Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Progressive Finite Element Failure PDF
Progressive Finite Element Failure PDF
ABSTRACT: While designing bridge - deck, placing of the live load i.e. to obtain maximum value of design forces
becomes quite tedious for different class of loading. It is not always possible to spend that much time for such a
calculation. Hence, there is a need to develop some design tables which may become quite handful tool for bridge
engineer. In the present work simply supported span varying from 5m to 40m are considered for single and two lane
bridges. IRC loading of class A, class AA and class 70R are used during analysis. The impact factor on these loadings is
not considered as the same that can be applied on the final calculations. The maximum bending moment and shear force
vale are computed using equivalent uniformly distributed load concept. Finally, charts are prepared to obtain maximum
design forces for various load cases enumerated as per IRC.
INTRODUCTION: The actual loads ar e wheel load train composed of a driving vehicle and
c onside r ed t o be axle load from engine and two trailers of specified axle spacings.
bogies.. The Equivalent UDL Values depend upon the
span length. However, in case of rigid frame, The loadings for the various classes are as follows:
cantilever and suspension bridges, it is necessary for
the designer to proceed from the basic wheel loads.
Class 70 R Loading
Class A Loading
Class 70 R Loading
For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with THE SHEAR FORCE VARIATION CHARTS FOR
span at 0.1 L CLASS A LOADING
For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with
span at 0.2 L span at 0.1 L
For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with
span at 0.4 L span at 0.3 L
For Class 70 R loading the shear force variation with For Class A loading the bending moment variation with
span at 0.5 L span at 0.4 L
For Class A loading the bending moment variation with For Class AA loading the bending moment variation
span at 0.2 L with span at 0.1 L
CONCLUDING REMARKS