24 views

Uploaded by Ankit Suri

bridge design

- Rengan a Than
- ies_2011_ce_1
- 2 FRAME&TRUSS
- Design of Plate girders as per IS 800 2007-LSM - Unsupported - Latest.xlsx
- staad
- SAFE Verification
- 1746_3
- Calculating Maximum Bending Stress of a Pipe
- SOM Question Bank 2014-15 FINAL
- Mnl 133 97 Appendix A
- Support design.pdf
- Mechanics of materials (Ch 3 and 4.pptx
- Shear Lug Design
- Strut and Tie New Models
- Torsion 1
- Chapter 3 Example 1
- Question Bank - Unit II
- Basic Stresses
- Shear_Lag
- TEK 14-07C11.pdf

You are on page 1of 17

BASIC DESIGN DATA

1. Ref: IRC 5-1998, Cl 112.1

Carriage way width = 4250 mm

Wearing Coat : Average 62 mm of Concrete Asphalt.

Bridge Cross Section as shown below

Height of Bearing Base Plate from H.F.L 2000 mm

unit wt. of Reinforced concrete= 2.50 t/m3

unit wt. of Asphalt concrete= 2.20 t/m3

Loading : Class A train of Vehicles

Minimum Clearance from Kerb face to outer edge of wheel = 150 mm

For the First Axle Load of 2.7Ton, i.e., 1.35Ton wheel load, we have,

Reaction at S2

= 1.58625 Ton

Reaction at S1

=1.11375 Ton

Similarly,

LOADS (Tn)

2.7

2.7

11.4

11.4

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.8

DIST (m)

1.1

3.2

1.2

4.3

3

3

3

LOAD on

each wheel

Transferred

Load on S1

Transferred

Load on S2

1.35

1.35

5.7

5.7

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.4

1.11375

1.11375

4.7025

4.7025

2.805

2.805

2.805

2.805

1.58625

1.58625

6.6975

6.6975

3.995

3.995

3.995

3.995

2.30 m of Carraige way to cover Class A loading, balance portion of width of carriage way to have 500kg/m2

of Live Load.

6.Ref: IRC 6 -2010, Cl 208.4

Impact Factor: 15.4%

Braking Force = 20% of first train + 10% of second train actually on the span, acting at 1.20m above deck

level, without effect of Impact.

Total Braking Force = 55.40 x 0.2 + 55.40 x 0.1 = 16.62 Ton.

Net Upward/ Downward Reaction on Support due to braking = (16.62x1.3) x1.20/60.0 = (+/-) 0.40 Ton.

The Braking force has been applied to the TIE members and the Tie members has been designed with a

Force of (16.62 / 2) = 8.31 Tn in addition to the Actual Force obtained by Staad Analysis.

NOTE: The effect of this Horz force from tie to ther members like Arch, Hangers and Diagonals has been

ignored

The forces created by the lever arm of 1.2m above deck level is to be reflected in the support reactions.

8. Ref: IRC 6 -2010, Cl 209.2

For Basic Wind Speed = 33m/sec

Interpolation for 14m height above HFL using Table 4: IRC-2010)

Vz = 28.92 m/s

Pz = 502.75 N/m2

For Basic Wind Speed = 55m/sec

Vz = 28.92 x 55/33 = 48.2 m/s

Pz = 502.75 x 55/33 = 837.9 N/m2

G = Gust Factor = 2.0

CD= Drag coefficient

Solidity ratio

Length of Arch member = 2r x (86.040/3600) = 67.02 m

Length of Tie member = 60.90 m

Length of vertical member = 99.20 m

Length of Diagonal member = 101.59 m

Assuming 300 mm member depth, net area of truss = 98.61m2

So, = (98.61/1495.55) = 0.066

CD for windward side = 1.9

Truss spacing ratio = distance between center of truss by depth of windward truss

=

(..)/

./

= 0.68

So CDfor leeward side = CD = 1.9

So Transverse wind force per m

= 955.2 N/m (used in staad model)

Seismic Zone = IV

Zone factor = Z = 0.24

Importance Factor = I = 1.0

Snow Load :

= 0.25x0.9 = 0.225 T/m2 (Applied in staad model)

BEARING ARRANGEMENT

NODE

X

CO-ORD

Z

CO-ORD

003

005

3434

3436

0.00

0.00

60.90

60.90

0.00

5.40

0.00

5.40

TRANSLATION

X

X

X

Y

X

X

X

X

Z

X

Four different types of support conditions have been used in modelling the structure whose Restrains and translations

are summarized as above.

Node 003:

Is modelled as a pinned support Restrained for translation in all the three axis.

Node 005:

Is restrained for translation in X and Y Direction, but is released in Z Direction inorder to allow its

translation that might occur due to wind forces.

Node 3434:

Is restrained for translation in Z and Y Direction, but is released in X Direction inorder to allow its

translation that might occur due to Temperature forces or Live Load.

Node 3436:

Is restrained for translation in Y Direction only, but is released in X and Z Direction inorder to allow its

translation that might occur due to Wind forces as well as Temperature forces and Live Load.

2800

2870

10870

11720

12000

3080

4250 X 5000

4250 X 5000

4250 X 5000

5400

5400

5400

3430

3920

4560

4250 X 5000

4250 X 5000

4250 X 5000

5400

5400

5400

5000

4340

7270

9400

4250

STAAD INPUT

Refer to Annexure - I

STAAD OUTPUT

Refer to Annexure - II

Dead Load Moment& Shear

Assuming MB-250 as long beam

Effective span = L = (2000-125) = 1875mm (IRC:21; Cl-305.4.3)

Considering Slab thickness = 175mm

Slab Weight = 2.5 x 0.175 = 0.44 t/m

Wearing Coat = 2.2 x 0.062

= 0.14 t/m

Total = 0.58 t/m

Moment = 0.58 x 1.8752/8 x 0.8 = 0.21 t.m/m

Shear = 0.58 x 1.875 x 0.6 = 0.65 t/m

Live Load Moment & Shear

For maximum effect, one wheel has been placed at the centre of span as shown below

Impact factor as per IRC 21 ; Cl:305-4.3 for span less than 3.0 m= 50%

Effective Width as per IRC 21 ; CL 305.16.2

beff = kx(1 X/L) + bw

bw = (205+ 2x62.5) = 375 mm

X = 1.875/2 = 0.9375

For B/L = 5000 /2000= 2.5 ; K = 2.60

beff = 2.60 x 0.9375 (1-0.5) + 0.375 = 1.59 m

Actual Effective with = (1.20 + 1.59) = 2.79 m

Width of Dispersion {500 +2 x (144+62.5)} (Considering 175 slab) = 913 mm

M = 12.49x0.913x1.875/2 0.913/2x 12.49 x 0.913 /4 = 4.04 T-m

Considering Continuity & Impact factor : M= (4.04x0.8x1.50) = 4.85 T-m

Moment per m width = 4.85/2.79 = 1.74 T-m/m

For Maximum Shear Load is placed as shown below:

Considering Continuity & Impact = 8.64 x 0.8 x 1.50 = 10.37t

Shear per m width = 10.37/2.79 = 3.72 ton

Total Moment = (1.74 + 0.21) = 1.95 t.m/m

Total Shear = (3.72 + 0.65) = 4.37ton

Design of Section

Considering M25 grade of concrete & Fe 415 Reinforcement

cbc = 8.33 N/mm2, st = 200 N/mm2 , cmax= 1.9 N/mm2

k = 93.33/(st + 93.33) = 0.318 ; j = (1-k/3) = 0.894

R = cbc k j = x 8.33 x 0.318 x 0.894 = 1.18

d required = (1.95 x 107/ (1000 x 1.18))1/2= 128mm

d provided = (175 25 5 ) = 145 mm

Ast required = (1.95 x 107)/ ( 145x200x0.894) = 752mm2/m

Provide = 12 @ 150 c/c (754 mm2/m)

c= (4.37 x 104) / (1000x145) = 0.30 N/mm2<cmax= 1.90 N/mm2

Carriage Way

C/C of Stringer

Effective width of dispersion

(lo)

beff

b/lo

k

Distance of Load from Nearest Support

= 4.7 m

= 2.0 m

= k*a*(1-a/lo)+b1

= 2.5

= 2.6

=a

Class A Loading

Impact Factor

Tyre Contact Dimension

Wearing Coarse thickness

Dispersion upto top of slab

= 54.5%

(IRC-6-2010 / Cl:208.4)

= 0.50m x 0.25m

= 0.065 m

= 0.25+(2x0.065) = 0.38m

b1

Dispersion upto Bottom of deck slab

= 0.5+2*(D17+0.175) = 0.98m

Max Wheel Load with Impact

= 57 kN

= 88.065 kN

Effective width of L1

When,

a

b eff 1

L1/Contact area

( FIG: 1)

Effective width of L2

When,

a

b eff 2

L2/Contact area

= 0.275 m

= 2.6 x 0.275 x (1-0.275/2)+0.38 = 0.997 m

= 88.065 / (0.98 x 0.997) = 90.161 kN/m2

= 0.075 m

= 0.568 m

= 158.295 kN/m2

Effective width of L1 = L2

When,

a

= 0.9 m

b eff 1 = b eff 2 = 1.667 m

(L1=L2)/Contact area

= 53.9 kN/m2

Case 3 : For Max Load at Mid-span FIG: 3

Effective width of L1

1

0

When,

a

b eff 1

= 1.0 m

= 1.68 m

= 53.49 kN/m2

a

b eff 2

= 0.8 m

= 1.628 m

= 55.198 kN/m2

L1/Contact area

Effective width of L2

When,

L2/Contact area

1

1

START JOB INFORMATION

ENGINEER DATE 01-Apr-14

END JOB INFORMATION

INPUT WIDTH 79

UNIT METER KN

JOINT COORDINATES

1 0 0 0; 2 0.352 0 0; 3 2.352 0 0; 4 4.352 0 0; 5 4.7045 0 0;

MEMBER INCIDENCES

1 2 3; 2 3 4; 3 4 5; 4 1 2;

DEFINE MATERIAL START

ISOTROPIC CONCRETE

E 2.17185e+007

POISSON 0.17

DENSITY 23.5616

ALPHA 1e-005

DAMP 0.05

TYPE CONCRETE

STRENGTH FCU 27579

END DEFINE MATERIAL

MEMBER PROPERTY AMERICAN

1 TO 4 PRIS YD 0.175 ZD 1

CONSTANTS

MATERIAL CONCRETE ALL

SUPPORTS

2 TO 4 PINNED

LOAD 1 LOADTYPE Dead TITLE DL

SELFWEIGHT Y -1

MEMBER LOAD

1 TO 4 UNI GY -1.43

4 UNI GY -5 0 0.225

3 UNI GY -5 0.1275

LOAD 2 LOADTYPE Dead TITLE CASE 1 - AT MIN DIST. FROM KERB

MEMBER LOAD

4 UNI GY -90.16 0.1265

1 UNI GY -90.61 0 0.7735

1 UNI GY -158.3 1.791

2 UNI GY -158.3 0 0.359

LOAD 3 LOADTYPE None TITLE CASE 2 - FOR MAX SUPPORT MOMENTS

MEMBER LOAD

1 UNI GY -53.9 0.22625 1.93375

2 UNI GY -53.9 0.06625 1.73375

LOAD 4 LOADTYPE None TITLE CASE 3 - FOR MAX LOAD AT MID-SPAN

MEMBER LOAD

1 UNI GY -53.49 0.1605 1.8405

1 UNI GY -55.2 1.9865

2 UNI GY -55.2 0 1.6145

LOAD COMB 5 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 5

1 1.0 2 1.0

LOAD COMB 6 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 6

1 1.0 3 1.0

LOAD COMB 7 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 7

1 1.0 4 1.0

PERFORM ANALYSIS

PRINT FORCE ENVELOPE

PRINT MAXFORCE ENVELOPE

PRINT FORCE ENVELOPE LIST ALL

FINISH

1

2

Concrete

Steel

cbc

st

cmax

= M30

= Fe 415

= 10 N/mm2

= 200 N/mm2

= 1.9 N/mm2

(IRC-21-2000 / Table 9)

(IRC-21-2000 / Table 10)

K

= 93.33/(200+93.33) = 0.32

J

= 1- 0.32/3 = 0.89

R

= 0.5 x 10 x 0.89 x 0.32 = 1.42

Max BM

Depth reqd

Depth Provided

d

D

= 28.39 kNm

= (28.39x106/(1.42x1000)) = 141.29 mm

= 175 5 25 = 145 mm (Hence SAFE)

Max BM

Depth reqd

Depth Provided

d

D

= 15.99 kNm

= 106.04 mm

= 145 mm (Hence SAFE)

Max Shear at Mid Support

= 69.12 kN

1

3

DESIGN OF DIFFERENT MEMBERS

Refer Annex -1 for the same.

The structure has been checked for the following load combination (Refer : IRC 24-2010)

Case 1.

Case 2.

Case 1 + Fte

Case 3.

Case 2 + W

Case 4.

Case 2 + Feq

Where

G = Dead Load

Q = Live Load

Gs = Snow Load

Qim = Impact Facor

W = Wind Load

Fb = Braking Force

Fte = Temperature Effect

Feq = Seismic Force

from the STADD Output file, maximum force on each type of memeber has been calculated and combined. This has

been tabled in Annex-2

Design of Steel Sections

For I.S. 2062 Grade E250, Rolled Section

Basic Permissible stress in Axial Tension = at = 0.6 fy = 150.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Axial Compression = ac = 0.6 fy = 150.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Bending for flats, tubes = bt = 0.66 fy = 165.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Bending for Rolled Sections = bt = 0.62 fy = 155.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Shear = vf = 0.38 fy = 95.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Axial Tension = at = 0.6 fy = 186.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Axial Compression = ac = 0.6 fy = 186.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Bending for flats, tubes = bt = 0.66 fy = 204.0 N/mm2

Basic Permissible stress in Shear = vf = 0.38 fy = 117.80 N/mm2

1

4

DESIGN OF STRINGER

1. DL on Intermediate Stringer

Dead Load of Slab = 0.175 x 2 x 2.5 tn/m

Wearing Course = 0.065 x 2 x 2.2 tn/m

SW of UB 305 (Stringer)

= 0.875

= 0.286

= 0.054

= 1.215

tn/m

tn/m

tn/m

tn/m

Max BM = 1.215 x 52/8 = 3.796 Tnm

Max SF = 1.215 x 5/2 = 3.0375 Tn

For Live Load

a. Max Reaction of the Stringer

= 6.27 Tn

5.7Tn

5.7Tn

1.8m

2.0m

2.0m

Applying Impact Factor of 15.4%

Max Reaction with Impact = 6.58 Tn

Total Reaction = 6.58 x (1+0.2/2) = 7.235

Reaction Factor = 7.235/5.7 = 1.27

b. Position of Vehicle for Max BM on stringers

7.235

7.235

0.3

0.3

2.2

A

Reaction at A :

RA

RB

0.6

1.2

CL

1.6

B

= 6.3668 Tn

= 8.1032 Tn

c. Position of Vehicle for Max SF in Stringer

1

5

(1.35 x 1.27)

0.475

7.235

3.2

7.235

1.2

0.125

5.0m

A

CL

The maximum wheel Load of the vehicle is placed at distance 0.125m (width of the flance of the Cross beam

from CL of the Cross Beam.

The Max Reaction on the Stringer at Point A,

= [(1.7145 x 4.525) + (7.235 x 1.325) + (7.235 x 0.125)] / 5

= 18.248/5 = 3.649 Tn

Reaction at B

= 1.7145 + (2 x 7.235) 3.649 = 12.5355Tn

Live Load S.F = 12.5355 Tn

Total BM = 3.796 + 14.007 = 17.803 Tnm

Total SF = 3.0375 + 12.5355 = 15.573 Tnm

Clause 305.15 of IRC 21:2000

UB 305x165x54

Thikness of web for beams

Distance b/w C/C of Cross beams

Effective width for Compression Flange

bw =

lo =

b eff

=

=

0.79 cm

500 cm

bw+lo/10

50.79 cm

Modulus of Elastricity of Steel (Fe 415)

Ec =

Es =

200 Table 3 Page 8 of IRC:21:2000

Modular ratio

m=

6.56

1

6

Sl

No

Element

Modular

ratio (m)

Width

Thk

cm

cm

50.79

17.5

1 Slab

2 UB 305x165x54

6.56

30.5

Total

Sl

No

2 UB 305x165x54

cm2

cm

Ay

C.G of

section

from top

of slab

C.G of

section

from top

of Girder

C.G of

section

from

bottom

of Girder

cm3

cm

cm

cm

15.328

2.172

32.672

135.55

8.75

1186.026

68.77

32.75

2252.218

204.316

3438.243

Ixx

Distance of CG

of element from

NA (Y)

AY2

Ixx + AY2

Zxx from

top of slab

Zxx from

top of

Girder

Zxx from

bottom of

girder

cm4

cm4

cm3

cm4

cm3

cm3

cm3

3459.24

6.578

5865.226

9324.468

11700.00

17.422

Element

1 Slab

Area (A)

Dist of CG

of element

from Top

Slab (y)

17923.925 19290.677

Total

41897.759

Total BM

17.803 Tn.m

Total SF

15.573 Tn

Stress at top of

Slab

99.325

102 kg/cm2

SAFE

92.288

1580 kg/cm2

SAFE

1388.280

1580 kg/cm2

SAFE

226.450

969 kg/cm2

SAFE

Shear Stress

1282.378

20873.291 32573.291

1

7

- Rengan a ThanUploaded byrenganathank1987
- ies_2011_ce_1Uploaded byAbhrankash Nit Dgp
- 2 FRAME&TRUSSUploaded bykannan
- Design of Plate girders as per IS 800 2007-LSM - Unsupported - Latest.xlsxUploaded bymehdihasan
- staadUploaded byRaUlKishan
- SAFE VerificationUploaded bygan6043
- 1746_3Uploaded byMohamed Rafeek
- Calculating Maximum Bending Stress of a PipeUploaded byNabil Al-Khirdaji
- SOM Question Bank 2014-15 FINALUploaded byRajib Mandal
- Mnl 133 97 Appendix AUploaded byBatisxuta Michael
- Support design.pdfUploaded bySakthi Vel
- Mechanics of materials (Ch 3 and 4.pptxUploaded byPraveen Kumar R
- Shear Lug DesignUploaded byariya
- Strut and Tie New ModelsUploaded byJouu Mercado Ramirez
- Torsion 1Uploaded byEdward van Martino
- Chapter 3 Example 1Uploaded byMesfin Derbew
- Question Bank - Unit IIUploaded bySIVANESAN
- Basic StressesUploaded byxeyesight
- Shear_LagUploaded byf81l
- TEK 14-07C11.pdfUploaded bysaadyamin2821
- Dunaiski Investigation 2008Uploaded byMladen Pantic
- Chapter 8 TrussUploaded byJefferson Altar
- Exercises of BendingUploaded byvuong
- bridge research projectUploaded byapi-327139465
- Previous Paper HPSC AE Civil Civil Engineering Paper I Short Answer TypeUploaded byVivek Thakur Sujanian
- SAFE VerificationUploaded bysandycivilpg
- flexionUploaded byivan bolaños
- Reaction of TrussesUploaded bySmile Collectives
- Slide Teacher KetyaUploaded bysochea
- Chapter 4Uploaded byGirma Fikre

- IS-1893_1-2002Uploaded bykumardbg
- 10column SteelUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Raft Design Sheet.Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- IRC_006-1966Uploaded byArun Ks
- qhlogsUploaded byArunKumar
- Truss CalculationsUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Unit-11Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- Wind Speed Map IndiaUploaded byAn1rudh_Sharma
- IS-13920 2016 AmendmentsUploaded byShakil Akhter
- Raft Design Sheet.Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- Digital Sign PrintUploaded byAnkit Suri
- 30,000Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- SampleUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Deflection Design2Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- 7 SIZEUploaded byAnkit Suri
- 3COLUMN STEEL.docUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Nbfm Elevation ViewUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Etabs TutorialUploaded bysalahaddinsharif
- EQ01Uploaded byGajendra Borkar
- Generator RoomUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Life CalculatorUploaded byAnkit Suri
- Maharaja Harisingh Dav Cent. Public School 19-01-2016Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- Basic Rates to Be Collected1111111Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- 50000 Glsns Oht Tapyal-3Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- 1. Bins Detail 17.12.14-ModelUploaded byAnkit Suri
- __ashwani_d_ashwani_sachitakna River 240mtr_reinf. Details of Pier _ Pier Cap Model (1) (1)Uploaded byAnkit Suri
- IRC 112 2011Uploaded byNeeraj Sharma
- 73M final1Uploaded byAnkit Suri

- Stresses in Deep Beams.Uploaded byakash kumar
- Effects of Strand Anchorage Devices on Shear Strength of Pretensioned Concrete BeamsUploaded byunix0123
- Soil Restraining MechanismUploaded bysaritasoham
- Jr. Engineer Civil 102 B SeriesUploaded bySrinivas P
- Bamboo Design and Construction in ThailandUploaded byThana Uthaipattrakoon
- 53360873-Failure-TheoriesUploaded byDeepak Ashokan
- stiffened plates.pdfUploaded byfarhadmrt6923
- IRC 6-2016Uploaded byManvendra Nigam
- various stages in stress strain curveUploaded byganesh_the_aviator
- Piezo Ceramic TutorialsUploaded bycal2_uni
- Benson 7ba7 DesignUploaded byvahid_haji
- Mock Board Examination in Geas - AUploaded bySantiago KeLvin
- Mechanical Engineering.docxUploaded byHamza Khalid
- Structural Notes NewUploaded byKatkat Casimiro Chuaco
- New Directions in Sonic LoggingUploaded byMohand76
- 51989151-DIN-1055-6-2005Silos_Parte2Uploaded byAngel Alvarez
- Size Effects in Manufacturing of Metallic ComponentsUploaded bylelix
- MSc_Mechanical_Engineering.pdfUploaded byabrar nasir
- Input Steel Properties in Abaqus _ IMechanicaUploaded byEngr Arbab Faisal
- Fracture Mechanics of Concrete StructuresUploaded byHowo4Die
- Eccentric LoadingUploaded byconfederateyankee
- Influence of loading speed on tensile strength.pdfUploaded bySadegh
- 249Uploaded bymile
- Advanced Soil Mechanics 1 - Chapter 1-1-12Uploaded bymmike9179
- NTU - Mechanical Engineering - MP 4J02 - MArine and Offshore Structural Integrity - Sem 2 05-06Uploaded byawy02
- Torque DiagramsUploaded byshilton1989
- Laterally Loaded Piles2005Uploaded byrashidking
- Photoelastic Stress Analysis of Bell Crank Lever: A ReviewUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Geometrical Picture of Third-Order TensorsUploaded bybuihuutu
- Rudder & Manoeuvering.pdfUploaded byamin