Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3.7 Design of Sub-Structure:: 3.7.1 PIER DESIGN: (A) Dead Load From Super Structure
3.7 Design of Sub-Structure:: 3.7.1 PIER DESIGN: (A) Dead Load From Super Structure
7 DESIGN OF SUB-STRUCTURE:
3.7.1 PIER DESIGN:
ey = 2.5 m
1
(c) Stability Check:
So DL of pier cap=9x1.4.0.25x25=78.75KN.
DL of 6 pedestals=6x(0.45x0.45x0.45x0.25)=13.67KN
DL of pier=6x1x9x25+2(π/8x0.52x6x25)=1350+29.45≈1380KN
Total DL =1473+2916=4389kN
Factored DL=4389x1.5=6584kN
Max.=1050/9+(1705x6)/1x92
=116.67+129.3
=245.97KN/m2=2.246N/mm2
2
Min.=1050/9-1705/1x92/6
= 116.67-129.30= -12.63KN/m 2
= -0.0126N/mm2
Stress in YY dinn
Max.=Pyy/A+M/Z
=Pyy/A+Muy/Z
=682/9+394x 6/9
=75.77+262.667
=338.45KN/m2=0.338N/mm2
Min.=Pyy/A-M/z
=-186.897KN/m2=-0.187n/mm2
i)Due to breaking
i.e. 0.2x700=140KN.
Factored moment=140x1.5x6.6=1386kN/m
Z= bd2/6=9x12/6=1.5m3
So M/Z=140x1.5x6.6/1.5=924KN/m 2 =0.924N/mm2
3
Right side span=DL +LL
According to AASHTO LRFD code for elastomeric bearing coefficient of resistance lies between
0.02 to 0.04
Dl + LL =4374+1050=5424KN
Resistance of bearing=0.04x5424+=217KN
Z=9x1/6=1.5m3
K1=1.08(referring to T1)
K3=1(topographic factor)
={(18.33x0.25)+(18.33x1)+18.33x(1.4+0.15)}
=57.234m2
LA=6+(0.45+0.05+1.4+0.95+0.25/2) =7.15m
4
Moment=89.82x7.15=642.213KN/m=643kNm
a)1.5(DL+LL)=1.5(4389+700)=7633.5KN
b)1.5(DL+WL)=1.5(4389+107.89)=6746KN
c)1.2(DL+LL+WL)=1.2(4389+107.89)=5396.27KN
At here LL should not be considered as our wind speed exceeds 130kmph(IRC 6:2000 LL-212.5)
6.Water current:
V=3m/s
P=52KV2=o.52x0.66x32=3.1KN/m2
P=3.1x1.4=4.34KN/m2
Area of obstruction=1x5.5=5.5m2
It acts at h/3 distance from base ABC is the pressure distribution after water current max. at top
& min. at bottom
So moment = (23.87x5.5)/3=87.53/2≈88/2=44KNm
=4.07x5.5x1=22.39KN
=1.48x9x5.5=73.26KN
M=73.26x5.5/3=268.62/2 kNm=270/2=135KNm
Z=9x12/6=1.5m3
thus = M/Z=268.62/2/1.5=179.08Kn/m2=(0.179N/4)N/mm2
At pier base
3)eccentric
loading due to LL
4)longitudinal Forces
5) Water current
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6
3.245 -1.347 3.36 -1.58
DL of pier=9x1x4x25+2(π/8x0.5x0.5x4x25)≈920KN
So total DL=2916+920+78.67+13.67=3929KN
3)eccentric loading
Due to LL
4)longitudunaltenus
_____________________________________________________
7
Stability analysis above 4m from pik cap
3)eccentric loading
due to LL
4)longitudinalForces
___________________________________________________
1.759 -0.55
1.793 0.78
Or (1000x9000)mm
Pu (factored) =6584+1050=7634kN
Mux = 682x2.5=1705kNm
Muy=1050x0.375=394kNm
Iy=13x9/12=0.75mm4
z=1x93/12=60.75mm4
breq=iy√12=0.75√12=2.59
hreq=iz√12=60.75√12=210.44
i y 0.75
y=eff.length/Ky;Ky=
√ √A
=
91
= 0.288
So y =1.3x6/0.288=27.02
ix 60.75
z=eff. Length/Kz;
√ √
Kz=
A
=
91
= 2.59
So z = 1.36/2.59 = 3.00; zz = xx
Condition I
z/y=1/9=0.111<2
ey=1.475m
ez or ex =0.375m
Condition – II
(ez/beq)/(ey/heq)=(0.375/2.59)/(1.475/210.44)=20.65>0.2
9
As the condition-I fails it should be designed as Bi-axially loaded column.
Assuming p=1.5
P/fck=1.5/35=0.042857=0.043
dI=45+20/2+10=65mm
dl/D=65/9000=0.00722
takingdI/D=0.05
Pu/fckbD=7634x103/35x1000x9000=0.0248=0.025
Muy=1050x0.375=394kNm
+ 1386kNm(breaking)
+ 1433kNm (resistance)
+ 135kNm(water current)
So Muy=3349kNm
Mux=1705kNm
d’/D=0.05and Pu/fckbD=0.072
=>Muy1=0.072x35x1000x90002=204120KNm
dl/D]y axis=65/1000=0.065=0.1
P/fck=0.043,d1/D=0.1,Pu/fckbD =0.025
Muy1/fck bD2=0.0672
=>Muy1=fck bD20.0672
=>Muy1=0.0672x35x9000x10002=21168KN
10
Referring to chart 63 of SP-16 and following the values of P=1.5 Fe=415 m=3
Puz/Ag=21
Puz=21x9000x1000=189000KN
Pu/Puz=7634/189000=0.041
Muy/Muy1=3349/21168=10.1
Mux/Mux1=1705/204120=0.0084
Mux/Mux1=0.85
P/fck =0.8/35=0.0228
Pu/fckbD=7634x103/35x1000x9000=0.0248=0.025
P/fck=0.0228 Pu/fckbD=7634000/3510009000=0.025
We get Mux1=0.48x35x1000x90002=136080KNm
Muy1/fck bD2=0.04
=>Muy1=0.04x35x9000x10002
=12600KNm
Puz/Ag=18.2
Puz=18.2x9000x1000=163800KN
Pu/Puz=7634/163800=0.0467
11
Mux/Mux1=1705/136080=0.0126
Spacing=18000/102=176.47c/c
Astp=18000x(π/4)x302/170=74844mm2
Since 1/4th of the main reinforcing bars i.e. 30mm # is 8.5 mm, that’s why we have chosen
10mm # bars as lateral and transverse reinforcement.
For reinforcement detailing, refer to Appendix-C
12
Fig-29 (Pedestal on pier and abutment)
1442 103
11.77 N / mm 2
Pressure or rubber paid 400 400
A1
A2
Pressure on loaded area and permissible bearing stress
A1
15.75 2 31.5 N / mm 2 9.013
A2
Permissible bearing stress (ok)
13
min. size of pedestal (L L) to carry out this type of pressure is
L
15.75 9.92
400
= 229
0.15
450 450 303.75 mm
min reinforcement 100
405
3bans
162
Providing 16mm bans 4
400
250mm c / c
Providing 3 bans in spacing 2
Ast p 122 4 452.389 405 mm 2
4 (ok)
400
133mm 130 mm.c / c
Spacing 3
1 1 1
Pc Pe P
14
PC c A 35 450 450 7087500 7087.5kN
2 EI 31.5 1
2
Pe
e2 2 10492623.18kN
e
v2 (are end is ticked and other end is hinged)
2
450 450 4503
e I 3417187500mm 4
2 and 12
1 1
2.3698 10 7 kN 1
Pe Pc
P 0.4 f ck A n f ck A SC
1 1 1 1
3.36 10 7 kN 1
Pu Pu Pc Pe
; (ok)
Preliminary dimensions
15
base slab width = 8m
ht. of stem = 6m
cos
2
1
ka
cos 2 cos sin sin
1 cos cos
350
00
2 / 3 22.50
2 35 22.5
3
23.336 22.5
So 23.336
k a 0.243
16
2
cos
2
1
kp
cos 2 cos sin sin
1
cos cos
= 9.547
a) STABILITY ANALYSIS:
Earth pressure:
1 1
PA k a H 2 0.246 19 9.952
2 2 231.37 232 kN / m
350
92.2 k N
Surcharge due to LL 0.85 2 0.08 3.6 2 0.08 m
185
ht 9.736 1.2m
So virtual 19 (acc to IRC-6:2014)
Horizontal force due to approach slab 0.3 25 0.243 9.95 = 18.15 kN/m
9.95
m
The above 2 forces act at a distance act at a distance 2 from base.
17
Weight of earth on heel slab:
49 3
73.5 kN / m
DL from super structure 2
V H Mv MH
mv −mH
x́ =
v
7200.7325−1329
= =3.712 m
1581.8125
18
b
e 3.71 0.2800 b 8 1.33
2 6 6 (ok or safe)
9.95
It acts 2 from base of abutment.
Vertical load due to LL surcharge and approach slab 0.3 25 5 37.5 kN / m
V H Mv MH
19
2 Active Earth pressure ---- 232 4.179 ---- 960
6575 1050.3
x 3.53m
1565
8
e 4 3.53 0.47 1.33
3
6575
6.26 1.5
FOS against over turning 1050.5 (ok)
0.9 1565
2.53 1.5
FOS against sliding 280.5 (ok)
Comparing the two condition we get the worst case as traffic load surcharge and earth
surcharge.
b) DESIGN OF STEM :
Design is done by considering surcharge i.e. both traffic surcharge and earth surcharges.
20
Area under the pressure diagram will give force (P).
1
P 5.544 6 27.72 6
2 33.264 81.66 114.924 120 kN
1 6
M v 5.544 6 6 / 2 27.22 6
2 3 99.792 163.32 263.112 kN m 270kN m
1000
613mm c / c
800 /( / 4 252 )
Spacing d = 1500 – 70 = 1430 mm c/c,
1000 202
4 392.69 mm c / c
Spacing 800
21
1000 162
4 255.327 cc
Spacing 800 = 200 mm c/c.
1000 16 2
4 1006 mm 2
Astp 200
This rf. to be provided for one face only i.e. in the back fill side.
According to the code both side to be equally reinforced so increasing rf. = 1006 2 2012 mm
2
Assuming the rectangular portion or stem should carry all the loads than acc. to
10, 000
5000 mm 2
So rf. to be provided 2 (each side)
1000
123.15 mmc / c
5000
Spacing / 4 282
1000 282
4 5132 mm 2
Astp = 120
5132
8.33 NOS 9 nos
282
No. of bars 4
9 282 5542 mm 2
Astp= 4 (in one face)
5542 2
100 0.93% 0.8%
% ofAstp 1000 1200 (ok)
22
As calculated shear = 120 kN
vu 180 103
v 0.159 N / mm 2
bd 1000 1130
Ast
100 0.93
bd
τ cp =0.6476 n/mm2
200 200
k 1 1 1.38 2.0 ok
d 1430
ASL 5542 2
L 0.0077 0.2 ok
b d 1430 1000
cp 0.2 f cd
(max. value)
0.67 35
f cd 15.633
1.5
1347.255 110.25
N Ed 1460 103
1.021 3.1267
A C 1430 1000
23
VRd,C 0.12 1.38 80 0.0077 35 0.15 1.0217 1000 1430 872809 N
0.33
VED 180kN
VRd,C 872.809 kN
VEd VRd,C
(so safe) (No. shear ref. reqd).
Loads:
LL in yy = 682 kN.
e x 0.375m
e y 2.5 m
24
Fig-32 (Plan of top of Abutment Stem)
e x 0.325m
e y 2.5m
1.23 9
iy 1.296 mm 4
12
93 1.2
ix 72.9 mm 4
12
beq i y 12 4.49
h eq i z 12 252.53
iy 4.49
ky 0.645
A 9 1.2
ix 72.9
kz 2.598
A 9 1.2
1.3 6 1.3 6
z 3.002
kz 2.198
y 12.1
4.036 2
z 3.002
25
z 1
0.2481 2
y 4.036
y z
and
As the z y
both should be less than 2 so we have to design as biaxial bending.
Design checking for abutment whether the design reinforcement to be provided will take the
load or no additional reinforcement required. Solved referring to SP - 16.
P = 1.5%
P 1.5
0.043
f ck 3.5
d1 70
0.00777 0.05
D 9000
Pu 5188 103
0.014
f ck bD 35 1200 9000
referring to chart-43
26
M ux1
0.072
f ck bD 2
For YY
d1 70
0.06 0.1
D 1200
Pu
0.014 P 0.043
f ck bD t ck
,
referring to chart - 44
M uy1
0.065
f ck bD 2
P = 1.5%, Fe-415, M - 35
Puz
20.5
Ag
Pu 5188
0.023
Puz 221400
M uy 2800
0.137
M uy1 20475
M ux 1705
0.0069 0.007
M ux1 244944
Pu M uy
0.023 0.137
Puz
and M uy 1
27
M ux
0.87
M ux1 chart
We get
M ux M
ux
M ux1 M ux1
chart from analysis
P 0.8
0.0228
f ck 35
Pu 5188 103
0.014
f ck bD 35 1200 9000
d1 70
0.0077
D 9000
M ux1
0.042
f ck bD 2
d1 70
0.06 0.1
D 1200
M uy1
0.039
f ck bD 2
Puz
18.2
Ag
Pu 5188
0.027
Puz 196560
28
M uy 2800
0.158
M uy1 17691
M ux 1705
0.012
M ux1 142884
Pu M uy
0.027 0.158
Puz M uy1
and
M ux
0.85
M ux1 chart
We get
M ux M
ux
M ux1 M ux1
chart from analysis
Astreqd=0.8/100(1000× 9000)
=72000mm2
0.8
1000 9000 72000 mm 2
Ast required 100
18000
181.69 180 mm c / c
Spacing 61000 /( / 4 282 )
( 282 ) 18000
Ast p 4 99851.70mm 2
111
99851.70 5644 2
So % of steel 1200 900 = 1.03%
29
p 1.03
0.0294
f ck 35
Spacing =
Pu 5188 103
0.014
f ck bD 35 1200 9000
M ux1
0.058
f ck bD 2
M uy1
0.055
f ck bD 2
from chart - 64
Puz
18.8
Ag
Pu 5188 M uy 2800
0.0255 0.158
Puz 203040 M uy1 17691
,
M ux 1705
0.012
M ux1 142884
M ux M
085 ux
M ux1 M ux1 analytic
from chart - 64. chart
M ux
085 0.012
M ux1
chart
30
Pu = 5188 kN
So Pu<Puz
So taking n 1
n n
M ux M uy
M 0.012 (0.158)1 0.17 1
1
M ux1 uy1 (ok)
Providing 10 - 4 legged stirrups throughout the section with spacing 200 mm c/c
(IRC-112:2011)
Providing approach slab of 3.5m length with 12 mm # bars with spacing 150 mm
c/c. (IRC – 6 : 2014)
Providing 30 mm # bars with 114 mm c/c spacing throughout the 18m.i.e.,
through both side of long section. Side face reinforcement.
For reinforcement detailing refer to Appendix-C
e) DESIGN OF HEEL SLAB:
P = 1582 kN
e = 0.325 mm
1 82
z 10.667 m 3
6
A 8 1 8m
31
Fig-33 (Pressure diagram for Heel Slab)
1
171.5 5 5 60 857.5 150 1007.5 kN 1008 kN
Shear 2
d 1500 70 1430mm
Providing 30 mm ∅ bars,
1000 302
4 95.07 mm
Astreqd 7435
1000 302
Ast p 4 7854 mm 2
90
32
Vu 1008 kN
v u 1512 1000
v 1.057 N / mm 2
bd 1000 1430
Ast 7854
100 100 0.56
bd 1000 1430
cp 0.53 N / mm 2 v
(so shear reinforcement(rf.) required)
0.87f y A sv d
Vus
Sv
0.87 415 4 10 2 1430
753610 4
SV Sv 215.25mm
ASv 0.4
bSv 0.87 f y
314.16 0.4
1000Sv 0.87 415
Providing 4 legged – 10 stirrups with spacing 200 mm c/c throughout the heel slabs.
Provide 0.12% of Ag as distribution reinforcement.
1000 162
4 111mm c / c
.12
1000 1500
100
33
So provide 16∅bans as spacing 100mm c/c as distribution reinforcement.
1
Vu 190.5 1.5 208.5 190.5 1.5
2 285.75 13.5 299.25 300 kN
1.5
A 285.75 13.5 1.5
Mu about 2 3 214.3125 6.75 221.0625 222 kNm
= 650 mm2
min. steel
34
A st 0.85 0.85 1000 1430
bd f y A st 415
2930 mm 2
vu 300 103
v 0.21N / mm 2
bd 1000 1430
Ast 2930
100 100 0.21
bd 1000 1430
Increasing the half reinforcement from stem and heel slab to the intersection portion
of heel slab and stem.
1000 30 2
4 241.24 mm
Spacing of bars 2930
h) DISTRIBUTION REINFORCEMENT:
The base slab thickness is increased upto 4.5m as that the abutment can be designed as shallow
foundation and stress at heel & toe will be safe.
Y 19 kN / m3
. 12.47 kN 13kN
35
2.25
m
It acts 2 above bare of direct wall.
1 1
K a Yh 3 0.243 19 2.253
6 6 8.77 9 kNm
2.25
13 14.625 15 kNm
Horizontal moment due to surcharge 2
36 106
dreq 90 mm d provided
0.138 35 1000 assuming 70 mm cover
0.45
Pu 700 1.5 1.1
3.6 144.375 150 kN
0.8
450 500 1800 mm 2
100
36
1800
9 bans
162
Providing 16 bans 4
450 2 500 2
211.11mm
Spacing 9
So providing 16 bans with 200 mm c/c spacing this are providing to increase ductility,
1
minimum diameter of lateral tic > 4 diameter of longitudinal bar or 5mm whichever
more.
1
916 4m 5mm
4
300 mm.
Wind force and live load cannot be considered at a time as per IRC:6-2014
Mux=1747kN-m
Muy=3348 kN-m
∑ V ∑ Mux dy ∑ Muy dx
P= ± ±
n ∑ dy 2 ∑dx 2
∑dx 2=3׿=30.375m2
37
∑dy 2=2׿=81m 2
= 1811.2-97.056+248=1962.144kN
F5= 1811.2+248+97.056=2157kN
F6 = 1811.2+97.056-248 = 1660.256kN
F1+F3+F5 = 6180 kN
F5 + F6= 3818 kN
Mux=3818× 4.5=17181 kN −m
4.5
Muy=6180× =13905 kN−m
2
17181 ×106
(dreq)=
√ 3
0.36× 35 ×0.48 ×6.2 ×10 ×(1−0.416 × 0.48)
=756.64mm
dprovided=1800-200(pile+ P.C.C)-55-15=1530mm
0.5× 3.5
(Ast req.)y-direction¿ × ¿)=32548.206mm2
415
0.5 ×35
(Ast req.)x-direction = ׿ ]
415
=26194.87mm2
38
Providing 30 - mm∅ 280 mm c /c
(Ast)prov x-dir=26507.18mm2;
After considering the shear criteria (explained in next article), revised reinforcement is given by,
(Ast prov.)revised = 30mm-∅ @110mm c /c=¿67472.8422mm2
Xx =1.75m, Xy =0 m
So the full reaction of the piles will be considered as the shear force to be resisted by the cap.
VEd = Vu =6180-361.25= 5820kN-m
As per IRC:112-2011,
Vmin =0.2925
A sc
Ρ1 = =0.00165<0.02
bw d
(Ast prov.)x-direction=97472.8422mm2
Ρ1 =0.0042
39
c) ANCHORAGE LENGTH:
αa=1,ℓb=k∅=30 × 30=900mm
(Astreq./Astprov.)x-direction = 0.388
(Astreq./Astprov.)y-direction = 0.989
Hence calculated ℓbnet. will be smaller than ℓb. But let’s continue the bars of base up to top of
the cap having 60 mm cover at top.
Scour depth=3.72m
Pile cap=1.8m
Фpile¿ 1.2 m
Lpile =11.7m
8.19
leff/d¿ =6.825 ( short column ) .
1.2
Qu= ApNcCp+ AaNcCa’ + Ca’As’ + αCaAs (clause-5.2.3.1 of IS: 2911-part 3) [for cohesive soil]
n
π π
Qu= ( Du2 – D2 ) [0.5 DunN + Nq∑ d r]+ D2 (0.5DN + dfNq)
4 r=1 4
+(0.5 πDK tanδ) (d12 + df2 – dn2) [for sandy soil] (Cl-5.2.3 of IS:2911-part3)
Du =3m,D=1.2m.
40
Nq=17.293(fig-2 ,is 2911-3-1980,page- 15) and ∑ d r = 6+10.5 = 16.5 m
Df =11.7m,K=1.75
(Qu)2ud =39438.41+4602.503+1849.34=45890.253 kN
Qu
(Qu)compression =9601.462 kN =
2.5
Qu
(Qu)uplift = = 8001.218 kN
3
Due to group action, 10% strength will be reduced of each pile as per IS:2911-3-1980(CL-
5.2.8.1)
(Qu)uplift=7201.09kN=7200kN
Though middlepiles will be having lesser load, let us take it as same as that of corner piles.
As per IS2911-3-1980,appendix-c,
EI EI
T=5
√ K1
, R=4
K2√
Using table- 2 of appendix-c.IS:2911-3-1980,since all the layers are impervious &66%(approx.)
of soil is sand/gravel group with in 13.50m, let us chose
41
K1 =1.245(dense sand &submerged condition) = 1.245 kg/cm 2 = 0.1245 N/mm2(category: dense
sand in submerged condition)
Un-confined compression=2Cu
Up to 4.5 m below the ground level ,unconfined compression is varying from 0.50-0.64 in bore
hole -1 up to 4,5 m below ground level of in all other case it is zero let us take
π
I= × d 4 =1.017876× 1011 mm4
64
T=777.556 m
R=249.32m
Using flexible piles will be those for which embedded length is ≥ 4 R∨4 T
K=1.25, V =3m/sec
(Fu)short face=1.4×64.012=89.63 kN
42
&¿ 54.857 kN
As per appendix –B -1-11 of IS:2911-3-1980, the loads lesser than above extrapolated loads
need not be designed separately. Since in our case it is lesser, that’s why no need of separate
design for horizontal forces.
Using Brom’s chart (page -274of Foundation Engineering, PHI - publication by P.C. Varghese),
e 1.92 L 9,78
= =0.1963=0.2 and = =8.15
L 9.78 b 1.2
From chart;
So Hu = 301.7282.518.87 = 2445.552 kN
For safe design, taking factor of safety 2.5, Hs = 978.2208 kN >> Fushort face and Fulongface(Safe)
So our piles will be designed as short axially loaded columns with axial force =P u=2157 kN
Or 264.05 A st=(-)1.367×10 7
That means minimum reinforcement will be provided. Since the design is based on
IS456:2000,minimum reinforcement is 0.8% of Ag as against 0.4% of Ag as per IS: 2911 (3)
43
0.8
Ast = ׿
100
9048
=12.80=13 numbers
Providing 30mm∅ bars, no. of bars= π 2 .
× 30
4
4. CONCLUSION:
From our project it’s concluded that using limit state method of design, the economy is
achieved due to reduction in both reinforcing steel and concrete volume due to reduction in
sectional size. Also the limit state of deflection, shear and bending stress are found to be safe as
per IRC:112-2011 which is the latest code of practice for designing reinforced and prestressed
concrete bridges. The whole structure is found to be stable against sliding and overturning.
Besides that, provision of long span decreases the obstruction by increasing the water way.
44