Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Thematic Area 1
Standards and Specifications
CHAPTER 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4. 1: Code of Practices Used in EA ......................................................................................... 9
Table 4. 2: Comparison of Code of Practices for Bridge Design...................................................... 10
Table 4. 3: Classes of special vehicles ........................................................................................... 12
Table 4. 4 - Description of special vehicles ..................................................................................... 12
BS British Standard
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The principle objective of this study is to make it possible to have a reliable, efficient and safe road
transport services in EAC region. This chapter addresses this objective by making
recommendations about the selection of design code standard for the EAC region.
In order to adequately address the scope of work, the approach and methodology adopted by the
study involved initial visits to EAC Partner States for the purpose of collecting bridge design
standards and other documents and information related to bridge design practice in each partner
state, preparation and submission of an Inception Report, detailed review of design standards and
preparation of draft working papers for experts’ views and comments through experts meetings in
each EAC Partner State.
The study found that bridge design standards and practices East Africa are: Burundi is using both
German and French design standards, Rwanda is using the two standards as well as British and
American standards while Kenya, Tanzania Mainland and Zanzibar as well as Uganda are using
British design standard. Another design standard that is available for EA region is the code of
practice for the Design of Road Bridges and culverts design standard of the Southern African
Transport and Communications Commission (SATCC), which was also derived largely from the
American and English practice, and AASHTO design guide. Each design standard was reviewed in
terms of the most important design features for proper bridge design; design controls and criteria,
types of loading
A comparative assessment of the bridge design standards practised in the EAC region and
elsewhere revealed a number of design features which are common and unique to particular
countries.
On the basis of the results of comparative assessment of the various standards, the study outlined
recommendation concerning potential areas for harmonisation and improvements. The study also
discussed about the suitability of various design standards in the EAC region and makes
recommendation on the most suitable design standard for our region.
4.1. INTRODUCTION
4.1.1 Background
As part of the on going EAC efforts to enhance trade among the Partner States and with outside
world thereby improving the region’s economy and competitiveness, BICO was contracted to work
on transport facilitation component of the East African Trade and Transport Facilitation Project
(EATTFP). The component aims at making it possible to have reliable, efficient and safe road
transport services in the region. As part of the contract, therefore BICO was required to review and
harmonise the following thematic areas:
This chapter is part of the outputs of the harmonisation process of the above thematic areas, and
more particularly Thematic Area 1: Harmonisation of Standards and Specifications. Several
subcomponents were identified to fall under this thematic area as follows:
i. Harmonisation of road geometric design standards
ii. Harmonisation of road pavement and materials design standards
iii. Harmonisation of bridge design standards
iv. Harmonisation of specifications for road and bridge works
v. Harmonisation of road and bridge maintenance standards
vi. Harmonisation of road signs, traffic signals and marking
vii. Harmonisation of vehicle safety and fitness
viii. Harmonisation of vehicle dimensions and combinations
ix. Harmonisation of transportation of abnormal, awkward and hazardous loads
Therefore this chapter addresses the third subcomponent of thematic area one (1).
One of the principal objectives of this chapter is to make recommendations about harmonisation of
bridge design standards for the EAC region such that the following can be achieved:
Provision of safe and comfortable riding conditions to all road users
Provision of low cost of ownership (i.e. minimum whole of life cost)
The chapter therefore discusses about practised bridge design standards within the EAC member
countries as well as applicable SADC and other international standards, and makes
recommendations for the EAC.
As outlined in the TOR, the scope of work under thematic area one (1) included:
(i) Review existing documents/ statutes and propose improvements to the same
(ii) Identify areas of commonality which lend themselves to harmonization
(iii) Propose and implement the incorporation of areas unique to particular countries into
the harmonized regimes
(iv) Give an indication of the impact of harmonization
(v) Conduct stakeholder workshops to gain consensus on the harmonization of different
regulations and standards
Visit EAC Partner States for the purpose of collecting documents from each partner state
and to make initial contacts with the responsible officials. The visits involved one member of
the consultant’s team visiting the contact person in the respective partner state to identify
and collect documents relevant to all thematic areas.
Preparation of an Inception Report and submission of the same to the EAC Secretariat.
Detailed documents review, situational analysis and preparation of draft working papers.
Collection of experts’ views and comments on the draft working papers through experts
meetings in each EAC Partner State. Meetings were held as follows:
o Nairobi, Kenya – 4th July, 2011
o Bujumbura, Burundi – 6th July, 2011
o Kigali, Rwanda – 8th July, 2011
o Kampala, Uganda – 11th to 12th July, 2011
o Dar es Salaam, Tanzania – 15th July, 2011
o Zanzibar, Tanzania – 25th July, 2011
The process of collection of experts’ views was concluded by revising the draft working papers so
as to prepare Working Papers for submission to the EAC Secretariat for comments by the Technical
Committee. This step will be followed by the revision of the papers to account for the committee’s
comments and preparation of Draft Final Report.
Additionally, it should also be noted that the SADC region has its own bridge design standard,
SATCC code of practice for bridge design.
4.4.2 Loads
The classification of loads is different by each code of practice. The SATCC guide specifies three
types of Loading (NA,NB and NC) while BS5400 has two loading type (NA and NB). Nominal NB
loading is a unit loading representing a single abnormal heavy vehicle. The magnitude of NB
loading is as follows:
For Type NB36 Loading referred to in Standard Traffic loading, 36 units of type NB loading
shall be applied, which equals an axle loading of 360 kN, i.e. 90 kN per wheel. The
effective contact area is accordingly defined by a circle of 340 mm diameter or a square
having a 300 mm side.
For Type NB24 Loading referred to Abnormal Loading, 24 units of type NB Loading shall be
applied which equals an axle loading of 240 kN, i.e. 50 kN per wheel. The effective contact
area is accordingly defined by a circle of 276 mm diameter or a Square having a 245 mm
side.
On the other hand, BS 5400 specifies the minimum number of units of type HB loading that should
normally be considered as 25, but this number may be increased up to 45 if so directed by the
appropriate authority. One unit is taken as equal to 10 kN per axle (i.e. 2.5 kN per wheel).The
overall length of the HB vehicle is taken as 10, 15, 20, 25 or 30 m for inner axle spacings of 6, 11,
16, 21 or 26 m respectively, and the effects of the most severe of these cases is usually adopted. In
Tanzania, the minimum number of HB loading units that are usually considered for bridge design is
37.5.
Eurocode 1 Part 2-prEN 1991-2-2002 considers the loading of 600 kN per 4-axle line with a notation
of 600/150 to 3600 kN per 9 axle-lines of 200 kN (spacing 12 m)+ 9 axle-lines of 200 kN with a
notation of 3600/200/200. The code provides basic models of special vehicles that are defined in
Tables 4.3 and 4.4. It should be noted that the basic models of special vehicles correspond to
various levels of abnormal loads that can be authorised to travel on particular routes of the
European highway network while vehicle widths of 3.00 m for the 150 and 200 kN axle-lines, and of
4.50 m for the 240 kN axle-lines are assumed.
n = 6×200 + 6×200
e = 5×1,5+12+5×1,5
3000 kN n = 15×200 N = 1×120 + 12×240
e = 1,50 m e = 1,50 m
n = 8×200 + 7×200
e = 7×1,5+12+6×1,5
3600 kN n = 18×200 N = 15×240
e = 1,50 m e = 1,50 m
n = 8×240 + 7×240
e = 7×1,5+12+6×1,5
NOTE
n number of axles multiplied by the weight (kN) of each axle in each group
e axle spacing (m) within and between each group.
The above loads are similar to the NA loading used today for the design of bridge decks, as
recommended by both the SATCC Code of Practice for the Design of Road Bridges and Culverts and
TM7: Code of Practice for the Design of Highway Bridges and Culverts in Southern Africa. BS5400:
Specifications for Loads also specifies a similar load referred to as the HA Loading. However, today on
top of the loading referred to above, two additional loads are recommended specifically to take into
account the effects of abnormal loads (NB Loading) and superloads (NC Loading).
4.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
The foregoing assessments were carried out to determine the most suitable set of codes for
designing the bridge. The three options available were:
BS 5400 is recommended for use in the EAC region as it provides the highway loading criteria
that most closely correspond to the situation expected in East Africa. Trucks are often heavily
loaded, matching the load patterns predicted within the British standard. For instance, live load
conditions of 37.5 BS HB loading units, which translates to 150 tons, results into much higher
live load than the prevailing truck loading conditions and hence higher safety margins.
On the other hand, some of the principles contained in the Eurocodes (which have been
calibrated to give similar results to BS 5400) as well as the AASHTO LRFD bridge design
specifications have not been studied in detail for major bridge projects in our region and
consequently their application in EA region should be subject to a detailed study on their
appropriateness to East Africa.