Internship Report

INTERNSHIP REPORT
CHAPTER 1
INTERNSHIP AND ITS IMPORTANS
1.1 General
The rise in global competition has prompted organizations to devise strategies to have a
talented and innovative workforce to gain a competitive edge. Developing an internship policy is
an impactful strategy for creating a future talent pool for the industry. The Internship program
not only helps fresh pass-outs in gaining professional know-how but also benefits, corporate on
fresh perspectives on business issues and even discovering future business leaders.
The interaction of Technical Institutions with the industries has been restricted to the level of
faculty communications and 2 to 4 hour industrial visits by the students generally. The
institutions are under a great stress to renew education offered by them, to be as close as possible
to the industrial requirement and expectations. Competition in the job sector is rising
exponentially and securing entry-level jobs is getting very difficult, as the students passing out
from technical institutions lack the experience and skills required by industry. The main aim of
these initiatives is enhancement of the employability skills of the students passing out from
Technical Institutions
Internships represent an important experience for our students by allowing them in particular to
achieve the following goals: submersion into the professional world of a company, bring to life
the importance of group work, acknowledge the goals set by company in its processes,
application of the knowledge acquired during the university years.
The Civil Engineering internships have duration of at least eight weeks. In general, they can
be divided into two types:
Short internship of two months, which is in general done during the periods between
semesters, allows students to not elongate the duration of their Master´s degree. This internship
can be done in two parts, but it needs to be in the same company.
Long internship of at most six months results in general in adding one semester to the
length of the student´s Master´s degree.
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 1

INTERNSHIP REPORT
1.2 Objectives
Internships are educational and career development opportunities, providing practical
experience in a field or discipline. They are structured, short-term, supervised placements often
focused around particular tasks or projects with defined timescales. An internship may be
compensated, non-compensated or some time may be paid. Theinternship has to be meaningful
and mutually beneficial to the intern and the organization. It is important that the objectives and
the activities of the internship program are clearly defined and understood. Following are the
intended objectives of internship training:
1) Will expose Technical students to the industrial environment, which cannot be simulated
in the classroom andhence creating competent professionals for the industry.
2) Provide possible opportunities to learn, understand and sharpen the real time technical /
managerial skillsrequired at the job.
3) Exposure to the current technological developments relevant to the subject area of
training.
4) Experience gained from the ‘Industrial Internship’ in classroom will be used in
classroom discussions.
5) Create conditions conducive to quest for knowledge and its applicability on the job.
1.3 Benefits of internship

1.3.1 Benefits to the Industry
1) Availability of ready to contribute candidates for employment.
2) Year round source of highly motivated pre-professionals.
3) Students bring new perspectives to problem solving.
4) Visibility of the organization is increased on campus.
5) Freedom for industrial staff to pursue more creative projects.
6) Proven, cost-effective way to recruit and evaluate potential employees.
7) Enhancement of employer’s image in the community by contributing to the educational
enterprise.

INTERNSHIP REPORT
1.3.2 Benefits to students

1) An opportunity to get hired by the Industry/ organization.
2) Practical experience in an organizational setting
3) Excellent opportunity to see how the theoretical aspects learned in classes are
integrated into the practical world.
4) On-floor experience provides much more professional experience which is often worth
more than classroom teaching.
5) Helps them decide if the industry and the profession is the best career option to pursue.
6) Opportunity to learn new skills and supplement knowledge.
7) Opportunity to practice communication and team work skills.
8)Opportunity to learn strategies like time management, multi-tasking etc in an industrial
setup.
9) Opportunity to meet new people and learn networking skills.

INTERNSHIP REPORT
CHAPTER 2
COMPANY PROFILE
2.1 About the company

Vision: To be the best in the construction industry in providing quality and timely
solution to the customers and clients in the competitive environment with the right blend of
honesty, integrity, team work and professional ethics
Mission: Relentlessly strive and constantly improve ourselves to the best in the fast
growing construction forum with high level of competitiveness, consistency and charismatic
approach in every aspect
The basic objective of “Industrial training”, planned as part of the curriculum for 3rd
semester MTech (Structures), VTU PG centre mysuru , are to understand the working flowchart
of a design industry and to bridge the gap between the knowledge of academics and the industrial
procedures of the structural design. In this regard, we had an opportunity to work with
Sri Raghu M.S., Structural Engineer, Classic Consultants, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru. In a period
of four months our objectives was to get experience with the working nature of a bridge analysis
and design work and to get ourselves familiarized with the various processes involved in
executing a typical structural design project work.
The entire structural consultancy cell can be broadly divided into three wings: Designing,
Drafting and Project execution coordination.
At the outset we were exposed to various codes and design standards that form the basis
for the structural design work in our country. We went through the special publications of the
Indian Road Congress and other specialized literatures related to bridge design. We were also
encouraged to review the various analysis and design aids in the form of software, which are the
widely used tools in a structural design industry. At the same time, due to importance was lied at
reviewing the conceptual principals of bridge analysis and design.

INTERNSHIP REPORT
2.2 Major Projects executed by the Company

Table 2.1: Major Projects and Clients
Sl No Client Job
Analysis, Design and Drawing of Bridges (Major/Minor) and Culverts (Slab/Box/Pipe) –
Work involves Analysis, Design and Drawing.
Karnataka Bridges Package-I Phase-IV, in
1. M/s Gammon India Ltd, the State of Karnataka (01 Major Bridge &
Mumbai 15 Minor Bridge)
01 Major Bridge (RCC-T Girder) in
M/s Bhoomika H.B.Halli, Bellary District, Karnataka State
01 Major Bridge (PSC-I Girder with Pile
Consultancy, Kalburgi
2. Foundation) in Afzalpur, Gulbarga District,
Karnataka State
01 Major Bridge, Construction of Major
3. M/s SLN Infratech, kulburgi Bridge near Hathalli in Vijayapura

01 Major Bridge, Construction of Major
Bridge near Kumtagi
02 Minor Bridges on Bagalkot – B.R.Hills
4. M/s CAD STATION, Mysore Roads, Chamarajanagar District, Karnataka

State.
01 Minor Bridge Construction of Bridge on
5. Public Work Department(PWD), Abhyathmangala-Cherala-Shrimangala Road

Kodagu Division, Madikeri at CH 4.20 KM in SomvarpetTaluk, Kodagu
District
04 Minor Bridges Reconstruction/Widening
6. National Highway, of Minor Bridges at KM:243.020, at

Mangalore Division, KM:247.660, at KM:249.410 and at
Mangaluru KM:250.620(ShiradiGhat) of NH- 48,
Bangalore - Mangalore section.
7. M/s STES Consultants, Hubli 01 Minor Bridge in Kingonda, Hubli

District, Karnataka State

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Bridge cum Barrage (BCB) for Karanagi

M/s Survey Tech, Bangalore
8. Halla in Yadgir District
BCB for Thirth Halla in Yadgir District
Solapur&Bijapur Road (NH-13) in the State
M/s GVR Infra ProjectsLimited,
9. of Maharashtra & Karnataka
Chennai
Coimbatore – Mettupalayam Road (NH-67)
in the state of Tamil Nadu.
10. M/s P.G.Shetty Cons.Tech. Pvt. Construction of low cost mass housing
Ltd., Mysore
buildings in Barhi and Khadrawi, UAE.
Up-gradation to Two lanes with paved
M/s SLN Infratech,
11. shoulder/Four lane configurations from
Kalburgi
Kurudwadi -Pandharpur - Sangola (SH-210)
connecting NH -166
Structural Design & Drawings of Buildings – More than 20 Residential and Commercial
buildings (Multi Storied) designed and successfully completed in and around Bangalore and
Mysore districts.

INTERNSHIP REPORT
CHAPTER 3
PROJECT DETAILS
3.1 Existing bridge detail
Nature of the project: Construction of Bridge on Srirangapatna - Jewargi Road
(SH-19) at KM: 445.80
Location: Near Maski, Raichur District
Structural consultants: “Classic Consultants”, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru
Fig. 3.1 Pictures of existing bridge
3.1.1 Existing project details

Type of Structure = Masonry Arch Bridge
Length of the Bridge = 211.000m
Culvert Width = 06.750m
Span Configuration = 59 Nos of 2.0m Clear Vents
Existing Bridge F. R. L. = 99.050m
Lowest Bed Level @ Bridge Location = 95.070m
Average Bed Level = 96.148m
High Flood Level @ Bridge Location = 98.000m
Type of Soil = 0-7m Coarse Material, 7.0m+ Hard Rock
Name of the River/Canal = Maski Nala

INTERNSHIP REPORT
3.2 Hydraulic Design
From Manning formula, V =
From Ryve's formula, Q =

Catchment Area, A = 591.00
Discharge, Q = 7 0 4 .2 4 7
From Dicken's formula, Q =

Catchment Area, A = 591.00
Discharge, Q = 1 3 1 8 .5 1 0
As per Cl.7.1 on Page-43 of IRC-SP:13-2000

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Sl Max. Scour Depth* Max Scour Founding

No
Location
from HFL (m) Level (m) Level** (m) Remarks
(H.F.L.- (M.S.L.-
Ds x 1.27(A)2.(P) M.S.D) 2.00)
) BOX
1 3.847 94.208 92.208

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Conclusion :

1. Bridge Type : R.C. Box Bridge

2. Span Configuration : 14 Nos 6m ht x 8m wide Cells + 3 Nos 10.40m Solid Slab

3. Bridge Width : 12.00m as per S.H. Standards (With Footpath)

4. F.R.L. : 100.850m

5. Founding Level : For Box 94.300m
Therefore Floor Protection is required. Hence Aprons are provided on both U/s and D/s
ANNEXURE - 1 (Cross Section of Stream)

Rugosity Co-efficient, n = 0.035 As per Table-3 on Page-34 of IRC-SP:13-2000
Bed Slope = 0.0020( 1 in 504) As per Field Survey

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 3.2: Cross section at 5.00m U/s next to Bridge Location
Fig3.2: Graph showing chainage v/s bed level at down stream
Table 3.3: Parameters at at 5.00m U/s next to Bridge Location
Area of Cross Section A1 190.067 sq.m

Perimeter P1 190.616 M

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Hydraulic Radius R1 0.997 M

Velocity V1 1.270 m/sec
Discharge Q1 241.457 m3/sec
Table 3.4: Cross section at 150.00m at upstream side

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Depth Avg. Depth of Difference in Wetted
Chainage Bed Level HFL Distance Area
of water water Bed level Perimeter
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (sq.m) (m) (m)
(3c - 2c) (4c,Rn+4c,Rn+1)/2 (1c,Rn+1-1c,Rn) (5c x 6c) Abs(2c,Rn+1-2c,Rn) √(6c2+8c2)
-66.240 100.050 98.298 0.000
-61.100 97.610 98.298 0.688 0.344 5.140 1.767 2.440 5.690
-49.940 97.420 98.298 0.878 0.783 11.160 8.735 0.190 11.162
-29.430 97.300 98.298 0.998 0.938 20.510 19.232 0.120 20.510
-15.840 97.210 98.298 1.088 1.043 13.590 14.170 0.090 13.590
0.000 97.120 98.298 1.178 1.133 15.840 17.942 0.090 15.840
9.130 97.070 98.298 1.228 1.203 9.130 10.981 0.050 9.130
17.690 97.050 98.298 1.248 1.238 8.560 10.595 0.020 8.560
28.770 97.200 98.298 1.098 1.173 11.080 12.993 0.150 11.081
41.450 96.780 98.298 1.518 1.308 12.680 16.582 0.420 12.687
55.480 96.800 98.298 1.498 1.508 14.030 21.153 0.020 14.030
62.870 97.210 98.298 1.088 1.293 7.390 9.553 0.410 7.401
66.530 99.050 98.298 0.000 0.544 3.660 1.990 1.840 4.096
70.000 100.210 98.298 0.000 0.000 3.470 0.000 1.160 0.000
145.693 133.778
100.000
99.000
Level (m)
98.000 Bed Level

H.F.L.
97.000
96.000
40 00 40 30 40 00 30 90 70 50 80 70 30 00
6.2 1.1 9.9 9.4 5.8 0.0 9.1 7.6 8.7 1.4 5.4 2.8 6.5 0.0
-6 -6 -4 -2 -1 1 2 4 5 6 6 7
Distance (m)
Fig 3.3: Graph showing chainage v/s bed level at down stream
Table 3.5: Parameters at 150.00m at upstream side


INTERNSHIP REPORT

Table 3.6: Cross section at 150.00m at down stream
99.000
98.000
97.000
Level (m)
Bed Level
96.000 H.F.L.
95.000
94.000
-9 90
-8 40
-7 10
-6 00
-4 20
-3 40
-1 0
11 0
32 0
46 0
59 0
85 0
88 0
0
-6 20
70
66
3
.74
00
.38
9
.77
5.5
8
.0
5
1.5
1.9
7.9
0
.9
.0
2
8.
6.
2.
0.
4.
6.
-9
Distance (m)
Fig 3.4: Graph showing chainage v/s bed level at bridge location
Table 3.7 : Parameters at at 150.00m at down stream


INTERNSHIP REPORT

3.3 Proposed bridge details
During the tenure of Industrial training program, we were involved in the project namely:
Nature of the project: Re-Construction of Bridge on Srirangapatna - Jewargi Road
(SH-19) at KM: 445.80 Near Maski, Raichur District”
Location: Raichur
1) Type of structure = R.C Box culvert with Floating Slab
2) Span configurations = 2 units x 3 cells of 8.00m + 2 units x 4 cells of 8.00m +
3 nos. 10.40m floating slab
3) Bridge width = 12.00m as per S.H. Standards (With Footpath)

4) H.F.L = 98.056 m
5) Required linear water way = 174.29 m
6) Provided linear water way = 143.20 m
7) Provided F.R.L = 100.850 m
8) Founding level = 94.20 m
2
9) SBC = 25 T/m
3.4 STAAD Pro V8i Software

STAAD Pro is comprehensive and integrated FEM analysis and design software which
offers state of the art user interface, visualization capabilities and international design codes. It is
having capacity for analyzing any type of structure exposed to static loading, a
dynamic1response, wind, earthquake and moving loads.
It is the premier FEM analysis and design tool for generating 3D models for any type of
project including culverts, towers, plants, bridges, stadiums and marine structures. It was
developed by practicing professionals to meet the demand as per ISO-90011certification and is
incorporated1 with large number of international codes including Indian standard codes.
3.5 Finite1Element Method

INTERNSHIP REPORT
In the Field of Engineering1Design, we come across many complex problems, the

Mathematical formulation which is tedious and usually it is not possible by analytical methods.
In such situations we resort to the use of Numerical techniques. Here lays the importance of
FEM, which is a most powerful tool used for getting the Numerical solution of a wide range of
many engineering problems. The FEM is a general enough to handle any complex shape or
geometry, any material properties, any boundary1conditions and any of loading conditions. The
generality of the FEM fits the analysis requirements of today’s complex engineering system and
1design, where closed form solutions of governing equilibrium equations are usually not
available. In additional it is an efficient design tool by designers can perform parametric design
studies by taking various design cases (like various shapes, materials and loads etc.), analysis
then can select the optimum design.
3.6 Finite Element Model
Before undertaking FE discretization and a numerical solution, we devise a model
problem for analysis, this step involves deciding what features are important to the purpose at
hand, so that unnecessary detail can be omitted, and deciding what theory or mathematical
formulation describes behavior.
i. Degree of freedom: Degrees of freedom are independent1quantities that govern the

spatial variation of a field. It denotes the number of independent1restraints necessary to
determine the geometric stability of the member as a whole, relative to system of co-ordinates.
For example a member freely1movable in a plane, has 3 degrees of freedom or 3 possible
movements, thereby requiring 3 Co-ordinates or restraints in the plane to fix it in a
stable1manner. Fig. 3.5 shows the degree of freedom for 2-noded beam element used for
modeling of beam. Each node has 6 degrees of freedom, 3 rotational and 3 lateral displacements.
Fig. 3.51Degree of1Freedom for 2-Noded Beam Element1

INTERNSHIP REPORT
CHAPTER 4
MODELLING, ANALYSIS, DESIGN AND DETAILING OF
FLOATING SLAB AND R.C BOX BRIDGE
Bridge is a structure that allows water to flow under a road, railroad, or similar
obstruction. Typically embedded so as to be surrounded by soil.
4.1 Floating Slab

4.1.1 Modeling
Fig 4.1: Floating slab model
4.1.2Analysis Using STAAD Software

4.1.2.1 Dead load analysis
(a) Weight of wearing course
= 0.065 x 22.000 = 1.430 kN/m2
Adopt 2.000 kN/m2
(b) Self weight of slab

= 0.825 x 25.000 = 20.625 kN/m2
(c) Crash Barrier

0.400 x 0.900 x 25.000 = 9.000 kN/m
Adopt 10.000 kN/m

INTERNSHIP REPORT
4.1.2.2 Live load analysis

Live load on culvert is vehicular loading. The vehicular live load consists set of wheel
loads moving on top slabof culvert. For the STAAD model vehicle definitions has to be provided
as per IRC 6-2010, for theload calculations and position of load has to be inputted as per IRC 6-
2010.
A point worth noting is that STAAD requires the distance to the centerline of the
outermost wheel away from the origin along the transverse direction, while during manual
calculation of transverse moments the eccentricity of the center of gravity from the centerline of
them carriage-way is used.
1) Vehicle classifications
The major classifications of vehicles considered as live load for design are
1) class 70R wheeled
Adopted on all roads on which permanent bridges and culverts are constructed.
Should also be checked for class a loading.
Fig 4.2: Wheel arrangement for 70R

wheeled vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
2) Class70 R tracked
Fig
4.3: Wheel arrangement for 70R tracked vehicle
3) Class A
Fig 4.9: Wheel arrangement for Class A vehicle
2. Load combinations
As per IRC 6-2016 table 6, for a 3 lane, 12 m wide carriage-way, 3 critical load combinations
are possible.
1) Class A (3 Lanes)
2) Class A (1 Lanes) + One Class 70R (T)
3) Class A (1 Lanes) + One Class 70R (W)

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.4: Vehicular load combination

One Class 70 R T; this configuration is checked for criticality as it generates maximum
transverse moment
4.2.3 Assigning loads
1) Dead load
Fig 4.5: Self weight floating slabX

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.1: maximum bending moment and shear force from Self weight
Longintudinal Moment (21-130) BM -ve BM+ve SF

SW+SIDL -308.327 NA 119.532
Fig 4.6: Bending Moment diagram of SW+SIDL
Fig 4.7: Shear Force diagram of SW+SIDL
2) Live load
1) Class A vehicle (3 lanes)
Fig 4.8: Vehicle definition class A

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.2: maximum bending moment and shear force from Class A vehicle
Longitudinal Moment (21-130) BM -ve BM+ve SF

LL-1 -148.212 1.853 83.67
2) 70R wheeled vehicle + Class-A – 1 Lane
Fig 4.9: Load generation of 70R wheeled vehicle
Table 4.3: maximum bending moment and shear force from 70R wheeled vehicle

LL-2
-132 3.531 101.314
3) 70R tracked vehicle + Class-A – 1 Lane

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.10: load generation 70R tracked vehicle
Table 4.5: maximum bending moment and shear force from 70R tracked vehicle

LL-3 -162.75 4.278 91.052

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.11: Bending moment diagram for 10th load generation

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.12: Shear force diagram for 10th load generation

X
Table 4.6: Max bending moment and Shear force of combination of dead load and live load
Mz kN-m (-VE Sagging)

SW+SID
LL-1 LL-2 LL-3 Max (LL-1,2,3) DL+LL
L
LONGITUDINAL MOMENT
- -
-308.33 -132 -162.75 -471.08
148.21 162.75
Fy kN
SW+SID
LL-1 LL-2 LL-3 Max (LL-1,2,3) DL+LL
L
SHEAR FORCE
101.31 220.84
119.53 83.67 91.052 101.314
4 6
X
Design of floating slab
Total Overall Develope Allowabl

Deff.
depth Remark
Member Shear provide
Provide d Shear Pt e Shear
d s
Force d Stress Stress

SHEAR FORCE
kN mm mm N/mm2 N/mm2
Slab-
Longitudinal
Slab-
Longitudinal V/b.d


INTERNSHIP REPORT
Max Shear 220.85 750 688 0.32 0.57 0.33 O.K

4.2 R.C BOX BRIDGE (2 units x 3 cells of 8.00m)

4.2.1 Modeling
In this method a structure like bridge is converted in to equivalent grillage of beams.
These beams are rigidly connected at discrete nodes. Beam deformations are related to bending
and torsion moments.
Grid lines are to be adopted along lines of Strength. Centre line of the slab is parallel to
edge lines and also parallel to longitudinal lines. Transverse lines are perpendicular to the center
line. The odd number of longitudinal and transverse lines is to be adopted.
Table 4.71Geometrical Properties of Box Bridge
Sl.No. Description Value
1 Height of box bridge 5.000 m

INTERNSHIP REPORT
2 Clear span of box bridge 8.000 m

3 Thickness1of top slab 0.700 m
4 Thickness of bottom slab 0.700 m
5 Thickness of end walls 0.650 m
6 Thickness of middle walls 0.600 m
7 Thickness of wearing coat 0.065 m
4.13: Idealization of slabs into equivalent grillage Assigning Sub grade modulus for elastic Mat

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.14: Assigning Properties and 3D View of Box Bridge
4.2.2 Analysis Using STAAD Software

4.2.2.1 Dead Load Analysis
Box bridge are subjected to dead load comprising of self-weight of top and bottom slab of
the bridge and two side walls of the structure. Super imposed dead load consisting of crash
barrier and wearing course. Directly applied on the top slab in Finite element method. Self-
weight is calculated based on clear dimensions of the culvert and thickness of the culvert. Super
imposed dead load is calculated from IRS Standards and Specifications code of practice.
A)Top Slab
2.1.1 Dead Load
= 0.065 x 22.000 = 1.430 kN/m2
Adopt 2.00 kN/m2
(b) Self weight of top slab
= 0.775 x 25.000 = 19.375 kN/m2
Say 20.00 kN/m2
(c) Crash Barrier
= 0.400 x 0.900 x 25.000 = 9.000 kN/m
Say 9.00 kN/m
B)Bottom Slab
2.2.1 Dead Load
(a) Self weight of Bottom slab
= 0.700 x 25.000 = 17.500 kN/m2
Say 18.00 kN/m2
C)Walls
2.3.1 Dead Load
(a) Self weight of End Wall
= 0.650 x 5.700 x 25.000 = 92.625 kN/m
Say 93.00 kN/m
(b) Self weight of Mid Wall
= 0.600 x 5.700 x 25.000 = 85.500 kN/m
Say 86.00 kN/m
(c)Dead Load of Floating Slab = 121 kN/m
(d)Moment due to Floating Slab = 67 kN-m/m

INTERNSHIP REPORT
D) Water Load
2.4.1 (a) Weight of Water
10.00
= 3.800 x 0 = 38.000 kN/m2
Say 38.00 kN/m2
E) Active Earth Pressure

. (a) Active earth pressure at base
= 0.500 x 18.000 x 5.700 = 51.300 kN/m2
@ Mid Strip 51.300 x 1.000 = 51.300 kN/m

Say 52.00 kN/m
@ End Strip 51.300 x 0.500 = 25.650 kN/m
Say 26.00 kN/m
F) Live Load Surcharge
2.6.1 (a) Live Load Surcharge at base
= 0.500 x 18.000 x 1.200 = 10.800 kN/m2
@ Mid Strip 10.800 x 1.000 = 10.800 kN/m

Say 11.00 kN/m
@ End Strip 10.800 x 0.500 = 5.400 kN/m
Say 6.00 kN/m
G) Dead Load Combinations
SW Self Weight
SIDL Super Imposed Dead Load
AEP Active earth pressure
LLS Live Load Surcharge
WL Water Load
LL Vehicular Live Load
Case 1 SW + SIDL + AEP + LLS

Case 2 SW + SIDL + AEP + LLS + WL
4.2.3 Assigning Loads
1) Dead Load

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.9: Self weight of Box Bridge
Fig 4.13: Super imposed dead load from crash barrier and wearing course

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig
4.14: load from active earth pressure
Fig 4.15: live load surcharge

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.16: water load

X
Table 4.2: Maximum bending moment and shear force from CASE 1
SW+SIDL+AEP+LLS BM -ve BM +ve SF

Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -284.219 190.693 196.481
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -140.543 290.026 140.449
End Wall (629-650) -309.124 162.382 132.997
Intermediate Wall (655-676) -106.807 140.127 43.322
Table 4.2: Maximum bending moment and shear force from CASE 2
SW+SIDL+AEP+LLS+WL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -276.757 202.522 228.845
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -139.101 288.908 140.075
End Wall (629-650) -301.834 160.089 131.286
Table 4.2: Maximum bending moment and shear force from Case 1 & Case 2
DL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -284.219 202.522 183.076
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -140.543 290.026 140.449
End Wall (629-650) -309.124 162.382 132.997

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.17: Bending Moment Diagram of Dead Load
Fig 4.18 : Shear Force Diagram of Dead Load
3) Live Load
1) Class A Vehicle (3 lane)
Fig 4.19: Load generation of class A vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.19: Load generation Due to Floating Slab
Table 4.4: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From Class A Vehicle+ Floating Slab
LL-1 BM -ve BM +ve SF

Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -87.685 77.612 69.183
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -84.103 92.347 90.231
End Wall (629-650) -86.803 49.533 21.349
2) 70R Wheeled Vehicle
Fig 4.20: Load Generation of 70R Wheeled Vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.6: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From 70R Wheeled Vehicle+ Floating Slab
-71.678 70.857 60.847

Bot Slab Long. M (25-156)
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -68.043 107.187 102.444
-78.761 47.905 17.44

End Wall (629-650)
3) 70R Tracked Vehicle
Fig 4.21: load generation 70R tracked vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.8: maximum bending moment and shear force from 70R tracked vehicle+ Floating Slab
Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -79.855 66.295 60.915
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -89.429 112.482 107.166
End Wall (629-650) -88.612 56.139 19.414

Table 4.8: maximum bending moment and shear force from live load
LL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -87.685 77.612 55.3464
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -89.429 112.482 107.166
End Wall (629-650) -88.612 56.139 21.349

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.22: Bending moment diagram of live load
Fig 4.23: Shear force diagram of live load

X
DL+LL BM -ve BM +ve SF

Bot Slab Long. M (25-156) -371.904 280.134 238.4224
Top Slab Long. M (337-468) -229.972 402.508 247.615
End Wall (629-650) -397.736 218.521 154.346
4.2.3 Base Pressure:

DL-1 DL-2 Max 1/2 LL-1 LL-2 LL3 Max 1/2/3 BP
Node
Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2 Py N/mm2
1 0.091 0.128 0.128 0.022 0.022 0.024 0.024 0.152
2 0.064 0.102 0.102 0.013 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.117
3 0.049 0.087 0.087 0.007 0.010 0.009 0.010 0.097
4 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.012 0.010 0.012 0.102
5 0.060 0.098 0.098 0.012 0.015 0.013 0.015 0.113
6 0.051 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.012 0.011 0.012 0.100
7 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.007 0.009 0.008 0.009 0.093
8 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.010 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
9 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.012 0.015 0.013 0.015 0.115
10 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.010 0.013 0.012 0.013 0.103

INTERNSHIP REPORT
11 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.106

12 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.028 0.026 0.025 0.028 0.146
13 0.116 0.153 0.153 0.050 0.042 0.045 0.050 0.203
14 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.014 0.006 0.009 0.014 0.141
15 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.008 0.002 0.004 0.008 0.109
16 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.089
17 0.053 0.091 0.091 0.004 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.095
18 0.060 0.098 0.098 0.007 0.003 0.003 0.007 0.105
19 0.051 0.089 0.089 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.094
20 0.047 0.085 0.085 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.004 0.089
21 0.056 0.094 0.094 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.099
22 0.064 0.102 0.102 0.007 0.004 0.004 0.007 0.109
23 0.053 0.091 0.091 0.006 0.004 0.004 0.006 0.097
24 0.053 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.005 0.007 0.009 0.101
25 0.078 0.116 0.116 0.022 0.016 0.018 0.022 0.138
Node DL-1 DL-2 Max 1/2 LL-1 LL-2 LL3 Max 1/2/3 BP
26 0.112 0.149 0.149 0.040 0.030 0.035 0.040 0.189
27 0.091 0.128 0.128 0.021 0.021 0.024 0.024 0.152
28 0.064 0.102 0.102 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.116
29 0.049 0.087 0.087 0.007 0.010 0.009 0.010 0.097
30 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.008 0.011 0.009 0.011 0.101
31 0.060 0.098 0.098 0.012 0.014 0.013 0.014 0.112
32 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
33 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
34 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
35 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
36 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
37 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
38 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
39 0.116 0.153 0.153 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.164
40 0.090 0.128 0.128 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.139
41 0.064 0.102 0.102 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.113
42 0.048 0.087 0.087 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.098
43 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
44 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
45 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
46 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
47 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103

INTERNSHIP REPORT
48 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111

49 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
50 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
51 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
52 0.116 0.153 0.153 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.164
53 0.090 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
54 0.063 0.102 0.102 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.113
55 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
56 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
57 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
58 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
59 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
60 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
61 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
62 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
63 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
64 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
65 0.115 0.153 0.153 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.164
66 0.090 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
67 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
68 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
69 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
70 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
71 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
72 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
73 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
74 0.061 0.099 0.099 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.110
75 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
76 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
77 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
78 0.115 0.153 0.153 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.164
79 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
80 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
81 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
82 0.051 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
83 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
84 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099

INTERNSHIP REPORT
85 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095

86 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
87 0.061 0.099 0.099 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.110
88 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
89 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
90 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
91 0.115 0.152 0.152 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.163
92 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
93 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
94 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
95 0.051 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
96 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
97 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
98 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
99 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
100 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
101 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
102 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
103 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
104 0.115 0.152 0.152 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.163
105 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
106 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
107 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
108 0.051 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
109 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
110 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
111 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
112 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
113 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
114 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
115 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
116 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
117 0.115 0.152 0.152 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.163
118 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
119 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
120 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
121 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101

INTERNSHIP REPORT
122 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108

123 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
124 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
125 0.055 0.093 0.093 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.104
126 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
127 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
128 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
129 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
130 0.114 0.152 0.152 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.163
131 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
132 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
133 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
134 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
135 0.059 0.097 0.097 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.108
136 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
137 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
138 0.055 0.093 0.093 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.104
139 0.062 0.100 0.100 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.111
140 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
141 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
142 0.080 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
143 0.114 0.151 0.151 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.162
144 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
145 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
146 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097
147 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
148 0.060 0.098 0.098 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.109
149 0.050 0.088 0.088 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.099
150 0.046 0.084 0.084 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.095
151 0.055 0.093 0.093 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.104
152 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
153 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
154 0.054 0.092 0.092 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.103
155 0.079 0.118 0.118 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.129
156 0.113 0.151 0.151 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.162
157 0.089 0.127 0.127 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.138
158 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112

INTERNSHIP REPORT
159 0.048 0.086 0.086 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.097

160 0.052 0.090 0.090 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.101
161 0.060 0.098 0.098 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.109
162 0.051 0.089 0.089 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.100
163 0.047 0.085 0.085 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.096
164 0.056 0.094 0.094 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.105
165 0.063 0.101 0.101 0.009 0.011 0.010 0.011 0.112
0.203
kN/m2 203.00
T/m2 20.30
4.4 Design of Box Culvert

INTERNSHIP REPORT
4.2 R.C BOX BRIDGE (2 units x 4 cells of 8.00m)

4.2.1 Modeling
In this method a structure like bridge is converted in to equivalent grillage of beams.
These beams are rigidly connected at discrete nodes. Beam deformations are related to bending
and torsion moments.
Grid lines are to be adopted along lines of Strength. Centre line of the slab is parallel to
edge lines and also parallel to longitudinal lines. Transverse lines are perpendicular to the center
line. The odd number of longitudinal and transverse lines is to be adopted.
Table 4.71Geometrical properties of box Bridge
Sl.No. Description Value
1 Height of box Bridge 5.000 m

2 Clear span of box Bridge 8.000 m
3 Thickness1of top slab 0.700 m
4 Thickness of bottom slab 0.700 m
5 Thickness of end walls 0.650 m
6 Thickness of middle walls 0.600 m
7 Thickness of wearing coat 0.065 m

INTERNSHIP REPORT
4.13: Idealization of slabs into equivalent grillage Assigning Sub grade modulus for elastic Mat
Fig 4.14: Assigning Properties and 3D View of box

INTERNSHIP REPORT
4.2.2 Analysis Using STAAD Software

4.2.2.1 Dead Load Analysis
Box bridge are subjected to dead load comprising of self-weight of top and bottom slab of
the culvert and two side walls of the structure. Super imposed dead load consisting of crash
barrier and wearing course. Directly applied on the top slab in Finite element method. Self-
weight is calculated based on clear dimensions of the culvert and thickness of the box. Super
imposed dead load is calculated from IRS Standards and Specifications code of practice.
2.1.1 Dead Load
= 0.065 x 22.000 = 1.430 kN/m2
Adopt 2.00 kN/m2
(b) Self weight of top slab
= 0.775 x 25.000 = 19.375 kN/m2
Say 20.00 kN/m2
(c) Crash Barrier
= 0.400 x 0.900 x 25.000 = 9.000 kN/m
Say 9.00 kN/m
2.2 Bottom Slab

2.2.1 Dead Load
(a) Self weight of Bottom slab
= 0.700 x 25.000 = 17.500 kN/m2
Say 18.00 kN/m2
2.3 Walls
2.3.1 Dead Load
(a) Self weight of End Wall
= 0.650 x 5.700 x 25.000 = 92.625 kN/m
Say 93.00 kN/m
(b) Self weight of Mid Wall
= 0.600 x 5.700 x 25.000 = 85.500 kN/m
Say 86.00 kN/m
2.4 Water Load

2.4.1 (a) Weight of Water

INTERNSHIP REPORT
= 3.800 x 10.000 = 38.000 kN/m2

Say 38.00 kN/m2
2.7 Dead Load Combinations

SW Self Weight
SIDL Super Imposed Dead Load
WL Water Load
Case 1 SW + SIDL
Case 2 SW + SIDL + WL
4.2.3 Assigning Loads

1) Dead Load
Fig 4.9: Self weight of box

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.13: Super Imposed Dead Load From Crash Barrier And Wearing Course
Fig 4.16: water load

X
Table 4.2: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From CASE 1
SW+SIDL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -224.138 206.95 185.992
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -118.559 258.521 131.099
End Wall (829-850) -224.545 224.545 53.061
X
Table 4.2: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From CASE 2
SW+SIDL+W L BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -216.895 218.928 218.54
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -117.53 257.321 130.718
End Wall (829-850) -217.145 217.145 51.356
Table 4.2: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From DEAD LOAD
DL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -224.138 218.928 174.832
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -118.559 258.521 131.099
End Wall (829-850) -224.545 224.545 53.061

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.17 : Bending Moment Diagram Of Dead Load
Fig 4.18 : Shear Force Diagram Of Dead Load

4) Live Load

INTERNSHIP REPORT
5) Class A Vehicle (3 LANE)
Fig 4.19: Load generation of class A vehicle
Table 4.4: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From Class A Vehicle
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -98.178 72.381 54.8688
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -82.624 100.956 91.863

INTERNSHIP REPORT
End Wall (829-850) -96.023 97.383 24.607

6) 70R Wheeled Vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Fig 4.20: Load Generation of 70Rwheeled Vehicle

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.6: Maximum Bending Moment And Shear Force From 70R Wheeled Vehicle
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -82.042 70.03 48.9248
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -69.94 112.22 108.902
End Wall (829-850) -86.468 87.874 20.807
7) 70R Tracked Vehicle
Fig 4.21: Load Generation 70R Tracked Vehicle
Fig 4.19: Load

generation Due to Floating Slab

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.8: Maximum Bending Moment and Shear Force From 70R Tracked Vehicle
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -90.445 71.122 51.7648
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -91.771 119.482 111.013
End Wall (829-850) -96.366 98.413 22.62
Table 4.8: Maximum Bending Moment and Shear Force From Live Load
LL BM -ve BM +ve SF
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -98.178 72.381 54.8688
Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -91.771 119.482 111.013
End Wall (829-850) -96.366 98.413 24.607
Fig 4.22: Bending Moment Diagram of Live Load
Fig 4.23: Shear Force Diagram of Live Load

X
DL+LL BM -ve BM +ve SF

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Bot Slab Long. M (33-208) -322.316 291.309 229.7008

Top Slab Long. M (445-620) -210.33 378.003 242.112
End Wall (829-850) -320.911 322.958 77.668

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Manual Calculation Using Moment Distribution Method

Genral data
End wall thickness = 0.650 m
Middle Wall thickness = 0.600 m
Top Slab thickness = 0.700 m
Bottom Raft thickness= 0.700 m
density concrete= 25.000 kN/mm3
numbers of middle wall= 3.000
End span= 2.150 m
Middle span= 2.150 m
Ka= 0.500
density soil= 18.000 kN/mm3
span= 34.400 m
height= 5.700 m
size end box = 8.600 m
size middle box = 8.600 m
Load Calculation :
1) Top Slab
Wearing Coat = 2 kN/mm2
Self weight = Thickness of Top slab x Density of Concrete (ϒ)
= 17.5 kN/mm2
Total Load = 19.5 kN/mm2
Total load at End span= 9.07 kN/mm2
Total load at Middle span= 9.07 kN/mm2
2) Bottom Raft
a) Top slab = 19.5 kN/mm2
b) End Wall = Nos x Thickness of End Wall x Ht of End Wall x ϒ
= 185.25 kN/mm2
c) Middle Wall = Nos x Thickness of Middle Wall x Ht of Middle Wall x ϒ
= 256.5 kN/mm2
Total Loadon wall = 12.84157 kN/mm2
d)Bottom raft = Thickness of Bottom Raft x ϒ
= 17.5 kN/mm2
Total Load = 49.84 kN/mm2
Total load at End span= 23.18 kN/mm2
Total load at Middle span= 23.18 kN/mm2
3) End Wall
a)`Active Earth Pressure = Ka x ϒ x h
= 51.3 kN/mm2
= kN/mm2
b) Live load Surcharge = 1.2 x Ka x ϒ x h
= 61.56 kN/mm2

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Moment Calculation:
1) Top Slab
FEM (For End span) = W l2/12
= 55.90 kN-m
FEM ( For Middle span) = 55.90 kN-m
Mid Span moments (For End span) = W l2/8

= 83.85 kN-m
Mid Span moments (ForMiddle span) = 83.85 kN-m
2) Bottom Raft
FEM (For End wall) = W l2/12
= 142.88 kN-m
FEM ( For Middle span) = 142.88 kN-m
Mid Span moments (For End span) = W l2/8

= 214.32 kN-m
Mid Span moments (ForMiddle span) = 214.32 kN-m
3) End Wall
FEM : Active Earth pressure ( Bottom ) = Wl2/20
= 83.34 kN-m
Active Earth pressure (mid span) = Wl2/16
= 237.13 kN-m
Active Earth pressure (Top) = 2
Wl /30
55.56 kN-m
Live load surcharge ( Top and Bottom)= W l2/12

= 166.67 kN-m
2
Live load surcharge ( mid span)= W l /8
= 569.12 kN-m
Therefore End wall Fixed end moments (Top) = 222.23 kN-m

Therefore End wall Fixed end moments (Bottom) = 250.01 kN-m
Total Mid span Moment = 806.26 kN-m

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Distribution Factor Table

Table 4.9: Moment Distribution Factor
Junction Member Kd3/l Σ Kd3/l D.F

AJ 0.060K 0.085 K 0.706
A AB 0.025K 0.294
BA 0.040K 0.339
B BC 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
BI 0.038K 0.322
CB 0.040K 0.339
C CD 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
CH 0.038K 0.322
DC 0.040K 0.339
D DE 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
DG 0.038K 0.322
ED 0.040K 0.100 K 0.399
E
EF 0.060K 0.601
FE 0.060K 0.100 K 0.601
F
FG 0.040K 0.399
GF 0.040K 0.339
G GH 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
GD 0.038K 0.322
HG 0.040K 0.339
H HI 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
HC 0.038K 0.322
IH 0.040K 0.339
I IJ 0.040K 0.118 K 0.339
IB 0.038K 0.322
JI 0.040K 0.100 K 0.399
J
JA 0.060K 0.601

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Table 4.8: Moments from Moment Distribution Method

Positive moment Negative moment
(kN-m) (kN-m)
Bottom Raft 130.59 130.57
Top slab 142.70 142.74

End walls 191.421 191.421
Intermediate wall 11.605 2.867
Table 4.9: Moments from STAAD Analysis

Positive moment Negative moment (kN-
(kN-m) m)
Bottom raft 147.11 144.50
Top slab 77.090 72.760
End walls 74.630 148.232
Intermediate wall 9.306 2.358
Table 4.10: Comparison of Fixed End Moments of STAADResults and Manual Calculation
Staad results Manual calculation Percentage
(kN-m) results(kN-m) Error(%)
+ve -ve +ve -ve +ve -ve
Bottom raft
moments moments moments moments moments moments
147.11 142.11 3.39
24.737 30.120 17.87
MBC 34.370 39.410 12.78
MCB 50.983 59.820 14.77
4.4 Design of 4 Cell Box

INTERNSHIP REPORT
Design Eff.depth Overall depth Deff. Ast

Member Remarks Ast.reqd. Ast.min Bar dia. spacing Remarks
Moment reqd. provided Provided Provided
From analysis output :- kN.m/m mm mm mm mm 2 /m mm 2 /m mm 2 /m mm mm c/c

Bottom Slab-Longitudinal
Hogging Moment 291.31 468.64 700 640 O.K 2102.69 768.00 2146.75 20 240 O.K
16 240
Sagging Moment 322.32 492.95 700 637.5 O.K 2335.62 765.00 5609.99 25 175 O.K
25 175
TopSlab-Longitudinal
STEEL CALCULATION
Hogging Moment 378.00 533.84 700 637.5 O.K 2739.15 765.00 5609.99 25 175 O.K
CHECK FOR DEPTH

25 175
MOMENTS
Sagging Moment 210.33 398.21 700 640 O.K 1518.18 768.00 1717.40 20 300 O.K
16 300
Vertical Wall-outer
Hogging Moment 322.96 493.44 650 587.5 O.K 2539.45 881.25 5609.99 25 175 O.K
25 175
Sagging Moment 320.91 491.87 650 587.5 O.K 2523.35 881.25 3272.49 25 150 O.K
0 125
Vertical Wall-inner
Hogging Moment 107.28 284.39 600 542 O.K 914.36 813.00 2010.62 16 100 O.K
Sagging Moment 100.00 274.58 600 542 O.K 852.33 813.00 2010.62 16 100 O.K
Total Allowable
Developed
Member Shear Pt Shear Remarks
Shear Stress
Force Stress
From analysis output :- kN N/mm 2 % N/mm 2
Bottom Slab-Longitudinal
Hogging Moment 229.701 0.36 0.88 0.39 O.K
Sagging Moment
TopSlab-Longitudinal
SHEAR FORCE
Sagging Moment
Vertical Wall-outer
Sagging Moment
Vertical Wall-inner
Sagging Moment

Internship Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Internship Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNSHIP REPORT

INTERNSHIP AND ITS IMPORTANS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 1

1.3 Benefits of internship

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 2

1.3.2 Benefits to students

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 3

2.1 About the company

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 4

2.2 Major Projects executed by the Company

3. M/s SLN Infratech, kulburgi Bridge near Hathalli in Vijayapura

4. M/s CAD STATION, Mysore Roads, Chamarajanagar District, Karnataka

5. Public Work Department(PWD), Abhyathmangala-Cherala-Shrimangala Road

6. National Highway, of Minor Bridges at KM:243.020, at

7. M/s STES Consultants, Hubli 01 Minor Bridge in Kingonda, Hubli

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 5

Bridge cum Barrage (BCB) for Karanagi

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 6

Fig. 3.1 Pictures of existing bridge

3.1.1 Existing project details

Length of the Bridge = 211.000m

Culvert Width = 06.750m

Span Configuration = 59 Nos of 2.0m Clear Vents

Existing Bridge F. R. L. = 99.050m

Lowest Bed Level @ Bridge Location = 95.070m

Average Bed Level = 96.148m

High Flood Level @ Bridge Location = 98.000m

Type of Soil = 0-7m Coarse Material, 7.0m+ Hard Rock

Name of the River/Canal = Maski Nala

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 7

3.2 Hydraulic Design

From Manning formula, V =

From Ryve's formula, Q =

From Dicken's formula, Q =

As per Cl.7.1 on Page-43 of IRC-SP:13-2000

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 8

Sl Max. Scour Depth* Max Scour Founding

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 9

ANNEXURE - 1 (Cross Section of Stream)

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 10

Table 3.2: Cross section at 5.00m U/s next to Bridge Location

Fig3.2: Graph showing chainage v/s bed level at down stream

Table 3.3: Parameters at at 5.00m U/s next to Bridge Location

Area of Cross Section A1 190.067 sq.m

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 11

Hydraulic Radius R1 0.997 M

Table 3.4: Cross section at 150.00m at upstream side

98.000 Bed Level

Table 3.5: Parameters at 150.00m at upstream side

Area of Cross Section A3 145.693 sq.m

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 12

Hydraulic Radius R3 1.089 M

Table 3.6: Cross section at 150.00m at down stream

Table 3.7 : Parameters at at 150.00m at down stream

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 13

Velocity V3 1.898 m/sec

3.3 Proposed bridge details

2) Span configurations = 2 units x 3 cells of 8.00m + 2 units x 4 cells of 8.00m +

3 nos. 10.40m floating slab

3) Bridge width = 12.00m as per S.H. Standards (With Footpath)

3.4 STAAD Pro V8i Software

3.5 Finite1Element Method

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, VTU PG CENTRE MYSURU Page 14

In the Field of Engineering1Design, we come across many complex problems, the