You are on page 1of 67

DUBAI RAPID LINK CONSORTIUM

Dubai Metro Project


RED LINE

Viaducts Design Basis Report

November 2007

WS Atkins & Partners Overseas

ATKINS

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


VIADUCT - DESIGN BASIS REPORT

W S Atkins & Partners


Overseas

Revision

Status

Draft

Draft

Working

Originated
By

M.
Badcock
M.
Badcock

Checked
By

Verified By

Issued By

A. Shaw

J. Baber

M.Badcock

A. Shaw

J. Baber

M.Badcock

M.
Badcock

A. Shaw

J. Baber

M.Badcock

For
Comment

M.
Badcock

A. Shaw

J. Baber

M.Badcock

A1-01P

Draft

G. Ziadat

A. Shaw

J. Baber

G.Ziadat

A1-02A

For
Approval

G. Ziadat

A. Shaw

J. Baber

G.Ziadat

B1-02B

Draft

M Chubb

C Hendy

M Chubb

C Hendy

G.Ziadat

J.Sundaram

J.
Sundaram

J.Sundaram

A5
A6

For
approval
For
approval

J.P.Sagar

Date Issued

Issued To

29 July
2005
5 August
2005
12
August
2005
15
August
2005
30 Nov
2005
30 Dec
2005

JT Metro
JV
JT Metro
JV

24 July
2006
7 Nov
2007

JT Metro
JV
JT Metro
JV

JT Metro
JV
JT Metro
JV
JT Metro
JV
JT Metro
JV

Verification Ref:

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 2 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Dubai Rapid Link

DUBAI RAPID LINK CONSORTIUM


DUBAI METRO PROJECT OFFICE
Contract No.: DM001
Project Title: DUBAI METRO

CDRL No.:
CDRL Title:

Document Title:

Viaduct Design Basis Report

Revision History
A6

7/11/07

Atkins update for approval

A5

21/7/06

Atkins update for approval

A3

23/6/06

Atkins update

B105B

23-05-06

Atkins internal update

A1

28-12-05

For Approval

15-8-05

First Issue

MARK

DATE

Signed below

DESCRIPTION

RAIL

Project Director

T. Uneda

Deputy Project Director

S. Sasaki

APPROVED

Signed below
CIVIL

Checked By (QA/QC Manager)


Checked By (Safety Manager)
Checked By

Checked By (Project Manager)

Checked By

Checked By (Design Manager)

Prepared By

Prepared By

DATE

DATE

RAIL SYSTEM
CONTRACTORS DOCUMENT No.:

21 July 2006
CIVIL JV

DOCUMENT No.:

DM001/E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

REVISION

A6

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

CONTENTS

1.

INTRODUCTION

2.

MATERIALS

3.

DESIGN CRITERIA

11

4.

EARTHQUAKE DESIGN

24

5.

RAIL/STRUCTURE INTERACTION

28

6.

DEFORMATIONS

30

7.

GEOTECHNICAL

32

8.

DESIGN METHODS

38

APPENDICES
A.

SCHEDULE OF DESIGN STANDARDS

43

B.

LOAD COMBINATIONS

45

C.

DESIGN RAIL VEHICLES

47

D.

RAIL CLEARANCES

49

E.

DECK SECTION AND TRACKFORM DIMENSIONS

52

F.

EQUIPMENT ON DECK

56

G.

MOMENT ROUNDING AT SUPPORTS

59

H.

DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE GRADIENT

61

I.

TYPICAL GLOBAL RAIL/STRUCTURE INTERACTION MODEL

63

J.

TYPICAL EARTHQUAKE INERTIA LOADING ANALYSIS MODEL

65

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 3 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

INTRODUCTION
1.1 This design basis report sets out the parameters and assumptions used in the design
of the viaduct structures for the Dubai Metro project.
1.2 This report is to be applied to the design of the viaducts for the Red Route and covers
the viaduct decks, piers, abutments and foundations, but excludes the trackform.
1.3 The viaduct superstructures consist of the following forms:
Simple Spans. Simply supported U-section decks constructed using post tensioned
segmental construction by the span by span method from an overhead gantry.
Twin Span Continuous. Two span continuous U-section decks constructed using post
tensioned segmental construction by the span by span method from an overhead
gantry and the stitching of both spans together to form a continuous structure.
Three Span Continuous. Three span continuous structures comprising a combination
of U-section and Box-section precast post tensioned segmental decks, erected by
crane using the balanced cantilever method.
Station spans. Three or four span continuous U-section decks constructed using post
tensioned segmental construction by the span by span method from an overhead
gantry and the stitching of both spans together to form a continuous structure
Single Track Decks. Simply supported U-section decks constructed using precast post
tensioned segments erected by the span by span method from an overhead gantry
(similar to Simple Spans)
Special Structures. Simply Supported and continuous post tensioned or reinforced
insitu concrete decks of variable geometry.
Segments are cast either using long line or short line moulds. Straight simply
supported, twin spans and Station spans with a horizontal radius below 2000m are
generally cast flat and straight using long line moulds and erected as a series of
straight chords between piers. Curved spans are cast wider than straight spans using
short line moulds to follow the horizontal curvature down to 300 m radius for twin
tracks and 250m radius for single tracks, but cast as a series of straight chords for
vertical alignment to simplify construction. 3-span continuous deck segments are cast
with a constant width to follow both the horizontal and curved alignments using short
line moulds. Minimum vertical curve radius is 1250m.
1.4 The viaduct substructures will generally comprise reinforced concrete piers with wider
pier caps to support the deck and reinforced concrete abutments. Pier heads for
simple, twin spans, station spans and some special spans are constructed using
precast thin reinforced concrete shells infilled with insitu concrete and prestressed in
stages. For single track spans and 3-span continuous internal piers pierheads are of
insitu reinforced concrete. Piers and abutments will be founded on large diameter
bored pile foundations.
1.5 This report does not consider the at grade sections on the approaches to the viaducts,
or the embankments retained by retaining walls behind the abutments. Consequently,
this report does not cover the requirements for transition structures on the approaches
to the viaducts. Measures to control differential movements and the effects of
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 4 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

variations in structural support stiffness are described in a separate Design Basis


Report (Ref. 1).
1.6 Stray current and civil earthing systems will be provided on the viaducts but these
requirements are subject to a separate Design Basis Report (Ref 2).
1.7 The Designer has obtained the Engineers agreement to use BS5400 as the design
code for the viaducts instead of AASHTO LFRD subject to the Engineer retaining the
right to refer to AASHTO general requirements. This agreement is documented in the
Engineers Comments on the Viaducts Design Basis Review Doc No DM001-E-ACWCV1-DR-DCC-310001-D.
1

MATERIALS

2.1 Concrete
The following concrete grades will be used
Structural Element

Grade (fc)
Cylinder
Strength
2

Grade (fcu)
Cube
Strength
2

36 kN/mm
2
36 kN/mm
2
38 kN/mm
36 kN/mm2
2
36 kN/mm
2
34 kN/mm

36 kN/mm
2
38 kN/mm
2
36 kN/mm
2
34 kN/mm

Superstructures
Precast - 3 Span
Precast 44/44 straight
Precast 44/44 curved
Precast 36m curved
Precast Type 1 station deck
Precast Other
Insitu continuity stitches:
Precast 44/44 straight
Precast 44/44 curved
Type 1 station deck
Insitu Structures

48 N/mm
2
48 N/mm
2
56 N/mm
48 N/mm2
2
48 N/mm
2
40 N/mm

60 N/mm
2
60 N/mm
2
70 N/mm
60 N/mm2
2
60 N/mm
2
50 N/mm

60 N/mm
2
70 N/mm
2
60 N/mm
2
50 N/mm

Piercaps and Bearing Plinths


Pier Columns (3-span internal
piers)
Other Pier Columns
Abutment walls, Bases and Pile
Caps

40 N/mm

50 N/mm

40 N/mm

50 N/mm

32 N/mm

40 N/mm

32 N/mm

Piles

48 N/mm
2
56 N/mm
2
48 N/mm
2
40 N/mm

32 N/mm *

E (short term)
Modulus of Elasticity
2

34 kN/mm

34 kN/mm

31 kN/mm

40 N/mm

31 kN/mm

31 kN/mm

40N/mm *

Table 2.1 Concrete strengths


* Allowance has been made for the loss of strength due to placement of the concrete under
2
drilling fluid. Design strength, fcu of 50 and 40 N/mm is the characteristic strength before and after
placement respectively.
The long term modulus of elasticity shall be taken as half the short term modulus where
appropriate.
Where required by design constraints a higher concrete grade may be used. The higher grade
shall be recorded in the design calculations and final drawings.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 5 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Unit weight of reinforced concrete

See Section 3.2

Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

10.8 x 10 / C

-6

The following table provides the design crack widths and nominal covers to be used in the
Design and specified for construction. The nominal design crack widths and nominal design cover
values specified are based on BS5400 Pt.4 Tables 1 and 13 respectively:

Structural
Element

Environment

Nominal Design
Crack width

Superstructures
Precast - 3 Span
Precast Other
Insitu Structures
Piercaps and
Bearing Plinths
Pier Columns
Pier Bases and
Pile Caps
Piles

Nom.
Specified
Cover

Nominal
Design
Cover

Considered for all


these decks as
Severe to Very
Severe
Severe to Very
Severe
Severe to Very
Severe
Severe

0.20 mm
0.20 mm
0.20 mm

40 mm
40 mm
50 mm

35 mm
35 mm
35 mm

0.20 mm

50 mm

35 mm

0.20 mm

50 mm

40 mm

0.20 mm

100 mm

45 mm

Severe

0.20mm

125 mm

45 mm

Table 2.2 Design crack widths and concrete cover


The environment for the piers and abutment walls above the maximum ground water
level, along with all the above ground concrete, including the decks, are assumed to be
an intermediate classification between a severe and very severe environment. The
benefits of the concrete coating system will be ignored in the design. A tanking system
will be applied to the pile cap below ground level in order to provide added protection.
This will be in addition to the cover requirements given above.

The pier and abutment bases, are to be waterproofed with a proprietary waterproofing
system For the piles the concrete will be of a low permeability C50 concrete mix
approved by the Engineer. In addition 125mm cover is specified throughout its length and
a severe environment is assumed for crack width and nominal design cover calculation.
Up to 3 m above ground level (or top of column) columns shall also be coated with a
sprayed water proofing membrane to minimise evaporation of water from exposed
concrete surface and upward draw of saline water from below ground.

This clarifies the approach to be taken with Tables 1 and 13 of BS 5400 Part 4.
It is proposed to use the recommendations of the Concrete Society Technical Report
TR49, Design for High Strength Concrete to allow for the increased concrete strength
2

above the 40 N/mm limit adopted in some clauses of BS 5400 Part 4. This makes the
best use of the available concrete capacity.
Exposed concrete surfaces (decks, pier and abutment stems) shall be treated with an
elastomeric coating system, with a weather resistant top surface and a penetrating
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 6 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

primer. The coating shall provide in-depth protection against corrosion associated with
the ingress of chloride and sulphate ions, carbon dioxide and other air-borne acid gasses,
and shall have the ability to allow water vapour to escape from the surface. The coating
will be non-slip over the walkway on top of the deck edge beams.

2.2

Steel Reinforcement
Hot rolled reinforcement to BS 4449: 1997 will be specified with the following properties:
Type

Designation

Elastic Modulus
Characteristic
Strength

Mild Steel

250 N/mm2

200 kN/mm2

High Yield Deformed Type 2

460 N/mm2

200 kN/mm2

Table 2.3 Reinforcement types


2.3

Prestressing Steel
The prestressing steel shall be ASTM A416-85 seven-wire strand, relaxation class 2.
Ducts to be galvanised steel.
The requirements for the temporary prestressing applied to the segmental joints during
the
curing of the epoxy glue will be determined by the viaduct superstructure subcontractor.
The following parameters will be used in the design of the permanent prestressing:
Nominal diameter of strand

15.24 mm

Nominal cross-sectional area of strand

140 mm

Ultimate tensile strength of strand

1860 N/mm

Minimum Breaking Load of strand

260.7 KN

Elastic modulus (circa)

195,000 N/mm

Coefficient of friction ()

0.20

Wobble coefficient (k)*

0.0010 /m

Wedge draw-in at anchorage

6 mm (max.)

Relaxation (after 1000hr at 20C & 70% of breaking load)

2.5 %

* The tendon support spacing shall be consistent with the assumed design
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 7 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

wobble factor.
The force in the prestressing tendons at the anchorage immediately prior to lock-off shall
be limited to 75% of the guaranteed ultimate tensile strength (GUTS). The jacking force
is to account for any jack losses.
Relaxation losses will be adjusted for 28C and the % of breaking load after lock-off.
None of the prestress tendons will be designed to be replaceable.
All the ducts will be grouted with cementitous grout.

2.4

Assumed Prestressing System Dimensions


Tendon
Size

No
Strands

4T15

12T15

12

13T15
18T15
19T15
22T15

13
18
19
22

Application

3 Span Deck
(transverse)
Simple, Single
Track, Special , 2
Span and 3 Span
Decks
3 Span Decks
3 Span Decks
Pier Crossheads
Pier Crossheads

Duct Diameter
Internal/External
45/50 mm

Minimum
Breaking
Load
1043 kN

Anchorage
Bearing Size
(mm)
150 x 150

80/87 mm

3128 kN

250 x 250

95/102 mm
100/107mm
100/107mm
100/107mm

3389 KN
4693 kN
4953 kN
5735 kN

310 x 310
310 x 310
310 x 310
310 x 310

Table 2.4 Prestressing system details


2.5

Bearings
The bearings supporting the viaduct superstructures will be either pot or elastomeric
bearings. The continuous span structures will use only sliding pot bearings.
Elastomeric bearings will be in accordance with BS 5400 Part 9, 1983 and the following
shear modulus values shall be provided:
2

G = 0.9 N/mm for static conditions (permanent loads)


2

G = 1.8 N/mm for short term loading conditions (live and earthquake loads)
The elastomer shall not have a nominal hardness value greater than 60.
Where transverse forces on elastomeric bearings exceed 10% of the vertical load, as is
expected in all cases, the bearings shall be fitted with an interfacing chequered plate to
provide a minimum coefficient of friction of 0.5 between mating surfaces. This
attachment shall be capable of carrying the entire transverse load.
Pot bearings will be provided with a PTFE sliding surface and will be designed and
specified in accordance with BS 5400 Part 9, 1983. The corrosion protection system
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 8 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

shall be in accordance with the Contract Specification.


All bearings shall provide electrical isolation between the deck and substructure.

2.6

Expansion Joints
No cover plate will be provided across the gap between decks, but a galvanised
chequered cover plate will be provided across the gap in the emergency walkways. This
plate will be fixed on one side and will not be recessed into the concrete surface but will
be detailed to avoid becoming a tripping hazard to passengers and maintenance
personnel.

2.7

Segmental Joints
The joints between the match cast precast concrete deck segments shall be formed with
shear and location keys during precasting and filled using an appropriate epoxy glue
during erection.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 9 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

3
3.1

ATKINS

DESIGN CRITERIA
Design Standards
The design will be carried out in accordance with the technical standards listed in
Appendix A. The design will be based on BS 5400 and the associated British Standards,
with additional International Standards introduced to supplement the scope in such areas
as earthquake loading and rail dynamic factors.
The load combinations used in the design are given in Section 3.23 and provided in
Appendix B.

3.2

Dead Loading (DL)


Dead loads will include the weights of the materials and parts of the structure that are
structural and permanent in nature. The following unit weights of materials will be
assumed:
Material
Concrete
Steel

Description
Reinforced concrete
Mass concrete
Structural, Prestressed and
Ordinary Reinforcement

Characteristic Density (kN/m3)


24.5
22.0
77.0

Table 3.1 Dead loads

3.3

Superimposed Dead Loading (SDL)


Superimposed dead loads include all the weights of materials on the structure that are
not structural elements but are permanent. The major part of the superimposed dead
loading is the weight of the trackform plinths. Details can be seen in Appendix E. The
remainder of the loading is the equipment on the deck, and details of these are provided
in Appendix F. The allowance per m run of deck is as follows for each deck type:

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 10 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


Description

ATKINS

Mainline (Twin
Track) Load
kN / m run / deck
23.0
27.9
2.9
1.0
5.9
0.6
1.2
0.4

Mainline (Single
Track) Load
kN / m run / deck
16.9
15.4
1.5
0.5
2.9
0.6
0.3

Mainline
(Turnout) Load
kN / m run / deck
48.0
3.9
1.0
5.9
0.6
0.5

Trackform plinths (Straight)+


Trackform plinths (Canted)+
Running rails and fixings
Third rail, supports & fixings
Cables trays and cables
Handrails
Soffit lighting*
Miscellaneous equipment
Total (Straight Track to
35.0
17.3
59.9
R=2000m)+
Total (Canted Track to
39.9
19.6
R=250m)+
* Soffit lighting only applies to simple and 2 span continuous twin track decks for 6.23 km
of twin track viaduct, the location of which is yet to be agreed with the Client.
+ For simple twindeck spans additional trackform weights shall be added to account for
camber and alignment vertical curvature where the deck is precast on flat long-line beds
as follows (Maximum vertical curvature of R=1250m is assumed until span arrangements
and alignment are fixed) :
Table 3.2 Superimposed dead loading

The allowance per m run of deck for station structure are:

Description

T1 & T2 Stations
(Twin Track) Load

T3 Stations
(Single Track
Middle ) Load

T3 Stations
(Single Track Side) Load

kN / m run / deck

kN / m run / deck

kN / m run / deck

Trackform plinths (Straight)

30.8

16.9

16.9

Platform Finishes

14.5

14.8

11.2

Platform Screen Doors

5.0

5.0

2.5

Running rails and fixings

2.9

1.5

1.5

Third rail, supports , fixings

1.0

0.5

0.5

Cables trays and cables

8.0

4.0

4.0

Handrails

0.75

0.75

0.75

Soffit lighting / Cladding

2.0

1.0

1.0

Miscellaneous equipment

2.0

1.0

1.0

Total

67.0

44.0

38.0

Table 3.3 Superimposed dead loading on viaduct deck for overground stations
(excluding concourse level loads in Type 2 stations)
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 11 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Description
Additional Trackform
Average Weight due
to Camber
Additional Trackform
Average Weight due
to Vertical Curvature
Maximum (not
additive)

ATKINS

28m Span

32m Span

36m Span

44m Span

kN / m run / deck
0.3

kN / m run / deck
0.4

kN / m run / deck
0.8

kN / m run / deck
1.2

3.0

3.9

5.0

12.2

3.0

3.9

5.0

12.2

Table 3.4 Additional trackform weights for Simple twintrack decks precast
on flat long line beds.
Description
Additional Trackform
Average Weight due
to Camber
Maximum (not
additive)

kN / m run / deck
0.38

kN / m run / deck
0.5

kN / m run / deck
1.0

kN / m run / deck
-

0.38

0.5

1.0

Table 3.5 Additional trackform weights for Station span twintrack decks precast
on flat long line beds.

Description
Additional Trackform
Average Weight due
to Camber
Additional Trackform
Average Weight due
to Vertical Curvature
Maximum (not
additive)

kN / m run / deck
0.15

kN / m run / deck
0.2

kN / m run / deck
0.4

kN / m run / deck
0.6

1.5

1.95

2.5

6.1

1.5

1.95

2.5

6.1

Table 3.6 Additional trackform weights for Simple single-track decks precast
on flat long line beds.

3.4

Vertical Train Loading (VTL)


The Red Route is to operate with 5 car trains from the outset. However, the Green Line
will start to operate with 3 car trains, which will be upgraded to 4 then 5 car trains as
patronage increases.
The variable sized trains operating on the Green Route will use the Red Route from
Union Square to the Main Depot. There is also the possibility that the Green Line trains

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 12 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

may use the remainder of the Red Route to the small depot at the south end of the
scheme. It is therefore considered necessary to design the whole of the Red Route for 3,
4 and 5 car trains.
Details of the maximum axle loads and spacing for the various train configurations
specific to this scheme are given in Appendix C. The choice of vehicle and position of
the vehicle will be chosen to produce the most adverse effect on the structure. The
assumed axle load for all train axles is 140 kN. This is based on the AW4 load case of
gross vehicle weight including the maximum passenger capacity.
The loading from maintenance vehicles and low loaders carrying equipment required
along the route will not be of a magnitude to be critical for the design.
3.5

Rail Vehicle Dynamic Impact Factor (DIF)


The American Concrete Institute technical design standard ACI 358.1R-92, Analysis and
Design of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Guideway Structures (Chapter 3 Loads, pg. 358. 1R-15), will be used for determination the dynamic factors to be applied
to the vertical train loading for longitudinal design, except for the simply supported spans
where they are to be derived by dynamic analyses for the respective span lengths. As
stated in the code Cl.3.3.1.2 the DIF will not be applied to design of viaduct foundations.
The maximum operating speed of the rolling stock will be taken as 90 kph and the Design
Speed shall be taken as 100 kph.
For transverse design, the recommendations of BS 5400 Part 2 Cl 8.2.3.2 for RL Loading
will be applied. This gives a dynamic factor of 1.2, which needs to be increased to 1.4 for
the design of the floor slab supporting just a single track. These values are to be verified
using a Finite Element Analysis.

3.6

Longitudinal Rail Forces (braking and traction) (LF)


The longitudinal rail forces at rail level are applied parallel with the tracks at the axle
locations in accordance with the recommendations of BS 5400 Part 2
The positions of the driving/braking axles are given in Appendix C. The Traction force
per axle is 27.5 kN and Braking force per axle is 20.0 kN, based on loads supplied by
the DURL Rail System Designer. ( Note: MHI to provide a basis for these figures)
For twin tracked decks carrying traffic in opposite directions, consideration should be
given to braking forces from one train and traction forces from another, acting
simultaneously to maximise the longitudinal loading on a deck. Additionally
consideration should be given to braking or traction acting in opposite directions to
produce rotational effects. Allowance is also made for one train pushing or pulling a
broken down train.

3.7

Centrifugal Forces (CF)


When the track is curved, centrifugal load will be considered. The centrifugal force
acting radially 1.8m above rail level will be determined in accordance with Cl 8.2.9 of BS
5400 Part 2, assuming a maximum design speed of 100 kph, reducing with cant and a
distributed load of 33 KN/m based on actual train loading. For calculation of f value the
statement for L greater than 2.88m and vt less than 120km/h will be amended to for L
greater than 2.88m and vt greater than 120km/h as corrected in BD37/01.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 13 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Where there are twin tracks, centrifugal loading should be considered from rolling stock
on both tracks.
For sections of track with radius in plan less than 400 m, the design speed for calculation
of centrifugal forces shall be reduced as follows:
Plan radius 400 m, design speed = 100 kph
Plan radius = 350 m, design speed = 90 kph
Plan radius = 300 m, design speed = 80 kph
Speeds for intermediate radii may be interpolated.
3.8

Nosing (Hunting Forces) (NF)


The nosing load shall be determined in accordance with Cl 8.2.8 of BS 5400 Part 2 for
RL Loading. A single 100 kN nominal load is required to be taken horizontally at rail
level at right angles in either direction to the track at a point to cause the most severe
effect.
For multi track decks only one load is required to be applied.

3.9

Lurching (LU)
Lurching effects should be determined in accordance with Cl 8.2.7 of BS 5400 Part 2 for
RL Loading. Lurching results from temporary transfer of part of the railway vertical live
loads from one rail to another, the total track load remaining unaltered.
To account for lurching effects on single and two track structures, 0.56 of the vertical
train load should be considered as acting on one rail concurrently with 0.44 of the
vertical train load on the other rail.
This redistribution of load need only be considered on one track where members
support two tracks. This variation in distribution of the vertical train loads is only
considered for local transverse design of the track support element. This variation does
not require consideration in the longitudinal direction.
Lurching can be ignored for elements supporting more than two tracks. It may also not
be required for elements supporting two tracks providing that a Finite Element Analysis
is carried out to demonstrate the actual transverse behaviour.

3.10 Derailment Loading (DF)


The derailment containment is generally provided by the trackform support plinths and
the walkway upstand, which restrain the train transversely and prevent it from derailing
off the tracks. No load cases will be considered therefore for a train displaced
transversely off the track as this displacement will be minimal and the stability of the
deck is not an issue.
The design of the trackform plinths falls outside the scope of this report, as the works
are part of the trackwork, rather than structure. Account will be taken of the transfer of
these loads from the trackform into the structure and down through to the supports, pier
and foundations.
The derailment loading in BS 5400 Part 2 applies a series of displaced vertical loads,
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 14 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

but no horizontal loads. In our situation the train vehicles will be held in position by the
track plinths and by the deck upstands. Therefore, this loading is not applicable as the
displacements proposed are not possible and the derailment effect is only the horizontal
load component caused by the tilting of the train.
Consequently, it is proposed to use the derailment loading from the American Concrete
Institute technical design standard ACI 358.1R-92, Analysis and Design of Reinforced
and Prestressed-Concrete Guideway Structures. The loading from Cl 3.5.2 of ACI 358
shall be applied to the deck upstands.
The horizontal derailment load applied to the deck upstands will be taken as 50% of the
maximum car weight applied to a 5m length of deck at axle level. For the most heavily
loaded car which has 4 axles of 140 kN each, this amounts to a nominal force of 280 kN
applied over a 5m length.
The maximum eccentricity of a derailed train from the tracks will be assumed to be
250mm and this should be considered in conjunction with the horizontal derailment load.
3.11

Walkway and Platform Loading (WL)


In the Station viaducts Platform loading of 5kN/m2, over 3m width per web shall be
considered.
2

A load of 4 kN/m shall be applied on the upper surface of the deck upstands (emergency
walkways) within the handrails. As this is an emergency condition of a broken down
train, this will only be considered in conjunction with a static unloaded train (no
passengers and no dynamic impact factor) located on the track adjacent to the loaded
emergency walkway. Rail loadings on any remaining tracks will be unaltered.
For loaded lengths greater than 30m the pedestrian loading will be reduced in
accordance with Cl 7.1.1 and 7.2.1 of BS 5400 Part 2.
Loads on the deck upstands which constitute part of the station platforms will include the
loads from the Platform Screen Doors, accounting for pressure from crowd, and air
pressure from ventilation, air conditioning and the passing trains.
3.12

Temperature (TC, TD)


The temperature range from the records of recording station No 41194 at Dubai
International Airport for the period of 1984 to 2001 shows a maximum recorded range of
7.4C to 47.5C.
Provisions shall be made for stresses and movements resulting from uniform temperature
expansion / contraction. A temperature rise of +43C and a temperature fall of -32C shall
be considered.
A positive temperature gradient of 20C and a reverse temperature difference of 10C
shall be considered between the top and bottom surfaces of the deck for both the USection and Box-girder decks, as shown in Appendix H. Only the effects of the moment
generated by this gradient will be considered, the axial effects will be determined by the
temperature changes mentioned above. Temperature gradient effects shall only be
considered at the seviceability state under load combination 3 with a partial safety factor

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 15 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

of 0.6, as shown in Appendix B.


During construction, a positive gradient of 15C and a reverse temperature difference of
7.5C shall be considered to reflect the short term nature of the construction condition.
The positive temperature gradient cannot co-exist with the maximum temperature rise
and the reverse temperature gradient cannot occur with the maximum temperature fall
and these combinations shall not be considered.
In the stations, the decks are enclosed by the station structures and therefore will not be
subjected to the above temperature gradients in the operating condition after construction
of the stations has been completed.
As the effects of peak rise and fall temperatures are a long term phenomenon, an elastic
modulus of 75% of the short elastic modulus will be used for the temperature rise and fall
analysis. The short term elastic modulus will be used for the temperature gradients.
3.13

Bearing Friction (BF)


The maximum coefficient of friction for the sliding pot bearings shall be taken as 5% of
the applied permanent vertical load. When considering the differential friction from
bearings either side of fixed pier(s) the friction on one side will be taken as 5% and on the
other side 2.5%. These values will be confirmed upon availability of test data from the
chosen bearing supplier / manufacturer. This assumes that both bearings are replaced at
the same time.
The minimum friction shall be taken as 0.5%.

3.14

Differential Settlement (DS)


The design longitudinal differential settlement between any adjacent piers will be:

between piled foundations 5mm


between any piers with spread foundations 15mm
between a pier with a piled foundation and a pier with spread foundation 20mm.

These values will be confirmed based on the findings of the Ground Investigation and
the actual viaduct loading.
Note it is generally not proposed to use spread foundations on any continuous structures.
Differential settlements are not considered in the design of any simply supported
structures. The short term settlement of the pad foundations from the loading during
construction is not considered as it will be built out in the simple spans.
In the transverse direction, a construction tolerance of 2mm will be assumed between the
bearings on either side of the pier cap for the U- section decks. A differential settlement
of 1mm will be considered in the transverse direction post construction, for the rail
alignment.
Combinations of differential settlement movements shall be considered on one or more
piers to produce the most adverse effect on the deck and piers.
Differential settlements between the stations and viaduct shall be established based on
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 16 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

serviceability requirements and the capacity of the interface movement joints.


Differential settlement is a long term effect and a long term elastic modulus will be used
in the design, equal to half the short term modulus.
3.15

Wind Loading (WL)


The wind loading shall be determined in accordance with BS 5400 Part 2 1978 assuming
a mean hourly wind speed of 30 m/s. This corresponds to a 3 second gust speed of
45m/sec on the standard span decks. Wind loads shall be determined on the deck, piers
and rail vehicle. In addition, the wind loading on the Type 2 Stations will be carried by the
shared substructure. Maximum wind load to be applied to the train travelling on the deck
is to be based on a maximum gust speed of 115km/hr.
The height of the rail vehicle is assumed to be 3.84m above the rail level, with the lower
1m masked by the deck. For wind with Live Load, the train design has been based on a
maximum operating gust wind speed of 32 m/s. This value shall be adopted in the design
for a loaded structure.
Wind loading shall be applied in the transverse (PT), longitudinal (PL) and vertical (PV)
directions in the following combinations:
PT alone
PT in combination with PV
PL alone
0.5PT in combination with PL 0.5PV
In determining the maximum and minimum wind gust speeds the following values will be
adopted:
K1, coefficient for return period = 1.0, for a return period of 120 years and K1 =
0.85 for the reduced return period applicable to the construction period
K2, hourly speed factor is to be taken from Table 2 of BS5400 Part 2.
S1, funnelling factor = 1.0
S2, gust factor to be taken from Table 2.
The deck will be assumed to of the single box or slab, with sloping sides type as shown in
Figure 3 of BS 5400 Part 2.

3.16

Earthquake Loading (EL)


Earthquake loading is not included in BS 5400, so reference is made to AASHTO LRFD
for Seismic Loading. Refer to Section 4 of this report for further information.
Seismic loading will not be considered during construction.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 17 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

3.17

ATKINS

Collision Loads from Road Vehicles (CL)


Collision of road vehicles with the deck and the piers will be considered in accordance
with the UK Highways Agency technical document BD 60/04, The Design of Highway
Bridges for Vehicle Collision Loads.
Bridge supports within the central reservation or a verge/footway adjacent to a highway
shall be designed for collision loads.
Bridge supports within 4.5m of the edge of a major carriageway will be designed for
impact loading as follows:

Load normal to the


adjacent carriageway

Load parallel to the


adjacent carriageway

Main load
component
500 kN

Residual
load
component

250 kN

1000 kN

500 kN

Point of application to the


Pier
At the most severe point
between 0.75m and 1.5m
above the adjacent
carriageway or ground level
At the most severe point
between 1m and 3m above
the adjacent carriageway or
ground level

Table 3.7 Collision forces for piers within 4.5m of a carriageway


Bridge supports greater than 4.5m from the edge of a major carriageway with a safety
fence, or adjacent to a minor road will be designed for the requirements of BS 5400 Part
2 Cl 6.9, as follows:
Load normal to the
adjacent carriageway

Load parallel to the


adjacent carriageway

Point of application to the


Pier

Main load
component

150 kN

50 kN

0.75m above the adjacent


carriageway or ground level

Residual
load
component

100 kN

100 kN

3m above the adjacent


carriageway or ground level

Table 3.8 Collision forces for piers more than 4.5m from a carriageway
The piers will be capable of resisting the main and residual load components acting
simultaneously. Loads normal to the carriageway are to be considered separately from
loads parallel to the carriageway.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 18 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

For decks (and pier caps) with headroom less than 0.4m above the minimum headroom
requirement, vehicle collision loads on the superstructure will be considered. The
headroom is measured over the carriageway and adjacent verges and should include
allowance for any sag deflection of the structure, as given below:

Highway

Minimum Headroom
For Roads crossing above

Minimum Headroom below


which Collision Loads applied

Sheikh Zayed Road

6.0 m

6.4 m

Others

5.5 m

5.9 m

Table 3.9 Deck headroom clearance requirements.


Vehicle Collision Loads on the superstructure and pier caps are set out below:

Table 3.10 Deck collision loads if clearance is less than 0.40 m than minimum
requirement
The structure will be checked to ensure adequate capacity at the ultimate limit state only
for a likely and reasonable load path to transfer the impact loads to the bearings,
supports and foundations, with consideration of each structural element in the load path.
For elastomeric bearings the effects due to collision loads will be considered at the
serviceability limit state with a load factor of 1.0.
3.18

Gantry, Transporter, Traveller and Construction Loading (GL)


The majority of the simply supported decks and two-span continuous decks are to be
constructed by overhead gantry. The temporary loading from the various gantries to be
used on the scheme will be defined by the subcontractors appointed to undertake the
deck construction. These loads will include the effects of the most severe loading
configuration carrying deck precast elements and the unloaded case when the gantry is
subject to high winds. These gantries also travel over the 3-span continuous decks in
some locations and their loads need to be considered in the design. 3- span continuous
bridges are all erected in balanced cantilever. Some spans however are erected using a
deck-mounted mobile traveller with a maximum weight of 40 tonnes. Its loads also need
to be considered in these bridge designs. Segments are mostly delivered at ground level
but in some location where access is difficult some segments are delivered over the deck
using special transporters. These loads and their effects on permanent works need to be
checked. When there are no specific construction loads, a load of 0.5 kN/m is considered
2
on the 3-span balanced cantilever and 1.25 kN/m has been considered for all the other
precast Viaducts.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 19 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

3.19

ATKINS

Shrinkage and Creep Effects (SE, CE)


Shrinkage and Creep effects will be calculated in accordance with the recommendations
of the FIP-CEB 1990 Model Code and shall be considered as permanent load effects.
The average relative humidity ratio will be taken as 70% and average annual mean
temperature as 28C.
Shrinkage and creep factors will be calculated for individual structural elements with
account taken of the member thickness, the age of the concrete when loaded and the
nature and timing of the applied loading.
The reinforced trackform plinths will be effectively discontinuous. Therefore the effects of
differential shrinkage and creep of stress into these plinths will not be considered.

3.20

Bearing Replacement (BR)


The viaducts will be checked for the effects of the deck being jacked to facilitate the
replacement of the bearings. Consideration will be given to the effects of the change in
the support positions due to the transfer of loads to the jacks, and for the displacements
to the continuous structures. The railway shall remain operational during the bearing
replacement.
The deck(s) at a pier will be jacked together to ensure there is no twist placed into the
deck and for a pier with a deck expansion joint, to prevent any adverse effects to the
continuous welded rail which spans the joint. The assumed maximum amount required
to jack each bearing type is:
For replacement of a pot bearing
For replacement of an elastomeric bearing

5mm
10mm

During the jacking operations considerations will be given to any changes to the
articulation. Temporary transverse and longitudinal restraint may be required.
3.21

Buffer Loading
At the end of the viaduct beyond Rashidiya Station buffers will be provided at the end of
the tracks.
The maximum horizontal load to be accommodated by the buffer stop is 960kN applied at
800mm above the top of rail level.

3.22

Earth Pressure
For the design of the abutments the earth pressure coefficients will be determined once
the fill material to be used is known. See also Section 7.6 for seismic earth pressures.

3.23

Load Combinations
For the load combinations for both the serviceability and ultimate limit states refer to

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 20 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Appendix B. Moments, shears, axial loads derived from the design loads are to be
multiplied by a further load factor f3 to obtain the design load effects. f3 values will be
taken as 1.0 for the serviceability limit state and 1.1 for the ultimate limit state.
For column design, when calculating the beneficial effect of axial load as a coexistent
effect, f3 at ultimate limit state shall be taken as 1.0.
3.24

Drainage
The drainage system will accommodate a rainfall rate of 20mm/hr. A minimum velocity of
0.6 m/s will be assumed.

3.25

Clearances
The separation of the two tracks is constant at 3.320m and the distance from the
centreline of the alignment to the centrelines of the tracks is a constant 1.660m, where
the alignment is straight or curved down to a radius greater than 2000m. Where the
alignment is curved between horizontal radii of 250m to 2000m these dimensions are
3.3525m and 1.6763m respectively. The only variations occur at Rashidiya and Nakheel
Stations where the twin track layout is replaced by a more complicated multi track layout.
The internal clearance widths between the inside faces of the deck upstands (platform
edge in stations) are as follows:
Location

Straight Track
(R>2000m)

Curved Track
(R=250-2000m)

Outside Station

6.780m

7.100m

Inside Station

6.330m

Not applicable

Table 3.11 Internal dimensions between deck upstands.


On the approaches to the stations, transitions will be required to accommodate the
variation in upstand separation. Also transitions are required to accommodate the
variations between straight and curved sections of track.
Details of the clearance requirements can be seen in Appendix D.
It is possible that additional internal width will be required at the crossover positions. The
final required clearance width has yet to be determined.
3.26

Deck Profile
The 2,040mm height of the Illustrative Design will be retained along with the outer profile
to the deck. A 1 in 100 fall will be maintained on the top surface of the deck upstands
outside stations. The height of the rail level (lower rail on radius) will be a minimum of
400mm above the crown of the deck floor slab on the viaduct centreline and the inside
edge of the deck upstands will be 1095mm above rail level. For simple and twin span
decks the deck will be cast and erected at constant gradients over vertically curved
sections of the alignment. The deck level will be lowered to ensure a minimum trackform
depth of 400mm throughout. The lowering of the deck level on these span types shall be

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 21 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

taken into account in setting out to see that adequate clearance is provided to obstacles
below rail viaduct.
3.27

Fire Resistance
The viaduct components within the station buildings will be designed to have a design
resistance period of 2 hours. This will include both the deck and the substructure.

3.28

Piling Tolerances
The additional load effects from the most severe application of the pile tolerances will be
allowed for in the design. The following maximum tolerances for the bored piles will be
allowed for in the design:
Positional tolerance 75mm (at pile head level)
Verticality tolerance 1 in 100
The additional load effects are particularly significant with the mono-pile foundation
solution, with the application of an additional bending moment.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 22 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


4

EARTHQUAKE DESIGN

4.1

Site Classification

ATKINS

The Particular Design Specification states that viaduct earthquake design shall be carried
out in accordance with AASHTO LRFD. The site is classed as Zone 2 with an
acceleration coefficient (A) of 0.12. The structures shall be considered as essential
bridges, as defined in AASHTO LRFD Article 3.10.3. A project wide site-specific seismic
hazard assessment is currently being carried out and the seismic acceleration coefficient
obtained from this will be utilised in design, on approval by the Engineer.
The Site Coefficients shall be determined in accordance with AASHTO LFRD Article
3.10.5 on the basis of the relevant geological profile and geotechnical data for the
foundations. Based on the available data it is anticipated that, in general, Soil Profile
Types I or II will be appropriate for the majority of the route. The Site Coefficients for Soil
Profile Type I and II are 1.0 and 1.2 respectively.
4.2

Loading

4.2.1

Inertia Loading
Seismic forces arising from inertial effects on the viaduct structures will be derived in
accordance with AASHTO LRFD Articles 3.10, 4.7.4.1 and 4.7.4.3.
In general, the single mode elastic method will be used and the fundamental period of
vibration will be determined by modeling individual piers using the computer program
LUSAS, or similar. An example of a typical model is included in Appendix J. The analysis
will model the pile supports either with equivalent cantilevers or complete piles with soil
springs.
Equivalent cantilevers will be based on analysing the soil/structure interaction using the
computer software REPUTE or similar. As the response may be non-linear, initial runs
will be based on assumed seismic pile forces and if these are exceeded it may be
necessary to modify the soil stiffnesses and equivalent cantilever properties.
The pile/soil springs analysis will be based on linear elastic springs to representing the
restraint of the soil. On completion of the analysis it will be necessary to check the
maximum horizontal earth pressures and if they exceed the passive limit then the springs
will be adjusted accordingly.
The mass of the piles will be neglected in the analysis as the soil liquification depths are
expected to be small and the results will then be slightly conservative.
For pile groups, the soil spring properties will take account of the shielding effect on the
horizontal earth pressures between the piles using the factors given in DIN 4014, Cl
7.4.3.
Further information on pile modeling is included in the Geotechnical Section.
The fundamental period will be used to obtain the Elastic Seismic Response Coefficient,
Csm, from AASHTO LFRD Equation 3.10.6.1-1:

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 23 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

C sm =

ATKINS

1.2AS
2.5A
Tm2 / 3

where:
th

Tm = period of vibration of the m mode (sec).


A = acceleration coefficient specified in Section 7.5.1 below.
S = site coefficient specified in Section 7.5.1 below.
The horizontal seismic design forces will be determined from the product of the Elastic
Seismic Response Coefficient, Csm and the equivalent mass of the structure. This will
include the deck, pier crosshead, pier and pile cap self weights and the superimposed
dead loading (SDL), specified in Section 3.3. In addition live loading from a single train of
33 kN/m, which represents the average axle loading given in Appendix C, will also be
included. Horizontal seismic design forces will be considered to be acting at the centroid
of each individual mass.
Elastic Seismic Design Forces, calculated as described above, will be divided by the
following response factors, R, for the respective elements. This is based on AASHTO
LRFD Table 3.10.7.1-1 and Article 3.10.9.3.
Substructure Element
Pier Crosshead
Pier
Pile Caps and Piles

R
2.0
2.0
1.0

Table 4.1 Seismic Response Factors


These inertial seismic design forces will be considered in both the longitudinal and
transverse axis of the viaduct structure as appropriate. The following two inertial load
cases will be considered in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Article 3.10.8.
Load Case
Load Case 1
Load Case 2

Applied Forces
1.0FL + 0.3FT
0.3FL + 1.0FT

Table 4.2 Seismic load combinations


where:
FL = member forces due to an earthquake in the direction of the longitudinal axis
of the viaduct
FT = member forces due to an earthquake in the direction of the transverse axis
of the viaduct
Generally, the plastic capacity of the base of a pier multiplied by an overstrength factor of
1.3 will be used to design the foundations, in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Article
3.10.9.4.3f. This approach is likely to result in foundation design forces, which are lower
than the Elastic Seismic Design Forces and will provide a more economical design.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 24 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Cracked sections will be assumed within the plastic zone at the base of the pier column.
Therefore the stiffness of the pier section is taken as EI/2 which has the effect of
practically reducing the Csm value by up to 10%.
In order to prevent a brittle shear failure, the piers will be designed for a shear force that
corresponds to the overstrength moment of resistance in the plastic hinge zone at the
base of the piers. To ensure that the plastic hinge zone is confined to the base of the pier,
the flexural design of the pier above the plastic hinge will be based on bending moments
which are consistent with the overstrength moment of resistance in the plastic hinge zone
and the corresponding overstrength shear force.

Superstructure/Pier connection forces will be based on the lesser of the Elastic Seismic
Design Forces divided by a response factor, R of 1.0 or the shear force that corresponds
with the overstrength moment of resistance in the plastic hinge zone at the base of the
pier.
4.2.2

Kinematic Loading
There is no requirement in AASHTO Seismic zone 2 to consider soil seismic interaction
as these are deemed to be covered by the Zone 2 design requirements.
Liquefaction of soil strata under seismic events is to be allowed for, as discussed in
Section 7.6.2.

4.3

Reinforcement Detailing

4.3.1

General
Reinforcement detailing shall generally be in accordance with the requirements of BS
5400. However special requirements for seismic detailing will be derived from AASHTO
LRFD.

4.3.2

Seismic Detailing
For bridges in Zone 2, the requirements of AASHTO LRFD Article 5.10.11.3 will apply.
In particular there is a need to ensure that piers have some ductility capacity. This will
be achieved by the provision of adequate transverse reinforcement in the potential
plastic hinge zones, to prevent buckling of the longitudinal reinforcement and to provide
confinement to the concrete core. It is considered that potential plastic hinge zones will
be confined to the base of piers and top of piles. Transverse reinforcement for
confinement will extend into the pile cap in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Article
5.10.11.4.3.
Detailing of laps and anchorages to the confining transverse reinforcement will make
allowance for loss of concrete cover. Spiral reinforcement shall only be spliced in the
potential plastic hinge zones at the base of piers by fully welded splices or by fullmechanical connections. Hoop reinforcement or cross-ties shall be anchored by seismic
hooks, with the extension of the hooks located within the concrete core, as defined in
AASHTO LRFD Articles 5.10.2.2 and 5.10.11.4.1d.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 25 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Pier longitudinal reinforcement shall only be spliced outside of the potential plastic hinge
zones. The minimum height of pier plastic hinges is defined in AASHTO LRFD Article
5.10.11.4.1e.
4.4

Dynamic Analysis
The dynamic analysis of the straight sections of simply supported spans will be carried
out in accordance with Clause 4.7.3 of AASHTO LRFD for multi-span bridges with
regular spans provided they meet the span ratio and pier stiffness segments even
though the number of spans will exceed 6. A single mode elastic analysis uniform load
method will be used.
Other structures will be design using a multimode dynamic analysis. The presence of the
rails will be ignored in this analysis.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 26 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


5

ATKINS

RAIL/STRUCTURE INTERACTION
A rail structure interaction [RSI] analysis is required because the continuously welded
running rails are continuous over the deck expansion joints. The interaction occurs
because the rails are directly connected to the decks by base plate fittings fixed to the
continuous reinforced concrete support plinths, which are monolithic with the deck. The
forces in the rails have a significant effect on the service performances of both the deck
and the track.
The analysis of the rail/structure interaction takes two forms, the local analysis of the rail
spanning the expansion joint between two decks, and the global analysis to consider the
distribution of the longitudinal loading and interaction between the various substructures.
The design of the rails and base plate fixings will be undertaken as part of the trackwork
design.
The temperature range of the continuous welded rail (CWR) is assumed to be relative to
its neutral setting temperature of 40C + or 3C and the maximum and minimum rail
temperatures which are assume to be +75C and +3C respectively. This gives CWR
extreme ranges of +38C and -40C.
The RSI temperature range is governed by the change of structure temperature relative
to deck temperature at the time of installation of the rail. Based on the air temperature
range given in Section 3.12 the maximum and minimum deck temperatures are assumed
to be +55C to +5C. It is further assumed that th e rails are fixed to the deck at deck
temperatures between +20C and 40C which gives max imum and minimum temperature
ranges of + 35C and 35C . This corresponds with the UIC 774 3R Clause 1.4.2
requirements of maximum and minimum bridge temperatures ranges of +/- 35C.
The effect of introduction of a break in the rail by an accident or for maintenance
purposes will be investigated at detailed design stage.

5.1

Local Behaviour
Checks for the stress in the rails will be made on the lengths of continuously welded rail,
which span the expansion joints between two decks. In principle the rails will be checked
against the recommendations in the International Union of Railways technical standard
UIC 774-3, Track/Bridge Interaction, Recommendations for Calculations, 2nd Edition,
dated October 2001. These checks are only to be carried for in service conditions, i.e. no
local analysis will be undertaken for a seismic event.
In addition absolute and relative displacement checks will be carried out against the UIC
774-3 requirements for braking and acceleration and deck end rotation due to vertical
loading. The relative deflection across adjacent decks at rail locations will be limited to
3 mm.
Checks will be made for the stresses introduced into the rails due to the end rotations of
the decks, the differential vertical movements due to the compressibility of the bearings
and the eccentricity of the end of the deck from the centreline of the bearings, and the
variation in the expansion joint gap due to temperature, shrinkage and creep effects. The
values of these various movements will be determined for the various deck types and
forwarded to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for consideration in their trackwork design.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 27 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


5.2

ATKINS

Global Behaviour
The global behaviour will be analysed using a 2D model of both the structure and rail to
examine the longitudinal load distribution. These will be modelled as separate members
with spring members connecting them together to represent the base plates.
This
idealisation is not used for dynamic analysis see section 4.4. A sketch of a typical
model is included in Appendix I.
Pandrol track fixings will be used and the slip resistance have been established by
testing. The displacement u0 at the beginning of plastic zone is 0.65mm for the unloaded
case and 0.55mm for the loaded case; and the resistance of the rails, k, to longitudinal
movement relative to the track plinth is assumed to be 30kN/m for an unloaded track and
54kN/m for a loaded track.
For lengths of simply supported spans, the interaction due to deck temperature change
will be analysed using spreadsheets which calculate the force variations in the rail due to
slip/stick of the track fixings. The out of balance effects of different adjacent span lengths
will be analysed using a simple elastic 2D model of at least 5 spans either side of the
design pier in order to quantify the forces on the bearings and piers. This will also be
used for vertical load effects and traction and braking and seismic loading. The results
will be compared with the Capita Symonds previous analytical work described in their
Rail Structure Interaction Report and the requirements of UIC 774-3. The allowable
2
increased rail stresses shall be 92 N/mm in both tension and compression.
This work will be extended to apply to lengths of viaduct spans between fixed piers using
simple methods. The work will then be calibrated using a non-linear analysis model of
simple spans and combinations.
In the transverse direction, the presence of the continuously welded rails between decks
will be ignored, so that each deck will be assumed to behave separately from its
neighbour.
For areas of horizontal curvature radial forces applied to the piers resulting from the
longitudinal analyses shall also be considered.
The complex track arrangements at Rashidiyah and Nakheel stations shall also be
modelled as special cases accordingly.

5.3

Global CWR Effects


The build up of CWR forces in the rail will be considered at points where rail breather
joints are located and for the case of a rail break. Account will be made of the CWR
temperature given above.
For viaducts with horizontal curvature the effects of the radial forces arising from the full
CWR forces will be considered.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 28 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


6

ATKINS

DEFORMATIONS
The deformations for permanent loads will be determined under the action of all
permanent loads. The deformations due to the live loads will include the appropriate
Dynamic Impact Factor. All the deformations are to be checked for nominal loading,
i.e. with applied load factors of 1.0. The following limiting values for bridge deformation
refer to the total deformations caused to the rails.

6.1

Vertical deflection at mid-span


The vertical deflection at mid-span will be limited to a Span/Deflection ratio given in the
table below based on the advice in UIC 776-3. This assumes the provision of a
reasonable level of passenger comfort for the multi-span viaducts for a Speed Range 1,
up to 120 kph. Intermediate span values are to be interpolated from the table.
Span
20m

Table 3
450

Table 7
0.65

25m
28m
30m
32m
33m
36m
54m

450
660
800
800
800
800
800

0.69
0.72
0.73
0.75
0.76
0.80
1.00

Span/Deflection Ratio
690
650
920
1,095
1,065
1,050
1,000
800

Table 6.1 Deflection limits


The vertical deformations will be determined for the maximum number of trains possible
on a structure and in the most severe locations. The total vertical deflection will be made
up of the deflections of the deck, the deformation of the bearings, and the deflections of
the pier caps.
6.2

Deck Twist
The deformation of the bridge will be checked to limit the twist applied to any of the
tracks to 0.0025 radians. This is to be checked over a length of 3m and is equivalent to
a maximum change of levels between rails of 7.5mm over this length.

6.3

End Deck Rotations


The total change in angle at the simply supported ends of a deck and the vertical
movement caused at this end by its rotation are required to be determined by the
Rail/Structure Interaction analysis. See Section 5 for further information. The check for
these rotations will be undertaken by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, as part of their
trackwork design exercise and these fall outside the scope of this Design Basis Report.
The total rotations and vertical movements will be made up of the residual long term
effects of creep, shrinkage and foundation settlement after installation of the rails and the
effects of the maximum number of trains possible on the deck in the most adverse
locations.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 29 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

6.4

ATKINS

Deck Relative Displacements


The serviceability limit state cyclic movements in the vertical direction between
contiguous deck ends (at expansion joints) will be limited to 3mm at the running rail
centreline.
In the ultimate limit state the deck shall be prevented from falling off the pier under
seismic conditions. This is to be achieved by providing sufficient resistance in the
support bearings to restrain the deck during a seismic event.
In the longitudinal direction the stresses in the rail will be checked at the serviceability
limit state under normal operating conditions (non-seismic). These effects will be
checked by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries as part of their trackwork design from the results
of the Rail/Structure Interaction analysis, see Section 5 for further information. At the
ultimate limit state, the gap between decks will be sufficient to prevent pounding of the
adjacent decks together.

6.5

Precamber
For the simply spans, two-span decks and station decks no precamber will be applied to
the deck, with all spans being cast flat.
Other viaduct decks may be built to a precamber so the sum of the anticipated
deflections under dead load, superimposed dead load, differential shrinkage and
prestress effects after long term conditions have occurred, should achieve the desirable
profile. It is proposed to provide a permanent camber to the decks, up to an amount at
midspan of the span divided by 1000, to improve the appearance, as recommended by
UIC 776-3. It is proposed that the loading from the trains are excluded from the
determination of the precambers, contrary to the proposal in the Station and Line,
Particular Design Specification (document PS007-T-ALLI-CWK-TN-SYS-064803-B1).
Additionally, the deflections of the deck will be determined for the trackwork to account
for the long term movements which will occur following the installation of the track. This
deflections will account for the effects of the application of the weight of the trackform, the
differential shrinkage between the trackform plinths and for the deck, the ongoing creep
in the deck and the weight of the equipment on the deck. It will be assumed that the rails
will be installed between 1 and 18 months after the completion of the deck. Deflections
will be determined for both dates and the trackwork installer will be expected interpolate
between the figures provided to suit the actual delay from deck construction to trackwork
installation. An assessment will be made on the sensitivity to the age of the deck
segments when incorporated into the works when undertaking this analysis.

6.6

Horizontal Deck Deflections


Horizontal deck deflections shall be checked as per the requirements of UIC 776-3
Clause 7. The horizontal deformation of the bridge deck shall not cause a horizontal
change of angle at a free end exceeding 3.5 milliradians or a change of radius of
curvature that is less than 3500 m.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 30 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


7

GEOTECHNICAL

7.1

Overview

ATKINS

A detailed site investigation is proposed for the whole of the route. Prior to receipt of this
information the design will be based on consideration of the limited ground condition
information provided at tender.
The Illustrative Design shows viaduct structures with piers supported on alternatives of
single, twin and four pile foundations. The piles will extend through the overlying sand
into the weak rock to provide the required load bearing capacity. It is noted that other
methods of providing a foundation may be considered, such as shallow pad foundations.
There will be a limited requirement for dewatering during the construction of the viaduct
substructures. Shallow foundations and pile caps may require some local dewatering but
these will be located close to the ground surface and will not require significant
dewatering. Therefore there will be a limited settlement risk to surrounding buildings and
structures adjacent to the elevated alignment.
Ground investigations shall be conducted at every foundation location before construction
commences. The presence of existing structures and obstructions in the ground shall be
investigated through survey, with the aim of recording and resolving conflicts prior to
commencement of construction.
The key geotechnical issues at the pier and station locations are:

7.2

Assessing liquefaction potential, defining water table level, particle size


distribution and the requirement for any ground treatment resulting in the
determination of suitable foundation types.

For piled foundations, determining the local rock-head level, assessing rock
quality through pilot holes and hence determining required pile lengths and rock
socket lengths. Insitu tests or dilatometer tests will be used in test pile boreholes
in the weak rock for correlation with Unconfined Compression Tests.

Obtaining design data from preliminary laboratory testing on bore hole samples
and CPTs and using it to provide design information for use in determining
appropriate foundation sizes.

Geotechnical Design Parameters


Detailed design shall use the data in the site-specific Ground Investigation Reports.

7.3

Foundation Design
The choice of foundation at any location will be driven by the performance, feasibility,
economics and programme. The design of foundations, shallow and deep, will be carried
out in general accordance with BS 8004 and standard reference books such as Bowles
and Tomlinson. The potential for liquefaction will be assessed using available data,
supplemented by the data from the proposed site investigation when received.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 31 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT


7.4

ATKINS

Pile Foundations
A liquefaction assessment is required for the foundation design as stated above. Where
piled foundations are to be used and liquefaction potential is indicated the design will
determine whether the material is replaced or treated. Alternatively the pile foundation will
be designed to resist the loading from liquefaction effects. Piled foundations will be
feasible throughout the elevated alignment. Pile foundation are to be analysed using the
proprietary computer software REPUTE or similar. The stiffness profile adopted for the
design will be appropriate for the design case:- static stiffness profile for normal loads and
degradated small strain stiffness values for the earthquake loading.
Where piled foundations are to be used, insufficient shaft shear stress or bearing will be
provided from the overlying soils. It is a requirement of Section 7.2.4.2 of the Particular
Specification that piles shall be extended to form sockets in the weak rock. A rock socket
of 4 times the pile diameter is proposed for piles up to 1.5m diameter. For piles greater
than 1.5m diameter a minimum penetration of 6m into the weak rock is considered
appropriate. Section 7.1.1 of the specification requires that all piled foundations shall be
bored cast in place concrete piles.
Foundations for the structures may be formed of single piles or groups formed of four
piles. It is anticipated that all pile diameters will be large (greater than 1.0m), in order to
resist the design forces. It is envisaged that drilling fluid such as good quality bentonite
or similar approved will be used to maintain bore stability and that as a minimum, casings
will be required through the loose sand in the near surface. Pile reinforcement will be
required to extend into the rock sockets due to the nature of the design loadings.
The process for the development of the piled foundations is as follows: Preliminary
design based on the preliminary parameters presented herein using theoretical
correlations with UCS values. A correlation following Horvath and Kenney (1979) is
adopted as this has been shown to give good correlations for the materials encountered
in Dubai. The design would then be modified based on the actual capacities obtained
from the preliminary pile test results and data from the pre-construction site investigation.
Pressure meter type testing will be used to investigate soil and rock properties as part of
the overall design basis verification.

The factors of safety to be adopted in design are as follows:


Normal
End Bearing
Skin Friction
Pull out

EQ

NOT PERMITTED
2.5
1.25
3.0
1.5

Construction Loads (Temp)

2.0
3.0

Design vertical and lateral deflections shall be commensurate with the form of structure.
Permissible limits are to be determined based on the track requirements. The settlements
of all the rock sockets will be limited particularly if good basal cleanliness is achieved
during construction. A failure criterion for working pile tests is presented as a residual
settlement of only 6mm after unloading in the Particular Specification. The
appropriateness of this limit is to be reviewed after the preliminary pile testing.
For piles the average compressive stress under working load shall not exceed 0.3 times
the concrete compressive strength calculated on the total cross section.
Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 32 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

7.5
7.5.1

ATKINS

Seismic Design and Liquefaction Assessment


Seismic Design
All structures are to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground
motions. For the bridges the AASHTO LRFD method (Cl 3.10) is to be used, as described
in Section 4. . The bridges are considered as essential under Cl. 3.10.3. and are to be
designed based on Seismic Zone 2 for an acceleration coefficient (A) of 0.12.
The design approach for bridges shall follow the Client requirements noted above based
on the AASHTO LFRD, Sections 3.10 and 4.7.4.1 and 4.7.4.3. The site coefficient is to be
determined based on Cl. 3.10.5.
Seismic earth pressure coefficients developed for all the horizontal accelerations
5
6
described above after the approach of Mononobe and Okabe are presented in the table
below. The values assume vertical sides to substructures and horizontal surface on the
active side of the wall.
Mononobe and Okabe derived active and passive earth pressures are presented below.
The ratio of vertical acceleration (kv) to horizontal acceleration (kh) is taken to be 0.5: In
general the design of retaining walls will allow for and take account of a small outward
displacement to reach the active state in the retained fill. In these cases the dynamic
active earth pressure will be calculated by using a horizontal coefficient kh equal to half
the maximum ground acceleration (in g) of the design earthquake, in conjunction with the
Mononobe Okabe method.

Table 7.1 Seismic Active Earth Pressure Coefficients for use in

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 33 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS
Substructure Design

kh

kv

(1-kv)KPE

/
33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

0.22

0.11

2.583

2.704

2.833

2.968

3.112

3.264

3.425

3.596

0.15

0.075

2.849

2.977

3.113

3.257

3.409

3.570

3.741

3.922

0.05

0.025

3.214

3.353

3.501

3.656

3.821

3.995

4.180

4.376

3.392

3.537

3.690

3.852

4.023

4.204

4.395

4.599

0.22

0.11

0.5

4.431

4.823

5.263

5.760

6.325

6.970

7.711

8.568

0.15

0.075

0.5

5.019

5.452

5.940

6.490

7.115

7.829

8.649

9.596

0.05

0.025

0.5

5.839

6.333

6.888

7.515

8.227

9.039

9.972

11.050

0.5

6.243

6.767

7.357

8.022

8.777

9.639

10.628

11.771

Table 7.2 Seismic Passive Earth Pressure Coefficients for use in Substructure
Design

kh

7.5.2

kv

(1-kv)KAE

/
33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

0.22
0.15
0.05
0

0.11
0.075
0.025
0

0
0
0
0

0.413
0.367
0.316
0.295

0.399
0.354
0.303
0.283

0.385
0.341
0.291
0.271

0.371
0.328
0.280
0.260

0.358
0.316
0.268
0.249

0.345
0.304
0.257
0.238

0.333
0.293
0.247
0.228

0.321
0.282
0.236
0.217

0.22
0.15
0.05

0.11
0.075
0.025

0.5
0.5
0.5

0.401
0.347
0.290

0.388
0.335
0.279

0.375
0.323
0.268

0.362
0.312
0.258

0.350
0.301
0.248

0.339
0.290
0.238

0.327
0.280
0.229

0.316
0.270
0.220

0.5

0.267

0.256

0.246

0.236

0.227

0.217

0.208

0.199

Liquefaction
The silty sand is assessed in the Systra Geotechnical Report as having significant
liquefaction potential. A quantitative analysis based on fines content, SPT values and
predicted earthquake magnitude based on 0.15g, concludes that 10% of the investigated
silty sand below the water table is potentially liquefiable to a depth of 15m.
The recent liquefaction assessment methods of Seed and Idriss based on SPT and/or
CPT data will be utilized to assess the liquefaction potential. The method has been
developed further by the National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research and was
presented by Idriss to the Institution of Civil Engineers in 2002. The original Seed
liquefaction relationship of N60 value and critical CSR (Cyclic Stress Ratio) can now be
determined for materials with <5% fines, 15% fines and >35% fines. Additionally, the
Idriss paper contains relationships for Stress Reduction Factor (rd) with depth and
Magnitude Scaling Factor (MSF) to allow the calculation of critical CSR for liquefaction

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 34 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

with varying maximum earthquake magnitude. The assessment will be carried out for an
earthquake magnitude value of M = 6.0 which is appropriate for the Dubai area. The
Japanese Roads Association liquefaction assessment method will also be used for
comparison.
For piles extending through potentially liquefiable layers to the weak rock, consideration
will be given to the effects of negative skin friction due to settlement of the upper layers.
The peak loading due to liquefaction is not expected to occur at the same time as the
peak inertial loading. When negative skin friction is considered it shall be treated as an
addition to the working load. Ground improvement may be considered to improve lateral
stability.
7.6

Ground Improvement
An assessment of the potential for liquefaction and hence the density, stiffness and
strength of the overlying silty Sand shall be made as part of the foundation design. This
pre-construction assessment shall then be used to determine if there is a requirement for
ground improvement as part of the development and choice of foundation options.
Reference is made to CIRIA C573, 2002, A guide to ground treatment. Ground
improvement could take the form of:
Preloading compaction with or without vertical drains
Dynamic compaction by heavy tamping
Vibro-Compaction
Vibro-Stone columns replacement
Compaction grouting
Excavation and replacement
Where there is limited depth of liquefiable materials, full excavation and replacement is
likely to be a cost effective option. It is anticipated that stone columns could be used
where there is potential for liquefaction or where capacity and stiffness are inadequate.
The grid of the stone columns shall be determined according to the bearing capacity,
settlement requirements and liquefaction potential reduction. Preloading could be used
for the station approach embankment and the at grade stations as the soil permeability is
high.
Extensive Vibro-compaction is presented in the illustrative design for the deep
foundations. Vibro-compaction is not suitable where the fines content of the soil is greater
than 20% and is best suited when fines content is less than 10%, whereas vibroreplacement techniques are feasible for all fines contents. Vibro-compaction could be
used to increase the SPT N60 to above 20 where the fines content permits. Dynamic
compaction is only likely to be more cost-effective than the aforementioned methods
2
where treatment areas are extensive (typically 5000m ). This process is also less efficient
when the water table is very high and would cause large ground-borne vibrations
potentially incompatible with built-up areas.

7.7

Chemical Aggressiveness of Ground


The Systra Geotechnical Report indicates that concrete design shall be in accordance
with CIRIA Special Publication 31 and section 9.2.3.2 of their report states that foundation
concrete is to have 100mm cover to reinforcement based on results of sulphate and
chloride determination on samples of water and soil/rock recovered during the ground

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 35 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

investigation.
CIRIA SP31, Table 13 indicates that for concrete that is in ground that is permanently
3
saturated (class d(ii) or d(iv)) minimum cement content is in the range 320 to 400 kg/m ,
maximum water/cement ratio in the range 0.50 to 0.42, a potential requirement for
tanking/membrane and minimum reinforcement cover of 40 to 50mm.
Sulphate and chloride test results have been analysed for each line to BRE Special
Digest 1, Concrete in Aggressive Ground. The current available data is relatively sparse
and therefore the design criteria shall be re-evaluated based on additional groundwater
and soil testing from the pre-construction phase Site Investigation.
Due to the aggressive environmental and ground conditions the requirements of BS 8004
regarding concrete cover to underground construction shall be taken into account in the
design in order to achieve a minimum design life of 100 years.
A concrete coating system will be adopted in addition to the concrete cover requirements.
This will extend to 5m below existing ground level. Skin friction on the piles will be
ignored in this zone.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 36 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

DESIGN METHODS

8.1

Computer Modelling for Evaluation of Load Effects


The viaduct decks will be modelled with both 2D and 3D models. The longitudinal effects
will be determined from the 2D models and the transverse effects and distribution of
longitudinal stresses and loads will be determined by 3D modelling. The critical position
of the rail vehicles will be determined by a 2D influence line analysis.
The 2D models will be simple line beam models and the 3D models of the decks will be
either formed of shell finite elements or solid brick finite elements. The analysis will be
based on gross un-cracked section properties, transformed to take account of variations
in material stiffnesses where appropriate.
Analysis of the pile caps will be undertaken either by the strut/tie model, or by standard
bending theory.

8.2

Prestressed Concrete Design


The design of internally prestressed concrete structures and members will be carried out
in accordance with BS5400: Part 4. Externally prestressed structures, elements and their
associated prestress where used on the viaducts shall be designed to the
recommendations of BD 58/94 - Design Manual for Roads & Bridges: Design of
concrete highway bridges and structures with external and unbonded prestressing.
For the 3 span continuous bridge decks it is intended that any external prestressing or
partially external prestressing is replaced with internal prestressing. This is in order to
overcome the problems associated with providing this form of prestressing in spans
which are partially box girder and partially U shape in section. This approach, combined
with cambering for the deck deflections, which are likely to be small for these mediumspan continuous bridges, and the reduced risk of increase in dead load due to non
presence of any deck surfacing or ballast, we believe will obviate the need to provide for
additional future external prestressing, as proposed in AASHTO LRFD Cl C5.14.2.3.8c.

8.3

Serviceability Limit State for Prestressed Concrete


The decks are considered as Class 1 for Load Combination 1 and Class 2 for the
remaining Load Combinations as per Clause 4.2.2 of BS5400 Pt4:1990. The stress
limitations for prestressed concrete for in-service conditions will be as follows:
Position

Load Combination 1
Maximum Tension

Segmental Joints

No Tension

Within Reinforced
Concrete Section

No Tension

Pier Cap

No Tension

Load Combinations
2,3,4 and 5
Maximum Tension

Maximum
Compression*

No Tension

0.4 fcu

0.36 fcu

0.4 fcu

0.36 fcu

0.4 fcu

* For loading in bending.


Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 37 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Table 8.1 Stress limits for prestressed concrete


Allowable stresses during construction shall be in accordance with BS5400 part 4 Cl
6.3.2
8.4

Ultimate Limit State for Prestressed Concrete


The ultimate loads will be determined by a linear elastic analysis of the structure.
The requirements of BD 58/94 shall be implemented in structures or elements on the
viaducts where external prestressing is used.
For ultimate shear, the precast segmental deck will be treated as monolithic except that
the shear friction at segment joints needs to be checked in accordance with Cl. 6.3.4.6 of
BS5400 Pt4: 1990.

8.5

Reinforced Concrete Design


Design and detailing of reinforced concrete structures and elements on the viaducts
section shall be carried out to the requirements of BS5400 Part 4: Clause 5.
The viaduct concrete decks will be designed as a reinforced concrete section in the
transverse direction. Concrete cover and crack width limitations shall be as per section
2.1 above.

8.6

Creep, Shrinkage, Differential Settlement and Temperature Difference


The effects due to creep, shrinkage, differential settlement and temperature difference
will generally be considered at the serviceability limit state design but will be excluded
from the ultimate limit state checks. Other temperature effects will be considered for both
serviceability and ultimate limit states.
Where the effects of differential settlement, temperature difference and creep and
shrinkage of concrete are considered at the ultimate limit state, stress limitations at the
serviceability limit state will not be considered, in accordance with BS5400 Pt4 Clause
4.1.1.3,
Creep redistribution of moments and shears within continuous decks will be taken into
account at both the serviceability and ultimate limit states.

8.7

Moment Rounding
Where prestressed concrete members are continuous over intermediate supports, the
serviceability bending moment over the support will be reduced by the method outlined
by Guyon in his book, Limit State Design of Prestressed Concrete, Volume 2, The
Design of the Member. Details on the method of reduction are given in Appendix G.
For reinforced concrete members, or prestressed members at the ultimate limit state, the
angle of spread of the support up to the neutral axis is assumed to be zero.

8.8

Time Dependent Effects

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 38 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

The time dependent creep redistribution effects of the dead load and the prestress load
will be calculated in accordance with the FIP-CEB 1990 Model Code.
For twin span and station decks the time dependent effects will de determined by the use
of specialist proprietary software such as ADAPT-ABI.
For manual calculation, design load effects will be calculated from the formula:
-(t)

MFinal(t) = (e

-(t)

MAs-built ) + (1 - e

) MMonolithic

MFinal(t)

Long term bending moment, shear force or axial force at time t


after completion of structure

MAs-built

Sum of elastic stage construction bending moment, shear force


or axial force

MMonolithic

Bending moment, shear force or axial force induced in the


structure if the loading is applied instantaneously to the complete
structure

(t)

Creep factor at time t, appropriate to the nature and time of


application of the applied loads

The long term creep calculations are to be undertaken for year 2050 (t =16,500 days). It
is assumed that the age of the precast deck segments when incorporated into the works
will vary in age from 28 days to 1 year.
8.9

Fatigue
All the elements of the viaducts subject to railway loading will be checked for the effects
of fatigue for repeated cycles of live loading. The number of load cycles will be based on
a life of 120 years.
Account will be taken for any welding of the reinforcement, for example for stray current
collection.

8.10

Dispersal on Wheel Point Loads


Concentrated wheel loads applied to the rail will be distributed both longitudinally by the
continuous rail to more than one base plate, and transversely by the width of the base
plate.
It is assumed that only two-thirds of the concentrated load from one wheel will be applied
to one base plate and the remaining one-third will be transmitted by the two base plates
either side. The base plates are assumed to be 200mm (along line of rail) by 350mm
(normal to rail) and spaced at 600mm centres.
A dispersal of 1 horizontally to 1 vertically through the structural concrete from the
underside of the base plate through the concrete track plinth to the neutral axis of the

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 39 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

floor slab will be assumed for determination of the patch area for application of the wheel
loads to the structure.
8.11

Early Thermal Crack Control


The determination of the minimum area of reinforcement to control early age thermal
effects will be in accordance with the recommendations of BD 28/87 Early Thermal
Cracking of Concrete, incorporating Amendment No.1, 1989.
Short-term fall in temperature values T1 given in Table 1of BD 28/87 shall be increased
by 10C to account for the higher ambient and conc rete placing temperatures in Dubai.
Shrinkage strain in Clause 5.6 shall be calculated in accordance with CEB-FIP 1990
Model Code recommendations, based on an average annual ambient temperature of
28C.
Account will be taken of the maximum cement content, the most adverse environmental
conditions, the formwork type and the duration any external restraint is applied. The
duration of any external restraint is particularly important with precast elements, where
the external restraint is removed when the segment is removed from the mould.

8.12

P-Delta Buckling Effects


P-delta effects are to be included for all significant lateral load or sway effects applied to
the top of the piers. These effects are additional secondary moments caused by the
deflection of the pier and will be quantified using a non-linear analysis.
The analysis will be used as an alternative to the slenderness moments given in BS 5400
Part4. The P-delta moments will be added to the foundation forces as well as for the pier
design.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 40 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE OF DESIGN STANDARDS

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 41 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Schedule of Design Standards to be used in the Design

BS 5400

Steel Concrete and Composite Bridges

Part 1; 1988

General Statement

Part 2; 1978

Specification for Loads

Part 4; 1990

CP for Design of Concrete Bridges

Part 9; 1983

Bridge Bearings

Part 10; 1980

CP for Fatigue

BS 5930; 1999

Site Investigations

BS 6031; 1981

Earthworks

BS 8002; 1994

Earth Retaining Structures

BS 8004; 1986

Foundations

UIC 774-3 R

Track/Bridge Interaction: Recommendations for


nd

Calculations (2 Edition)
UIC 776-1 R

Loads to be considered in Railway Bridge Design


th

(4 Edition)
st

UIC 776-3 R

Deformation of Bridges (1 Edition)

BD 28/87

Early Thermal Cracking of Concrete


(Published by the Highways Agency, England)

BD 58/94

The Design of Concrete Highway Bridges and Structures


with External and Unbonded Prestressing.
(Published by the Highways Agency, England)

BD 60/04

Design of Highway Bridges for Vehicle Collision Loads


(Published by the Highways Agency, England)

CS Technical Report TR49

Design for High Strength Concrete


(Published by the UK Concrete Society in 1998)

AASHTO LRFD

Bridge Design Specifications -3 Edition

Dubai Municipality
Dubai Municipality

Geometric Design Manual for Dubai Roads


Drainage System Design Criteria

rd

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 42 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS
APPENDIX B
LOAD COMBINATIONS

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 43 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

Walkway loading shall be considered in conjunction with an unloaded train on the adjacent track
and normal train loading on the other track where appropriate.
Shrinkage and creep shall be included in the ULS with a partial factor of 1.2 unless included in
the SLS stress checks.

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 44 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX C
DESIGN RAIL VEHICLES

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 45 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 46 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX D
RAIL CLEARANCES

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 47 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

PLEASE REFER TO THE VIADUCT STRUCTURAL GAUGE DRAWINGS

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 48 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX E
DIMENSIONS OF TYPICAL DECK
SECTIONS WITH TRACKFORM

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 49 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

TYPICAL SECTION - STRAIGHT


Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 50 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

TYPICAL SECTION - CURVED

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 51 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

TYPICAL SECTION SINGLE TRACK, STRAIGHT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 52 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

TYPICAL SECTION SINGLE TRACK, CURVED

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 53 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX F
EQUIPMENT ON DECK

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 54 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 55 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 56 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS
APPENDIX G
MOMENT ROUNDING AT SUPPORTS

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 57 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 58 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX H
DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE GRADIENT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 59 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 60 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX I
TYPICAL GLOBAL RAIL/STRUCTURE
INTERACTION MODEL

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 61 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 62 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

ATKINS

APPENDIX J
TYPICAL EARTHQUAKE INERTIA
LOADING ANALYSIS MODEL

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 63 of 64

DUBAI METRO PROJECT

Document No.: DM001-E-ACW-CVI-DR-DCC-310001

ATKINS

Date: 7 November 2007


Page 64 of 64