You are on page 1of 2

Design of Abutment for straight Minor bridges

1. Abutment footing is unsafe in sliding check. Effect of µ has not been considered. Please
review.
Reply: The same has been reviewed and found to be in order.Sample Check for one of straight
& one skew bridge is attached for your reference, however check of any bridge of your choice
may be sent in case of any issue observed after independent check from your side.
Kindly note that the submissions has already made to your goodself 6 months before and GFC
drawings has been issued one & a half months before and the issues at this stage without your
independent check is not warranted.

2. The Ast provided as horizontal reinforcement in abutment shaft is less than the requirements.
Please review.
Reply: Ast provided has been reviewed and found to be in order as per codal provisions. Kindly
review as per your independent check in line with IRC:112-2011 clause 16.3.2.
Kindly note that the submissions has already made to your goodself 6 months before and GFC
drawings has been issued one & a half months before and the issues at this stage without your
independent check is not warranted.

Minor Bridge at design Ch. 10+648:

3. Dimension of heel & toe of abutment has been considered as 3.9m & 2.9m in design note
however as per dimension drawing. The same dimensions are 3.8m & 2.8m respectively.
Please review.
Reply: Corrected in design in line with drawings and found to be in order. Check for the same
is attached for your reference. We understand the issue is closed now.

Design of Abutment for Skew Minor Bridges:

4. Crack width in SLS quasi permanent combinations do not satisfy cl 12.3.4 of IRC: 112-2011 in
design of abutment footing for minor bridges at chainages 12+600, 14+800, 23+080, 26+675.
Please review.
Reply: Checked and found to be in order. Sample Check for bridge at Ch. 12+600 is attached
for your reference. The check of any bridge if required further may be asked after independent
check from your side to avoid un-necessary delay at this stage. Kindly note that the
submissions has already made to your goodself 6 months before and GFC drawings has been
issued one & a half months before and the issues at this stage without your independent check
is not desired and serious concern if any as per your independent check along with
suggestions/improvement for our confirmation.

5. Effect of µ has not been considered in sliding check of abutment. Also, cos component of Earth
pressure has been considered in overturning effect, whereas sin component of longitudinal

. Reply: Kindly refer reply of point no. Please review. 12+600: 8. bearing force has been considered in overturning effect. Reply: Reviewed again & found in order. 1 6.5m in design note of abutment. Please consider cos component of both the forces as longitudinal overturning load. Depth of superstructure has been considered as 0. Reply: Corrected in design however. Minor Bridge at design Ch. Check for the same is attached for your reference. The Ast provided as horizontal reinforcement in abutment shaft is less than the requirements. Please provide the checks for secondary effect of pier shaft for all minor bridges as pier shaft height is comparatively high. it does not impact in design. but the same has been shown 0. We understand issue is closed now. In view of the above. you are therefore requested to kindly release the GFC drawings at the earliest. Reply: Kindly reply of point no. Please review.7m in GAD & Dimension details. 2 Design of pier for Minor Bridges 7. Kindly reconfirm as per your independent check.

Related Interests