such situations. However.. Overturning. '" __ __Jt. but deemed to satisfy rules for bar spacing are appropriate in some situations (see Chapter 7).  !. Effective heights The Code clauses concerning effective heights are intended.4 exi m>d (0. the ultimate strength of a slender unbraced waU is the lesser of: Deflection It is necessary to control cracking due to both applied loading {flexural cracks) and the effects of shrinkage and temperature. 9. At present a single analysis covers all aspects of design but.29. since the requirement was taken from CP 110. ..0' r. Hence. When considering shear forces in the plane of the wall. = (h. The spacing of 300 mm is in accordance with the maximum spacing discussed in Chapter 7. For a column size currently adopted. in accordance with the Code.. 5.. shrinkage and temperature effects to be ignored at the ultimate limit state.. In fact. very large amount of reinforcement would be required to control the cracks... each under a different load condition. five analyses. If the latter criterion is critical then it may be necessary to specify columns with greater crosssectional areas than are adopted at present. A shear force at right angles to a wall arises from a change in bending moment down the wall. at least 0. when subjected to bending in the plane of the wall. A major difference is the number of analyses which need to be carried out. This approach is simple.a2ea)'J. and that the average shear stress does not exceed 0. but it should be noted that they are much Jess than those given in the new standard for water retaining structures (BS 5337) [231).25% of high yield steel or 0. but does not reflect the true behaviour of a slender column at collapse. shrinkage and temperature) need to be considered for all aspects of design. The reason for assigning these allowable stresses is not apparent. 4.a wall. Stresses at the serviceability limit state. from the wall centre line. The author would thus suggest that the values of N v moment over the length of the wall occurs when the eccentricities at each end are of opposite sign. there is no difference in the assessment of effective heights in accordance with the Code and with CP 114.31) m>d n. as explained in Chapter 13. 9. Thus the reduction factor approach has noi been adopted in the Code: instead. The basis of this criterion is not apparent.4 e. the maximum net eccentricity should be taken as the greater of (0.25 of the associated total vertical load. Factor of safety against sliding and soil pressures due to unfactored nominal loads in accordance with CP 2004 [92].32) Shear 128  ~. However. the constant shear force throughout the length of the wall is 0..) respectively. These percentages are identical to those for waterretaining structures in CP 2007 [230]..23). the Code clauses concerned with columns and reinforced walls are presented and brief mention made of their application. which is described earlier in this chapter. in accordance with the Code.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 h/2 [185].. but the CP 110 handbook [112 J adds that the ratio can be increased to 15 if tension does not develop in the wall under lateral loading. Thus. is used.~_. which is either axially loaded or is subjected to a relatively small moment. only one calculation has to be undertaken . The maximum change of Shrinkage and temperature effects In order to control cracking due to the restraint of shrinkage and temperature movements. which could be considered to be short at present.25% and 0.J 9°""'~' ·4 "''• CP 114 defines a slender column as one with a slenderness ratio in excess of 15. would have to be considered as slender when designed in accordance with the Code.1 and (e. the Code states that it is not necessary to consider shear forces nonnal to the wall if l. In general the total shear force in a horizontal plane should not exceed onequarter of the associated vertical load.ri + 0. 3.3 N/mm~ for lower grades of concrete. However. and thus the effects of applied deformations (creep. ~~. Slender unbraced wall The lateral deflection of a slender unbraced wall is shown in Fig. for buildings and are not necessarily applicable to bridge piers and columns.. the additional moment concept. 9. three calculations. this criti· cism is equally applicable 10 the effective heights given in the existing design document (CP 114). aod thus the design of slender columns.3% of mild steel should be provided in the area of wall in tension: the spacing should not exceed 300 mm. have to be carried out. v N h/2 Serviceabil'ity limit state Fig. will take longer than their design in accordance with CP 114. '· Earlier in this chapter. These percentages are identical to those discussed in the next section when considering the control of cracking due to shrinkage and temperature effects. 2. In the following discussion the design of bridge piers and columns in accordance with the Code is considered briefly and compared with present practice. Design procedure In accordance with CP 114..12(c). by replacing e.25N.. the design procedure will be much longer for a column designed in accordance with the Code.<2 +ea) The appropriate net eccentricity should then be substituted fore"' in equation 9. or the limiting crack width at the serviceability limit state could be critical.13 Shear normal to wall gest that.. Bearing The bearing stress under a localised load should not exceed the limiting value given by equation (8. specifically to control flexural cracking. A further problem arises when applying the Code: it is not clear in advance which of the three design calculations will be critical. primarily. A further important difference in design procedures occurs when considering the effects of applied deformations described in the Code and in the present documents._ :_... This possibility is increased by the fact (see Chapter 10) that the maximum amount of reinforcement permitted in a vertically cast column is 6% in the Code as compared with 8% in CP 114. The reduction factor is a function of the slenderness ratio.45 N/mm 2 for concrete of grade 25 or above. and are also much less than those suggested by Hughes (9.25. Thus Part 4 of the Code permits creep. However. The maximum moments at the ends of a wall occur when the load is at its greatest eccentricity of h/2. by analogy with equation (9. For colurrms subjected to a large moment. only has to be provided when tension occurs over at least 10% of the length of .2e.___. The reason for this requirement is not clear but.a + e. The implication of this is that less mainreinforcement would be required in an abutment designed to the Code than ooe designed to the existing documents.
\'. the Code does pennit the use of plastic methods of analysis. should be checked in accordance with the method given in Chapter 6 for flexural shear in beruns. Since less reinforcement would be' present in an abutment designed to the Code than one designed to the existing documents. the reinforcement. 9. 9..... _JAfT: . The strut and tie system for a fourpile cap is shown in Fig. 9.1 should be used. largely.. 9. BS 5. would have resulted in much deeper foundations than those previously required in accordance with CP 114. The Code is thus more precise than CP 114 with regard to the distribution of reinforcement. the design loads appropriate to the various limit states should be adopted. the Code pennits the usual assumption of a linear distribution of bearing stress unde~ a foundation. Foundations General A foundation should be checked for sliding and soil bearing pressure in accordance with the principles of CP 2004 [92].. Ji'4 I .. An alternative plastic method of design is the Hillerborg strip method. L~ . because of the assumed structural action.. • . The Code should thus lead to less congestion of main reinforcement.cciSlructu.) where d is the effective depth is the shear span which.M 'Si"( N/4t ""I Concrete _. Truss analogy The truss analogy assumes a strut and tie system within the cap. 131  /1 Central band width Fig. Such a design method is not correct because a pile cap acts as a deep. but is chosen merely because it is convenient for design purposes.8/y and 0.. However. However.:on11< . calculated from the tie forces. The perimeter is shown in Fig. (c) Punching shear Piles Fig. the pile can be designed as a column in accordance with CP 2004 and the Code. should be concentrated in strips over the piles. The enhancement factor (2d/a. 9.. The latter document is written In terms of \YOrking stress design and thus unfactored nominal loads sl\Ould be used when checking sliding and soil bearing pressure. when allowance is made for the different design loads. they have to be considered at the serviceability limit state. These requirements. The latter requirement is empirical and was based upon a similar requirement in the ACI Code [168)...c. as shown in Fig... 9.section c.. Serviceability limit state l._ __ ( 2) A jf. are very similar to those of BE 1173. This critical section was adopted in CP 110 because a critical section.. Pile caps Ultimate limit state The reinforcement in a pile cap may be designed either by bending theory or truss analogy. 9.+l 2 I Areas of reinforcement h =overall slab depih As= total area of reinforcement parallel to shorter side Critical sections 71 (bl Flexural shear (1"t· Jfounl). the method has been shown by tests to result in adequate designs [234]. The question now arises as to what allowable design sliear stress should be used in association wilh the above critical section. it is unlikely that they would exceed the Code limiting stresses of 0.. Tests carried out by Clarke [234] have indicated that the basic design stresses given in Table 6. LindSell [232] has tested a model abutment with cantilever wing walls. In particular. the stresses at the serviceability limit state would be greater in the former abutment.14(a)... It can be seen from Fig. Reinforcement parallel to the shorter side should be distributed as shown in Fig. The main bar spacings will generally be greater for abutments designed in accordance with the Code than for those designed in accordance with the present documents. the pile cap is considered to act as a wide beam in each direction. 9. The total amount of reinforcement calculated at a section should be uniformly distributed across the section.14(c). beam.t"" strut Reinforcement tie Nl•t I Fig.. since it is considered good practice to have some reinforcement throughout the cap.2 at the end of this chapter. inelevant [234). Flexural shear The Code requires flexural shear to be checked across the full width of a cap at a section at the face of the column. and has shown that yield line theory gives reasonable estimates of the loads at collapse of the abutment and of the wing walls. jf. is and a. It is worth mentioning that the Code clause is identical to that in CP 110. for reinforcement and concrete respectively. Punching shear The critical perimeter and design method discussed for slabs in Chapter 6 should be used for foot· ings. It should be noted that the critical section is not intended to coincide with the actual failure plane.+l s ("1) A. and is in the spirit of a lower bound method of design. .·"' ~( I /' Stresses II is necessary to restrict the stresses to the limiting values of 0.I4(a)(c) Critical sections for footing spread uniformly across the base. However. at a distance equal to the effective depth from the face of the column or wall (see Fig. rather lhan a shallow.. Reinforcement should be designed for the total moment at this critical section and. Footings Ultimate limit state Flexure The critical section for bending is taken at the face of the colwnn or wall as shown in Fig.1. 9. (i37+l iI L i D i .16 Truss analogy for pile cap can be obtained al that section.5 fcu. . Flexural shear The total shear on a section. In the absence of a more accurate method. except that the latter document requires· The Code does not give specific design rules for piles. Finally.. and the total amount of reinforcement at the section detennined from simple bend· ing theory as described in Chapter 5.14(b)). in the reinforcement and concrete respectively.16.I7(a). I dI .at the ultimate. The effects of applied defOrrnations thus contribute to the stresses at the serviceability limit state. whereas spacings of about 100 mm are often necessary at present. Fonnu]ae for detennining the forces in the ties for various arrangements of piles are given by Allen [203) and Yan [235]. For the latter parts ·of the critical section. except for those parts of the critical section which are crossed by flexural reinforcement which is fully anchored by passing over a pile. which is applied to an abutment in Example 9. and • lc+2h) I (a) Flexure "1) 2A. the Code requires 80% of the reinforcement to be concentrated in strips joining the piles and the remainder to be unifonnly distributed throughout the cap.Jdge d"' ~ . when carrying out the structural design of a foundation. 131 130 . This is because the Code maximum spacing of 150 mm (see Chapter 7) will generally be appropriate for abutments. footings should be treated as slabs when considering crack control. The shear strength then has to be checked. more calculations have to be carried out when designing foundations in accordance with the Code than for those designed in accordance with the current documents. However. Bending theory When applying the bending theory [233].5 fc. Crack widths As discussed in Chapter 7.. however. once the forces acting on a pile have been assessed.. at a distance equal to the effective depth from the loaded face.15 Distribution of reinforcement in rectangular footing the critical section to be at 1~ times the effective depth from the face. The total bending moment at any section {.15.. Hence. it should be i i ~ di D Critical sections I Grea1er of/. in the present context. This is probably because most pile caps fail in shear and the method of design of the main reinforcement is..8fy and 0... the basic design shear stresses should be enhanced to allow for the increased shear resis· tance due to the short shear span (see Chapter 6). limit state.16 that. 9. Tests carried out by Clarke (234] have demonstrated the adequacy of the truss analogy. and the design of abutments and wing walls is an area where plastic methods could usefully be applied.":~ ' igil~d. except for the reinforcement parallel to the shorter side of a rectangular footing.•.
0.fiw ' Enhance Ve .. from Table 9. in a proposed amendment to CP 110. M. the load is l' '"'. is sitni· lar to the absolute value of 150 mm suggested by Whittle and Beattie [233] to allow for dimensional errors. I  0. chosen by Clarke [234]. The critical section given in the Code for punching of a comer pile is extremely difficult to interpret and originates from the 1970 CEB recommendations [2261.. It is understood that. M/bh 2 = 2318 x 10 6/(1200 x 600 2 ) = 5. from the face of the column. punching shear is checked by limiting the shear stress calculated on the perimeter of the column to .~ which is appropriate to the average of the two areas of reinforcement which pass over the pile. M 1 = 2318 kNm and. r . The lateral loads acting on the abutment are the earth pressure. 9.. thus design to resist M._.10 = 16.. which varies from zero at the top to 5H kN/m 2 at a depth H.17(a).9.. In an actual design..22).__. from equation (9. ·~== = 30 x I. the author would suggest ignoring the serviceability limit state criteria for pile caps.6/1750)(26.\_·_) L. consider the column to be a cantilever with effective height equal to twice the actual height.12). at the ultimate limit state.. in a proposed amendment to CP 110. The relevant diagram in the latter document shows that the correct interpretation is as shown in Fig.6 X 600 X 1200/100 = 25 920 mm 2 Use 22 No.5 x 1. the result is that the allowable design stress varies along the critical section.\ line .3) 2 (1.3) = 1391 + 150 = 1541 kNm = = A reinforced concrete abutment is 7 m high and 12 m wide. if the characteristic strengths of the reinforce· ment and concrete are 425 N/mm 1 and 40 N/mm 2 respec· tively. and thus the 'average' shear span is somewhat greater than the clear distance between pile and critical section. 9.m D / Fig./ resulting shear force at the critical section will be only marginally different.03 = 2318 kNm Since the column is braced.611750)(13. 9. but the Punching shear Clarke [234] suggests that punching of the column through the cap need only be considered if the pile spacing exceeds four times the pile diameter~ which is unlikely.. Slenderness ratio = 810.4)(0) + (0.25 x 1.7) 2 (1 . at the serviceability limit state. l 1 \. from equation (9. the initial moment to be added to the additional moment is. which acts at the top of the abutment and may be taken to have a nominal value of 30 kN/m width of abutment.. the total moment is M. Clarke [234) has suggested the same additional distance in order to allow for th"e fact that the piles are circular.6 = 26...75 which is specified in the Code {see Chapter 6). 40 mm bars (20160 mm 2) with 8 bars in each face.10 = 41.Ji. The Code does not state what value of allowable design shear stress should be used with the critical section. in all cases in which failure could occur along the Code critical section.2dp (a) Flexural shear d = effective depth of "P Sm . This exceeds 12. Thus the critical section is at the· distance av• defined in Fig 9. Hence use Design Chart 84 of CP 110: Part 2 [128]. the design loads {nominal load x YJL x Yp) are. ~ ccm"r 1 section . 40 mm bars (27 720 mm 2 ) with 11 bars in each face. Hence. the total moment is M.6 :.e. 9. Initial moment at top of column = M 1 = 0 Initial moment at bottom of column = M2 = 280 x 8 + 2600 x 0.17(b) but of the section which would actually occur as shown in Fig. The loads indicated are design loads at the ultimate limit state.2 Hillerborg strip method applied to an abutment No sidesway With sidesway prevented.6m H 1.1 Slender column (b) Punching shearCode 0. Assume that the articulation of the deck is (a) such that sidesway is prevented and (b) such that sidesway can occur. This limiting shear stress is very similar to the maximum nominal shear stress of 0.8/hu. In view of this. Since it is difficult to imagine serviceability problems arising in a cap which has been properly designed and detailed at the ultimate limit state. HA surcharge.61 N/mm 2 (as before) From Design Chart 84 of CP 110: Part 2. At the ultimate limit state. The load distribution is chosen to be as shown in Fig. such an ana1ysis would probably need to be nonlinear to allow for cracking.. Assume a minimum eccentricity of O. as shown in Fig.17(b). Thus. 9. Realistic values of stresses and crack widths in a pile cap.\ .Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Critical section / ..5 kN/m 2 HA braking However. 9. obtained from Table 6. at the centre of the base. 9. = 1391 + (2600 x 0. the enhancement factor would be equal to 4. 70 N/mm 2 Nlbh = 3.'. and.17(c). ___'_. (c) Punching shearactual Fig.6 = 13. which will thus be designed as if it were fixed on three sides and free on the fourth. Examples ~ I I 9.e.. Ase= 2._. i. Consider the column to be partially restrained in direction at both ends.15 = 8. 1 1 Bv=x+0. thus the column is slender. 9.3. The basic shear stress. the nominal value of which is 10 kN/m 2 (see Chapter 3).0035 x 26..23). viewed in elevation.= 2318 + (2600 x 0.25 kN/m The wing walls and abutment base are considered to provide fixity to the abutment. it would be necessary to check the stresses and crack widths at the serviceability limit state by carrying out elastic analyses of the sections. This critical sec· tion is more logical than that defined in the Code.. Earth pressure = SH x 1. ' ' q ' ~~._.. } .OSh = 0. from which 100 Ascfbh = 2. .625H kN/m 2 HA surcharge = 10 x 1. (0. At each end of the abutment there is a wing wall which is structurally attached to the abutment.37 N/mm 2 Nlbh = 2600 x 103/(1200 x 600) = 3.19 (see also Chapter 2). d. .. 0:' ~ .18 Bridge column Failure~/ /". take the effective height to be the same as the 'actual height..1. all of the load is considered to be car· ried in the x direction.. Design reinforcement for the column.· "'' f"·" < l"""•t• ~ A reinforced concrete column is shown in Fig. and the total shear capacity at the section should be obtained by summJng the shear capacities of the component parts of the section. rather than rectangular. It should be noted that the above designs have been carried out only ac the ultimate limit state. However.22). The Code states that the reason for adding 20% of the pile diameter is to allow for driving tolerances.17(a)(c) Shear in pile caps taken as the distance between the face of the column and the nearer edge of the piles. Z.8 :. However... The Hillerborg strip method will be used to obtain a lower bound moment field for the abutment. could only be assessed by carrying out a proper analysis.6)(2318) 1391 kNm From equation (9.7) = 2318 + 576 = 2894 kNm M/bh 2 = 2894 x 10 8/(1200 x 600i) = 6. i!}I .5 X 1. so tha1 dlh = 5401600 = 0.oVerthese lengths r.0. 2600kN ._' Substructures and foundations 280kN Serviceability limit state Bearing which permits on!y rotation .. 9. I~ = 8m.o. Slenderness ratio= 16/0. ''. le= 16 m..61 N/mm 1 Assume 40 mm bars with 40 mm cover in each face. The value of 20% of the pile diameter. Thus at the top of the abutment all of the load is considered to be carried in they direction.'' . i. Sidesway Since sides way can occur.8 X 600 X 12001100 = 20160 mm 2 Use 16 No. thus the Code only requires punching of a pile through the cap to be considered. where a~ should be taken as the distance from the pile to the critical section (i.  c\33 ..0035 x 13. ?  \ ~ x I• •I• d.7 The initial and additional moments are both maximum at the base. It is understood that. Thus. the column can be considered to be braced.1 should then be enhanced by (2dlav). = M2 = 2318 kNm.e. plus 20% of the pile diameter. in the bottom comers. a sophisticated analysis at the ser· viceability limit state cannot be justified./~r . 100 As)bh = 3.17{a). this moment is less than M 2 . Ase= 3. ___ _ '  . the critical section for flexural shear is located at 20% of the diameter of the pile inside the face of the pile.18. This suggestion is not based upon considerations of the Code section of Fig. and the HA braking load.03 m for the vertical load. the author would suggest using the value from Table 6.
.23.. I . lhe lever ann is = = Fig.2 x 500)] 980 x 10' = 2760kN Actual shear force = 2 x 1300 = 2600 kN <2760 kN . 3m t~5~1~. 9.5m The loading and bending moments are shown in Fig. The reaction (R) can first be obtained by talcing moments about the point of zero moment.25 if the characteristic strengths of the reinforcement and concrete are 425 N/mm 2 and 30 N/mm 2 respectively. o3ml0..36 = 2. /..15kN/m °"""'i 1. . I• 2m..Q.. The loading is taken... CC..35 N/mm Shear capacity of critical section 3 = [(2)(2. . In order that the resulting moments do not depart too much from the elastic moments. 1 8m 34..75m A r1 1'1 I' 3m 4m a=O 12.. earth pressure and braking loads but also supports the ends of typical strips CC and DD..5kN/m Fig. Total bending moment at column centre line 2 x 1300 X 0..2 X 500 = 300 mm Enhancement factor = 2 x 980/300 = 6.I 467kNm~ ~4~7kNm ~ +374kNm 34. .75 1950kNm Assume effective depth = d = 980 mm From equation (5.__ _ _ _ __ 16. 9... 9. .5m...24.1 46.. 11 '!j. 9. The design load at the ultimate limit state is 5200 kN.\ ! I i x direc:tion strips 25. T 0. as thar at a depth of I m. _.llcNJm 2 l2. ___ +__ . surcharge and braking ) tEB \ 0...2kN m+ 0....35)(500) + (0.. 9..3kN/m 2 1.~ 1 ~400 o. allowable shear stress without shear reinforcement= vc = 0.. 9. ..6).7kN/m \<>=WI B B 6m .17(a). ______ 71 °' m'...75 m '1 ...87 X 425 X 931) = 5665 mm 2 Use 19 No.) .36)(2300 . BB.15kN/m f'=<'o ii~ 2m..35kN/m . Strip DD o. / !• 0.rand.. 0.9kN/m 187kNm Fig.4m 62kN/m 12..66..Sm 12m ~Strong . l~"'12.23 Strip DD Pressure distribution 0.21.4kN 9. 9.. 9. + .26 From Table 5 of Code. = 6./'J763kNm ~ +627kNm Fig.. Fig.1m ~ .. required reinforcement area is 2 As= 1950 X lOG/(0.20 Strip AA The loading and bending moments are shown in Fig.24 Strip EE 1.25..36 Nfmmi.. I I ' I 0. 9.i11 2m I ___.Load dispersion line . 76..20.. •!~ n.22. +22kNm 2 51.53 2 Enhanced v..0kN/m 2 1m 2m •:•' m..1 +41.... l\ + .19 are chosen..5kN/m + R""6.Sm 1" c /. 9.25kN/m E 1m 7mj 2 .J~b Strip AA 1. and then the bending mom.21 Strip BB Strip BB Strip DD is similar to strip CC and its loading and bending moments are shown in Fig.s m Strip EE Strip EE acts as a strong edge band (1 m wide) which not only supports the surcharge..::~.. earth pressure and surcharge at the top of the abutment.19 is merely one possibility...2kN/m = .... must also pro 134 ~137kNm +17kNm Fig. and thus serviceability problems do not arise. the loading and bendings moments for strip CC are shown in Fig. 20 mm bars (5970 mm ) Flexural shear 100 AJbd = (100 x 5970)/(2300 x 980) = 0. 9.ent diagram can be calculated. Strip CC Strip EE. It is emphasised that any distribution of load could be chosen and that shown in Fig.Zero moment line Typical strip Reactions from ..\ . . 9. conservatively.75 m ' 1' 0..:_ __~._..5X980(1+ Ii 6 5 x 1950 x 10 ) 30 x 2300 x 9801 = 943 mm But maximum allowable z 0...95 x 980 931 mm Thus z = 931 mm From equation (5. /  •l . the zero moment lines shown in Fig.0kN/m +43kNm Design the fourpile cap shown in Fig.Free edge ~Fixededge '2mlm l• •l '1 6 rI .5ml 4 4t.9kN/m 2 'I / 94kNm 38. _ _ .3 Pile cap... l. 9... 9.4m A a=1h i j Ol""l ·.53 x 0..22 Strip cc Bending theory Bending vide a reaction to strip CC._ ..95d 0..Sm II 03m 1.~'>nS ...3m b2m/ · 1 . DD and EE of unit width are now considered. _.5 I '\l· I 25.. 15200kN lm2m m •1 I •'.25 Pile cap z=0.. / 0 •I•' m. Hence. 135 ..4 m . which carries the braking load.. 1 'I 1.Sm 68... Typical strips AA.. lyv)"' ' ." Subsi .4kN/m 6.5m Load per pile = 5200/4 = 1300 kN The cap will be designed by both bending theory and truss analogy methods. I ·+·I ~.5 m..2 m·. 1. 9..75m 76... av = 200 + 0.K.. .dJsign ...4 m •Ii Earth pressure. 9. 2m 0. 6m 137kNm~ considered to he shared equally between the x and y directions. This stress may be enhanced by (2dlav) for those parts of the critical sec· tion il'ldicated in Fig.:::rete 1>/ru. 7631:Nm~ edge band .. Thus the loading and bending moments are as shown in Fig. 1.19 Abutment Fig.7).m 1.
(l) surfaces protected by a waterproof membrane. ~ '16 ~· .. 9. t: !! I Ii. thus Ve = 0. e..51 = 3. concerned with considerations affecting design details for both reinforced and prestressed concrete.g.6 of Part 8 of the Code does specify air contents for various maximum aggregate sizes._ ' ' .K.5. From Table 5 of Code.2 x 500)] 980 x W' = 3710 kN Actual shear force = 2 x 1300 = 2600 kN < 3710 kN :. at [(0. 0. Thus talce critical section at corner of column.. 2 x 540 = 1080 mm 1 should be placed between the piles...g. '1 1i'.... the Code gives rules for bundled bars since the latter are allowable..J3_2__. These values are very similar to those given in Amendment 1 to BE 1n3: however.g.I'. 20 mm bars (1260 mmi) between the piles.1 Nominal covers Conditions of exposure Nominal cover (mm) for concrete grade 25 30 Moderate Surfaces sheltered from severe 40 rain and against freezing whilst saturated with water. the Code would require.·cc ~!F ' __ _ . roadside ~tructures Ii The cover to a particular bar should be al least equal to the bar diameter..51 = 2. top slabs in beam and sJab construction may need to be thicker than they are at present. 20 nun bars (2200 mm 2 ) over the piles. = 5. The remaining 20% (540 mm!) should be placed between the cap centre line and the piles.87 X 425) = 2690 mm 2 Since there at two ties in each direction.08 X 0.13. whereas BE 1/73 would require only 30 mm. Use 4 No. = 0. BE 1/73 does not have this requiiement.36 N/mm 2 Enhancement factor = (2 X 980/386) = 5. j' ::1 1I I!: ::>. First. Ve= 0.. The latter value will be assumed.35)(2300. _______ . 80% of the tie reinforcement should be provided over the piles. . O. and this is generally the case. However.83 Nfrnm 2 Shear capacity of critical section = I. Thus. Ve= 0.. i.08 (as for bending theory) Enhanced ve = 5.K. Cover Table 10.36 = 1.35 N/mm 2 Assume no reinforcement outside piles. .. the force in each of the reinforcement ties of Fig.for aw From Fig.. 0.Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Punching shear The critical section shown in Fig. (2) internal surfaces whether subject to condensation or not._~_______.e.lj! 111 . 0. . and is also dependent upon the exposure condition and the concrete grade as shown by Table 10. 9. ie.17(b) would occur under the column in tbis example.3 = 26so kN Actual shear force= 1300 kN<2650 kN :.. in contact with backfill and to freezing whilst wet 40 40 25 30 ..0. 1: ': = 0. The Code thus requires a dramatic change in current practice. for roadside structures subjected to salt spray and constructed with grade 30 or 40 concrete. NIA 60 50 • Only applicable if tlte concrete has entrained air (see text) :o. v.8 x 2690 = 2150 mm 2 Use 7 No.75 . 1>~ ?:·.25] = 0.35 N/mm 2 Shear capacity of critical section = ((2)(3.JJh$JJ ' I . Hence. the Code clauses.1. although they are very similar in implication. Punching shear Length of critical section = 1480 mm (as for bending '' theory) As for flexural shear..._ . but Clause 3. v. Bar spacing Very severe (I) Surfaces subject to the effects of deicing salts u :·  1i. = 0.. as shown in Fig... Truss analogy Truss For equilibrium.=. so 20 25 NIA 50* 40"' 25 and marine strucrures (2) Surfaces exposed to the NIA action of sea water with abrasion or moorland water having a pH of 4. The footnote to Table IO.3)/2 ..45.. the Code or salt spray. It can be seen from the above calculations that the truss theory design results in a greater shear capacity than does the bending theory design. I Introduction Reinforced concrete In this chapter. 9. e.51 N/mm 2 il! Enhancement factor= 6. 100 AJbd = (100 x 1260)1(1000 x 980) = 0. the total reinforcement area in each direction is 2 x 2690 = 5380 mm 2 • It can be seen that the truss theory requires less reinforcement tban the bending theory. The Code clauses were taken from CP 116 and are thus more detailed than those in CP l 14.5 or less. a minimum cover of 40 mm. In addition to rules for single bars and pairs of bars..59 N/mm 2 Shear capacity of critical section = 2. e.59 X 1480 X 980 X 10a = 3760 kN Actual shear force = 1300 kN <3760 kN :. .~ Iii! ~ . = (5200 x 1500)/(8 x 980) = 995 kN Required reinforcement area is A 8 = 995 X 103/(0. are discussed and compared with those in the existing design documents...53 (as for bending theory) Enhanced Ve = 6.: Chapter 10 Detailing . whereas BE 1/73 distinguishes between sheltered soffits and exposed soffits.51 N/mm 2 Enhancement factor= 5.j'!:1· Minimum distance between bars I: I I relates the minimum distance between bars lo the maxi· mum aggregate size. For ease of placing and compacting concrete. Part 7 refers only to the pennitted variation in specified air content without giving the latter.33)(500) + (0.. for grade 30 concrete..0. From Table 5 of Code. length of perimeter is 980 + 500 = 1480 mm As for flexural shear.16 isNl/Sd.I appears in the Code with a reference to Part 7 of the Code. Flexural shear Over a pile.08 Enhanced v. the Code considers all soffits to be subjected to severe exposure conditions.25.K. (3) buried concrete and concrete continuously under water 30 Severe (I) Soffits 50 (2) Surfaces exposed to driving rain..386 m from pile. 9. u .17(b). Second.:.. alternate wetting and drying..33 Nfmm=' Between piles.!'. the Code requires the concrete to have entrained air..08 x 0.. for the soffit of a slab between precast beams.53 X 0. >'"'"""'.' 1. there are two important dif· ferences. 100Ajbd = (100 x 2200)/(500 x 980) ..83 x 1430 x 930 x io..
8%) in CP I 14. This value is adopted in the Code and is a little greater than that (0. the link spacing should not exceed 16 times the diameter of the compression bar. the following Code equation is obtained ~ _Y+Mtan8/d (ku. 15 Nlf.26 and 0. links have to be provided.!!'.4% vertical reinforcement. .2 Local bond "' The Code. Hence.15 respectively. rather than act as individual bars. could result in larger columns . fph'l6 Walls O< JOOA. The tension steel force at any point Ct) is T.1) becomes positive.) is the sum of the perimeters of the tension rein· forcement. Type 2 bars have superior bond characteristics to type I bars. ACI Committee 105 [236J proposed a minimum reinforcement area of 1%. Hence. f.z where z is the lever arm.I Load transfer in column under service load conditions The above minimum reinforcement areas are given in the Code under the heading 'Minimum area of main reinforcement'. the amount of reinforcement in a member must be restricted to a maximum value.25% of high yield steel should be provided. Column service load load carried Beams and columns The link diameter should be at least by reinforcement onequarter of the diameter of the largest compression bar. except that the latter also requires the link spacing in columns not to exceed the least lateral dimension of the column nor 300 mm. but.rC'. the maximum spacing of bars has to be limited. bd (z!d)f. which are. Beams and slabs Neither the area of tension reinforcement nor that of com· pression reinforcement should exceed 4%. (. However. otherwise.. However. rather than the effective section. the link spacing should not exceed twice the member thickness. In order to prevent 'yield. These values are discussed in detail in Chapter 7. Load carried by concrete Tim. Columns Beams and slabs A minimum area of tension reinforcement is required in a beam or slab in order to ensure that the cracked strength of the section exceeds its uncracked strength. This require· ment is intended to cover a case where a column is made much larger than is necessary to carry thC: load. IO. Ia order to ensure the stability of a reinforcement cage prior to casting. Hence.25 and 0. If M increases in the opposite direction to which d increases. where fb• is the local bond stress and (:Eu.)z (10. the Code is more restrictive with regard to vertically cast columns.1) The Code assumes that z = d (and adjusts the allowable values of fbs accordingly). In the direction of the compressive force.) V. which carries a significant axial load. Beeby [119] has shown thatfi =0.. The CP 114 amount is always 8%.16. Jn the crosssection of the member. The cracking moment of a rectangular concrete beam is given by M1 = f/Jh 216 where ft is the tensile strength of the concrete. In the Walls and slabs When the designed amount of compression reinforcement exceeds 1%. square twisted. The link diameter should not be Jess than 6 mm nor onequarter of the diameter of the largest compression bar. Type 1. Bond C.). if a column is lightly loaded.as discussed in Chapter 9. the ultimate moment of resistance is given by M.7. 8% if horizontally cast nor 10% at laps.Mtan 8/z ' 0< fb~ = VMtan8)z (:Eu.7/. and the link diameter not to be less than 5 mm. it is necessary to assume type 1 for design purposes. Voided slabs Although a minimum area of secondary reinforcement in solid slabs is not speci~ed. These requirements were taken from the ACI Code [1681 and are different to those of CP 114. generally. at least 0. there is a danger of the reinforcement yielding under service load conditions. recognises two types of deformed bars: I. Type 2. and this fact. However. Links Links are generally present in a member for two reasons: to act as shear or torsion reinforcement. Since it is required that Mu~ M 1. The procedures for calculating maximum bar spacings are discussed in Chapter 7.. The Code values are as follows.. like Amendment 1 to BE 1173. unless it is definitely known at the design stage which type of bar is to be used on site. the negative sign in equa· lion (10.1. j}:) Fig. Walls The area of vertical reinforcement should not exceed 4%. Minimum reinforcement areas Shrinkage and temperature reinforcement In those parts of a structure where cracking could occur due to restraint to shrinkage or thermal movements.2. and b and h are the breadth and overall depth respectively. the requirements for a link to restrain a compression bar are discussed..~ion iO BS 5~flfJ 1 n~·''•'nv_ · following. These values are less than those suggested by Hughes [185] and the author would suggest that they be used with caution.2) General Jbi All bond calculations in accordance with the Code are car· ried out at the ultimate limit sEate. =fyA. The latter values cannot be compared directly with those in CP 114 because the CP 114 values are expressed as a percentage of the gross section. These requirements are the same as those in CP 114. and extremely wide cracks would result.A.7/.). load is transferred from the concrete to the reinforcement as shown in Fig. 138 Under long·tenn service load conditions. 2. in no circumstances. No limit is given in CP 114. The minimum requirements for links to act as shear reinforcement are discussed in detail in Chapter 6. The Code values originated in CP 2007. this equation differs to that in CP 114 because the 139 .Cq~l!{t!. Maximum steel areas In order to ease the placing and compacting of concrete. the Code requires (as does CP 114) the main bar diameter to be at least 12 mm. which is fw (ku.) at an effective depth (d) and having a characteristic strength (j. the Code requires at least six main bars for circular columns and four bars for rectangular columns. where N is the ultimate axial load andfy is the characteristic strength of the reinforcement. It is explained in Chapter 9 that a reinforced concrete wall. values are given for voided slabs. = 250 Nlmm 2 and 410 N/mm 2 respectively.~. If the beam is reinforced with an area of reinforcement (A. the Code will generally require greater rnininium areas of reinforcement than doeS CP 114. These values agree very well with the Code values of 0.then f. since a minimum area of secondary reinforcement is not specified for solid slabs. 10. should have at least 0.:e a'ridge .). (:Eu.. This requirement is necessary because smaller amounts of reinforcement can result in a reinforced wall which is weaker than a plain concrete wall [227].)d (10.556 l!cu: thus. the required minimum reinforcement percentages are 0. the bars would be sufficiently close together for them to be assumed to form a 'smeared' layer of reinforcement. where T=Mlz and M and z are the moment and lever arm respectively at x. The load transfer occurs because the concrete creeps and shrinks.. Local bond Consider a beam of variable depth subjected to moments which increase \n the same direction as the depth increases. and to restrain main compression bars. in all reinforced concrete bridge members. CP 114 requires only that the area of compression reinforcement should not exceed 4%. transverse ribs. for the maximum allowable value of fcu of 50 N/mm 1 . Hence fb. for f. coupled with the small allowable design crack width. should the spacing exceed 300 mm. If the area of reinforcement is very small. The latter requirement is automatically satisfied by the fact that the smallest available bar has a diameter of 6 mm (although it is now difficuil to obtain reinforcement of less than 8 mm diameter).z. whicb have.. 16. the area of reinforcement is allowed to be Jess than I% but not less than (0.3% of mild steel or 0. The Code also stipulates that. Fig. = 3.M(dzldx) z2 dx But dMldx is the shear force (V) at x and the Code assumes dzldx = tan e•.9 N/mm:. In addition to the modification to allow for variable depth. as shown in Fig.)~ 16. Columns The amount of longitudinal reinforcement should not exceed 6% if vertic·any cast. Maximum spacing of ban: in tension In order to control crack widths to the values given in Table 4. and the links should be spaced at a distance which is not greater than twelve times the diameter of the smallest compression bar. any reinforcement would yield as soon as cracking occurred. 10. 10. it would seem prudent also to apply the Code values to secondary reinforcement. Hence dT VMtan8/z dx ' But tf[/dx is also equal to the bond force per unit length. generally. In addition. d f. The rate of change of Tis dT _ z(dM!dx) . This was considered a reasonable maximum spacing to ensure that.
. rive depth..~. conservatively. a bar should extend at least twelve diameters beyond the point at which it is no longer needed to carry load.8 3. where a bar is curtailed.> c T = Ml' + (V/2) (1  cot o:) oot •) (10.x is.e.7 3.. and by extending the reinforce ~~"'·~ . A rigorous analysis [239) of the truss of Fig.. the Code requires the following minimum lap.7 3. respectively. .4) In Fig. . three or four bars respectively. ~'  . In order to control the crack width at the curtailment point. above the plain bar values. in the presence of shear.6 times those in BE 1173 if overstress is ignored... if more than the required anlount of reinforcement is provided.. 1.0 2. about z/2.~'. then local bond calculations will. 10. in tensioo Plain. Higher values are permitted for bars in compression because some force can be transmitted from the bars to the concrete by end bearing of the bar.x).0 Therconventional expression for the anchorage length(/.6 2. have shown that the sbear capacity of a section with curtailed bars can be up to 33% less than that of a similar section in which the bars are not curtailed.5 1. in compression Deformed.. vertical stirrups) and equation (10. takes the extension length to be the effec.25 : l.5 4.7 2. L = (f)4f. However. However. to ultimate load conditions.1 Deformed Type 2 2. concrete strength and whether the bar is in tension or compression. 10._d Plain. in a proposed amendment to CP 110.7 1. The distance l:::. a bar should extend at least an anchorage length. \..87 fy. In order to be conservative.6.. and which result in splitting of the concrete along tbe bars at a lower load than would occur for a single bar in a pullout test [238].5) Tx = Wxlz + W/2 The moment at (x Mx+bx = W(x + t::.. type 2. so calculated. beyond the point at which it is no longer required to resist bending. The allowable anchorage bond stresses are given in Table 10. Snowdon found that the advantage of the latter bars over plain bars decreased with an increase in diameter.3 2. since the ratio of steel stresses is 1..1 2. Hence.9 2... which has to be carried by the main tension reinforcement at a section where the moment and shear force areM and V. particularly with low strength concrete. Tests.x)lz From which These minimum lengths are much more conservative than those in CP 114 for small diameter bars. in compression 20 25 30 ~40 1.6 Detailing I Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 l:::..56/1 • The ratio of these steel stresses is 1.7 1. in compression Deformed.x} is + l:::.. Curtailment in tension zones In addition to the above general requirements. However. a bar at a particular section has to carry a force greater than that cal· culated by dividing the bending moment (M) at the section by the lever arm (z).~~ . hence.2 Ultimate local bond stresses ·. In order to control the crack width at the curtailment point.5 2. However. Snowdon's tests on 150 mm lengths of various types of bar indicated that the bond stresses developed by plain.5 to 1. for plain bars at working load conditions. if the longitudinal reinforcement is designed solely to resist the moment at a section. it can be shown thatl:::. The effective perimeter of a group of bars is obtained by calculating the sum of the perimeters of the individual bars and.8 3.)z Thus + W/2 = W(x + l:::.9 1. which is required to develop a certain stress ifs) can be obtained from any standard text on reinforced conctete. Tension lap length< 25 ¢i + 150 mm Compression lap length< 20 4> + 150 mm Bar curtailment and anchorage As in CP 114. The allowable local bond stresses at the ultimate limit state depend on bar type and concrete strength: they are given in Table 10.3. local bond calculations are not required at all.87 fy for tension bars and 0. 10. type 1. T = M/z For a central point load (2W) on a beam of span l.) depend upon bar type. the Code requires any.3). A bar should also be extended a minimum distance to allow for the fact that. type 1 deformed and type 2 deformed bars are in the approximate ratio 1 : 1.2 1. shows that the total force. the distributions of tension force due to bending fM/z) and total tension force (/')are plotted for a general case. when bars are in compression. and thus the result of carrying out local bond calculations in accordance with the Code and with BE 1/73 should be about the same.. lhan those given above. The increase of 25%.3 2. The bond stresses for plain.3. 3. This is because BE 1173 allows increases in bond stress.55. then the ~ ""'~''' OT..5. the reinforcement should be extended a distance z/2 beyond that section. the lap length should be 25% greater than the anchorage length. The Code ratio agrees very well with SnoWdon's results. in tension Deformed.2 2. type l. ~· Vx= W From equation (10.5 those in BE 1173. is + (V/2) (cot 6  Bundled bars T = Mlz The Code permits bars to be bundled into groups of two.3.x can be found from Tx = Mr+tJ. square twisted (type 1) and ribbed (type 2) bars were in the approximate ratio 1 : 1. .5 2. However. may be used. These percentages compare with 40% and 80%. be omitted from the Code also. the Code requires the shear capacity at a section. and. and is (10.5) . However.) $ stress in the bar is less than the design stress and lower values offs.3) where !ba is the average anchorage bond stress and 4> is the bar diameter. Hence the Code ratio is reasonable for type 1 deformed bars but can be seen to be conservative for type 2 deformed bars. type 1 deformed and type 2 deformed are in the approximate ratio I : 1.4(a). /. But anchorage lengths for deformed bars will be shorter by about 13% for type 1 bars and 29% for type 2 bars. Since bond calculations are carried out at the ultimate limit state.4) becomes •I /::. thus . This requirement is to allow for the stress concentrations which occur at each end of a lap. The stresses for plain. + V/2 Mx=Wx Wxlz ' General curtailment The Code average bond stresses for plain bars are about 1./ (10.8. 2..8.Ype Anchorage bond 14fd=·· I Anchorage bond stress {N/mmZ) for concrete grade The Code local bond stresses are about 1. for plain bars at working load conditions.3 Ultimate anchorage bond stresses Local bond stress (N/mm 2 ) for concrete grade Plain I. it should be remembered that the Code bond stresses are intended for use at the ultimate limit state with a steel stress of 0. one of the following conditions to be met before a bar is curtailed in a tension zone. Such splitting does not occur with plain bars. if overstress is ignored. It can be seen from Fig. at least double the amount of reinforcement required to resist the moment at that section should be provided.3 Steel force diagram In general._ tion factor of 0. and slightly less conservative for large diameter bars. 6. in tension Deformed..4 : 1.. such as those carried out by Ferguson and Matloob [240]. 2.~ ·~ 20 25 30 S:40 2.x can be found by equating the total steel force at a section atx to the steel force due to moment only at a section atµ: +l:::. The resulting/perimeter. was taken from that implied in CP 114.4 4. If this proposal is adopted.x) t::.x in Fig. 7 Deformed Type I 2.2.4 2. Table 10.LI\  . which fail in bond by pulling out of the concrete.5 1.. It is understood that the tabulated values were obtained by considering the test data of Snowdon {237) and by scaling up the CP 114 values.9 2.3 : 3. square twisted (type 1) and ribbed (type 2) bars were in the approximate ratio 1 : 1.x = z/2 If this analysis is repeated for a uniformly distributed load. for a bar of diameter </>: ' 1.9 2. The Code assumes 9 = 45°. In addition to the above requirements. It is understood that the values for bars in tension were obtained by considering the test data of Snowdon [237) and by scaling up the CP 114 values. 10. a lap length should be not less than the anchorage length calculated from equation (10.CP 114 equation is written in terms of the lever arm rather than the effective depth.4 1. to ultimate load conditions. three or four bars.3 2. presumably. .. is less than the actual exposed perimeter of the group of bars to allow for difficulties in compacting concrete around groups of bars in contact.. The author understands that. respectively. The maximum increase in steel force due to the shear force.55 (see previous discussion of local bond stresses). anchorage lengths for plain bars will be about the same whether calculiited in accordance with the Code or BE 1n3. again. for deformed bars in tension. the Code. the reinforcement stress ifs) is the design stress at the ultimate limit state an'd is 0..87 f1 . This requirement was taken from the ACI Code [168]. of only 25% for type 1 bars and 40% for type 2 bars.1 I• x I ment beyond that section by the distanceb. and those for bars in compression are about 25% greater than those for bars in tension.3 that the increase in steel force due to shear can be allowed for by designing the riinforcement at a section to resist only the moment at that section.lengths to be provided.5. The allowable average anchorage bond stresses (fb. by multiplying by a reduc. type 2.x I i Steel force ~i 2v {1cotal ! T I t beam J!ig.1 3. ""' 0. calculated from equation (10.4 for groups of two. the maximum value of6x occurs when Cot« is zero (i. the moment and shear force at x are: Lap lengths Ba'r t. to be greater than twice the actual shear force. in the Code. \.~~ .2 1.4 : 2.2 3. whilst the BE 1n3 bond stresses are intended to be used at working load with a steel stress of about 0.2· 2.. or 0. as in CP 114. 0. then. rather than the simplified analysis of Chap· ter 6. Table 10.) of a bar. Snowdon's tests indicated that the anchorage lengths for plain...72/y for compression bars.3) with f..
and equation (l0. Hence.7) should be conservative. the Code requires the covers to bonded tendons to be the same as those to bars in reinforced concrete. J + 2¢>/ab . is provided (in Appendix D of Part 4 of the Code) for covers to curved tendons in ducts. 'the length of the resisting concrete block is (c + $ + atf2). the greater of 30 mm or onethird of the support width. when external tendons are to be protected by dense concrete. The Code definitions of ab are summarised in Fig.6) should not exceed the allowable value given by equation (8.. by reinforcement. which is identical to that in BE 2173. End blocks in posttensioned members General In a posttensioned member. As in CP 114.~i. whereas. R F.. whereas the Code does not refer to maximum spacings.. The forces then spread out 143 .2.5 fcu (b) Definitions of ab Fig. for CP 110.i:. 3.4(a). the end section of the member acts like a deep beam when turned through 90" (see Fig. BE 2173 requires compliance with the maximum spacings specified in CP 116. concrete compaction and strength. in equation (8. sin (012)/$ [2r sin (012)] (a) Bearing force :. However.8. The CP 110 handbook [112) warns that the transmission lengths for strands. If such test data are not available. and those for strands are based on data from tests carried out only in the laboratory by Base [243].. should be taken as(c + $ + ai)2)! 2. should be ca1cu1ated by assuming the resultant force (R) 142 ' r· on the concrete is uniformally spread over the length of the bend. as appropriate.4(a) the resultant force is · The Code thus seems to be conservative in this situation.Jfs The following points concerning detailing in prestressed concrete are intended to be additional to those discussed previously for reinforced concrete. Hence. tendon type and size) and. In addition a table.4).4). the bar diameter is the length of the load. for a bar adjacent to a face of a member. which.4). The bearing area is <I> F. the Code specifies a minimum cover of 50 mm to a duct. "" 0. which is typically of the order of 400 mm. where$ is the bar diameter. When using the Code. The suggested transmission lengths for wires are based (10. concentrated loads are applied by the tendons. at some distance from the end. and it is not clear whether the clause is applicable to bridges. ' R = 2Fb. 10. a bar should extend for an anchorage length equivalent to twelve times the bar diameter. If the support is wide and a bend or hook does not begin before d/2 from the face of the support (where d is the effective depth of the member). if possible. as in BE 2173. Bearing stresses inside bends The bearing stress on the concrete inside a bend of a bar of diameter$. the author would suggest that equation (7.5 and the above discussion. The Code is not specific regarding how the latter check should be carried out: BE 2173 refers to the reinforced concrete crack width formula of BE In3.µI' to B. It is not necessary to cafry Out these bearing stress calculations if a bar is not as.i::. This is due to the fact that. to the prestressed member. the latter clause does not exist in Part 7. and. In the present context. the transmission length is defined as the length required to transmit the initial prestressing force in the tendon to the concrete. by analogy with a deep beam. Transmission length in pretensioned members In both the Code and BE 2173. Similarly the bar spacing (ab) is the length of the resisting concrete block and thus. which is bent through an angle $ with a radius r. rbe prestress is fully distributed over the section. to cover small precast units [112].4) for beams should be used. is the tensile force in the bar at the ultimate limit state. 10.04Pk!Js bw = width of web. The bearing stress calculated from equation (10. 3rstn1ss over fc=average 7 this length . but before protection. could be exceeded on site. the Code requires that. the comments made earlier in this chapter regarding the reinforced concrete covers are relevant. = atf2..(b) Bearing force at bend The above requirements are far more complicated than those of CP 114. Again.8. 10.4).3 of Part 7 of the Code for the definition of an external tendon. the protective concrete should be anchored. the prestressing forces have been considered to be applied at the end of the member. as shown in Fig. towards the end of the member. y. the following Code expression is obtained.. 1.J. Tendons in ducts. Stress distribution Fig. is outside the structure'.c). This clause was originally written.3. and should be checked for cracking. as shown in Fig. they are transferred to the concrete over the transmission length.2h. Spacing of tendons Bonded tendons The minimum tendon spacing should comply with the minimum spacings specified for reinforcing bars. It appears that the Code requirements were based upon those of the CEB [226]. Hence.umed to be stressed beyond the bend. On substituting into equation (8.6) which is the equation given in the Code.4(b). unless one chooses to apply option l and continue a bar for a full anchorage length.i 0 0 0 ' (10. <t where = (0. but the Code. the required area of the vertical reinforcement (As) should be calculated from: A.5). In addition. It defines an external tendon as one wbich 'after stressing and incorporation in the work.. \4M . Cover to tendons Bonded tendons As in BE 2173. 10.. In members which have the tendons arranged vertically in widely spaced groups. where c is the side cover. defines ab as (c + $12) for a bar adjacent to a face of a member. of course. the cover to the tendons should be the same as if the tendons were internal. beyond the centre line of the support.= S 0 HP. are similar to those specified in BE 2173. Jpo = $12. the end face of the member is in tension and a crack can form. but exists in Part 8 of the Code as Clause 5.4(b). implies that Yo=(c+$)/2 Anchorage at a simply supported end The Code requires one of the following conditions to be satisfied. with reference to Fig. or end block. at a distance h from Tendons in ducts The Code gives a number of requirements for the clear distance between ducts. The transmission length depends upon a great number of variables (e. Provided that the local bond stress at the face of a support is less than half the value in Table 10. which were based upon laboratory data.5. by redefining ab as (c + $). as explained earlier in this chapter. Thus y. The latter spacings are similar to those of CP 116 and.n (0/2)] Thus the bearing stress fb is given by !b = 2Fb.~. the Code gives recommended transmission lengths for wire and for strand. and Green [241] suggests that..'de.}J. 1.o. External tendons Part 4 of tbe Code refers to Clause 4. l0. [2rs. 10. Bi. 2. fb = Fblr<P Bi. and no bend or hook should begin before the centre of the support. the prestressing forces are applied directly to the ends of the member by means of rclalively small anchorages.S Splitting at end of prestressed member on data from tests carried out in the laboratory and on site by Base [242]. Hence. The Code implies values which are identical to those in BE 2173. As in BE 2173.. bearing stress calculations are not required for standard end hooks or bends.eq bridg.. In addition. these requirements are identical to those in BE 2/73. it also warns that they should not be used for compressed strands. 10. for which transmission lengths can be nearly twice those given in the Code. in fact.g. Thus the deep beam analogy tends to overestimate the tendency to crack. should be determined from tests carried out under site or factory conditions.87/~) total initial prestressing force In Fig. Vertical links should be provided to control tbe crack.7) h = vertical clear distance between tendon groups the end of the member fc = average compressive stress between the tendons at a distance h from the end of the member fs = permissible reinforcement stress Pk Prestressed concrete 0.. This definition is essentially the same as that in BE 2173. a bar should extend from the face of a support for an anchorage length equivalent to (d/2 + 12 $ ). a straight length of bar should extend.ed area and thus. sin (012) where Fb. in equation (8. 10. However.
it is reasonable to calculate the shear strength of a lightweight aggregate concrete member by multiplying the shear strength of the comparable normal weight aggregate con· crete member by the following factors. 4.Concrete bridge design to BS 54()() Lightweight aggregate concrete still in excellent condition after forty years in service.34 N/rnm 1). .1n) above which tor· sion reinforcement has to be provided should be 0..42 N/mmJ) as used for normal weight aggregate concrete (see Chapter 6). instead of 0./!cu+ 0. ::. Curing conditions affect the tensile strength of light· weight aggregate concrete more than nonnal weight aggre· gate concrete. gate concrete... which develop in members of light· weight aggregate concrete. Hence: .~ .:· .. although ii is not stated explicitly in the Code./lu (but not greater than 0. ..2 and 10. frequently pass through the aggregate rather than around the aggregate. 11 i'· Movements I '~ Thermal properties Lightweight aggregate concrete has a cellular structure and.5 N/mm 1 for in· fill concrete. this requirement may be conservative because tests. carried out by Grimer (252].. I'! i'' ·1' 1 I 1 z. The flexural tensile strength tends to be reduced by drying more than the direct tensile strength. be 0.) should be taken as 0. When calculating the shear strength of a prestressed member uncracked in flexure. The maximum nominal flexural... 0. One important difference between concretes made with lightweight and normal weight aggregates is that the gain of strength with age may be different. for defonned bars.. because of the greater porosity of lightweight aggregates.. 4. for a variety of lightweight aggregates. The Code implies that the above reduction should be applied only when considering bearing stresses inside bends of reinforcing bars..36 l!cu. Hence.. 2.5 to be applied.3 thus seems reasonable. instead of 0.. Strength mal weight concrete... The average ultimate bond stresses developed with the light· weight aggregate concretes were 50% to 70% of those developed with the normal weight aggregate concrete.~·' L.~ i. which result from restrained thermal movements.__:._. it would seem pru· dent to multiply the basic limiting interface shear stresses for composite construction.1.85 if the coarse aggregate is lightweight and the fine aggregate is natural sand.. The lower coefficient of thennal expansion also means that overall thermal movements of a bridge are less when lightweight aggregate concrete is used. The Code thus requires the cover to the reinforce· ment to be 10 mm greater than the appropriate value obtained from Table 10..'L!i>l I 1: ii. The allowable concrete flexural tensile stresses for insitu concrete.. When calculating the shear strength of a Class 1 or 2 prestressed member cracked in flexure. . I !1 LI . to the allowable bond stresses of Tables 10. but bas to be allowed for in the design of prestressed concrete.ffcu respectively. coupled with the lower elastic modulus of lightweight aggregate concrete (see next section). by analogy. that a bearing failure is. it is thought that. The relatively reduced tensile strength does not influ· ence the design of reinforced concrete. 0. The average ultimate bond stresses developed with the lightweight aggregate concretes were.65 and 0. i. .. The basic allowable hypothetical tensile stresses for Class 3 prestressed members. .03 bd JT.24 jJ.instead of 0. instead of 0.! \: ~.30 . the tensile strength of lightweight aggregate concrete when cured in dry conditions can be up to 30% less than that of comparable nonnal weight con· Crete [96].8. Although the tensile strengths are similar for moist cured specimens. Shideler [257] has carried out comparative pullout tests on deformed bars embedded in eight different types of lightweight.. 3. However.. The Code thus advises that allowable bond stresses should be reduced still further (than 20% and 50%) for horizontal reinforcement used with formed slag aggregate: appropriate reduction factors would seem to 2. The limiting torsional stress (v.6 /!cu (but not grCater than 3. The Code reduction factor of 0.~.. the design flexural tensile strength of the concrete (f. should be multiplied by 0. Only half of these values should be used for slabs (see Chapter 6). so obtained.1 for normal weight concrete. at least 76% of those developed with the normal weight aggregate concrete. its themial conductivity can be as low as one· fifth of the typical value of 1.i and 40 N/mm1 for reinforced. a tensile splitting failure. which permits the relatively easy diffusion of carbon dioxide through the concrete. fur the cracking moment.~. Bond strength 1. by 0. The Code reduction factor of 0... The allowable tensile stresses for Class 2 pretensioned and posttensioned members are 0. Hence. 148 '..3 thus seems reasonable. showed that the effect of the type of aggre· gate on the rate of penetration of the carbonation front was small in comparison with the effect of mix proportions. which are given in Table 4. the Code requires the limiting bearing stress for lightweight aggregate concrete to be twothirds of that calculated from equation (8. [253]. Although differential temperature distributions are more severe with lightweight aggregate concrete.. when used in composite construction. it implies that the differential temperature distributions are more severe than those discussed in Chapters 3 and 13 for normal weight aggregate concrete. 75 if both coarse and fine aggregates are light· weight. with the exception of foamed slag. and details of mixes suitable for prestressed concrete have been given by Swamy et al. should be multiplied by 0. which are given in Table 4..· 0... aggregate concrete and one normal weight aggregate concrete.. When calculating the shear strength of a Class 1 or 2 prestressed member cracked in flexure. Shldeler's tests with foamed slag aggregate indicated that the average bond stress could be as low as 66% for horizontal bars due to water gain forming voids in the con· crete under the bars._ .5. and 0. in which specimens of five different lightweight aggregates and one noimal weight aggregate were exposed to a polluted atmosphere for six years. ~~~ r~1.. Tensile strength The tensile strength of any concrete is greatly influenced by the moisture content of the concrete.8 ...ffc. because it provides good thermal insulation. In nonmarine environments. for bridges.A. No specific guidance is given in the Code. Bearing strength He .~ . or torsional.5. Since the tensile strength of lightweight aggregate concrete can be up to 30% less than that of comparable normal weight aggregate concrete [96].8. becomes . The reduced thennal conductivity is of great benefit in buildings. In particular the gain in strength with certain lightweight aggregates may be very small for rich mixes (254]. thus. for normal weight aggregate concre.8 N/mm 1 for reinforced and prestressed concrete respectively) for nonnal weight aggregate concrete (see Chapter 6).i.4 W/m°C for normal weight aggregate concrete [96]. the· design tensile strength of the concrete (fi) should be taken as 0... respectively. as occurs in members of normal weight aggregate concrete. instead of 0.. In the Code an average value of 0. instead of 0.. ~.:_"'"1 '~ '~::. for normal weight aggregate concrete (see Chapter 6). referred to in the prestressed concrete clauses for nor Mr= (0. essentially..1) Shear strength The shear cracks.te (see Chapter 6). I0.37 lk. when compared with test data collated by Swamy [259).037 bd/lcu as used for normal weight aggregate concrete..8. means that thermal stresses.. which illustrates an end block of a posttensioned member..4).3 ..8 to be applied. Tests earned out by Hanson [255] and by Ivey and Buth [256] on beams without shear reinforcement have shown that. 1.... and less shear force cmi be transmitted by aggregate lnterlock across the crack (see Chapter 6). are less than for nonnal weight aggregate concrete..054 ...8...067 (but not greater than 0..75 N/Jnm= and 5.19$ao. are very close to those given in BE 11.. because drying reduces the tensile strength..4. Hence the allowable bearing stresses for lightweight aggregate concretes should reflect their reduced tensile strength discussed earlier in this chapter. This increase seems reasonable.8/pr)//y (11. which are given in Table 6. This value seems reasonable in view of the reduction in tensile strength referred to in the last paragraph... the shear strength of a lightweight aggregate concrete member can be appreciably less than that of a comparable normal weight concrete member. should be multiplied by 0. These strengths can be attained readily with lightweight aggregates [96]. as compared with approximately 12 x 10arc for nonnal weight aggre./lcu .29 . Short and Kinniburgh [258] have reported the results of pullout and 'bond beam' tests in which plain bars were embedded in three different types of lightweight aggregate concrete and in no"rmal weight aggregate concrete.12). 3..2 and 10. the first term of the righthand side of equation (6. for plain bars.. The nominal allowable shear stresses for reinforced concrete (vJ.6(a).. 2..36 . carbonation of the concrete may occur to a greater depth when lightweight aggregates are used.6 N/mm 1 for reinforced and prestressed concrete respectively). The implications of the factor of 0... """'"•'. Compressive strength The minimum characteristic strengths permitted by the Code when using lightweight aggregate concrete are 15 N/mm.8.6(a). which are given in Table 4.. posttensioned and pre· tensioned construction respectively.:.8 are: 1. their effects are mitigated by the fact that the coefficient of thennal expansion can be as low as 7 x 1o·frc [96]. ·I .8 N/mm! and 4.11) should be taken as 0. The Code gives no specific advice on transmission lengths for lightweight aggregate concrete. The lower bond stresses developed with lightweight aggregate concrete imply that transmission lengths of pretensioned tendons are greater than the values discussed in Chapter 10 for use with normal weight aggregate concrete. 5. shear stress should be 0. Although not stated in the Code.8 bas been adopted for any lightweight aggregate concrete./!cu and 0.33 for deformed and plain bars respec· tively. but it would seem prudent to apply the reduction to all bearing stress calculations involving lightweight aggregate concrete. the same value has been adopted for torsional strength. It should be noted that BE 11 requires a minimum strength of 22.~ ··w· It can be seen from Fig. as an upper limit.. [96]. 30 N/mm. This fact.~ i ~ I 'i :i.. but the CP 110 handbook [112] suggests that all allowable tensile stresses. Since aggregate interlock can contribute 33% to 50% of the total shear capacity of a member [152].75 (but not greater than 4.45 jf". The allowable stresses. equation (6.. for normal weight aggregate concrete (see Chapter 4). but the CP 110 hand· book [ 112] suggests that they should be taken as 50% greater than those for normal weight aggregate concrete. to the allowable bond stresses of Tables 10. should be multiplied by 0. However. the surfaces of a shear crack tend to be smoother for light· weight aggregate concrete. and.
since the latter va1ue is a reasonable upper limit of applied pacing frequency (frequencies above 3 Hz representing running).0. this is quantified in the Code as a maximum verticai acceleration of 0.5 jf. it bas a1so been observed [260) that less creep may occur with structural lightweight aggregate con· crete as compared with normal weight aggregate concrete. the additional moment is increased by nearly 50%. creep of lightweight aggregate concrete depends upon a great number of factors. It can be seen that the attenuation factor drops rapidly and. the CP 110 handbook [112] suggests that the loss of prestress due to concrete creep should be assumed to be 1. These factors are allowed for in the Code by: (a) Defining a short colwnn as one witb a slenderness ratio of not greater than 10. 3. Although creep of lightweight aggregate concrete can be up to twice that of normal weight aitgregate concrete [96]. Elastic losses in a prestressed member can be up to double those in normal weight aggregate concrete members. \I'.3 1.3 and 1. They will also be within 20% of those specified in BE 11. Shrinkage Great variations occur in the shrinkage values for light· weight aggregate concrete.. 12.. . In similar circumstances.1 (D. reference is made to Parts 2.. the attenuation factor is very small. In lieu of such data. at a frequency ratio of 1. it is still necessary to calculate the amplitude of the nonresonant vibrations which do occur when a pedestrian strides at the maximum possible frequency of 4 Hz.t exceed 4 Hz. is the fundamental natural frequency in Hertz of the unloaded bridge [107]. vibrations of railway bridges are allowed for by multiplying the nominal static standard railway loadings by a dynamlc factor.. values up to twice those for nonii. that the elastic modulus of a lightweight aggregate concrete with a density of De (kg/ro 3 ) could be predicted from Ee= 9. The resulting elastic modulus will thus agree closely with that predicted by equation (11.2).4 Natural friiquency Pacing frequency Fig.6 times that calcu· lated for normal weight aggregate concrete..00375 for normal weight aggregate concrete (see Chapter 9). The higher values are associated with fuamed blast furnace slag aggregate and the lower values with expanded clay aggregate [254].." It is thus considered 151 . 1. Introduction B 1. and additional moments (see Chapter 9) are greater. because the stress increments due to the dynamic effects are within the allowance made for impact in the nomina1 highway loadings [107]. Ana1yses were carried out to detennine an attenuation factor defined as the ratio of the maximum acceler'ation when walking below the resonant frequency to that when walking at tbe resonant frequency. can be obtained by multiplying the elastic modulus of a normal weight aggregate concrete by (Dc/2300)'. 150 movements are less than for normal weight aggregate concrete. llridge .:_.4 and 2. as compared with that of nonnal weight aggregate concrete. ~ ~ O.6 times that of normal weight concrete under the same conditions.Bi \ \ '. mlsi. are conflicting. Stresses arising from restrained shrinkage or thermal 2.c~. however. where f. 4 and 10 of the Code.6 times that ca1culated for normal weight aggregate concrete.2) was based upon data from sixty mixes covering four different lightweight aggregates with concrete densities in the range 1400 kg/m 3 to 2300 kg/m 3 • The Code states that the elastic modulus of a lightweight aggregate concrete. This increase is reasonable in view of the reduced elastic modulus and the greater creep of lightweight aggregate concrete (see next section). by a divisor of 1200. The reducecl elastic modulus of lightweight aggregate concrete has the following design implications. with a density in the above range.. Thus. 0.1>. Spratt [96] suggests the adoption of an unrestrained shrinkage strain of between 1. Spratt [96] suggests that creep of lightweight aggregate concrete should be assumed to be between 1.2) Equation (11. Parrot and Pomeroy [20] from considerations of test data. It was found that it was possible to excite a bridge in this way if the natural frequency did no.6 '~\ Vibration Design criterion ' 0.1 1. This is because of the smaller elastic modulus and the greater creep and shrinkage of lightweight aggregate concrete. The requirement to reduce the divisor from 1750 to 1200 implies that the assumed extreme fibre concrete strain at failure for ligbtweight aggregate concrete is about 0. from considerations of test data...21) to (9.. Hence.H"'. Compliance Introduction The above design criterion is given in Appendix C of Part 2 of the Code. which also gives methods of ensuring compliance with the criterion. if the natural frequency exceeds 4 Hz. Jl. In the absence of data pertaining to the actual conditions under consideration. it is apparent that total losses in prestressed lightweight aggregate concrete may be up to 50% greater than those in prestressed nonnal weight aggregate concrete.·' .25 (for which the natural frequency is 5 Hz if the pacing frequency is 4 Hz). the CP 110 handbook [112) suggests that the loss of prestress due to shrinkage should be assumed to be 1.0 times that of normal weight aggregate concrete under the same conditions.4 It is explained in Chapter 3 that it is not necessary to consider vibrations of high'"Yay bridges.1. Ee= 9. Elastic modulus The elastic modulus of lightweight aggregate concrete can range from 50% to 75% of that of normal weight aggregate concrete of the same strength [254].al weight aggregate concrete have been reported [96]. the dynamic aspects of design are considered in terms of vibration and fatigue. It is explained in Chapter 4 that the appropriate design criterion for footbridges and cycle track bridges is that of discomfort to a user...i! " 0 In this chapter..1 Attenuation factor with the natural frequency of a footbridge.1 fcuO. '. The results of such an analysis have the form shown in Fig.0 1. and it is desirable to obtain test data appropriate to the actua1 conditions under consideration. Hence.. In similar circumstances. Hence stability problems are more likely to occur. as compared with the critica1 ratio of 12 for normal weight aggregate concrete columns (see Chapter 9).ll where Ee is the elastic modulus in kN/mm 2 and fcu is the characteristic strength in N/rnmi. (b) Substituting the divisor of 1750. Chapter 12 Vibration and fatigue Creep The data on creep of lightweight aggregate concrete. Hence. It is mentioned in Chapters 2 and 4 that the Code gives a tableof shortterm elastic moduli for normal weight aggregate concretes. The latter authors further suggested.~_.·io BS~/.00633 as compared with 0. Davies and Smith [107]. with a static weight of 0.28). suggested by Teychenne..0 · 33 (11.9 m. In addition.. specific vibration calculations only have to be carried out for footbridges and cycle track bridges. It should be noted that the criterion and the methods of compliance are the same as those in BE 1177. Losses in prestressed concrete From the previous considerations. L'ateral deflections of columns are greater than for normal weight aggregate concrete..2 1. These values are in good agreement with the following relationship. They considered a pedestrian.. in the additional moment parts of equations (9. As is true of all other concretes. The background to the compliance rules has been given by Blanchard.. 7 kN and a stride length of 0.12400) 2 /eu. walking in resonance \\ I I OJ~ 1. resonant vibrations do not occur.
12. '. as shown in Fig.kiji f0 .: ... Davies and Smith [107] by considering some existing bridges: for each bridge the number of pedestrians required to produce a maximum acceleration just equal to the allowable value of 0.. Linear interpolation may be used for intermediate values of l 1/l for three span bridges. In fact the Code takes the amplitude to be 180 N and._.··r .6 o.2) a=4r?f'oy. which is the natural logarithm of the ratio of the amplitude in one cycle to the amplilllde in the following cycle. 12. This maximum acceleration should then be multiplied by an attenuation factor which varies linearly from 1.7 kN.:JJ&Utv (~. Nine bridges were considered and the calculated frequencies were within 6% of the measured frequencies except for one bridge._ '"""'~"' . 10 40 50 Main span !I) metres Fig.for b = 0. in a simple form.. to give the maximum acceleration due to a pacing frequency of 4 Hz. and/or more than three spans. and ·Appendix B of Part 4 of the Code tabulates such moduli for various concrete strengths.1) 'lj.1.. but including the stiffness of parapets. referred to in the last paragraph. this view is not supported by experimental data._.. if the natural frequency of the unloaded bridge exceeds 5 Hz. However.OS.. the logarithmic decrement. when considering a bridge.. c:\_ ___._.. <i~'..i (12. to obtain good agreement ___ J<.. is: II "1 1] I ! i ''iI I ii 111 ~ . Equation (12.S. I ·. The damping is expressed in terms of the logarithmic dee· rement (0). The relationship between the dynamic response factor ('lj)) and the main span length (l) is given graphically in the Code. This requirement was proposed by Blanchard. the acceleration calcu where L (12. or a simplified analysis based on a uniform crosssection.4 for the logarithmic decrement of O. in the absence of more precise da1a.05 L·••••~• . 12. which had an error of 15%. It was concluded that.i . of both reinforced EI = flexural rigidity A = crosssectional area p = = = = If/0 1ies in therange 4 Hzto5 Hz.. t· . It would seem appr9priate to use the dynamic modulus. due to energy dissipation at joints. it is necessary to analyse tbe bridge under the action of an applied moving and pulsating point load.5 Moving pulsating force be O.0 2 K""0. the fundamental natural frequency can be obtained easily by using.Actual combined ·Idealised combined 6 time Right Time Fig. the Code gives the following fonnula for calculating the maximum vertical acceleration (a): where y.6 ~ < 0. the amplitude of..._.. K /fil 2iiD /p. If a bridge is excited.7 kN. The relationship is shrJwn in Fig. 12. because it was felt that cracks in reinforced concrete dissipate energy and thus improve the damping.. and/or unequal side spans. a larger vaiue has often been taken for reinforced concrete than for prestressed concrete.I = density = length of bridge = parameter dependent on span arrangement and lengths. 12... Davies and Smith [107] suggest that the maxi· mum bridge acceleration should first be calculated using the natural frequency.5 /f. when applied to a simply supported single span bridge. The Code suggests that. .. Hence the Code states that.. as discussed earlier in this chapter.1) can then be used.9 Force Ii I • K 0.J\':\ T\il ! I q \ VD"\.. and their vibration may be ignored. which is of interest. For bridges of constant crosssection and up to four spans.02 to 0. The natural frequency of a bridge should be calculated by including superimposed dead load but excluding pedestrian live loading. at the midpoint of the main span._ I • <UI <Otvl< K"" 1.2).. was calculated. The Code also requires the shortterm elastic modulus of concrete to be used. Equation (12. for a vertical load of 0.:2  ...3 Decay due to damping very difficult to excite bridges with natural frequencies greater than 5 Hz.1.OS seems reasonable [264}. The amplitude of the point load was chosen so that. 20 30 i t~ ~' Simplified method For a bridge of constant crosssection and up to three symmetric spans (as shown in Fig. Tests on existing concrete footbridges have indicated logarithmic decrements in the range 0..__. the results of a study of a number of bridges with different span arrangements. 12... it is necessary to use either a computer program.. In the past. Jn the above discussion it is implied that it is necesSSI)' to consider only a single pedestrian crossing a bridge.0 at 4 Hz to 0.. for example. which represents a pedestrian crossing the bridge. etc.. 12.3 at S Hz.' 1. given in the Code. the vibration gradually decreases due to damping.Concrete bridge design to BS 54()() T I I i. The configuration factor (K) depends upon the number and lengths of the spans.) should be calculated.___) 153 ______. The relationship obtained by combining consecutive single foot relationships is also shown. In Fig.0 o. Jn the latter approach.. ~.. which represents a single pedestrian. 10' g_ r. and thus the Code value of O._ 0 Fig.2) should be reduced by applying the attenuation factor discussed earlier in this chapter.· 1.4 Dynamic response factor (ip) .OS suggested in the Code. Calculation of natural frequency The Code requires that the natural frequency of a concrete bridge should be determined by considering the uncracked section (neglecting the reinforcement).a J"''6 . Davies and Smith [107] and represents. It can be seen that the combined effect can be represented by a sine wave with an amplitude of about 25% of the static single pedestrian load of 0. ~ For bridges of varying crosssection.. 12. such as that adopted by Wills [261].. If the natural frequency lies between 4 Hz and 5 Hz. Wills [261] has used the material and section properties. Furthermore... support conditions and the vibration mode.a :E0. the forcetime relationship is shown for a single foot. in addition to inherent material damping. For each bridge. Hence the pulsating point load (Fin Newtons). values are given in Fig. This approach has been adopted in the Code. according to Tilly [264]. ' r· .. . as shown in Fig.. the vibration criterion is deemed to be satisfied. the pacing fre· quency is taken to be equal to the natural frequency of the bridge (/0 ). The tabulated values are in good agreement with data presented by Neville [108]. should be assumed to Calculation of acceleration between predicted and observed natural frequencies of existing bridges. 12. In such situations.11 1. it is the overall damping. J "I and prestressed concrete footbridges. tables presented by Gorman [262]. a numerical solution to its governing equation of motion was obtained._. ~ . Blanchard. Wills [263} explains this pro· cedure and shows that it leads to satisfactory estimates of the natural frequencies of bridges having crosssections which vary significantly. 12.~. the applied loading should be limited to a single pedestrian. it produces the same response as that produced by a pedestrian walking across the bridge [107J.7 ""•!'£ 12 "• I 11 11 I 1. "'"····""' fundamental natural frequency (Hz) static deflection (m) configuration factor dynamic response factor lated from equation (12. in order that the more sensitive of the existing bridges could be considered to be just acceptable to the Code vibration criterion.3.2. ignoring shear lag.2 Configuration factor (K) Deflection i ~ I Right I 4 I I One foot .. The static deflection (y. The dynamic response factor (1p) depends upon the main span length and the damping characteristics of the bridge. the above simplified method of detennining the maximum vertical acceleration is inappropriate.._ ·.t  "'~ Stotlol \ load 8 '... The fundamental natural frequency (fo) is given by [262] ·::. a bridge of VSI)'ing crosssection is replaced by a bridge having a constant crosssection with a mass per unit length and flexural rigidity equal to the weighted means of the actual masses per unit length and flexural rigidities of the bridge. General method For bridges with nonuniform crosssections. I \\\ JI T 1I ~'Lr· ''! ~ a Fig.2) was derived by Blanchard.
Hence. It is obviously tedious in design to have to consider a number of different axle arrangements. Concrete in compression can withstand. The design fatigue loading is specified in Pict 10 of the Code and. and thus the minimum flexural stress is always compressive. the work of Edwards [267. Code fatigue highway loading A table in Part 10 of the Code gives the total number of commercial vehicles (above 15 kN unladen weight) per year which should be assumed to travel in each lane of various types of road. It is significant that. Cracking does not' occur. compressive and tensile stresses specified in the Code imply that the stress range. if the minimum stress is zero or compressive [265. Since the latter stresses have to be checked under the full design load at the serviceability limit state (i. if the maximum tensile stress does not exceed about 60% of the static tensile strength. the required velocity (v 1 in mis) of the pulsating point load 'is given by: v. With the partial safety factors for loads a~d for material properties that have been adoPted in the C~t. The reduced resistance to cracking of concrete subjected to repeated loading has two implications. the section should be provided with unstressed reinforcement capable of resisting a reverse moment of 10% of the static live load moment. partial safety factors (YJL and Y/3) do not bave to be applied. as do the actual vehicles. should also be considered. exceed the allowable stresses given in the Code for static loading at the serviceability limit state (see Chapter 4). the implications of not considering concrete and prestressing tendons are discussed briefly in a simplistic manner. only those vibrations whiCh result from nonnal pedestrian use of a footbridge have been considered.ethod with the elastic modulus of concrete equal to its shortterm value. With regard to concrete bridges. and thus it was decided to specify a standard fatigue vehicle. · Prestressing tendons The allowable concrete flexural. which are discussed in Chapter 4. it would seem prudent to ensure that. is about 60% of the static tensile strength. the pennissible hypothetical tensile stresses in the Code (see Chapter 4) are conservative in comparision with test data [120. and thus excessive cracking under repeated loading should not occur. Part 1 of the Code requires the use of a linear elastic rD. Class 2 prestressed concrete. the stress range in concrete was about 8% of the ultimate static strength as compared with about 13% in air. It is thus unlikely that fatigue failure of a prestressing tendon.. ment to check interface shear stresses under the full design load is discussed fully in Chapter 8. the interface shear strength was reduced. 122. Wills [261] shows that the approximate method is adequate for many footbridges. since they can withstand smaller stress ranges [265]. For repeated loading. This is· because fatigue damage in welded steel connections is proportional to the third or fourth power of the stress range whereas. tension stiffening under repeated loading should be taken as 50% of that under static loading. One method requires a large amount of computer storage space and the other more approximate method requires much less storage space. it is the repeated apphcation of working loads which cause deterioration to a stage Where failure occurs. should exhibit adequate shear resistance wben subjected to repeated loading. However. is based upon tests on prestressing tendons in air. When determining the response of a bridge to fatigue loading. which were proposed in [279] for repeated loading. it should be emphasised that. the maximum tolerable tensile stress. in the vast majority of Class 3 members. the allowable interface shear stresses. which could result in the bridge being considered unserviceable. the cracks are wider.:. Thus. for 2 million cycles of repeated loading. thus the Code merely gives a warning that reversals of load effects can occur. stress ranges in tendons could be up to 15% of the ultimate static strength of a tendon. in CP 115. John· son and Buckby [24] have emphasised that equivalence of cumulative fatigue damage does not occur for shear connectors in composite (steelconcrete) construction. Part 4 of the Code requires only the fatigue strength (or life) of reinforcing bars to be assessed. appropriate to a compressive minimum stress. fatigue is dealt with under 'Other co~siderations'. under repeated loading. However. Fatigue 2.:fc:t(: 'bridge rte. However. then test results indicate that it may be conservatively assumed that 2 million cycles of stress can be withstood by a tendon without failure. tendon stress ranges do not exceed 10% of the ultimate static strength of the tendon.le at the ultimate limit state.:. it is possible that flexural fatigue cracking could occur in a Class 2 member designed in accordance with the Code. Fatigue failure of tendons are thus possible in some Class 3 members. For concrete in tension.3) It is mentioned earlier in this Chapter that the assumed stride length is 0. 123). Before presenting the Code requirements for reinforcing 154 Shear cracks may fonn at a lower load. fatigue calculations are carried out separately from the calculations to check compliance with the ultimate and serviceability limit state criteria: in Part 4 of the Code. since it is a design loading. Particular attention should be given to the possibility of an anchorage fatigue failure when unhanded tendons are used. However.wt. Concrete I. It is thus reasonable for the Code not to require calculations for assessing the fatigue life of concrete in compression.9 m. for a shear connector. rather than of a tendon.. It was found that. the working loads may cause minor fatigue damage. In a Class 3 member. where the author suggests that. which is quoted in the last paragraph. Flexural tensile stresses are not pennitted under service load conditions and thus repeated loading cannot cause cracking.25 fc. for prestressed concrete. Since the flexural tensile stress pennitled by the Code may be up to 80% of the static flexural tensile strength (see Chapter 4). or cracks wider than the allowable values in reinforced concrete or Class 3 prestressed concrete members. It should be noted that 2 million cycles of loading during the specified design life of 120 years are equivalent to about 50 applications of the full design load per day. The standard fatigue vehicle was chosen to give the same cumulative fatigue damage. in less than 2 million cycles of repeated loading. because stress changes in the tendon are transmitted directly to the anchorages. designed for the maximum allowable hypothetical tensile stress of 0. bars. Thus concrete and prestressing tendons do not have to be considered in fatigue calculations. resulting in either cracks in Class l or 2 prestressed members. (see Chapter 4). 1• F = 180 sin(217 f 0 T) where T is the time in seconds. under service load conditions. However. Flexural cracking Wlder repeated loading is now considered. providing that the stress range does not exceed about JO% of the ultimate static strength [265). a maximum stress of about 60% of the static strength if the minimum stress in a cycle is zero {265]. However. ""' "lion{) (12. The maximum stress which can be tolerated increases as the minimum stress increases. Tension stiffening Wlder repeated loading is discussed in Chapter 7. tested under static loading by Saemann and Washa {118]. Repeated loading may cause the cracks to be wider than under static loading. Since Part 4 of the Code specifies a limiting compressive stress of 0. Forced vibrations Up to now in this chapter. in a Class I or 2 member.9/0 (12. However.4) Wills [261] discusses two methods of analysing a bridge under the above moving pulsating point load. for welded connections in steel bridges. No flexural tensile stresses are pennitted under dead plus superimposed dead loads (see Chapter 4).5 x 108 for a single twolane all purpose road to 2 x 10 8 for the slow lane of a dual threelane motorway. If it is assumed that the effective prestress in a tendon is about 45% to 60% of its ultimate strength. designed to resist static shear in accordance with the Code. Fatigue failure of anchorages and couplers..5 fcu for concrete at the serviceability limit state (see Chapter 4). However. It was not possible [107] to quantify a loading or a c~terion for this action. Class 3 prestressed concrete A Class 3 member is designed to be cracked under the serviceability limit state design load. Class I prestressed concrete. of a prestressing tendon in a Class 1 or 2 member Cannot exceed about 10% of the ultimate static strength. the latter stresses are very similar to the Code values. the author would suggest that the breakdown of tension stiffening Wlder repeated loading has a greater influence on crack widths than does the reduction in the load at which cracking occurs. it is unlikely that principal tensile stresses under working load conditions would be great enough to cause fatigue shear cracks. tendon stress ranges will be much less than the values quoted above and fatigue failures would then be unlikely. The interface shear strength of composite members should also be adequate under repeated loading. Badoux and Hulsbos [279] have tested composite beams Wlder 2 million cycles of loading. heading 'ultimate limit state'. subsequently. The intention was that each type of commercial vehicle in the load spectrum would be represented by a vehicle having the same gross weight as the actual vehicle. cracking occurs at a lower stress under repeated loading than under static loading. General i Reinforced concrete Repeated loading causes cracks to fonn at a lower load than under static loading and. The number of vehicles varies from 0. The load spectrum depicts actual traffic data in terms of twentyfive typical commercial vehicle groups. it is very unlikely that fatigue failure of concrete in compression would occur. The require· ·~·'·~Ill . the Code does suggest that. Code approach Although Part 1 of the Code refers to fatigue under the . but having the axle arrangement of the standard fatigue vehicle. 266].Cofii.e. it is also necessary to consider the possibility of damage arising due to vandals deliberately causing resonant osci!Iations. if the pacing frequency is foHz. It would thus seem prudent to take about 65% of the Code values when considering repeated loading. It should be noted that the conservative tolerable stress range of 10% of the ultimate static strength.1·1·Pn ·to BS _. for all classes. would occur under service load conditions. under dead plus imposed loads) it is very unlikely that interface shear fatigue failure would occur.. as an interim measure. Alternatively. Fatigue damage of unweltkd reinforcing bars is proportional to stress range to the power 9. Thus a bridge. The test specimens were essentially identical to those. Part 10 of the Code also gives a load spectrum for commercial vehicles showing the proportions of vehicles having various gross weights (from 30 kN to 3680 kN) and various axle arrangements. it is proportional to the eighth Power. Flexural cracks may form at a lower load. 268] has shown that tendon fatigue strength can be less when embedded in concrete than in air: for 7wire strand. with a possible decrease in shear strength. = 0.5 (see 155 . Nevertheless. The maximum tensile stress which can be tolerated without cracking increases if the minimum stress is tensile. the allowable tensile stresses for repeated loading are about 65% of those for nonrepeated loading.
. However..iq. simply supported beam. the section is.9) i ii=i. The strain at the cen· troid of the section (i..9) and (13. r.13) + /1). but the equilibrium method is generally preferred because it is computationally more con· venient. bztlz .ts o:fic ~. f2 = (z .t.re at level of reinfo. for temperature differences of the shape shown in Fig. the first of equations (13. typically.E.4(a)(e) Thermal stress method where A is the crosssectional area:· is the distance of the section centroid from the bottom of the section..~"·· Jo = E.dz are the selfequilibrating stresses calculated from equation (13. the free thennal curvature 'I' is prevented from occurring by the centre support..+f.• (13. J E~[•.10) become i)'[rx. in order to maintain equilibrium. within the height of the crack.b. r~ ··~~'' rrm·.E. due to the restraint is F= J: If no moment restraint is present.8) (13.b._) . the same principles.15) + f 1 )bzzdz If the section is uncracked.A. ~= {.4(a). by the strain method.=. JJ.. 20% less than that of an uncracked section. from equa· tion (13. ·= temperaru. [~ . (z . have shown that the free thermal curvature of a cracked section is. If it is assumed that the crack extends to the neutral axis of the cracked transformed section.b. then equations (13. The calculation of these shear stresses is demonstrated in Example 13.. the free thermal curvature could be calculated from equation (13.__''_:.2) and (13.+f. Hence the stresses buildup from zero to the values given by equations (13.0 +ipi (13. so that the strain Eo can occur. a1 t. ip fs: bz!zdz  Air..t. the restraining force is s: In a structure which is externally unrestrained. in such cir· cumstances. However.i)dz F= o:. However. which are illustrated for a one·dimen· sional structure.sts (h .16) become Hence. If the centre support were absent._.>.. then secondary stresses occur in addition to the selfequilibrating stresses. as shown in Fig. However. 13. on both cracked and uncracked sections under the thermal loading shown·in Fig.A.5 are assumed to pennit longitudinal movement. The equations for F and M then become: (13. = area of reinforcement t.i ~"". = F.) is given by ip = {b) Temperatures above ambient Fig. the restraining moment must be released by application of a releasing moment Mr= M.) .A. so that no displacements take place. Externally restrained structure If the section is cracked...Ec J: bztz(Z . The two methods are compared in the following section by considering a twospan beam.19) are identical to those calculated.. where O:s section about its centroid = distance of centroid of cracked transformed section from the bottom of the section.17) M = rx.. typically.3.3 Cracked section 0 + • 2cii4Y16 .12) f.". I is the second moment of..Temperature loading Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 Potential 25'C 200 ) g h Elevation ·I (a) Potential and restrained strains Section £o =~I [ 1r.14) .Z)(M)ll If no longitudinal restraint is present. It can be seen from Fig..2).11) predicts. The secondary stresses can be calculated by using either a compatibility method or an equilibrium method..11 Compatibility method The supports of the twospan beam shown in Fig. irrespective of whether the section is cracked or uncraoked.. 13.re can be calculated from equation (13 ..rcement d = effective depth of reinforcement c. 3.t. I J: b...1).. equations (13.(zi)'dz In the stress method. 13..::___··)61 <.. b.=·'''~ .~.9). the elastic modulus of the con· crete.t.. (13. '.E. such as a (j. (_+ c=_J .(.. the restraining force must be released by application of a releasing force F.b. the strain e0 and the curvature 'ljl can occur freely.dz] (13. the thermal curvaru. within the hpight of the crack.dz/ f.Af + ~ 130 . Such a buildup of stress implies that. J: J~ b::tz(Z  bzlzdz + Z)dz } (13.11) I = second moment of area of cracked transformed i = coefficient of expansion of reinforcement Es = elastic modulus of reinforcement A.t) dz . + <¢. these stresses do not occur at the free ends of the structure. fo = . The stress (j2) at z due to the releasing moment is Stress method .f.1 160 M= Tests have not yet been carried out under temperature distributions which cause the cracked part of the section to be hotter than the uncracked part.6) by assuming the elastic modulus of the concrete..i)dz 0 = Restrained stresses !cl Stresses due to (d) Stresses due to relaxing relaxing force moment {e) Self·equilibrating stresses Fig..:. 13.9) (which is for an uncracked section). and the thermal stresses do not affect the position of the neutral axis.i) dz] b::t:: (z.would suggest that. the beam would take up the (13. f. However.19). assumed to be fully restrained.' The net stress at z is now (/o J: b.4 that the selfequilibrating stresses can be calculated from :Li '.Ez rxztz Externally unrestrained structure The restraining moment (M) can be obtained by taking moments about z = O. Thus the only stresses in the structure = Ee !Xe t:: F = c.18) This approach is very similar to that adopted by Hambly (274] for a cracked section.area about the centroid and o:~ is the coefficient of expansion of concrete. where plane sections distort and do not remain plane.·~ . with its nonzero temperature at the bottom of the section {see Fig. should be assumed to be uro.. if a positive moment is sagging: A = area of cracked transforme"d sectiOn The stresses calculated from equation (13.E. 13.~ If the strain e0 or the curvamre 1jJ is prevented from occur· ring by the presence of external restraints. for design purposes. Furthermore. 13. Thus the author . E.2) or (13. and thus the transverse effects of tern· perature loading should also be considered. can also be applied to twodimensional structures (see reference [99]).d .tzdzlA M = O:.2. The stress (/i) at z due lo the releasing force is f.3.~=·.12) to (13.Z) + J o. (13.d .i)(MJ/f'. when the Code temperature distribution. to be zero. at first. longitudinal shear stresses occur near to the ends of a member.dz [1 = rxcEc rxcEc E.19) f=f.10) b::t::dz Cracked section Tests carried out by Church (273) at the Transport and Road Research Laboratory.E._!Xch ' 0 • = . that the free thermal curvature is. (h .Z) (13. it is found that the differences between the calculated free thermal curvatures for the uncracked and cracked section are much less than 20% (see Example 13. .dz (13. The author feels that the compatibility method explains the actual behaviour better.16) f~ bzt.2) is considered. at z. 13. 20% greater than that of an uncracked section.:cEc (13.. The stress f 0 . It should be emphasised that bridge decks are two· dimensional in plan.4.
which the Code assumes to be 0.6(b). The maximum thennal moment is 1.20).. designed to examine these problems. in terms of bending and shear. 13.. the restraint moment should be calculated from the second of equations (13. If) Net thermal moment= {c) +(el Fig. from the free thenna! curvature.. that it is less than the specified permissible stress. at the ultimate limit state. It is now necessary. as shown io Fig. add the thermal continuity moments to the moments due to the other loads and design accordingly. M.. through the depth of a beam. Equilibrium method At each support.. if a section is cracked. typically.6(c).. However. In addition.. 276]... of the order of 0. To date. ··~==:.9) using the second moment of area of the uncracked section.j . the author would suggest that thermal stresses or stress resultants can be ignored at the ultimate limit state provided that it can be demonstrated that the structure is sufficiently ductile to absorb the thermal strains. Calculate the free thermal curvature and self· equilibrating stresses using the uncracked section.. are obtained by sununing the restraint moments and the distributed releasing moments. Hence... the moment distribution shown in Fig. are in progress at the University of Birmingham.. the ·properties of the uncracked section should be used to calculate the secondary stresses due to the thermal moments.. The final thermal moments. to cancel the end restraining moments by applying releasing moments which are equal and opposite to the restraining moments. is available to redistribute completely the thermal moments and shear forces. 13. as discussed earlier in this chapter. / .. and what load effects result (see also Chapter 3). If the section is cracked. However. It thus seems reasonable to ignore. Thus.5(a). within the crack height. In view of the comments made in the last paragraph. Calculate.pl/ This force induces the thermal moments shown in Fig... 13. These strains or displacements should be multiplied by the appropriate 'YfL values to give the design loads. 13. 13. is (13.15) and shown in Fig.5(c). t M($)M Mc~ • (a) Restraining moments M :1~ M 110+ !TL+ !Tr.6(e) is obtained.15). tests have been carried out on simply supported beams under various combi· nations of force and thermal loading.. . The net restraining moments are shown in Fig. one is more concerned about strain capacity (i.6) and (13. the author would suggest that the El value of the cracked transformed s~tion should be used in equation (13. the strains associated with the self· equilibrating stresses.20) If the section is uncrack~d. 13.. 3. 13..(b) Effects of applied strains Although Fig. it is probably sufficiently accurate to calculate 'ljJ from equation (13.6(a)(0 Equilibrium method moments. 5. H the required rotation is less than the rotation cap· acity. It can be seen from Fig. (13. it is essential to consider carefully what the loads are.S(a)(c) Compatibility method R = 48 El (F.18) which was derived using this assumption. 163 . Design procedure General The logical way to allow for temperature effects in the design procedure is to check ductility at the ultimate limit state.. 4. 13. EO EL E7 '"' ' Jing To summarise. and provide nominal reinforcement to control cracking. The properties of the cracked transfonned section should be used to calculate the secondary stresses due to the thermal moments. as shown in Fig. One would expect structural concrete sections to possess adequate ductility. · such that no thennal continuity moments occur. If the section is uncracked.. 2.i/2 npeh {.5 El.20)). it is not clear whether they are also sufficiently ductile in terms of shear behaviour. 13. 13. to restore the beam at this point to the level of the centre support. only a small thennal stress arises. it is oecessary. this' ·value of El and the neutral axis depth appropriate to the cracked transfonned section should be used to calculate the secondary stresses due to the thennal moment.e. are.20).. so that thermal moments could be ignored at the ultimate limit state. Tests.12).6(a). but. and the displacement at the position of the centre support woulcJ. At the ultimate limit state. Thus. thus. and the stresses or stress resultants which arise from any restraints.rri {e) Releasing moment diagram free thermal curvature. However.~~  brid~ . / Ultimate limit state 1. at the ultimate limit state.7 that. due consideration should be taken at the ultimate limit state of the magnitudes of the thermal strains or displacements. at the ultimate limit state. If the required rotation exceeds the rotation capacity. althougb'1p.E111t .0035 (see Chapter 4). at the serviceability limit state... the El value of the uncracked section should be used in equation (13.. are zero.~. at the serviceability limit state [275. It is mentioned earlier in this chapter that. the beam is first assumed to be fully restrained against rotation but not against longitudinal movement. which may occur due to the temperature effects. Since no external moments are applied..6(0. as shown in Fig.5{b).p/2) I (21)' = 3EI.. the following design procedure is suggested by the author. Because of material plasticity.7 is presented in terms of stressstrain curves. with peak temperatures of up to 5(fC do not affect the moment of resistance or rotation capacity [273]. Tests on statically indeterminate beams are about to commence to ascertain whether adequate ductility. the Code does not permit such an approach. The author would suggest that the at:iplied thermal strains or displacements should be interpreted as being nominal loads. {b) Ultimate Fig. It has been found that temperature differences as large as 30°C. 13. which arise from the continuity.6(d). the applied thermal strain results in a relatively large thennal stress. to be zero.7. The significance of this can be seen from Fig.. in tenns of rotalion capacity.Op~rmiss (a) Free Deflected shape (bl Ne! restraining moments l D=Daadload l=Live load T=Temoerature load R. ductility) and it is only necessary to limit the total (dead + live + thermal) strain so that it is Jess than the strain capacity of the material.. whereas at the serviceability limit state.. Such strains are very small compared with the strain capacity of concrete in compression. by using equations (13. and the restraining moment diagram is shown in Fig.. 13. for equilibrium. its response to thermal loading can be calculated by assuming the elastic modulus of the concrete. ~.0001... 13. 'uist. be Ap/2. Ultimate limit state When considering thermal effects under ultimate load conditions it is essential to bear in mind that the thermal load· ing is a deformation rather than a force.3EI1jJI/ \ M 21 {c) totLEr Restraining moment diagram ~ {b) Force applied to give zero displacement at centre support ~ (cl Thermal moments Fig. Thus restraining moments (M). the stress or stress resultant design load effects are very small and. shown in Fig. However. at the support.. for' the twospan beam. if full plasticity is assumed. are set up. 13.. ignore the selfequilibrating stresses..+Er:s.ln to _B~·~4ili/" " 1PoJ.p M' ~ Eo+E. The strains associated with the selfequilibrating stressei. The design load ejfeets are then the final strains or displacements. given by equation (13. ' '. it is necessary to limit the total (dead + live + thermal) stress SQ.5 M.. the following discussion is equally applicable to loaddeflection or momentrotation relationships.11).14) and (13. this moment can be shown to be identical to that given by the compatibility method (equation (13. ignore the theimal continuity moments. 7(a). 13. 1he rotation required. which compares the response of a material to an applied stress and an applied strain at both the serviceability and ultimate limit states.could be calculated from equations (13. assuming full plasticity of the section. = R(2/)14 = 1. to apply a vertical force R at the centre support. If the beam is analysed under the effects of the releasing 162 (a) Serviceability )M (d) Releasing moments ~ M/2 ~ ~MI "' . the maximum moment.
3 I 1000 1oosurfacing + (28 x 150 13. ' ~ ~J 'T~ . 13.~·.5 la) Section 50 2. the neutral axis depth is found to be 304 mm. the axial strain is It is required to determine the response at the serviceability limit state of the section.ts I 10·• '~ \_. after cracking.s!s (h . using the uncracked or cracked section as appropriate. ._.. .49 x 1oey1 x 1oe x = £. ~ .d  200 0 0 0 . Cracked 83. fur a member designed to Class 2 for imposed force loadings.5) (646) + x (28 x 10') (1000) [(6. These should be multiplied by the appropriate value of Y13 to give the design load effects: in fact..7 1..equilibrating stresses can now be obtained from equation (13. 13..661) (154) (88.___.5) 1. Area of transformed section = A b. it would seem reasonable to adopt the Class 2 allowable stresses when considering thermal loading in addition to the other loadings.9 are the stresses which should be added to the dead and live load stresses...8 (see Chap!er 3) to give the design temperature differences of Fig.9). Ypis unity at the serviceability limit state (see Chapter 4).9(a).6) (150) + (1.\jl i = 0. the axial strain and curvature are 1000 [(6. 13•.__'=:::_.1 Design = (200 (b) Cracked {a) Uncracked 1. However.1 Uncracked and cracked rectangular w· X 10" 5) (0. In the following analysis.~ ~::_:.3)] = 0. thus. from Table 2 of Part 4 of the Code.. = 1000 [(6.43 X 109)/83.. in Fig. in Fig.4)] From equation (13. Calculate the secondary stresses due to any external restraints.i)dz = 17... Cross"sectional area + (1... but the short~tenn value seems more appropriale than the longterm value.17 x lOg mm• · c 10·~ Bottom fibre strain = 13. can now be obtained from equation (13..8/y for reinforcement) are greater than those specified in BE tn3 (see Chapter 4)./ / .. Eo = 17.t.19): they are identical to those. the restraining force and moment '"" = (1000) (304) + (200/28) (10 000) M = (12 X 10G)(5.3754 x 10 6) (12 x 10..6) (150) = 37. = 0..2) (250) (28 x 104 ) {0.9 x 1o·s  Strain method From equation (13..88 x 10 9 ) 500 mm + Thus the cracked free thermal curvature is only 3% less than the uncracked free thermal curvature. Calculate the free thennal curvature (or the restraining moment) and the selfequilibrating stresses.B(c).:.0 0 + (1. The . calculated by the strain method.c' '.8 \30 .33 x 10 9 mm.·~j :~~ ·~ .. 13. 13..j. the curvature is Serviceability limit state 10') (10 000) (1. The concrete is assumed to be grade 30. Examples 1P = (12 • E 'IJ!i Height of neutral axis = z= = x = 60... shown in Fig. Thus Z = 696 mm...43 x 10' section = 5. It is worth mentioning that. This is because the Code does not require crack widths to be checked under thermal loading._.3754 x 10 6 mmi Design load effects Second moment of area of transformed section = I (1000) (304)'/3 If no external restraints are applied. the tensile stress is small.6 )(5...17). i) + f~ E)Jtzzdz (d) Free thermal temperatures (~C) temperatures (°C} Fig. (It is not yet clear what value of elastic modulus to adopt. however.487 X 10 11) = 65. the shortterm elastic modulus of the concrete is 28 kN/mm'. the curvature and the selfequilibrating stresses..d... the load effects are the + (200/28) (10 000) (646)' axial strain.Temperature loading Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 1· = (200 x 10 3 ) (10 000) (1.A...____c_) + J: E}JtJ::dz a•· .9 2.9) + (1.49 x 10 6 ) 0... the section is considered to be both uncracked and cracked. Compare the total stresses with the allowable values. obtained from Figure 9 of Pali 2 of the Code. 6 ) (28 x 1oa) (1.454 x 10 6 N With an elastic modulus of the reinforcement of 200 kN/mm 2 . (z .19): they are identical to those calculated by the strain method.(b) Selfequilibrating stresses (N/mm') \ It should be noted that step 4 assumes adequ)\e ductility in shear in addition to adequate rotation capacity.6) (150) (440..9 x Uncracked s: f: x Strain method From equations (13. it would seem reasonable to adopt the Class 3 allowable stresses. the restraining force and moment are: b. In the case of a prestressed member designed as Class 1 for imposed force loadings.2). ..2).7 29 400 1000 s:Ezhztz(zi)dz = E/.. ' 0.487 strains Ix 105) section is identical to that considered by Hambly [274]. the effects of thennal loading at the serviceability limit state are less onerous when designing to the Code than to the present documents. 13.49 x 10' ·· x 10" 6 x io·0 = t.0 X 10" 9 mm" io·e now be obtained from equation (13.4 (60 x 10" 0 ) (696) The selfequilibrating stresses.10).2 x 10" 6 = = 1 x 10 8 mm 1 ..S(d).8(a) to the application of a differential temperature distribution.6) (150) (245) Fig.5 10.5 !cu for concrete and 0.) The coefficients of thermal expansion of steel and concrete are each assumed to be 12 x 10erc..9(a)... can = A = 1000 x I 000 (12 X 10" 6) (37.9 x 10" 9 ) (500) =1_3. 2. 13.l Second moment of area= I = 1000 x 1000 3/12 e= 1ou = 43.9(a). shown in Fig. 13.33 X 10 9 = 61.~:165 ":/ . 13.661) (154)] 696 'O 10000mm2 10') (1000) [(6.9(b). Bottom fibre strain = Stress method From equation (13. It can be seen that.<~ . ~~ ·'·' rr = E.S(b) first have to be multiplied by a partial safety fac!or (YJL) of 0.43 = 0. for a reinforced concrete section. Similarly.__. f " E~bJ::tzilz 0 (12 x 10"•) (1. . and the net stresses compared with the allowable values. 24 (c) (b) Nominal 1.17 x 10 9 ) (61. 13. experimental evidence of adequate ductilit}r in shear is not available at present. is shown in Fig.9j 250 0.88 X 10 9 . shown in Fig. (!) (200)] = 1.18). and both the strain and stress methods are demonstrated..7) (I) (200) (433. 13.S(b). 3. The free thennal strains appropriate to the design temperature differences are shown in Fig. F = (12 x 10.11).2) (250) (266._.501 x to 0N M = (12 x 10" 6)(28 x 103 ) (0. Stress method From equations (13.8 x 106 Nmm The selfequilibrating stresses can now be obtained from equation (13.· >· .9(b). The nominal positive temperature difference distribution.487 x 10' 2 ) The selfequilibrating stresses. The nominal temperature differences in Fig. 13.2 F = (12 x 10" 6 ) (37. these strains are the design loads. under thermal loading.9 £0 = 43.88 X 10 9) 1P = (28 x 10 3 ) (39. ' mm· 1 39. Thus the stresses shown in Fig. the extreme fibre compressive stress is reduced by 17% but the peak tensile stress is increased by 29%. and the Code allowable stresses (0. 13.144 x 10 9 Nmm x 10 9 ) The self.8(a)(d) Example.t..
• 0.1) (1.2 {a) Section (not to scale) !ling (~c1 ..6) A prestressed concrete continuous viaduct.lO(b).1 (b) Nominal temperatures a..ll(b). 13. 13.13 Thennal rotations ill multispan viaduct Longitudinal shear stresses At the free end of the viaduct. 13. with spans of 45 m.325 m 2 First moments of area about sof. ~ .6) (1.6 ) (15.1 N/mm1 ). 3. then the only secondary stresses to occur are those due to the restraint to the curvature.6 p: 0. (2.75) (1.25 l 1. The net stresses.(c) Thermal stresses (N/mm') 13.iz X EI. 13.a 1. at the ultimate limit state is 1.6) (10.55) (l. 1. has the crosssection shown in Fig. Failing span 112 Fig. 75) (l.4) (0. 13. Then the average longitudinal shear stress at the webcantilever junction is equal to the average compressive stress in the cantilever (i. It is required to detennine the Iongitudinal effects of a positive temperature distribution at both the serviceability and ultimate limit states.7 X 10. as shown in Fig.15) (0.5 m).} X ' • '  1.9) and (13.. 13.7 1. is. 72) f' 0 r 1 r bzlzzdz (12) (0. are shown in Fig.21) = 10. 13.0) Free thermal curvature= oJt = 15.8 (see Example 13.2 le) Net Fig..0 o•I 1.8639) Since the section is prestressed.)·ii:i1 .3 x 10.5 "''"'·'==:::::i_..27)(34 x JO') (4.4) (1. away from the free end. the curvature and axial strain are: 1jJ = (12 X 10.1) (1.72) (0. The average compressive stress in the cantilever.27EI 'I : (1. Venant's principle this stress will be assumed to buildup over a length..~·. 7276) + (2) (0.0 2 (c) Design temperatures l'C) 0.8) = 34. elastic modulus of concrete = E = •34 x 1oa N/mm 1 • The coefficient of expansion is 12 x io·erc. "'Plastic~~"'" ~'.2) (1. 13.1 Nlmm 1 • In accordance with St. (If a negative temperature difference dis167 .!75)]/7. 13.3 x 106) =5614 kNm The secondary stresses due to this moment are shown in Fig.25)'/!2 + (12) (0. This restraint produces the thermal bending moment diagram shown in Fig. 13.9 1. The maximum thermal moment occurs at the first interior support and is M.5 0. 166 10e m· 1 f = (12 X 10. U!t.1 0. + (5) (0.3 t = 25. is shown in Fig.4 {bl Flexural secondary {a) Selfequilibrating Fig. b.0. These temperatures have to be multiplied by 0.to B. ~Free thermal curvature i . from Fig.0/0.e. equal to the breadth of the cantilever (i.3 o.100mm'""'dog Je ::] rJ.1 X 1o·s Second moment of area = I ~ (12) (0.2 Box girder ~ (12) (0.0.0) (1.1 l{a).12 Thermal moments in multispan viaduct 11 The soffit strain is Eo = 8 'ljli = 25. Serviceability limit state The nominal temperature difference distribution.25) (0. 75) (0. 1.t. can nOw be obtained from equation (13.15 0.102)2 4 = 4..55) 3/12 + (2) (0.mate Nmit state The partial safety factor Y11.075) Using equations (13. l. 798)' + (5) (0.lO(a).35)/7. The concrete is of grade 50.I) to obtain the design temperature differences of Fig.13.· 1• Ct.75) (l. (2) (0.ll(c).6 '1•3 1.. c•'? brid1tt"'i£e. the selfequilibrating stresses do not occur.e.10) (for the strain method).0 (see Chapter 3). This is because such a therm.7 .6)/2 = 1.8 The selfequilibrating stresses.lO(c).6) (0.35 + (12) (0.4) + + (5) (0. shown in Fig. ~ 02I 2.15) (0.27£/J.277m J'..25) (2. from Figure 9 of Part 2 of the Code.623) + General Crosssectional area= A= (12) (0.325 = 27..""Pera! .1 x 1o·e m· 1 • The worst effect that this positive curva· ture can have on the structure at the ultimate limit state is to cause rotation in a plastic hinge at the centre of a failing span.32~ = 1. ·~ . 13.277) = 9.3 O.2sI 0.92) (0. ~ l.92) + ····· (5) (0.fit to determine i: i ~ [(12) (0. along the span. which are obtained by adding the secondary stresses to the selfequilibrating stresses.25) + (12) (0.077)' + (2) (0.//r~~~ 10.al rotation is of the same sign as the rotation due to force loading. 13. the transverse effects of the temperature distribution should also be investigated.12.75) (0.83 (2) (O.55) = 7.762) x (27..o./. Transverse effects In practice.3 X 10.27Elijr Fig.6 ) (1.83)/4.ll(a). but longitudinal shear stresses occur in the zone within which the selfequilibrating stresses buildup.6 112 (27.2).Il(a).75) (1.15) (6. r "·'iiH o.762 m From Table 2 of Part 4 of the Code.15) (6.JO(a)(c) Example 13. If it is assumed that the articulation is such that the axial strain can occur freely.55) (0.4)'112 + (5) (0.i. Hence the free thelmal curvature at the ultimate limit state is (27. it is assumed to be uncracked.2sI 11 .2) + (2) (0. 762 + (5) (0.. 13.2) (1. The shear stress is greatest at the webcantilever junction.
'~ . = My + JM... (A21)... the thermal rotation at a support hinge would be calculated.1 Slab element M... L ___ _ ..~ p.=O M'=M ' ' + 1~1 M.M...<O M. + 2Mzycot o: + M.!M..yl ~. (A23).I •I I I a: 11 :11 'I M.15 at the ultimate lintit state. .. Bottom (A3) Generally IfM.+l~:I Mycot2 o: + M9 +Mvcoto:I (A4) I Slllo ~*o: =~ + IM... (A28) and (A30) is tensile when positive. i Fig.1 x 1CfG)(22..I (A6) ItM.y/ M._T_ .>O \Generally M.__:__. Thus... ' Sign conventions The positive directions of the applied stress resultants per unit length and the reinforcement direction are shown in Fig.. c::=t (A!O) IfM. o: reinforcement M. but the CEB Model Code [110] gives a relationship between permissible rotation and the ratio of neutral axis depth to effective depth...I (Al) M. ... ·/ . = (34. afor'skew reinforcement.. +..88 x 1Cf 3 radians.'~/ . + IM..15 x 0.. (A2) IfM. "" ...> 0 Orthogonal x. Al.<O Skew x. (A7) 1~1 (AS) 1tM.) is given by e.) The total thennal rotation (0. Thus the design rotation is 1. = M. y for orthogonal reinforcement and x.. The Code does not give permissible rotations. = "1ll2 where l is the distance between hinges.I tribution were being considered..j t1: 1U! ...= 0 M•y = My 1~1 M.77 x 10· 3 = 0. = M.. A.=:o_.. the section has sufficient ductility to enable the thermal moments at the ultimate limit state to be ignored.. Thus a...cota:I sm a sma: 1 Top Mi= M... Stress resultants with the superscript* are the required resistive stress resultants per unit length in the reinforcement directions x....=O M: = M. y reinforcement Bottom M.<O Generally 'ss (A9) (AS) Mi= 0 169 ·L:. (A26).... = M1  Bending 11 II IM. . Appendix A Equations for plate design t'•I !I ._~ '. '0=J c=~:· ''c_. The principal concrete force per unit length (FJ which appears in equations (A19). unless the moment due to the applied forces is considerably redistributed away from midspan.~? r~.=M.5) = 0. This value is much greater than the design rotation.} _______ __'· ~ . . It is unlikely that the pennissible rotation would be less than 5 X 10s radians... To obtain the design load effect tQis rotation must be multiplied by YP• which is 1. __ :____:_}. ._.77 x 1Cf 6 radians...!I Cpnerete bridge design to BS 5400 . =O M.
>0 N! N.. The latter l7l .> 0 M. irrespective of their thicknesses and amounts of reinforcement. +smN. Thus. = M.. B. =N.a:cot' a: I 1 It is mentioned in Chapter 6 that no rules are given in the Code for the design of cellular or voided slabs to resist Flanges (A25) transverse shear. (A30) Points of contraflexure may be assumed at the midpoints of the flanges and webs. However. B. =_My _.. to resist the bend170 ing moments and shear forces of Figs. (A23) M. All stress resultants in the following are per unit length. to resist the shear forces of Fig. in accordance with the methods described in Chapters 5 and 6. Jn this Appendix.. The design procedure considers..A2g) Analysis of Vierendeel truss IfN. as appropriate. cot a:) (cota: ± cosec a:) Cellular slabs IfN. in both the compression and tension flanges. a more precise idealisation is probably not justified.r +. In view of this. The suggested design procedure is initially to consider the Vierendeel effects separately from those of global transverse bending..<O N.s/4 (from Fig.. a method of design is suggested which is based on considerations of elastic analyses of voided slabs and the actual behaviour of transverse strips of reinforced concrete voided slabs subjected to shear [277]. Such deformation is generally referred to as Vierendeel truss aotion. = N_.=Nr+ IN"J'j Fe= 2IN_.. possible cracks initiating on the outside and inside of a void due to the Vierendeel effects of the transverse shear. Clark and Symmons [71].'9 /JS )f:¥_. N. y reinforcement Y (N.. In addition to the Vierendeel bending moments. 2 2 Inplane forces Fo Orthogonal x.. gested ultimate limit state method is virtually identical to an unpublished working stress method proposed by Elliott [278] which.. of M )z. The sug. each flange should be designed as a slab eccentrically loaded by a moment Q.y + Nycot a:)..rr+Mycota:/ sm2 « sm a: (A13) (A14) Skew x.<o + Mycot 2a:+ fCM. the sign in the last bracket is the same as the sign of (N.y +_MY cot a: J I sm a: M:. in accordance with the method described in Chapter 6.) sin a: 2Nxy cot a:+ Nr cot' .+2Nx1 cota+N1 cot 2 a+ l(N_.N.. + (Nxv + Nr cot rx. + 2Mxycota: +My cot a:M. The shear forces are assumed 10 be divided equally between the two flanges to give the loading. independently..y + (A19) N: cot a:) 2 ) The effect#of a transverse shear force (Qy) is to deform the webs and flanges of a cellular slab. N.= _!_ (N +/(N_..l(c)) and either a compressive or tensile force.•~)(All) 2 N. ~reinforcement Generally N. = M.•_"·. J(a). respectively. = N. as shown in Fig.co « "" (A28) N.M.l(b). B. However. + 2MxyCOt a: + My cotia:) lfM*.~J' cota:) Appendix B 2 1 Transverse shear in cellular and voided slabs N. = M. Although Aster's tests to failure were conducted on transverse strips of voided slabs. Design Webs A web can be designed as a slab. + 2Nxycot a:+ Nycot2a: If M. (~6) + N.<uige \..+~cot a:) 2 N"' + 2N. Top (A22) N +N'. + 2M. l. (A21) IfM.. a similar failure mode has been observed in a 1est on a model voided slab bridge deck by Elliott..y Fo Generally +l*I y N. ='(M sin 2 « Y M"' t:. + Nxv cot a:)2 + (N. the author suggests design approaches at the ultimate limit state. and then to combine the global and Vierendeel effects...l(d). +/~I (A20) N ' +~ N.ycota: HN. since the web and flange thicknesses of a voided slab vary throughout their lengths. The flanges can be designed as slabs.yl (A17) N. B.=o N.=O General ') (A27) IfN!<O Generally Fo Ny +Mr N. (A24) In equation (A26).=O N*"'.. +/(M. is based upon the test data and design recommendations of Aster [277].v .yl (A18) N. in tum. + 2Mxy cot a:+ My cot2a:  l a: _ . B. B...Uf/1 .~··· .1 cot a: + N. + 2M. + IN. (.l(c) and (d). bending moment and shear force diagrams of Fig. analysis of the Vierendeel effects is not readily carried out. the global transverse bending moment (My) induces a force of M/he..!!J:_ + 2 F~ = 2 (Nxy M!=O Introduction + Voided slabs General The effect of a transverse shear force is to deform the webs and flanges of a voided slab in a similar manner to those of a cellular slab..y +Mr cot a:) cot a: + My cot .y+Nycota:/ Sill  sin a: (Mxy + My cot a:) 2 1 Y ....<o M: = Fo =O M. Assuming the point of contraflexure in the web to be always at its midpoint implies that the stiffnesses of the two flanges are always equal.<O (A16) N. M.=o (Al2) N.cy {M.=o M"' = 1 (M "' ~ Y I I (M2 + Mr cot a:)2 /) (Al5) (~. where he is the lever arm shown in Fig.
L.oncrere oruzge aes1gn to JJS :J4UU
Transverse shear in cellular and voided slabs
Idealised Vierendeel truss
a,

+
+
I

I
"· '
+
I
a,12
l
~
I
p
D
0/2
+
~
I
o,
____,_____
0/2
i
00
(M,
'
Section
'
1
d/4
Fl
0/2
0/2
!+ (a)
+
0/2
0.5t
c
0/21
>I
Reinforcement
I
Critical section

{b) Loading
0/2
Fig. 8.3 Bottom flange of voided slab
Critical
s~ion
0tSlh 0
+c
0.5t
~
H600}
0/2~
(c) Bending moments
)av
o,
I
+
M,J "
(dl Shearforces
Fig. B.l(a)(d) Cellular slab
Fig. B.4 Top flange of voided slab
0;2(
.
00 GD O!
I I
occurs at about the quarterpoint of the void (i.e., at d/4
from the void centre line, where d is the void diameter).
Thus a crack may initiate, from the bottom face of the
slab, at this critical section.
It' has also been observed that peak bottom flange reinforcement ~ains, in cracked concrete slab strips, occur at
about d/4 from the void' centre line. This is illustrated by
Fig. B.2(b), which shows some of Aster's measured bottom reinforcement strains in a reinforced concrete transverse strip.
Fig. B.2(a} shows that the Vierendeel bending stress at
the centre line of the void is zero; hence, only a shear
force acts at this section, as shown in Fig. B.3. It is con·
servative, with regard to the design of the reinforcement in
the bottom flange, to assume that the shear force (Q,) is
shared equally between the two flanges. In fact, less than
Q/2 is carried by the bottom flange because it is cracked.
Thus the Vierendeel bending moment at the critical sec·
tion, d/4 from the void centre line, is:
I
I
I
1ff1d14
0
Compression
Bottom
reinforcement
Elastic bottom!+~
fibre stresses
strain
(bl Measured relnfcrcement strains
~
Mv = (Qj2) (d/4) = Q,d/B
(a) Elastic stresses
Fig. B.2(a),(b)
Vicre~deet
sttesses in voided slab (277]
effects and the global transverse bending effects are then
combined.
In the following, the global transverse moment (M1 ),
coexisting with the transverse shear force (Qy), is
assumed to be sagging.
Bottom flange design
Elastic analysis of the uncracked section shows that the
distribution of extreme fibre stress, due to Vierendeel
action, is as shown in Fig. B.2(a) [277}: the peak stress
~,
112,
~'
t'"
'"··~
!"'' ·
.~
··
____ .,
__ /
~).
'...,;'~~_}
,...",
~
/..
·....__~ ~
(B.l)
The bottom flange reinforcement is also subjected to a
tensile force of (MJz), where My in this case is the maximum global transverse moment and z is the lever arm for
global bending shown in Fig. B.3. The resultant compressive concrete force (C) in the top flange is considered to
act at middepth of ihe minimum flange thickness (t),
because the design is being carried out at the ultimate limit
......
'    /'
(;~_;
___,,....
~
\.
state and the concrete can be considered to be in a plastic
condition.
The bottom flange reinforcement should be designed for
the combined effects of the force M/z and the Vierendeel
momentMv. The section depth should be that at'the critical
section.
Top flange design
The extreme top fibre stress distribution, due to Vierendeel
action, is similar in form to that, shown in Fig. B.2(a), for
the bottom fibre. Thus, due to Vierendeel action, a crack
may initiate, from the top face of the slab, at the critical
section {distance d/4 from the void centre line). The
Vierendeel bending stress is again zero at !he centre line of
the void, but it is now conservative, with regard to the design
of the reinforcement in the top flange, to assume that all of
the shear force is carried by the top flange. This assump·
tion implies that tbe bottom flange is severely cracked due
to global transverse flexure and cannot transmit any shear
by aggregate interlock or dowel action.
The Vierendeel bending moment at the critical section is
(see Fig. B.4):
Mv = Q,d/4
(B.2)
... The top flange is also subjected to a compressive force
of (M/z) which counteracts the tension induced in the top
/::.:Kl
.'.;
'""''_,~_.
i<..,, ___ , __ _
.'~
_,
~·.,
l
~r
1
:/;
~·
"60
~
~•
\:)'.'
~
1:: 501
•
l~
~75
IE
',I',
;"I, i]I
~
i~
'''"'
,
! 30
dlh = 0.700
!!

40
~
dfh = 0.725
dfh = 0.650
200
1
2
4
4
'
,'
(b) Location of maximum tensile stress
I
(c) Section
Fig. B.S(a)(c) Maximum tensile stress at face of void
l~:i
~'
I
,I
\1
J
Detailing of flange reinforcement
The areas of flange reinforcement provided should exceed
the Code minimum values discussed In Chapter IO, and
the bar spacings should be less than the Code maximum
values discussed in Chapters 7 itnd 10.
Web design
It is desirabl~ to design the section so that the occurrence
of cracks initiating from the inside of a void is prevented,
because it is difficult to detail reinforcement to control
such cracks.
Elliott [278] has produced graphs which give the maximum tensile stress on the inside of a void due to combined transverse bending and shear: it is conservatively
assumed that all of the shear is canied by the top flange.
Elliott's graphs are reproduced in Fig. B.5.
The maximum tensile stress obtained from Fig. B.S(a)
should be compared with an allowable tensile stress. The
author would suggest that the latter stress should be taken
as 0.45 If~: the derivation of this value, which is the
s
(B,3)
Reinforcement at the critical section, with the effective
depth shown in Fig. B.6, can be designed to resist the
momentMv.
The vertical reinforcement in the web is most con·
veniently provided in the fonn of vertical links, as shown
in Fig. B.6; however, only one leg of such a link may be
considered to contribute to the required area of reinforcement. This area should be added to that required to resist
the longitudinal shear to give the total required area of link
reinforcement.
Jf the tensile stress obtained from Fig. B.S(a) is greater
Effective
depth
l<>i
{
o,12/
..,,,
o,12f 1'
l
..
lo,12
~=
l
10,12
than the allowable stress, cracking will occur on the inside
of the void. In this situation, it is preferable to reduce the
size of the voids, so as to reduce the tensile stress, or to
alter the positions of the voids in the deck, so that they are
not in areas of high transverse shear. If cracking is not
precluded by either of these means, it is necessary to
design the voided slab so that reinforcement crosses the
crack, which initiates on the inside of the void. This can
be done either by providing inclined reinforcement in the
webs, or by providing a second layer of horizontal reinforcement in the flange, close to the void.
s
Fig. B.6 Vertical web reinforcement in voided slab
Code allowable flexural tensile stress for a Class 2 pretensioned member, is given in Chapter 4.
Tensile stresses less than and greater than the allowable
stress now have to be considered.
Tensile stress less than allowable
Inclined reiriforcement The forces acting in a web are
shown in Fig. B. 7. The horizontal shear force at the point
of contraflexure of the web is Q,slhe (see discussion of
vertical web reinforcement). For boriwntal equilibriwn
(T
+ C) cos a =
slabJ
t'
Critical section
for bottom layer
oftopf1ange
reinforcement
Inclined reinforcement should be designed to resist this
force. The reinforcement could take the form of, for
example, inclined links or bars: the latter should be
anchored by lapping with the top and bottom flange reinforcement.
Additional horizontal reinforcement
As an alternative to
inclined reinforcement an additional layer of horizontal
reinforcement may be provided as shown in Fig. B.8. The
critical section for designing this reinforcement should be
taken as the position of maximum tensile stress, obtained
from Fig. B.S(b). The latter figure gives the position in
tenns of the angular displacement(¢>): its horizontal distance from the void centre line is thus d sin¢> /2. It is
conservative to assume that all of the transverse shear
force is canied by the top flange and thus, from Fig. B.8,
the Vierendeel bending moment at the critical section is:
Mv =
Qyd sin $12
(B,5)
The top flange is also subjected to a compressive force
of (M/z), which counteracts the tension induced in the
reinforcement by the Vierendeel moment Mv. Hence, the
greatest tension in the reinforcement is obtained when M,,
is a oUnimurn.
The critical section should be designed as an eccentrically loaded column (see Chapter 9) to resist. the com·
pressive force (M/z), which acts at t/2 from the top face,
and the moment Mv. The depth of the column should be
taken as the flange thickness at the critical section.
Effect of global twisting moment
A global twisting moment induces forces in the flanges;
QySlh~
But T = C, from vertical equilibrium; thus
T = Q,sl2he COS a
~
Fig. 8.8 Additional horizontal reinforcement in voided slab
Tensile stress greater than allowable
I
flange reinforcement by the Vierendeel moment Mv.
Hence, the_ greatest tension in the reinforcement is
obtained when My is a minimum.
The top flange should be designed as an i;:ccentrically
loaded column (see Chapter 9) to resist the compressive
force (M/z), which acts at tl2 from the top face, mid the
moment Mv. The depth of the column should be taken as
the flange thickness at the critical section.
.,..10,12
5
My!Oyh
lilj(\
11•,
I a '
Mv = (Q,<lh,) (d/4) = Q,<dl4h,
z,, ,
My!Q.,h
Cal Maximum tensile stress at face of void
\t
ZI
l'f '" I
aran
dsin<fi/2
C = Concrete strut
T"" Reinforcement tie
Fig. 8.7 Inclined web reinforcement in voided slab
dfh = 0.675
1'·.v
'1 ' '
I!~
i
l
d!h = 0.600
g 50
~
Ja.;2
~ 60,
Maximum tensile stress= KQ.,Jh
1
~hear
T"
_':'.,,o.,7ete bt,u.,;.; u'lisign 1X11., i4bo
.·~'o/
(BA)
these forces can be taken into account in the suggested
design methods by replacing M,, throughtrnt by M;
(obtained from the appropriate equation of Appendix A).
Cracking at the inside of a void would not occur in this
situation, and vertical reinforcement in the webs should be
provided.
The work of Aster [277) indicates that the design can
be carried out by considering the Vierendeel truss of
Fig. B.I(b), for which the horizontal shear force at the
point of contraflexure in the web is Q,slh~. The critical
section for Vierendeel bending of a web is considered to
be at d/4 above the centre line of the void, as shown in
Fig, B.6. The VierendeeJ bending moment at this critical
section is:
175
174
Jtejerem;c:.>
!j I
Iii
67. Yeginobali, A., 'Continuous skew slabs', Ohio State University
En8ineering Experimental Station, Bullelin 178, November I959.
68. Yegioobali, A., 'Analysis of continuous skewed slab bridge
decks', ·Ohi0 State University Engineering Experimental Sl<Uion,
Repon EES 1702, August 1962.
69. Schleicher, C. and Wegener, B., ContinuoUli Sk~ Slabs. Tobks
for Statical Anaiysis, Verlag fur Bauwesen, Berlin, 1968.
70. Ell!ott, G. and Clark., L. A.. Circular voided concrete sf.ob lli/f
neues in preparation.
71. Elliott, G., Clarie, L. A. and Symmons, R. M., 'Test of a qua11erscale reinfol'Ced concrete voided slab bridge', Cement and Co11cre1e
Association, Technicol Repon 42.527, ~ber 1979, p. 40.
72. Elliott, G. (Private communication).
73. Timoshcoko, S. P. and Gere, J.M., Mechanics ofMoteria/£, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1973, p. 608.
74. Holmberg, A., 'Shearweak beams on elastic foundation', lABSE
Publication, Vol. 10, 1960, pp. 69SS.
75. Clark, L.A., "Comparison of various methods 'of calculating the
torsional inertia of rigbt voided slab bridses', Cement and Concrete
Associmion, Technicol Repon 42.508, June 1975, p. 34.
76. Timosbenl::o, S. and Goodier, J. N., Theory of Elasticity,
McGrawHill, 1951, p. 506.
n. Jackson, N., 'The «>rsional rigidity of concrete bridge deeks', Con·
crete, Vol. 2, No. JI, November 1968, pp. 469471.
78. Hillerborg, A., 'Strip method of design', Vi~point, 1975, p. 256.
79. Wood, R. H. and Atmer, G. S. T., "The tlleory of the strip method
fOl' design of slabs', Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 41, October 1968, j>p, 285311.
80. Kemp. K. 0., "A strip method of slab design with concenl/'11.ted
loads or supports', The Structural Engineer, Vol. 49, No. 12,
~mber 1971, pp. 543548.
81. Fefoando, J. S. and Kemp, K. 0., 'A generalized strip deflexion
metllod of reinforced concrete slab design', Procudings of the lns1i1ulion a/Civil Englnt!ers, Part 2, Vol. 65, March 1978, pp. 163174.
82. Spence, R. J. S. and Morley, C. T.• "The sb'engtb of singlecell
concrete box girders of deformable crosssection', Procudings of the
Institution .of Civil Eng/Mers, Part 2, Vol. 59, December 1975.
pp. 7:43761.
83. Beeby, A. W., 'The analysis of beams io plane frames according to
CP 110', Cemern and Concrete Assocfolion, Development Repon
44.0DJ, October 1978, p. 34.
84. Jones, L. L. and Wood, R. H.• Yieldline Analysis of Slabs,
Thames and Hudson, Chatto and Windus, 1967, p. 401.
85. Jones. L. L., Ult/mole Load Analysi.r of Concrete Structures,
Cbaito and Windus, 1962, p. 248.
86. Gtanholm, C. A. and Rowe, R. E., 'The ultimate load of simply
supponed sl::ew slab bridges', Cement and Concre1e Auociotion,
&searchR1tpon 12, June 1961, p. 16.
87. Clark, L.A., 'The service load tesp::mse of shonspan skew slab
bridges designed by yield line cbetlry', Cement and Concrete Assoc/·
otion, Ttchnlcal Repon 42.464, May 1972, p. 40.
88. Nagaraja, R. and Lash, S. D., 'Ultimate load capacicy of reinforced
concret.e beamandslab highway bridges', Proceedings of tht Ameri·
con Concrete ln.stitule, Vol. OT, December 1970, pp. !003 l009.
89. Morley, C. T. and Spence, R. J. S., 'Ultimate stn:ngth of cellular
concrete box.beams', Proceedings of o Symposium on SlrllCturol
onolysb, nonlinear behaviour and techniques, Tron.sport and Rood
Reuorch lAboraJory Supplememory Repon 164 UC, 191S, pp. 193197.
90. Cookson, P. J., 'Collapse of concrete box 8itders involving distortion oflhe crossscerii:m';PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1976,
p. 227.
91. Best, B. C. and Rowe, R. E., 'Abnonnal loading on composite
slab bridges', Ctment and Concrete AssoclOlion, Research Repon 7,
October 1959, p. 28.
~. British Standatds ln5titution, Code cf Practice for fo/llUlalions.
CP 2004: 1972. p. 158.
93. Hay, J. S., 'Wind forces on bridges  drag and lift coefficicnts',
Tronspon and Rood Research Laboratory Report 613, 1974, p. 8.
94. Emerson, M .• 'Extreme values of bridge temperatures for design
purposes', Tron.sport and Road Research Laboratory Repon 744,
1976, p. 25.
95. Emerson, M., 'Temperature differences in bridges: basis of design
40.
References
I.
British Standards Institution, BS 153 Specifaxaion for steel girdu
bridges, Parts I & 2, pp. 16; Part 3A, pp. 40; Parts 38 & 4, pp. 64;
1972.
2.
Kerensky, 0. A., Major British Standard covers design and construction of bridges', BS! News, July 1978, pp. 1011.
3. Department of Transport, Technical Memorandum (/Jridges) BE Im
(/st amendment). StaMard highway lotldings. May 1979, p. 47.
4, British Standm'ds Institution, BS /SJ. Specifieationfor Slee/ girder
bridges. Ptut JA, 1972, p. 39.
5. Department of Transport, Technical Mf!mf)randum (JJrldges) BE 1173
(!st revision, I.rt amemhMnJ). Reinforad concrete for highway .structures, July 1979, p. 19.
6. Department of Transport, Technical Memorandum (/JritJgu) BE Z/73
(3rd ami!ndmenJ). Prestressed conc~te for highway structures, June
1975, p. 22.
7. Bri1ish Standards Institution, TM ".s1rucrural use of reiliforced con·
crete in buildings. CP 114: Part 2: 1969, p. 94.
8. British Standards Institution, The structural we of prestre.ssed concretl! in buildings. CP 115: Pnn 2: 1969, p. 44.
9. British Standards Institution, The struc1urol we of precast concre/e.
CP 116: Pon 2: 1969, p. 153.
10. Dcpartmenl of Transpon, Specification for rood and bridge works,
1976, p. 194.
l l. Department of Transpon, Technical Memorandum (Bridges) BE If
76 (3rd tunendment). Design requirements for elostomeric bridge bear·
ings, September 1978, p. 14.
12. Department of Transport, Interim Menwrondum (,Bridges) IMll
(/st addendum). PTFE in bridge bei.Jrinss, January 1972, p. 3.
13. Department of Transport. Depomnemol Standard BD 1178.
lmplememotion of BS 5400  The design and specification of steel,
concre1e and composite bridges, September 1978, p. 3.
14. Ferguson, H., "New code introduces limitstate approach to bridge
design', New Civil Engineer, 6 July 1978, pp. 1314.
15. British Standards Institution, CP I 10; Pon I: 1972. The struciural
use of concrete. P<1n I. Design, materials and workmanship, p. 155.
16. lntema1ional Organization for Standardization, GeMrol principles
for the verificotio11 of the safety of structures. Inttmationo/ Stondord
IS02394, l973, p. 5.
17. Bceby, A. W, and Taylor, H.P. J., Accuracy in analysis  lnflu·
ence of YtJ• unpublished note submitted to a meeting of Comite Europei!:n du Beton Commission XI, Pavia, June l9n, pp. 12.
18. Henderson, W., Burr, M. E. and Ooodearl, K. A., 'Bridge loading', Proceedings of an lntenrationo./ Co11ference on Steel Box Glrdtr
Bridges, London, Institution of Civ!l Engineers, 1973, pp. 193201.
19. Cope, R. J. and Rao, P. V., 'Nonlinear finite clement analysis of
concrete slab structures', Proceedings of rhe lnstltU/ion of Civil
Engineers, Pan 2, Vol. 63, March 1977, pp. 159179.
20. Teychenn6, D. C., Panot, L. J. and Pomeroy, C. D., 'The estimation of the elastic modulus of concrete for the design of structures',
Building Research Esrabllshment C1UTent Paper CP 23178, March
1978, p. 11.
~176
·
~.~.
""""'~··,·.,.,
,...__....,."""""
21. British Standards Institution, Specification for hot rolled and hot
rolled and processed high tensile alloy steel bars for the prestressing of
concrete. BS 4486: 1980, p. 4.
22. British Standards Institution, Specification for nineteenwire s1ee/
strand for prestressed concrete, BS 4757: 1971, p. 14.
23. Roik, K. H. and Sedlacek, G., 'Bir.tension of engineets' bending
and lorsion theory considering shear defonnarion', Die BOUJechnik,
January 1970, pp. 2032.
24. Johnson, R. P. and Buckby, R. J., Composite s1ruc1ures of steel
and concrete. Vol. 2. Bridges, with a comrllf!ntary on BS 5400: Pan
5, Crosby Lockwood Sta.pie~, London, 1979, p. 524.
2S. Moffatt, K. R. and Dowling, P. J., 'Shear lag in steel box girder
bridges', The Structural Englmier, Vol. 53, October 1975, pp. 439
448.
26. Moffatt, K. R, and Dowling, P. J., 'British shear lag roles for
composite girders', Proceedings of the American Society of Civil
Engineers (Structural Division), Vol. 104, No. ST7, July 1978,
pp. ll231130.
27. Clark, L. A., 'El.ostlc analysis of concrete bridges and the uUim11te
limit stale', The Highway Engineer, Octobel' 19TI, pp. 2224.
28. Pucher, A., Influence Surfoces of Elastic Pia/es, Springer Verlag,
Wien and New York, 1964.
29. Westergaard, H. M., 'Computations of stresses in bridge slabs due
to wheel loads', Public Rood.I, Vol. 2, No. I, March 1930, pp. 123.
30. Holland, A. D., and Deuce, T. L. G., "A review of small .span
highway bridge design and standardisation·, Journot of the lnstinalon
of Highway Engimiers, August 1970, pp. 329.
31. Bergg, J. A., 'Eighty highway bridges in Kent', Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers, Pa11 1, Vol. S4, November 1973,
pp. 571603.
32. WooUey, M. V., 'Economic road bridge design in concrete for the
medium span range 15 m45 m', The Struc/urol Engineer, Vol. 52,
No. 4, April 1974, pp. 119128.
33. Peooells, E., Concrete Bridge DesigMr's Monuo/, Viewpoint Publications, 1978, p. 164.
34. Somerville, G. and Tiller, R. M., Standard bridge beams for span$
from 7 m to 36 m, Cement and Concrete Association, Pub!icntion
32.005, November 1970, p. 32.
35. DowMac Concrete Ltd., Prestressed concrele bridge beams.
36. Manton, B. H. and Wilson, C. B. MoTIC &: CA srandard bridge
beams, Cement and Concrere Association, Publication 32.012, Mnreh
1971, p. 36.
37. Somerville, G., "Three years• experience with M·beams•; Surveyor, 27 July 1973, pp. 5860,
38. Hook, D. M.A. and Richmond, B., 'Western Avenue Extension prc<;ast conCMte box beams in cclluiaf bridge decks', The Strucliuol
Engilleer, Vol. 48, No. 3, Match 1970, pp, 120128.
39. Chaplin, E. C., Garrett, R. J., Gordon, J. A. and Sharpe, D. J.,
"The development of a design for a precost concrete bridge beam of
Usection', The S1rucrura/ Engineer, Vol. 51, No, 10, lktober 1971,
pp. 383388.
'~
~~.J
::::::·;
,..,
__ :
...:__:..
SWann. R. A., 'A feature survey of concrete box spinebeam
bridges·, Cement and Concrete Association, Technkal Repon 42.469,
June 1972, p. 76.
41. Maisel, B. I. and Roll, F., 'Methods of analysis and design of concrete box beams with side cantilevers', Cement" and Concrete Associ·
otion, Technical Repon 42.494, November 1974, p. 176.
42. Timosbenko, S. P. and WoinowskyKricger, S., Theory of Plalts
and Shells, McGrawHill, 1959, p. 580.
43. Planteroa, P, J. Sandwich construction, John Wiley and Sons,
1966, p. 246.
44. Libove, C. and Batdorf, S. B., 'A seneral small deflection theory
for flat s11ndwich plates', U.S, National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics, Report No. 899, 1948, p. l7.
45. Guyon, Y., 'Calcu! des ponls dalles', AMO/es des Ponls et Chaussees, Vol, ll9, No. 29, pp. 555589, No. 36, pp. 683718,
194!1.
46. Massonnet, C., Mithode de calcul des poms apoiares multiple tenon/ compte de leur risistonce il lo /onion, IABSE Publications,
Vol. 10, 1950, pp. 147182.
47. Morice, P. B. and Lit't!e, G., 'The 11nalysis of right bridge deeks
subjected 10 abnonnal loading', Cement and Concrete Association,
Publicotion 46.002, 1956, p. 43.
48. Rowe, R. E., Concrete Bridge D~ign, C. R. Books, 1962, p. 336.
49. Cusens, A. R. and Pama, R. P., Bridge DeckAnolysb, John Wiley
and Sons, 1975, p. 278.
50. Dcpl!'fment of Transport, Technical Memorandum (JJridges) BE 61
74. Suilt of bridge design and analysis programs. Program HECBIBI
15 (ORTHOP) and Dtslgn Charts HECB/85, October 1974, p. 3.
51. Morley, C. T., 'Allowing ro~Shcar defonnation in orthotropic plate
theory', Proceedings of the ln.nliuJion of Civil Engimien, Supplement
paper 7367, 1971, p. 20.
52. Elliott, G., 'Partial loading on onhotropic plates', Cement ond
Concrete Associotion, Technical Repon 42,$19, October 1978, p. 60.
SJ. Goldberg, J.E. and Leve, H. L., 'Tbcory of prismatic folded plate
structures', IABSE Publication, VoL 17, 1957, pp. 5986.
54. De FriesSkene, A.. 11nd Scordelis, A. C., 'Direct stiffness solution
for folded plates', Proceedings of the Americon Society of Civil
Engimiers (/Jtructuro/ Division), Vol. 90, No. ST 4, August 1964,
pp. IS48
55. Department of Transport, Technical Memorandum (JI ridges) BE 31
74. Suite of bridge design and anolysb programs. Program HECBIBI
11 WUPDJ), August 1974, p. 2.
56. Department of Transport, Technical Memorondwn (Bridges) BE 41
76. Suite of bridge design ond onolysis programs. Program HECBIBI
13 (!J'J'RAND 2), March 1976, p. 5.
57. Ocpanment of Transpon, Technical Memorandum (,Bridges) BE 31
75. Suite of bridge design and analysis programs. Program HECB!Bf
14 (QUEST), February 1975, p. 2.
'
58. Department of Transport, Technical Memorandum (,Bridges) BE 4/
75, Suite of bridge dts/gn and anolysb programs. Program HECBIBI
16 (CASKET), 'February 1975, p. 3.
59. Cheung, Y. K., 'The finite &trip method in the analysis of elastic
plates with 1wo opposite simply supported end!I', Proceedings of rhe
lnslitution cf Civil Engimiers, Vol, 40. May 1968. pp. I7.
60. Loo, Y. C. and Cuscns, A. R., 'A re.6.oed finite &trip method for
!he analysis of orthotropic plates', Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers, Vol. 48, January 1971, pp. 8591.
61. Hambly, E. C., Bridge Deck BehU11iour, Chapman and Hall Lld,
1976, p. 272.
62. West, R., 'C & CA/CIRJA recommendations on the ose of grillage
analysis for slab and pseudoslab bridge decks', Cement and Concrete
Association, Publication 46.017, 1973, p. 24.
63. Robinson, K. E., 'The behaviour of simply supported sl::ew bridge
slabs under concentrated loads', Cemfl/fJ and Concrete Association,
Reseorch Rep0n 8, 1959, p. 184.
64. Rusch, H. and Hergenmder, A., b!flueJU:e surfaces for moments in
skew slobs, Technological University of Munich, 1961, availabk: as
Cement and Concrete AS$0Ciation transla1io11, p. 21 + 174 chart&.
65. Balas, J. and Hanusl::a, A., Influence Surfaces of Skew Plates,
VydaratelHfO S\ovcnslccj Akademic, Cuehoslavakia, 1964.
66. Naruoka, M. and Chmura, H., '011 lhe analysis of a skew girder
bridge by the theory of ofthottopic plaltJI', IAJJSB Proceedings,
Vol. 19, 1959. pp. 231256.
j""'°',";1'lf/"
·~
''
,.~,,..,
l~
1:'
I'Ii:
:._
Kl)
L......._;
\__;
__
~\
,"
:......~'·
,·
177
'
:,',, ,;
I
il:1
':1
'I'
. !'
~i
,ii
,I
·I
I•'
Ii:
'!.
.:[;
jl
fl
~I,1
:1'
'
LI
i
!
'
i,j
~~
~
•'
~,j
\:1
II
!·
!i
.··
~
',
Proceedings ' of tlu! Jnsritution of Civil Engineers. 1970.A. 1971. W...C<. 'The reinforcement of slabs in accordance with a picdetennined field of moments'.A. Pub/U:oJion 45. 143. L. F. 59. 159. 5. A. No. American Concreu /n. 3. Prague. 97. No. J6. Ru!lcy. Technical Memorandum ()Jridges) BES (1st amendment). P.. Vol. l. 7. Swann. B. Swann. K. 312.. 90.. lnstitutionen for Brobyggnad Kungl. G.. H. M. 'Zur Bcwchrung von Schieben und Schalen fur Hauptspannungen schiefwinklig zur Bewehrungsrichtung'. 71. J. 16.a review of research'. 1910. 181.. and Cranston. August 1973. Blanchard. 1974.. 132. Cowan. p. A. 90100. and Hanson. pp. 6. p. Clark. Intemalional Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering. Transport 4nd Road Research laboratory Report 765. 0. 346351. Clarke. Hillcrbor8. March 1968.. 98.11581161.. pp. 47. 119. 'Punching of bridge slabs'.!lress'. 1972.mber 1970. p. 166. L. 186. Seamann. Liege. 'Flat slab3 in posttensioned concrete with par\ ticular regard to the use of unbonded teodons . 669677.. Technical Report 42.. 171. 107. M. Technical Report 42.. S . V. 153. pp. Rao. M. J. No. 'Design criteria and analysis for dynamic loading of footbridges'. March 1976.. p. New York. P. March 1971.P. Roya! Institu!e of Technology.. C.501..Magazine ofConcreteReseorch.p. Proceedi11gs of the American Concrete /nstilut~. 146. 785806. Cement and Concrete Association. STJ. 123. S. W. R.. February 1968. P. rechlwinklig zur Druckrichtung angedrahtc Elnlagen'. Beeby. July 1978. pp. December 1971. pp. 7781. M. Somerville. and Edwards. 1%9. and Speirs. pp. p. and Gulvanessian. pp. 'Forces on bridge due to braking vehicles'.A. Vol.485. pp.14. 1%9. September 1962. British Standards Institution. M. SI. 506511. Pro ceedings of a Conference 01' Developments in Bridge Design and Construction. R. 'British highway bridge loading'. 31.78. 1977. London. T. Vol... Proceedings of the American Concrete /n. and Swann. W.. lember 1972. J. 'Tempernture difference cffocrs in concre!e bridges'. Beeby. 1950. 151. 54. Porr/Qnd Cement Association. "The instrumentation of bridges for the measurement of temperature and movement'. 'Bridge temperatun:s calculated by a computer program'. 116. 'Safety in shear. Handbook on the IUlijied code for . 103. p.. 1978. L. MacGregor. Australia. 'The design of sections for flexure and axial lead according to CP 110'. P. Kemp. Comitt! Buropeen do B&on. 47. Armer. 649677. Vol. Hori:wntal shear connections•. 'Short 1erm defom1ations of reinforced concrete memben'. 461467. F. Cranston. London.453. 'Horizontal shear connections between preeast beams and castinpince slabs'. 'The structural behaviour of a prestressed box beam with thin webs under combined bending and shear'. 'Finite element analysis of reinforced concrete slabs'. Vol.. Nylander. Vol.. Kemp. Bate. W. Bennett. A. L. TJylor. No. 'The effec:t of size on the torsional strength of rectangular reinforced concrete beams'. July 1969. 150. A. 'Optimum reinforcement of conctete slab elements'. J. A. L. K. November 1972.rtructurol concrete. No. HaUbjom. A. 147. Pannell. 677. Departme/ltal NoteDNIJOll. Stevens. R. and McNeice. Special Publication SP42. Proceedings of tM Institution of Civil Engineers.r. lnstfrure of Engineers. 'Tests on slab elements and skew slab bridges designed in accordance with the factored elastic moment field'. T. C.. 120. and Williams. B. Baker.500. and Hawkins. 115. 176. 72.'. E. 4.acceleration'. 9499.An investigation of the behaviour of composite beams. Vol. Concrete. 158. pp. B. 3858. American Concrete Jnstitute . p. The Structural Engineer. Prac~edings of tlu! Amer/can Concrete Institute. Vol. M. No. L. Technical Report 42. G. Regan. 128. J. No. M. 121. 139. 'Shear strength of slabs withou! shear reinforcement'. Transport and Road Resenrch LaboraJory Supplementary Report 275.. C. G.rtltute. M. Vol. Dundee. CP JJO: Part 3. p. 285293. 'Abminderung der Tragfahi8keil des Betons info!ge stabfonniger. 52. Becby. H. 187 Clark. June 1954. Devefopmellt Deparrmem Bulktin D47. pp. No. 64. 61. !O. 20. January 1969. 32. 123135. 184. B.43/.. July 1979. Procetdings of lnterna/ional Conference on Concrete Slabs. 180. T. o. 254. May 1974. P. Vol. and West. Included ln: Knittel. A. February 1968. 183. pp. illtemational Journal of Meclumical Sciences. F. Praperries of Concrete. Design charts for singly reinforced beams. 'Prccastprestressed concre1e bridges. Transport tll1d Rood Research laboroJory Report 382. Vol. 1969. 124. and Sie~. 137. T.. 'Reinforced concrete skew bridge slabs supported on columns'. Cement and Concrete Association. No. Technical Report 42. 1964.P. Shear and diagonal tension'. 441454. InterAssociation Colloquium on the behaviour In service of concrete structures. and Collins. J. L. pp. R. August 1978. el al. 15. Ceme/lt and Concrete Association.P.design recommen· dations'. Tramporr and Rood Research LaboroJory Supplementary Reporr442. 'Skew reinforcement of concrete slabs against bending and torsional moments'. Man:h 1971. A. 63. pp.rehung and Praxis. Seplember 1970. pp. Clarke. No. pp.::~• ·• t~ BS . 173. 2. ·c.. 110. Cement and Concrete Association. 50. 125. 19. Proceedings of !he American Concrete Institute. . BeJong. 'Explanatory note on the proposed Unified Code Clau~ on shear in reinforced concrete beams with special reference to the Report of the Shesr Study Group'. Port 2. 39. The Struc tural use ef concrete. R.76. p. Burt. S. Berlin. 2. p.. 'Trisegrnental momcntcurvature relations for reinforced concrete members'. Regan. E. Hansan. 'Combined loading 1e•1s on model prestressed concrete box beams wilh steel mesh'. Edwards. C. pp. l. 16. Morley. Vol. (Eds). Proceedings of a Symposium on dynamic behaviour of bridges. Proceedings of the Americ'an Concrete Institute. pp. 155. P. Proceedings of tlu! Third Congress ofrhe FitllraJion lnrema1/o114k de fa Prir:antrainte. 1 preslressed concrete'.reo. V. S. 57.. 'Tension stiffening in reinforced concrete beams and slabs under short·tenn load'. Cemen1 and Concre1e Assodalion. J. 168.. 172. Ceme/lt and Concrtte Association. 5165. C. CE6. Final Report of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering Colloquium on Plasticity in Reinforced Concrete{ Copenhagen. 175. American Concre/e Jns1i1u1~.sis! inplane forces'. Vol. Clari::. R. Civil Engineering and PubUc Works Review. 52. 96. J. Cement and Concrete Association. November 1970. 104. November 1974. 'Strength of reinforced concrete Thcams under combined direct shear and torsion'. S. Cement and Conctete Association. Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn. 487505. Construction Industry Research and Informat inn Association. 325373. pp. Concrete Society Technical Report 17. 145. 6. No. Morley. Beeby. 'Some expcrimCfltal data relating to the design of 178 R. 185. 164. p. 'The provision of tension and compression re· inforeemcnt to re. Soren. 38. pp. W. Cement and Conctete Association. 'Influence of embedded service ducts on ~trengths of flat plate structures'.. Davies. Rowe.rtructu. S. 1965.. 19. Neville.408. J31.. Vol. 163. 1958. 165. 'The torsional stiffness of suppon diaphragms in beam and slab bridges'. Vol. p. January 1%9. Transport and Road Research l. S. 22. A. Clarie. B.. ComitC EuroInternational du Beton. Technical University of Stuttgart. C. Optimum reinforceme/lt In a concrete slab subjected to multiple loadings.. Pait 2. G. 3. J. 0. 68. Vol. Jones.. H. British Standards Institution.510.720. !29. 1971. November 1963. 'The behaviour of solid skew slab bridges under longitudinal pre. Spran. pp.002. p. E. p. 7. 'Shecr Slrength of large beams'. October 1976. British Standards Institution. R. Building code requirements far re· infarced concre1e (AC! 31877). pp. N. Technical Report 42 521..American Society of Civil Engineers Committee 323. J. 207224. and Rowe. and Smith. A.. pp. 8. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers ($rructura/ Division). Vol.. M . 169. 118128.. L. Emenon. !02. 1970. December 1978.. and Symmons.R. H. 178. 53. M. No. dejkction and ultimate load af concrete slab systems). CEB·FIP model code for concrete . De«. L. Civil Engineering and Building Construction Series No.·nd Balasooriya. December 1974. R. 204212. pp. P. Abeles. TechniCal Report 42. Man:h 1970. H. Vol.533. Flint. P. JOO.stressed beams with 1hin webs failing in inclined compression'. and Annstrong. 'Shcru' provisions for pre. 63. A. Portland Ceme/lt Assocuizion.. Tramporr and Road Research laboratory Report 561. p.. Clements. Morley. pp. March 1955. 117. J.. June 1974.re.. Cemell/ and Concrete Associ· ation. 1968. P. and Washa. Hanson.023. Cement and Cqncrete Associalion. August 1968. CP 114 and CP 110'. 136. September 1980. L.. M. II. H. December 1974. R. A. Monlock.. Wood. CP 117: Part 2: beams for bridges: 1967. 1979. 'Recent research on the action of unstressed concrete in composite structures (precast monolithic struc:tmes)'. 96. Part 2. Concrete. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers ($trucrurai Division) Vo!.. A. 105.. p.P. R. Vol. H. 43. 10. pp. Hughes. March 1978.• Theory of Flow and Froclure of So/ids. 'Proposed changes in shear provisions for reinforced and prestressed concrete beams'. Beeby A. D. ·shear strength of pre. 7. Magazine efConcreu Research. 135. Tmnsporr and Rood Resean:h LaboratoryReport64!. C. J. 98. 7. 28... 155162. March 1971. Vol. and Clarke. C. Tckniske Hogskolan. p. N. 'Corrosion of reinforeing steel in concrete and its relation to cracking'. A. H. New York. No. 7..plain concrete rectangular sl:<!tions'. Vol. Magazine of Concrete Research. 889902. Berlin. L. RefXJrt 52. J. 'Discussion· of reference 133'. 'The prediction and control of flexural cracking in reinforced concrete members'. Contribwlon II 317.. P.W.. 1974. 'Torsion of structural concrete . The shear strength of reinforced concrete beams. Cemtnl atUJ Concrete Association. Reynolds. 42.. M. Pro· ceedings of tlu! ln. pp. 43. B. 154. 135. Vol.. Proceedings of the lm1i1wion of Civil Engineers. 213. 0. 1968. 141. 'Notes on bridge bearings'. and Regan. Sep 188. 156. 737746. 126. 1972. August 1975. 113. 1953. T. 'Torsion and bending in reinforced and presoesscd concre1e members'. Pederson. H. August 1975.rch Laboralory Technical Note 401. N. W. Vol. M. 22. Pan 2. Research and Developmem Bulletin RD 005 . Taylor. 'The shear provision of AS CA35SAA Code for prestressed concrete'. Septemhcr 1976.. pp. G. !975. Peter. 6880. Kajfllllz. and West. 24732490. No. 'Detailing for torsion'. Vol. Technical Report 42. Developml'lll Report 44.stressed beams. D. Jofrie1. Division of Structural Engineering and Bridge Building. W. Stockholm. 157... B. Schiess!. G. May 1973.res. W. 56A. IOI. 1978. P. G. 118.. Ill. p. 1977. 66. 1976. 'Limit state design of highway bridges'.. Journal of the Research and DevelopmenJ laboratories of tlu! Portland Cemenr AssoCioti. 55. No. 'Investigation of the forces carried across cracks in reinforced concrete beams in shear by intedock of aggregstc'. K. Technical Report 42. Hawkins. amd Kupfer. 2. p.is. Shear Study Group. p. No. 122. ST3. 7. 162. 'Shear in beams with bentup bars'. 10. 19. Yu. A. Leonhardt. Nadai. F. 21. Recommerula1ions for an i11terna1ional cotk of practice for reinforced cancrete. October 1973. Technical Report 42. Taylor. Moc. 320. Concrete.ahora1ory Report 702. Vol. March 1977. 'Tcntaiive recommendations for prestrcMed concrete'. Composite construction in structural s/eel and concrete.452.447. No. 93105. 170.. W. 'Current European views on structural safety'. 'Admissible crack width in reinforced con«ete struc. No. 2. 'The influence of bar spacing · on tension stiffening in reinforced concrete slabs'. 1971. Blythe. 5774. Technic4/ Report 42. November 1964. January 1958. A. 'Investigation of the dowel shear forces carried by the tensile steel in reinforced concrete beams•. 103. Lampen. Vol. No. 1010IOl2.. pp. L. 3133. 12. Hawkins. pp. Clark... 'J7. June 1977. H. E. 66.P. April 1961. 'Early thermal movement and cracking of concrete'. 1964. September 1972. Ac/a Polytechnica Scandinavicd. E. 1958. Vol.nitute Special Publication SP18. 'The design of concrete box spinebeam bridges'.C. D. Maisel. Cement and Cancrete Association. ) 12. p. 133. p. p. Black. !03116. Vol. 94. and Subrahmauyan. 134. J. S. R. Cement and Concrete Asrociation. 152. pp. p. 21. N. Vol.':f'M requirements'. Proceedings of the American Concrete Institute. c'risswcl!. Seventh Congress of the Ftdtrarion l111ernationole de la Pr&omrainte. Preliminary Report. Bate. H. 545578. December 1960. 70. 148. B.. Man:h 1969. L. Design charts for cireular columns and pre. Vol..• 'Effect of draped reinforcement on behaviour of prestressed concrete beams•. 138. 1969. 2... pp. p. Vol. Concrete Society. Uppcnberg. No. 53. D. p. 177. pp. 'Drivers' and Passengers' maximum tolerance to lateral . Taylor. Vol. Concrete. p. Hsu.tiona/e de Prfrontrainte. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. pp. and Sundquist. Instituiion of Structural Engineers. 13411347. Cemem and Concrete ksociati'on. September 1964.. 'Shearing strength of reinforced concrete slabs and footings under concentrated loads'. M. May 1960. p. M. Part 2. 1968. p. pp. J. pp. 'Cracking in partially pre· stressed members'. 20. C.rtitwion of Civil Engineers. p.. Technical Report 42. 2. May 1973. 197207. 144.. C. October 1967. and Taylor. Cement and Concrete Association. J. IUJ'Cs'. and Taylor. 68. 174. The Stnlctura/ Engineer. 8. 'The behaviour of skew solid and voided slab bridges under longitudinal prestress'. 'Optimwn reicforcemenr of concrete slab elements against combinations of moments and membrane forces'. pp. J. . 4354.. L. M. 44. W. S. pp. A. 109. 203238.. 2. April 1969. p. Proceedings of the Americon Concrete institute. 44. 99. October 1974. W. Department of Tr1111sport. 'The yield criterion for onhotropicalJy reinforced conctele slabs'. Clark.. 48. Feslschrift Rusch. W. pp. Vol. !971. MacGregor. Technical Report 42. Vol. 179 . Proceedings of the American Concrete InsliluJe. T. 'The calculation of the distribution of temperature in bridges. L. and West. Research Report 15. Mikhailov. Mag~ine of Concrete Research. Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ud. 167. Sllw cancrele bridge slabs on line supports. 7986. Cement and Concrete Association. 'Design charts for prestressed concrete Tsections'. E. 'Experimental basis for a design meihod for rectangular reinforced concrete beams in torsion'. Sozen. pp.. 'On the strength of reinforced concrete discs'. Part 3. 161.on.. M.509. E..17111$.Stahlbetonbou: Berichll! aus For. 'Design of partially prestressed concrete beams'. and Taylor.474. 66. l2801284. 8. J. Vol. pp. 'The influence of section breadth on rotation capacity'. 170. pp. Americon Concrete lnstitwe Speciol Publication 30 (Cracking. W.. W. 23... p. 140. Cemem ond Concrete AssociaJion. pp. B. 179.. 'Temative recommendations for the design of reinforced concrete members to resist 1orsion'. 2. 127. N. p. pp. Stockholm. Nielson.ral Engineer. 101109. 27. M. The Struc/11.• 'E!~periments on the strengih of reinforced and prestressed concrete beams and of ccncreie encased . CP llO: Parr 2: 1972. 174. 6. March 1970. D. 108. p. Civil Engineuing Trans=rions. 'Discussion of a paper by ACIASCE! Committee 326. Clark. p. Sixrh'Congress of the Filllration lnterno. 106.. I.. A.J. J. Swann. No. W. R.A.A.. . McGrawHi!:. No. M.. 69. 182.. No. p. pp. 153. 1973.. Proceedings ofllu! American Concrete lnstitu1e. 13831410.• 'Deflections of reinforced concrete beams'. pp.. M. The design of highway bridge parapus. p. Doctoral Tbei. 5. P.A. R. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers <Structural Division}. The Structural Engineer. C. Transport 41ld Rood Re. pp. Proceedings af tM Amei. J. 70. 532.A.P. 1%5.. pp. 93108. C. Vol. doubly reinforced beams and rectangular col11. American Concrete Institute. CP 110: 1972'. 40. L.. Mitchell. pp. Proceedings of the lnstilution of Civil Engineers. ?14.OJ D. May 1955. 1911. 276288. 'The ultimate moment of resistance of unbonded prestressed concrete beams' . H. 142. Proceedings of a Symposium on bridge temperaJu. C. 9. p. and Roll. Cardiff.!tressed· concrete in the Unified Code. STll. Vol. Proceedings of the American Concrete lnstitUle. 'Reinforcement of slabs and shells designed according to the theory of elasticity'. R. :an Concrete Institute.. 'The structural use of lightweigh! aggregate concrete'. 'Design for punching shear'. 319320. 130. Steel joists in combined bending and torsion•. No. 1979. 149. Transport and Road Research Laboratory Tech nical Note455. American Concrete Institute Commiuee 438. 38. 32. W. 2. 156. 'Web crushing . 18. "· 160. Brown. G. Technical Report 42. The structural use of concrete. H. E. and Lunniss. iJTidge :. Henderson.
June 1979. A. Proceedings of the American Concreu Innitute. Bygn/ngsstntiske Meddelelser. Elliott. D. p. p. Series E. E. 239. 3.. Hambly. Concrete. Concrete Publications Ltd. 64. P. 1. C. Concrete Society TtcM/cul Report No. Cooley. 54. Technical Report FlP/914. September 1945. February 1972. Research Report 9. 'Reinforced concrete colwnn invei. L. 220. ConSlrlll:tion Industry Re:eorch and lnformation A. M. C. G. The Strlll:tura/ Engineer. 54.. I.ssocialion. J. in Developments in Prestressed Concrete 1.. surrey UnivelS. C. 1975.1321. pp. Dhir. Report 74. 'Bloom base allowable in the design of pile caps'.. Vol.. G. 244252. · 225. K. and Rowe. Robinson. Proceedings of the Amen'can Concrete lns1itute. Ctment and Concrete Associcuion. 'Prcstrcssed lightweight concrete•. The Structural Engineer. Beckett. 246. 279.. No. Proceedings of o Symposium on The Strength ofCon· crete Structures. Branson. Tilly... 'Crack control in concrele brldges'. pp. 10. Pritchard. F. T. 2. Technical Report 42. Technical Report 42. J. Report SJ. A. MSc Thesis. Cement and Concrete Association. 323336..·. D. 10. 4. __ _ . Vol. p. Construction Industty Reselll'Ch and Information Association. Cemuit and Concrete A:sociation.. 11. p. Publication 12. 234. H. pp. D.. pp. 1977. E. pp.. 'Effect of bar cut·off on ·· ~~ c'. 50. Cement ond Concrete A$. Structural recommendatiorzs for loodbeoring wolfs.. The structural ust of concrete for retaining aqueous liquids. 'Cumulative damage in fatigue'. Development Report4.ederbaum. G. 2. H.ighway structures'.. R.. W . pp. H. Clark.A. 'Model analysis of a bridge abutment'. 276. •A survey of the problem of lateral instabilily in reinforced concrete beams'. May 1973. Larsson. 200. 7089. 1961.. 97121. 250. 7595. 4345.. J. E. L.eler._ •• ~. August 1972. A. E. HenleyonThames.I II i 'I II I! ' i: I' F' ! . p. 191. S. 31. January 1958.. Creep of Concrete: Pklin. 9. No. March 1974. F.s gliders'.A .reinforcing bars for bond strength'. J. p. 'Designing for transverse shear in voided slabs'. W. Amcrican'Concrete ln$tilute Committee 105.397406. ff. p.. 271. Report 804. 210. p. Vol. pp. pp. 46.D. p. bond and shear strength of reinforced concu:te beams'. p. 1946. Edwards. 8. 4. 'The behaviour and design of reinforced concrete corbels'. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers.. 19. November 1965. D. 205. Cr~. unpublished. New York and London. Goteborg. 'Static and repeated loading tests on lightweight prestressed concrete bridge be8Ills'. 58A. 'Lapped spl!ces for highstrcngth reinforcing bars'. L. W. 207. Cement and Co1f€~1e 4ssoi:iation.. WiUiams.A. and Hulsbos. and Smith B. 'Precastpre$1ICSSed concrete bridges. April 1970. M.. May 1965. p. Wills. 'Classifying. I ::' . 197. pp. Clarke. Snowdon. 1978.. Holnsberg. G. Creep and shrinkage studies'. Ivey. 261.. No. R. 248. and Picard.ftituJion of Civil Engineers.' 9. 2. Theodorakopoulos. Sheaf te$l8 of continuous girders'. Further tests of continuou.. N. 'Damping of highway bridges: a review'. November 1970.te. No. 'The strength of halfjoints in reinforced concrete beams·. 235. p. No. pp. 455471. July 1969. Fehniary 1933. An lnJrod/. A.. 1973..ICtioll to Str11e1urol Design (1) Concrete · bridges. 64. J.. July 1959. 24. October 1976. CttMnJ and Concrete Association.. Transport and Road Research laboratory. 265. November 1979.488.. 1972. Vol.:'i 1: r.. p.P. Supplementary Report 432. 'Factors influencing the longitudinal movement of a concrete bridge system with special reference 10 deck contraction'. K. p. 1970. 4048. p. Rules for the design and use of Freysslnet concrete hinges in highway structures'. R.062. 255. No. A.S. The StrUClural Engineer. 1980. 'Friction in posttensioned prestressing systems'. p.. pp.036. 198. Vol. l. Sittampalm._fl . and Rowe. Vol. J. Technological Universily of Stuttgart. Bennett. S~ plementory Report 275.. Januruy 1961. end Kuar. p. Vol. 64. M. 32. August 1978.. 29. pp. 'Prestressing steels'. 'An investigation of the crack control characteristics of various lypes of bar in reinfol'C'ed conCJCIC beams'. 'The durability of steel embedded in lightweight concrete'.. G. .l:J.__1.ily Pres$. Whittle. ~ 1::: tll .. 'Fatigue tCSt5 of reinforcing bars . A. pp. Vol. Burton. The Strlll:tural Englnetr. 12. No. 47. and Kinniburgh. pp. J. A. 236.. J. G. ·Building Rcsean:h Establishment. end Sozen. August 1958. pp. January 1972.H. 273. Proceedings of the Jrzs1ilution of Civil Engineers. L. Pre· stresud concrete fric1ion lo. Cement ond Cancrete Associotlon. Theory of Elastic Stabilily. No. September 1965. Lee. L. pp. 275. 240. N.• Lighlweight Concrete. No. Beeby.tigation ._J 260. 77. L. if 1' I 1 ! Oi '~ 1. Cement and Concrete Association. Cement ond Cancrete Associa1lon.. . I. 252. 1977. 3. The S1ruc1urol Engineer. Vol. and Munday.' r~ ' Jl . 43. No.). and Raithby. 1978. 199. 1936..____. Deformation of C<mcrete Structures. 445473. Vol.A guide to theB. I.. 31. 245. p. 1981. 194. Research Report 13. 6... pp. 20. 209. Code of Practice for prestressed concrete. 'An investigation of transmission length in pretensioned concrete'. C.. St. pp. H.S. E. Clark. Construction Jndustry Research and lllfonnotion Association.. (Eds). Proceedings of the 111Stitution of Civil Engineers. September 1972. E. 67.J I . 8. D. 52. E. and Kaar. F. Development Report 3. and Beattie. 229..rses dw'ing stressirig. Research &port No. 268. May 1980. Concrete in the OceQJIS. Wills. J. 'The use of continuous precast beam decks for the Mii Woodford Interchange viaducts'. pp. 221. Vol. Moss. 3. No. ProceedingS of the American Concrete lllSlitute. Vol. p. Supplememary Report 622. 'Ao investigation of cracking in slab3 spanning one way'. pp. end Breen. N. ].512. p. 251. I. p. Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 'Cracl: (:Olltrol in slab bridges'. H. 37. 4. 'The theory and practice of bearings aod expansion joints for bridges'. 267. October 19'12.433.References Concrete bridge design to BS 5400 189. J. Kerensky. Base. Sweden. 228. Depanmerrlal Note 3009. Swamy. The StrUcJruoi Engineer. Aster. January 1979. 275282. No.. p.. 266.. 217. Transport ond Road Research Laborat0ry. A. 1967.. 'Discussion of reference 274'.. Proceedings of the 111. 634643. C. Church. pp. 15. 'Strength wid servlceabilily considerations in the arrangement of the reinforeement in concrete skew slab bridges'. 190. Research Report 11. HMSO. p. Lindseil. 493495 and No. October 1962. 'Correlation of calculated and measured dynamic behaviour of bridges'. Fe<leration Internationale de la Preoontraio. M. W. 15. 5. E. 'Techlricol Memormuium (JJridges) BE 5175.. J973.. . 811819. 214. Vol. Vol. Publication 7364 BIS. 62. 40. G.479. pp. 'The ll!lalysis of rectangular hollow reinforced concrete slabs supported on four sides'.. K. Journal of the Research and DevefopmenJ Loboratorles of the Portland Cement Assoc/Cllion. 29. p. Base. 'The bearing capacity of concrete loaded over a limited area·. C. J.45. 258. 'Structural concrete made with lightweight aggregate'.. p. 1979. P~dings of the American Concrete lnstitUJe.B. 57A.020. B&dow:. p. p.D.. February 1978. 'Flexural cracking in slab brldges'. 1959. W. . 1970. No. J. 80. p. A. Cement and Concrete Association. Technical Report 42. Vol. Price. 14211439. Ferguson. pp. 3436 and No. L. I. (Ed.. Cement and Concrete Association. o. 'An investigation of the use of strand in pretensioned preslleSsed concrete beams'.018. 'Shear capacily of lightweight concrete beams'.. 2. G. p. Depanment of Transport. ResearchRqmn 18. pp.. W. D. pp. 211.. 'Simplified methods of predicting the deformation of structural concrete'. Vol. '·' ·'"~J r~ ~ '. I.W. 'Tests on four prototype reinforced concrete hinges'.~ '' '. Hobbs. K. March 1975. McGrawHill Book Co. IS. No. Mattock. May 1960. Soertryk a/ Bygningsstatlske Meddeleber. 'A simplified method 10 calculate dynamic behaviour of fOOlbridges'. 'Standard pile caps'. CemenJ ond Concrete Association. and Paterson. p.. JullC: 1976. Proceedings of the American Concrele lnstitutt. H. No. L. . 'Precastprestressed . E •• •An investigation of the mess distribution in the anchorage 1. Vol. 1977. Cement and Concrete As. TrQJISpon and Road Research Loborotary. Clark. and Elf1ott. No. Chalmers Technical Universily. Grimer. . August 1981. wid Taylor. z. K. July 1961. M. p. August 1979.tack welding of stirrups'. 28. p... 2. 87114. 'I !j !. P. T. 11. 2137. 143148. D. D. R. 232. concrete bridges'. G. H. 238. 395404. 257.lltive final report of Committee 105'. 'Cracking wid corrosfoo'. 'Longtenn defonnation characteristics of Lyiag !ighlweigbt·aggregate concrete•. Shid. E. J. 195. and Buth. 'Reply 10 reference 275'. l. 19. 16.Januruy 1967. Pilot tests of continuous girders'. Pergamon Press. Vol. K. 212. 1977. 270. pp. S. Technical Repon No. May 1956.. October 1974. Research Report S. 269. May 1960. JoumDI of the Research and Development Loboratories of the Portland CemenJ Association. D. W. 204. Timoshenko. R. 227.. Dccem~ t966.. 'Precastprestressed concrete bridges. 11. 12. Technical Report 42. 157162. 'A review of the international use of lightweight concrete in highway hrklges'.. Zielinski. II I.526.. 'Use of lightweight aggregate concrete for structural applications'. E.. Cranst0n. :. Mattock. A. 39.. r. Cement and Concrefe Association.·' L.. 1975. Parrott. American Concrete Institute Committee 215. Vol. 233. September 1960. Lensehow. Reynolds.·. 'Plastic shear sttength of reinfo~ concn:te bcllllUI'. 23t. D. Zlcliru. ···so ""'"""' concrete bridges. A. 248 .. 263. p. Part 2. No. Kaar. 'Horizontal shear conneclion in composite concrele beams under repeated loads'. 264. Cement and Concrete AMociaticm. 208. Part l. 299328. Vol. Vol. P. 'International recommendalions for the design and constnJdion of concrete structures'. G.pp. Clarke. H. p.9. 223. pp._r~. 1967. 241. 1. F. 259. 'Axial fatigue of highyield reinforcing bars in air'. L. and Winata. No. 149191. 272. pp. p. 44. 65. No. K. 215. 'The stress distribution associated with gi:oups of 1111chorages in post·tensioned concrete members'. 278. 183191.ssociotlon. Vol. October 1957. A. 56. aod Madoob. pp. Cement ond Concrete Association. CP 2007: Port 2: 1970.p. 253. 2. T. Technical Memorandum (JJrldges) No. D. 546. 10. P. 'SJ6. 202.. BS S337: 1976. W.. 'Precastprestressed co~te bridges. A. Department of Transport.415. R. B. 12. P. 254. Beeby. P. p. 1974. September 1978. 'The strength of concrete walls under axial and eccentric loads'. CurrenJ Paper 36170. 203. No. Technical Report 42. October 1967. ].I 11 . 237. P. ll!ld Braestrup. Cement and Concrete A$SOC/atlon. 12. P. pp. John Wiley and Sons. 218.er. Building Research Station. L. Hambly. p. M. 524.. May 1978. 377382. Ajibade. 11. October " 1953.. . Proceedilzgs of a Symposium on dynamic bthaviour of bridges. W. 262. Concrete. Vol. Ferguson. Ncivember 1973. Walley. The Strlll:tura/ Engine. May 1967. Vol.. French Government. Gorman. Cement and Concrete Assoclotion. 'Lightweight aggregate concrete for use in h. Nielsen. 229. 'Fatigue strength of prestressed concrete flexural members'. H.A. 2'74. 196.I ·1. 21. P. 464. Building Research Station. Proceedings of the American Concrete Institute.D.. Technical Report 42. London. Green.. O. T. 'Lightweightaggregate concreie for suuctural use'. Longbottom.~ =:=. pp. April 1968. 'Tensile strength and diagonal tension resistance of stnictural lightweight concrete'. L. 10631078.igo of reinforced concu:te columns'.. B. L. British Standanls Institution. No. Journol of the Research and Development Loboratorie3 of the Portland Cemen1 A. Cement and Concrete Associmion.. Swamy. A. 193.. 4. p. L . 2931. Yd. J. Vol. The Strlll:/Ura/ Engineer. S. 44. 222. Neville.. I. Sturrock. J. and Hognestad. No. p.:__. 3. CP 110: Part 2: 1970. December 1!173. 53. G. L. Hanson. Clark. L. 242.. 213. end Mallett. 'Behaviour and design of small nibs'.0nes of posttensioned concrete members'. Proceedings of the American Concrelt lnstltwe. 9. 1978. pp. A. 'The effects of diurnal thermal loading on cracked. Concrete. R.. Evans. and Hognestad. 1. April 1969. Mattock.. and Bate.. B. No. p. Base. 'Tests on model bridge beams in precast lo in situ concrete consttuetion'. May 1954. JoumDI of the Research ond Development Labortl/ories of Jhe Pon/and Cemou As3ociotion. King.. S. 56A. Vo!. Mareh 1976. 'Reinforced concrete design 10 CP 110 . P. Vo[.· Ii• 'I' !: r i' J 11 111 I. 247. 62.. The Strlll:tural Engineer. Somerville. 192. P. Cement and Concrete Association. 2829. pp. 216. and Edwards. Allen. 518. . Clarke..slmply explained'. pp. 227. L. p. p. R. pp. 140. No.. December 1980. 19. 1978. 17. Applied Science Publisben (thirded). 111122. 201. 12. 6199. 1979. 'Conception et calcul du beton precontraint'. 3. NorthHolland Publishing Co. p. 249.472. D. 6. 'A guide to the design of anchor blocks for poHl:tensioncd prestrcSSed concrele members'. p.• 'Prac1ical analysis of the anchornge zone problem in pn:sttessed beams'. Sawko. New York. 95.. H.June !969. L. 'Behaviour and design of pile caps with four piles'. R. in Advances in Concrete Slob Technology. 1971.1 i:lil: . Research Report 17.• 'The design and construction of Frianon Bridge'. J.E. SBA. pp. Vol. A. Comitt Europee:n du Btton. 'Shear at the interface of precast and in si1u concrete'. American Concrete lnst/tUJe Special Publication 23 (First International Symposium on Concrete Bridge Design).. R.. H. Tr(lJISpon and Road Research Loborcuory. 58. 386. C. 243.. 'Fatigue in concrete'.. Read. Transport and Road Research Loborcuory. pp. 3070. Teychcnne. No. No. 'Prestreased conCrete cylindrical tanks'. 9396. Al59A164. No. September 1961.489. 280. 49. 622. 34.. 244. The Concrete Society.. W. Vol. 224. Cement and Concrete Association. January 1961. Howells. Guide 1. January 1974. 226. Vol. 'Considerations for design of concrete structures subjected to fatigue loading'. Short. British Standards Institution.. PhD Thesis. Current Paper (Engineering Series) 49. p. 70. McGrawHill Internacional Book Company. Supplemen1ary Report 275.sociCllion. Civil Engineering and Public Works Review. p. June 1954. 4. 17. Proceedings of the American Concrete lnsliJute. 54. L_. Yao. Cemem and Concrete Associal'ion. 'Shrinkageinduced curva~ of reinforced concrete memben'.. December 1967. Pllhllcation 12. 'Bearing capacity of plain and relnforced concrete walls'. Miner. 3858. April 1967. 'Crack width prediction and minimum reinforcement for crack conti:ol'. Technir:ol Repon 42. Technical Report 42.tent. Vol. Proceedings of the American Concrete Institute. 'Temperature distributions and stresses in concrete bridges'. 5. 56A. Free Vibration a/Beams and Shefts. D. 'Analysis and dei. Seddon. 57A. Marshall. British Standards Institution. Vol. E. D. C. M. Clar!c. Bridge FollllLiotions ond Substructures. Applied Science Publishen. M.. J. 5. 'Fatigue characteristics of prestressing strand'.. 205226. 277.. p. pp. Proceedings of a Symposium on dynamic behaviour of bridees. E. J. J. May 1974. Research Report 41 .A. A. pp.A. December 1973. Doctoral Thesis. Part2. J.. I.No.:r. .. 3. 622623. 256. University of Birmingham. L'. pp. 'Detailing for standard prestressed concrete bridge beams'.. D . G. Design ond construe1ion of reinforced amJ prestressed concrele structures for the storage of wcuer and other aqueous liquids.. Vol. R.socfation. C. BE 11. 12. 206. A. Publication 48. A. October 1970. Cement and Concrete Association. S.~·"'"". October 197!1. Proceedings of 1ht American Concrete Institute. 71. p. 29. reinforced ond prestressed. 575. Base.. 244. Beeby. 5. 230.
129 reinforcement. 90 colwnn. 36 duct. 9. 32. 8894 concrete. 139 short. 19. 46 beam. 90 flexure. 1335 analysis. 94. 124 reinforeement. 32. 19. 11617 concrete characteristic strength. 801. 117 slab. 41 coefficient of thennal expansion. 14750 stress limitations. 1023 cracking. consequence factor. 7683 beam and slab. 45. 104. 20. 150 fatigue. 1067 continuity. 11922 slender. IO. 26 bearings. 119. 171 central reserve loading. 931 elastic. 1213. 501. 45. 129 stresses. 41 support. 138. 1213. 13. 19. 17.Index abutment. 124 bridge. 12930. 4951. 51. 1920 local effect. 11825 additional moment. 910 ultimate limit state. 45. 105 interface shear. 203 model. 1089 stressstrain. 13942 · anchorage. 17. 42 column. 70. 227 berun cracking. 32. 1078. 54. 2731 plate theory. 27 non. 49 . 725 torsion. 65. 10 lower bound. 149 collision load parapet. 4 Characteristic strength. 1223 axial load. 7 corbel.7 braking load. 1068. 13. 36 bearing stress. 1212. 10 upper bound. 142 bond. 36. 41 centrifugal load. 45 base.Jinear. 45 183 . 13. 45 elastic modulus. 119 biaxial bending. 11. 41 carriageway. 45. 34 cellular slab. 94 prestressing tendon. 10910. 11015 differential shrinkage. 85 box girder.70. 15 folded plate. 1234 composite construction. 1316 finite element. 41 characteristic load. 279. 111 flexure. 13940 box beam. 1927. 118. 94. 140 local. 20. 558 shear. 1089. 5. 19. 4951 vertical shear. 1224. 96 skidding. 124 uniaxial bending 11921. 110 stresses. 9. 32. 10. 456 coefficient of friction bearing. 10517 beam and slab. 26. 140 bundled bars. 1545 lightweight. 9 plastic. 124 effective height. 1516 limit. 1315 serviCeability limit state. 13. 129 cracking. 15 grillage. 10. 15 finite strip. 133 slenderness.
131 prestressed cone~. 91. 4 notional lane. 35 footway and cycle track. 13942 characteristic strength. 15868 partial safety factor load. 1516. 32. 1517 effect. 345 railway. 1512 nib. 5 design resistance. 143 .I' ~ i I ·1. 32 nosing. 32. 35. 1415. 83 reinforcement. 46 cover. 3244 application. 32. 45. 141 lightweight aggregate concrete. 12 membrane action. 32. 32. 5. 912. 32. 823 serviceability limit state. 164. 1819 HA loading. 171 . 35. 10. 42 friction at bearing. 4. 910. 956 curtailment. 989 footing. 4. 38. 38 impact. 356 loaded length. 3940 HB. IO. 110 HA. 89 moment redistribution. 1547 concrete. 46 transmission length. 155 losses. 1517 early thermal movement. 18. 6 global load factor. 42 foundation. 48.' li~fi!. 36. ' . 1301 interface. 95 torsion.7 wall. 94 beam. 725. 32. 11115 data. 16 interfuce shear. 171 flexural. 131 pile cap. 702.. 1089. 48. 4852 design life. 34 influence surface. 77. 63 yield line theory.70. 52. 67. 122 composite construction. 117 inverted Tbeam. 1567 maximum. 45 cover. 14750 limit analysis. 38 fatigue. 70. 34 Hillerborg strip method. 65. 945 __ · bond. 133 slab. 45 deflection. 834. 868. 968 design criteria. 689 beam. 1547 r. 88 flange. 1289 voided slab. 968 design criteria. 57 effective wheel pressure. composite construction. 32. 31. 41 centrifugal. 38 fatigue. 38. 1314 shear defonnable. 32. 956. 12. 35 dynamic. 45 differential. 6972. 16. 1545 prestressing tendon. 6575 at points of contraflexure. 34 load. 2 influence line. 32. 32. railway loading. 323 dead. 53. 26 model anaJysis. 35 temperature. 35. 1415 theory. 1. 32. 75. 3 local effects. 41 Ibeam. 3940 HB. 15. 20. 32. 9. · ·1 segmental construction. 93. 910' modulus. 13 ice. 26. 368. 94. 32. 68 slab. 3842 lurching. 3940 halving joint. 15862. 32. 9. 61 reinforced. 42. 150 load. 4851 endblock.Jfi'J'f ·~· 'i i. 90. 6. 868. 8894. 86. 412 Mbeam. 1436 fatigue. 111 cracking. 6570. 23. 578. 42 skidding. 468 pier. 85 prestressing tendon characteristic strength. 53 flange. 130. 32. 401 prim"')'. 7 design strength. 52. 4. 86101 ultimate. 4. 15 footing. 1335 hypothetical flexural tensile stress. _i'___ . 1412 cycle track loading. 94 L:J r it. 10. 5. 9 endblock. 129 pile. 131 pile cap. 10. 725. 32 permanent. 42 implementation of Code. 11517 deformation. 117 lag. 1315 Poisson's ratio. 668. 1378 stress limitation. 725. 51 reinforced concrete. 41 centrifugal. 55 reinforcement anchorage. 32. 2930 skidding load. 142 prestressed. 1920 limit state serviceability. 1313.. 70. 76. 139 minimum. 345 deflection. 401 highway loading. 725. 41 slab . 924. 1045 HB loading. 48 limit state design. 41 verge. 6570. 38 effective flange width. 4 design load. 32. 956. 150 lower bound method. 42. 46 retaining wall. 1069. 75 transverse. 1289 composite construction. 56 erection.184 traction. 32. 51 design criteria. 5960. 989 slab. 19. 97 lightweight concrete. 52.3 material. 910 base. 989 stressstrain. 1301 finite element. 34 braking. 143 stress limitation. 1089. 613. 42. 32.70. 1436 erection. 834. 38 exceptional. 1303 gap factor. 725 cellular slab. 4. 94. 389 load factor design. ~ c=:=: . 1389 spacing. 9 fatigue. 1356 plate bending. 47. 92. 131. 42 damping. 38. 945 cracking. 170 orthotropic. 412 skidding. 945 temperature effects. 202. 11 l lightweight concrete. 52. 150 steel. 745 short members.Index design crack width. 32. 912 creep column. 95 stress limitation. 945. 401 highway. 1089. 32 transient 32 3542 wind. 2. 38. 35 loss. 1289 shear. 334 load effect. 9 fatigue. 16 prestressed concrete. 132 reinforced concrete. 601. 923 torsional. 51 lap length. 834 slab. 945 column. 125. 38 exceptional load.·) L__________. 150 load. 51. 834 punching. 52. ! 11 ' 185 L· c:::: r··· . 6 detailing. 40 elastic modulus concrete. 13746 deterministic design. 41 collision. 32. 153 dead load. 989 losses. 501. 8894 deflection. 10. 27 modular ratio. 813. 137. 1301 footway loading. 32. 70. 9. 38. 95 spacing. 88 earthquake. 38. 3842 application. . 32. 110. 32. 32. 6572. 42 rectangular stress block. 32. 1025 prestressed concrete beam.J c. 3841 secondary. 83. 32. 6 . 4852. " fill. 41 superimposed dead. 148 curtailment. 501. 36. 95 skew slab natural frequency. 155 reinforcement. 24. 94. 45 precast concrete. 38. 412 combination. 125. 1423 elastic modulus. 16970 inplane forces. 42. 15 folded plate. 86101 analysis. 103 nominal load. 1715 voided slab. 1516. 48 stressstrain. 512 early thermal. 15 finite strip. 1715 shrinkage curvature. 3 differential settlement. 40 durability. 155 initial stress. 1478 dynamic loading. 34. 32. 202 grillage analysis. 99101 shear. 69. 35 loss. 61. 401 braking. 78 wall. 97 data. 4852. 33 HA. 345 differential settlement.4 footing. 878. 32. 1412 elastic modulus. 1567 flexural shear. 41 collision. 35 dispersal of load. 10910. 150 serviceability limit state. 72. 140.
1112. 558.. 634 pile cap. 48. 12. 1678 tension stiffening. 7980 prestressed concrete. 98101. 171 composite. 613 footing. 1819 of voided slab. 10. 1715 yield line theory. 34 Ubeam. 19 of discrete boxes. 10 axial. 63 stiffness. 16970 bridge. 41 verification. 12930 welding. 813. 72. 130 composite slab. 13. 9. 17. 79. 76 cracking. 7583 upper bound method. 108 concrete in tension. 75 skew. 90 flange. 26 prestressed. 11924 composite construction.. 4. 1634. 1289 effective height. 48 reinforcement. 38 stiffness. 989 stressstrain concrete. 19 of slab. 226. 49 design. 38 difference. 1112 cracking. 86. 48. 40 effective pressure. 1619 for grillage analysis. 356 wing wall. 95 shear. 125. 1678 torsion. 1623. 126. 19. 4 analysis.. 15868 combination·of range and difference. 778. 1301 inplane forces. 6575. 868. 125. 1619 torsional. 17. 4950. 659. 923 Hillerborg strip method. 1623. 9 flexural. 19. 1715 stiffness.7 slender. 5960. 1278 slenderness. 130 snow load. 923. 912. 1213. 1617. 601. 52. 61. 94. 94 top hat beam. 26. 36 serviceability limit state. 501. 11. 1819 stresses.. 2930. 1819 for plate analysis. 801 segmental construction. 13 ultimate limit state. 48. 16. 945. 1058 design criteria. 42. 40 HB. 1617. 125 wing. 368. 227 verge loading. __ . 5861. 78 equilibrium. 98101. 91. 125 retaining. 1269 reinforced. 10. 126 stresses. 845 186 yield line theory. 23. 945. 9. 1078. 15862. 9. 20. 1617.. 2731. 1619 stress limitation. 125. 32. 48 flexure. 36 range. 10 beam. 756 flanged beam. 23 torsion. 878 voided.7 ultimate limit state. 601. 61. 4851 concrete in compression. 1618 of beam and slab. 45. 16. 126 plain. 14. 912 shear. 170 membrane action. 7583 box section. 32. 5861 shear. 85 compatibility. 72. 108 interface shear. 14. 49. 8990. 38. 15868 frictional bearing restraint.. 1715 slab. 76. 279 slab bridge. 19 sbear. 40 HA. 279. 31 wing wall. 236. 24. 117 prestressing tendon. 368.. 94. 125. 7 vibration. 1259 cracking. 48 prestressing tendon. 1634. 1089. 7583 column.. 110 cracking. 801. 51. 94..40 wind load. 19 of cellular slab. 11 cellular. 53 abutment. 70.75 temperature effects. 2730 top slab. 17. 19. 8485 reinforcement. 6972. 868. 35 temperature. 46 reinforcement. 156 wheel load dispersal.. 1313 plate. 164. 7681. 70. 823 traffic lane. 46 superimposed dead load.. 128 short. 85 rectangular section. 226. 69. 34 working stress design. 130 . 51. 151'4 voided slab.. 77. 32. 12930 working lane. 97 beam. 5560. 14. bending. 20 inplane forces. 13 reinforced concrete. 94 shear. 19 wall. 1213. 9. 769. 70. 17.
1 ( :L._JI [] [J ' ~ [] L. J I .u ' I. r1 '·1 [] [] I 1.. 11 .J •.I  [I I! I ( I i ..