P2 H Subbarao

CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES IRC:112 Session 2 : Basis of Design
CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE
WORKSHOP ON CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES IRC:112 – 2011, ORGANISED BY ING-IABSE, 18-19 NOV 2016, MUMBAI WORKSHOP ON CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES IRC:112 – 2011, ORGANISED BY ING-IABSE, 18-19 NOV 2016, MUMBAI
Session - 2 : BASIS OF DESIGN (SECTION 5)
Dr. HARSHAVARDHAN SUBBARAO The Aim of the Structural design is to design a structure so that it fulfills its
CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, CONSTRUMA CONSULTANCY PVT LTD
Chairman of Scientific Committee & Vice President of IABSE , Zurich. intended purpose during its intended lifetime
Harshavardhan Subbarao, holds a Ph.D. from Imperial College,

London. He has been involved with a number of Landmark • with adequate safety (in terms of strength, stability and structural
projects such as Signature Cable Stayed Bridge, Delhi; 4.6km integrity),
Add Rail-cum-Road Bridge, Patna; Bridge No. 20 on JURL; metros,
Photograph viaducts, elevated roads, arch and extradosed bridges,
underpasses etc. A member of the Technical Committee of IABSE, • adequate serviceability ( in terms of stiffness, durability, etc.)
several committees of IRC and various International and National • economy
bodies, he has over 30 years of experience and a number of
papers and bridge projects to his credit.
Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
q Contents
• Sources of Information q SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND OTHER REFERENCES
• Eurospeak
• 1.0 Background of Section 5 PUBLICATIONS
• 2.0 Coverage of IRC:112 – 2011
• 3.0 Section Wise Observations on Section 5 1) Eurocode ‘Basis of Design’: 1990:2002
• 4.0 Aims of Design 2) Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures: 1992-1-1:2004
• 5.0 Limit State Philosophy of Design (Section 5.2)
• 6.0 Limit States(Section 5.3) 3) CEB-FIP Model Code 1990
• 7.0 Actions & their Combinations (Section 5.4)
• 8.0 Representative values of Properties of materials (Section 5.5) 4) Bulletin 51: Structural Concrete, Textbook on behaviour, design, and
• 9.0 Analytical Methods to Evaluate Behavior of Structures (Section 5.6) performance (Second edition) by FIB 2009
• 10.0 Design Based on Full Scale Testing (Section 5.7)
• 11.0 Durability Aspect (Section 5.8)

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE
q EUROSPEAK Ø Uncertainties in Design :
• ‘Action’ means a load, or an imposed deformation (e.g. temperature

effects or settlement)
• ‘Effects of Actions’ or ‘Action effects” are internal moments and forces,
bending moments, shear forces and deformations caused by actions
• ‘Strength’ is a mechanical property of a material, in units of stress
• ‘Resistance’ is a mechanical property of a cross- section of a member, or
a member or structure
Fig. 1 Typical example of frequency distribution of wind loads on a structure
1
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
Ø Uncertainties in Design : q Safety Concepts in General

Structural calculations normally imply the following three ‘steps’ :
• Calculations of the structural action/load effect or response, S
• Calculation of the resistance/capacity, R
• Comparison of R and S: The structure is ‘safe’, if R-S>0 by a
certain margin
Loads, material properties, structural and mechanical models and the
construction method involve a number of uncertainties, which require
an acceptable margin between R and S. The existence of structural
damage and/or deterioration introduce additional uncertainties not
considered in design.
Fig. 2 Typical example of frequency distribution of concrete strength

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE
Ø Partial Safety Factor Format 1.0 BACKGROUND OF SECTION 5

• Earlier Codes based on ‘Working load/Allowable stress’ philosophy used
• The multiple safety factor format adopted by the Code, is well understood classical methods of analysis and design practices
the so-called partial safety factor format, which may be followed in a country.
expressed as follows:
• The concepts of Safety and methods to achieve the same varied a lot,
but these discrepancies did not bother the practising engineers much.
• All this changed slowly in the first half of the 20th century as the
In order to gain code acceptance, the probabilistic ‘reliability-based’ engineering knowledge started developing in many institutions within a
approach had to be simplified and reduced to a deterministic format country, was shared between different fields of applications and most
involving multiple (partial) safety factors (rather than probability of failure). importantly, shared between the countries, the process being accelerated
during and after the world wars.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Background of Section 5 ….. contd Background of Section 5 ….. contd

• IRC decided to revise its bridge codes for Concrete Bridges and taking
• New knowledge was developed and shared, by systematic research to
benefit of all. The strong impetus to this effort came from Europe, benefit of the Model Code MC-90 and drafts of Euro codes being
where directive was given to form Euro Codes, common to entire developed in parallel. It brought IRC 112 to the status of “New
European Community. This exercise in a span of 15 years or so, Generation, rationalized Code”, up-to-date to the first decade of 21st
revolutionized the structural engineering Codes by: (a) basing them on Century, and transparent to the core.
sound theoretical principles of safety, by adopting probabilistic reliability
based approach; together with (b) the Limit State Philosophy, and (c) • IRC-112, therefore, has to bring to the attention of the users the basic
shared common up-to-date knowledge as well as (d) technology. principles, safety formats, design philosophy and the new methods. In
fact, bring a whole working generation in the age group of 22 to 65 on a
• In India the Standards and Codes borrowed much from the British common footing with Codal guidance to operate in the new
Standards, but increasingly started borrowing from other English environment.
Speaking World, as well as from French and Germans.
• This is the purpose of this ‘Non- Operative’ Section 5 ’ in the Code.
2
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
2.0 COVERAGE OF IRC: 112 - 2011 Coverage of IRC: 112 – 2011 ….contd
Whether explicitly stated or implied, the subject matter of IRC:112 d) Stated (or Unstated) Aims: Safety, serviceability, durability, and
covers the following: economy are the aims – may or may not be stated explicitly, but they
a) Statement of Philosophy, ‘Basis of Design: The code should form a strong background of contents of the code.
clearly state its aims and its approach adopted to achieve the aims. e) Expected Minimum Requirements of Structures: The ‘requirements’
b) Established Knowledge/Theory: is reiterated in the Code to are the description of the characteristics that a structure should
minimum necessary extent to indicate the basis for application possess in order to meet the “aims” stated in (d). This is followed by
Sections. setting up corresponding ‘design criteria’. The code presumes that by
c) Analytical Models and simplifications: Modern codes cover this satisfying design criteria the requirements will be met.
topic explicitly. They distinguish between the simple, normally met f) Rules and Practices : A set of rules, derived from theory or from
methods, well established by long use and the more advanced practice, and acceptable analytical models used in predicting the
methods of analysis, which involves use of more accurate, if not characteristics/properties of the designed structure (element), use of
exact, properties of materials. which meets the ‘requirements’ stated in (d).

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Coverage of IRC: 112 – 2011 ….contd 3.0 CLAUSE WISE OBSERVATIONS ON SECTION 5
g) Materials: Acceptable materials and their properties. The most Advantages from introduction of Section 5
commonly used materials are included covering the essential
properties - but not exhaustively. • Codal section 5 adds a strong element of transparency to the Code. On
h) Workmanship: Recommended workmanship practices are covered. the basis of the approach outlined in this section, the Codal
These are essentially technical specifications, but are not complete recommendations can be used with full understanding of their context,
by themselves and are not exhaustive like tender specifications. applicability and limitations.
Aspects of Quality Assurance, Reliability, Operation and
Maintenance are addressed to varying degree.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Clause Wise Observations .....contd

Clause Wise Observations on Section 5 …contd • The short paragraph 5.1.1 defines the targets of performance precisely,
but less concisely. The term “disproportionate to the original cause (of
• Where extra information - available from literature or other international
accidental load)” needs some examples to clarify the concept.
codes - is considered in the design, it can be critically evaluated for its
applicability and consistency for combining the same with the Codal
approach of IRC:112. • Clause 5.1.1 If one imagines a type of un-balanced cantilever type of
superstructure supported on slim piers which are prone to accidental hit
• The future modifications of the Code itself, made to include new by a commercial vehicle passing on road below resulting in its
knowledge and technological developments, can be presented in a way destruction, a collapse of one pier due to the accident will lead to
which is consistent with the overall philosophy and basis of design of the successive collapse of all the spans of the bridge – a damage
Code. disproportionate to the event of accidental hit, (which is not a very
unlikely event, in any case). The choice of such superstructure should
be disallowed by this performance requirement, but is not specifically
prohibited by the Code.
3
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
4.0 AIMS OF DESIGN (SECTION 5.1) q Reliability Aspects and Codal Approach (Section5.1.2 )
• Degree of Reliability: The “acceptable” low level of probability of failure
The bridge should : in meeting its expected performance.
a) perform its function • This Section states that “At the present state of knowledge, determination
of probability or reliability is possible only in limited cases for simple
b) be safe against all actions structures”.
• The code tries to achieve the desirable level of reliability by approximate
with appropriate “degree of reliability” during Construction methods.
& its Design Service Life. • This statement, though true, rather underplays the role and application of
research of the probabilistic methods by the “International codes and
practice” from which IRC: 112 borrows heavily.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Reliability and Codal Approach .....contd Reliability and Codal Approach .....contd
It is generally expressed in terms of target reliability index, β
The probability and reliability based evaluation of the risk of achieving The Code strives to achieve the desirable degree of reliability by
or not achieving a certain aim, and keeping the risk within acceptable approximate methods based upon a combination of the following:
limits is the fundamental approach adopted by the International Codes (1) Known statistical parameters describing properties of
• For ULS : β = 4.75 ( i.e. probability of failure occurring is 1 in 10 -6 ) materials and actions.
• For SLS : β = 3.72 ( i.e. probability of failure occurring is 1 in 10 -4 ) (2) Deterministic models of structural behavior.
10 -1 10 -2 10 -3 10 -4 10 -5 10 -6 10 -7 Postulated (3) The international practices and past experience of
β 1.3 2.3 3.1 3.7 4.2 4.7 5.2
relationship of Pf & β acceptable/ unacceptable performance of structures.
at ULS (of failure in
(4) Partial factors for actions and resistance models based on
. refern period of 1 yr.)
calibration and rationalization of existing international practices.
• IRC:112 has not explicitly defined the ‘acceptable limits’ used in the
Code in terms of probability or the ‘β’ factor.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
Ø Classical Reliability Models : Ø Classical Reliability Models :

1. Strength Design Model 2. Serviceability Design Model
Fig. 3.4 Classical reliability model

Fig. 3.3 Classical reliability model for for serviceability design
strength design
4
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
5.0 LIMIT STATE PHILOSOPHY OF DESIGN (SECTION 5.2) Limit State Philosophy of Design ..... contd
• Limit state philosophy of design refers to a condition of a structure Some general observations and shortcomings are given below:
beyond which it no longer fulfills the relevant design criteria. A
1) The IRC has shifted rather late to the limit state philosophy as
structure designed by limit state method is proportioned to sustain
compared to the international codes or to the Indian codes for
all actions likely to occur during its design life, and to remain fit for
building applications (IS:456).
use, with an appropriate level of reliability, for each limit state.
• IRC 112 needs to be fully understood as it is key to designing
• However, in my opinion, it has not paid enough justice to the
structures that have an acceptable level of safety, serviceability,
‘Serviceability Limit State’. For e.g. while the Code covers
durability and economy; with opportunities for innovation.
pedestrian bridges, the SLS of vibration due to footfall has not
been covered.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Limit State Philosophy of Design ..... contd Limit State Philosophy of Design ..... contd
2) Other major miss out, - for historical reasons of inability to do so, - • 3) The short paragraph 5.1.1 defines the targets of performance precisely, but
is not specifically asking for the ductile failure of the super less concisely. The term “disproportionate to the original cause (of accidental
load)” needs some examples to clarify the concept.
structure in UTS. In case of RC bridges it is ensured by choice of
the under reinforced section in the sectional design.
• Clause 5.1.1 If one imagines a type of un-balanced cantilever type of
superstructure supported on slim piers which are prone to accidental hit by a
• However, while staying within the all other requirements of commercial vehicle passing on road below resulting in its destruction, a
IRC:112, it is possible to choose a combination of partially bonded collapse of one pier due to the accident will lead to successive collapse of all
the spans of the bridge – a damage disproportionate to the event of accidental
and partially unbonded HTS to achieve the required high amount
hit, (which is not a very unlikely event, in any case). The choice of such
of pre-stress for SLS as well as the yielding of the bonded steel, superstructure should be disallowed by this performance requirement, but is not
thus making ductile behaviour possible. specifically prohibited by the Code.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Limit State Philosophy of Design ..... contd Limit State Philosophy of Design ..... contd
(4) The state of cracking, or increase in cracking of the existing and (5) The limit state approach is to be followed for structural design of
old R.C. bridges, due to repetitive loading cycles or deterioration bridge components only.
of bond is not mentioned at all. BUT for FOUNDATIONS, Until the foundation code, IRC:78 is
modified to include material safety factors and resistance
Admittedly, the Code is not meant to cover the assessment or factors for the soil parameters,
retrofitting of the old bridges, nevertheless, the Industry tends to a) un-factored loads are to be used for checking of base pressure
use it for such purposes. under foundation for stability check for foundation and for
checking of maximum load on pile foundation
The Code should give some guidelines or warnings about such b) table 3.4 of IRC:6-2010 therefore shall be used only for the
use. structural design till such time.
5
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
6.0 LIMIT STATES(SECTION 5.3) LIMIT STATES ……contd

• Ultimate limit states (ULS) associated with collapse or other Fatigue vehicle has been introduced in IRC 6. However, It is an interim
forms of structural failure, for example, through flexural failure, measure & further work is required to come to ideal vehicle/s and lay down
shear failure, buckling, failure of anchorages. the procedure for fatigue verification by IRC B2 Committee. However, the
They are grouped under : fatigue limit state verification can be avoided provided following conditions
• Limit state of equilibrium are met with:
• Limit state of strength
• Serviceability limit states (SLS) correspond to conditions (a) For Reinforced concrete structures when the stress in the tensile
beyond which specified service requirements are no longer reinforcement is maintained less than 300 MPa under Rare
met, They are categorized as below : Combination of Serviceability Limit State as against 0.8 fy specified
• Limit state of internal stress(excessive stress) in Section no. 12.2.2 of the Code.
• Limit state of crack control(excessive cracking)
(b) For pre-stressed concrete structures under the frequent combination
• Limit state of deformation(excessive deformation)
of actions and pre-stressing force only compressive stresses occur at
• Limit state of vibration
the extreme concrete fibers under frequent load combination of SLS.
• Limit state of fatigue

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE
BASIC PRINCIPAL OF LIMIT STATE DESIGN (ULS) q LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS
(a) Ultimate Limit State
• Minoration of strengths of concrete, reinforcement , pre-stressing 1. Basic Combination
• Majoration of effects (loads) - Check Equilibrium (overturning, sliding, uplift)

- Check Structural Strength
• Combine effects of actions with different load factors in different
2. Accidental Combination
combinations (Vehicle collision, barge impact, Impact due to floating
bodies)
3. Seismic Combination

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
q LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS q Design situations

(b) Serviceability Limit State
1) The relevant design situations shall be selected taking into
1. Rare Combination account the circumstances under which the structure is required
2. Frequent Combination to fulfil its function.
- Check deflection, vibration, crack width in pre-stressed

concrete 2) Design situations shall be classified as follows :
- Check fatigue Persistent design situations, which refer to the conditions of
normal use
3. Quasi-permanent Combination
Transient design situations, which refer to temporary
- Check crack width in R.C.C., settlement, creep, stress conditions applicable to the structure, e.g. during execution or
due to permanent loads repair
6
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
q Design situations 7.0 ACTIONS AND THEIR COMBINATIONS (SECTION 5.4)

Types of action:
(3) The selected design situations shall be sufficiently severe and - Direct action, i.e. force (load) applied to structure.
varied so as to encompass all conditions that can reasonably be - Indirect action, i.e. from imposed or constrained deformation,
foreseen to occur during the execution and use of the structure. such as that caused by settlement, temperature changes,
seismic acceleration and impact loads.
Actions are classified:
(a) By their variation In time (duration of application) :
- Permanent Actions (G), e.g. self-weight,
- Variable Actions (Q), e.g. imposed live loads,
- Accidental Actions (A), e.g. barge Impact loads.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Actions and their Combinations …contd q Characteristic and Combinational Values of Actions
• Characteristic value
Some variable actions acting for long durations are treated on par with
permanent actions. These are called 'Quasi-Permanent‘ actions. Pre- Ø the main representative value, based upon the statistical
stressing force (P) is a permanent action with time-dependent variation. distribution of magnitudes of action (e.g. a mean value, or
upper or lower value). Alternatively, a representative 'nominal
(b) By their nature and/or by response of the structure to them: value' is specified which is treated as a characteristic value.
Combinational values
- Static actions are those which do not cause significant acceleration Ø Structure is acted upon by various direct or indirect actions at
different times in different combinations, representing various
- Dynamic actions are those which cause significant acceleration design situations. Some of these situations are represented
by a few combinations chosen for design checks

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
q Characteristic and combinational values of actions 8.0 REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS (Sect 5.5)
Ø The combinational value is represented by characteristic • Statistical variation in numerical values of Material properties
value multiplied by a factor, which takes into account the • Strong co-relations with other properties
probability of simultaneous occurrence of the most likely
unfavorable values of several independent actions. • Correlations pre based on laboratory or field observations and
statistical regression analysis.
Ø Various design situations (represented by various load • A few of these properties are chosen as descriptive and/or
combinations) for which different limit states are to be
representative properties of the materials
checked are given in IRC:6 and Annexure A-1.
• Often used to define the material itself or its grade (e.g. concrete
grade M40 and reinforcing steel Fe 500).
7
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
8.0 REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS (Sect 5.5) 9.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS TO EVALUATE BEHAVIOR OF
• Depending upon the purpose of carrying out the evaluation, one or more STRUCTURES(SECTION 5.6)
of the following three representative values are used in the design: • Global analysis of structure
1. Average or statistical Mean value. • Local analysis
2. Lower Characteristic value is based on the statistical distribution • Idealization, modeling and adequacy
function or the statistical mean value suitably reduced by a factor
(5 percent fractile). Ø GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURE (Section 5.6.1)
3. Upper Characteristic value is based on the statistical distribution • The purpose of this analysis is the verification of overall stability on
function, or the statistical mean value suitably increased by a factor the whole or a part of the structure. These effects include internal
(95 percent fractile). forces and moments stresses, stains, curvatures, rotations and
THE CHARACTERISTIC VALUE IS THAT VALUE BELOW WHICH 5% OF TEST
displacements in static or dynamic modes which can be evaluated
RESULTS MAY BE EXPECTED TO FALL. by Classical methods of mechanics or modern techniques such as
finite element can be used for analysis.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
5.6.1 GLOBAL ANALYSIS
RESULTS OF GLOBAL ANALYSIS: EXTERNAL PT

APPLIED
GLOBAL ANALYSIS:FEM SOLID MODEL OF BOX GIRDER DECK SLAB REMOVED,
EXTERNAL PT APPLIED

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
10.0 DESIGN BASED ON FULL SCALE TESTING (Section 5.7)

For some elements, design based on the experimentally
established use of materials, structural configurations and
detailing is accepted by the Code. Some instances where this can
be used advantageously include:
• Precast elements with large repetitions
• Pre-stressed anchor blocks
• Crash barriers
Before undertaking full scale testing the acceptance criteria
regarding load carrying capacity and deformation limit should
TENSION BEHIND ANCHOR BLOCKS INVESTIGATED be agreed upon.
8
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
11.0 DURABILITY ASPECTS (SECTION 5.8) Durability Aspects …contd

• The durability of a structure is its ability to remain fit for use during • After specifically mentioning the aggressive elements and the
the design working life given appropriate maintenance. The resisting mechanism in the design basis, both of which are about
structure should be designed in such a way, and/or provided with the micro-environment surrounding steel in the concrete, the
protection so that no significant deterioration is likely to occur Codal Sections are still based on the atmospheric classification
within the period between successive inspections. The need for of the geographical region in which the intended structure will be
critical parts of the structure to be available for inspection without built, thus, following the old practice of IRC: 18 and IRC:21.
complicated dismantling should be considered in the design.
• It is hoped that in the future revisions Durability will be put on
more rational basis so that effective use of the appropriate
• The basis of design stated in section 5.8.5 is not directly reflected preventive mechanisms can be made i.e. Performance Based
in the Codal Sections dealing with Durability Service Life Design

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
Durability Aspects …contd
In defining DSL take into account:

• Use of appropriate values of time-dependent material properties
• Specification of actions and action-effects
• Control of properties of materials
• Control of attack on materials by aggressive elements
• Maintenance

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
ING-IABSE ING-IABSE
q To Conclude
• It is hoped that the observations and comments given here,
and read in addition to the Codal Section 5 will prepare the
average engineers to use the code intelligently and with
better understanding of its approach and methods. Thank you
h.subbarao@construma.in
9
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
BASIC PRINCIPAL OF LIMIT STATE DESIGN (ULS) Design Consideration

The Aim of the Structural design is to design a structure so that it fulfills
its intended purpose during its intended lifetime
• Minoration of strengths of concrete, reinforcement ,pre-stressing
• with adequate safety (in terms of strength, stability and structural
• Majoration of effects (loads) integrity),
• adequate serviceability(in terms of stiffness, durability, etc.)
• Combine effects with different load factors in different combinations
• economy

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
SAFETY : SERVICEABILITY:
• Implies that the likelihood of (partial or total) collapse od the • implies satisfactory performance of the structure under service
structure is acceptably low not only under normal expected loads, without discomfort to the user due to excessive
loads (service loads), but also under abnormal but probable deflection, cracking, vibration, etc.
overloads (such as due to live loads, earthquake and/or extreme • A design that adequately satisfies the ‘Safety’ requirement need
wind). not necessarily satisfy the ‘serviceability’ requirement.
• Another related aspects of safety is structural integrity. The
objective here is to minimize the likelihood of progressive
collapse triggered by a local failure.

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
• Service Load (or working load) : The expected load to which the Ø Uncertainties in Design :
structure is subjected to in its normal use/service. It does not
include any possible overloading or any safety factor.
• Ultimate Load: The maximum load the member or structure, as
the case may be, can carry before failure.
Ø Design Philosophy
In order to gain code acceptance, the probabilistic ‘reliability-
based’ approach had to be simplified and reduced to a
deterministic format involving multiple (partial) safety factors
(rather than probability of failure). Fig. 1 Typical example of frequency distribution of wind loads on a structure
10
CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
Ø Uncertainties in Design : Ø Classical Reliability Models :

1. Strength Design Model
Fig. 3.3 Classical reliability model for

Fig. 2 Typical example of frequency distribution of concrete strength strength design

CONSTRUMA CONSTRUMA
Ø Classical Reliability Models :

Ø Partial Safety Factor Format
2. Serviceability Design Model
• The multiple safety factor format recommended by
CEB−FIP and adopted by the Code, is the so-called partial
safety factor format, which may be expressed as follows:
Fig. 3.4 Classical reliability model

for serviceability design
11

P2 H Subbarao

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

P2 H Subbarao

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES IRC:112 Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session - 2 : BASIS OF DESIGN (SECTION 5)

Harshavardhan Subbarao, holds a Ph.D. from Imperial College,

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

q EUROSPEAK Ø Uncertainties in Design :

• ‘Action’ means a load, or an imposed deformation (e.g. temperature

Ø Uncertainties in Design : q Safety Concepts in General

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Ø Partial Safety Factor Format 1.0 BACKGROUND OF SECTION 5

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Background of Section 5 ….. contd Background of Section 5 ….. contd

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Clause Wise Observations .....contd

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Ø Classical Reliability Models : Ø Classical Reliability Models :

Fig. 3.4 Classical reliability model

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

6.0 LIMIT STATES(SECTION 5.3) LIMIT STATES ……contd

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 1 : Basis of Design

• Majoration of effects (loads) - Check Equilibrium (overturning, sliding, uplift)

Session 1 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

q LOADS AND LOAD COMBINATIONS q Design situations

- Check deflection, vibration, crack width in pre-stressed

q Design situations 7.0 ACTIONS AND THEIR COMBINATIONS (SECTION 5.4)

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

5.6.1 GLOBAL ANALYSIS

RESULTS OF GLOBAL ANALYSIS: EXTERNAL PT

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

10.0 DESIGN BASED ON FULL SCALE TESTING (Section 5.7)

11.0 DURABILITY ASPECTS (SECTION 5.8) Durability Aspects …contd

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Durability Aspects …contd

In defining DSL take into account:

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

BASIC PRINCIPAL OF LIMIT STATE DESIGN (ULS) Design Consideration

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Ø Uncertainties in Design : Ø Classical Reliability Models :

Fig. 3.3 Classical reliability model for

Session 2 : Basis of Design Session 2 : Basis of Design

Ø Classical Reliability Models :

Fig. 3.4 Classical reliability model

You might also like