Reports
According to the inductive approach,
a research question is usually based
on a concrete description of a practi-
cal task, which can then be pared
down to its essential theoretical com-
ponents. Conversely, comprehensive
underlying theoretical knowledge al-
lows research or calculation results to
be interpreted and different designs
Jörg Schlaich
assessed. was particu-
larly successful in combining the sci-
entific inductive and deductive ap-
proaches very effectively, and eradi-
cating apparent contradictions. The
reasons for this can be traced back to
his studies at TU Berlin; this training
was influenced by Franz Dischinger
(1887–1953) and his fundamental de-
ductive approach.
Jörg Schlaich contributed par-
ticular impetus to the Stuttgart School
of Construction Engineering during
the last quarter of the 20th century.
As Fritz Leonhard’s direct successor
and especially as his pupil, Schlaich
was naturally imbued with his meth-
odology. Fritz Leonhardt took as the
basis for his work questions arising in
practice, developing a wide variety of
constructions, including cable-stayed
and prestressed concrete bridges and
reinforced concrete television towers.
In the same way, Jörg Schlaich
combines design engineering activity
with teaching and research. Hence he
not only made close connections be-
tween research and practice, but also –
in the tradition of the Stuttgart schools,
both of architecture and engineering –
between teaching and practice. Other
close contacts Jörg Schlaich cultivated
were with the city of Stuttgart, as part
of realising his design ideas which in-
cluded various pedestrian bridges, and
his construction innovations such as
jointless and integral abutment bridges
or the use of cast nodes in road bridges.
In particular, the combination of
deductive and inductive thinking al-
ready described is characteristic of his
working methods in science, teaching
and research. Through his teaching,
Schlaich imparted the idea that theo-
ries do not exist for their own sake
and equally that practical issues can
reliably be traced back to their basic
theoretical elements.
A search for the best, often new
types of structural solution has always
been at the forefront of Schlaich’s
work. This synthetic aspect of his
work is illustrated by the description
280 Steel Construction 7 (2014), No. 4
ton
vide.
in
be stiffened using a spoked wheel con-
struction, as follows: it is a question of
preventing the open edge from being
deformed. This is usually achieved us-
ing a bulkhead, which acts as a closed
surface to absorb transverse forces. It
will not be possible to explain purely
by observing the equilibrium of forces
in the undeformed state why the thin
spokes of the wheel construction,
which can only take a tensile load,
should counteract deformation. Yet all
becomes clear when Schlaich demon-
strates how the circular cross-section
of the tube becomes deformed and is
restrained by the normal action of the
spokes.
Design and construction
Design and construction are not al-
ways considered to be a self-evident
part of everyday engineering work.
All too often, the focus is on calculat-
ing and measuring the construction as
a load-bearing framework. Schlaich
has warned in many publications that
this approach is inadequate, in par-
ticular with the striking words “archi-
tecture cannot be divided”. This atti-
tude places the substance and meth-
odology of his work in line with the
traditions of both the Stuttgart School
of Building Design and the Stuttgart
School of Architecture.
It is an integrated approach
which combines technical innovation
with design considerations, and inter-
weaves the two with overarching so-
cial responsibility. The implications
for both teaching and practice are
that the design process must be re-
corded in all its complexity. A con-
struction cannot claim to be the cor-
rect solution in and of itself, but must
instead be considered as the result of
an iterative design process and as a
major contribution to the formal ex-
pression of the edifice as a whole.
Engineers and social responsibility
Given this integrated approach, the
engineer’s responsibility for many pro-
-
-
-
­
The Stuttgart School of Building Design
­
The Stuttgart School of Building De-
sign positioned itself both in close
contact with the Stuttgart School of
Architecture and in competition with
other engineering faculties. It is possi-
ble to pick out the developments
which shaped the School by focusing
on three particular people associated
with what have certainly been its three
most creative phases: Emil Mörsch
Fig. 2. Studs on the Second Hooghly
Bridge, Calcutta (photo: schlaich berger­
mann und partner)
Precast–Pretensioned Concrete Girder Bridges 3

counteract tension due to expected gravity loads (e.g., self-weight, superimposed dead loads such as
deck weight, barrier weight, overlay, and live loads). To achieve this, precast girders employ prestressing
strands that are stressed before the concrete hardens. Pretensioning requires the use of a stressing bed,
often several hundred feet long for efficient casting of a series of members in a long line using abutments,
stressing stands, jacks, and hold downs/hold ups to produce the desired prestressing profile. The transfer
of strand force to the pretensioned members by bond between concrete and prestressing steel is typically
evident by the upward deflection (camber) of members when the strands are detensioned (cut or burned)
at the member ends. Steam curing of members allows for a rapid turnover of forms (typically one-day
cycle or less) and cost efficiency. Control in fabrication of precast girders also permits the use of quality
materials and many benefits such as higher-strength materials and high modulus of elasticity, as well as
reduced creep, shrinkage, and permeability.

1.2.1  Typical Sections

In the United States, the most commonly used precast girders are the standard AASHTO sections, as
shown in Appendix B of PCI Bridge Design Manual (2011). A number of states have their own s­ tandard
girder products. Local precast manufactures should be consulted on girder form availability before
design starts. Typical cross sections of precast girders used for common bridges are shown below:
• Precast I-Girder
• Precast Bulb-Tee Girder
• Precast Wide-Flanged Girder
• Precast Bath-Tub or U Girder
• Precast Solid and Voided Slab
• Precast Box Girder
• Precast Trapezoidal Girder
• Precast Double-Tee Girder
• Precast Deck Bulb-Tee Girder
Among these girders, the I-girder has been most commonly used in the United States for nearly 60 years.
With bridge span lengths normally ranging from 50 to 125 ft, the I-girder typically uses a depth-to-span
ratio of approximately 0.045–0.050 for simple spans. The depth-to-span ratio is approximately 0.005 less (i.e.,
0.040–0.045) for multi-span structures made continuous for live load. This structure type has proven to be an
excellent choice for rapid construction and widening of existing structures. With no requirement for ground-
supported falsework, precast girder construction usually takes far less time than that taken for cast-in-place
construction. Once the deck is poured, the structural section becomes composite, minimizing deflections.
The bulb-tee and bath-tub (or U-shape) girders are targeted for bridge spans up to 150 ft in length. The
depth-to-span ratio is also in the range of 0.045–0.050 for simple spans and 0.040–0.045 for continuous struc-
tures. However, due to the weight limits of economic trucking, the length of bath-tub girders is limited to 120 ft.
The wide-flanged girder (Figure 1.2) was recently developed in several states in coordination with
precasters to produce more efficient bottom and top flange areas that permit design for spans up to
200 ft, with a depth–span ratio of 0.045 (simple) and 0.004 (continuous). The larger bottom bulb accom-
modates nearly 40% more strands than the standard bulb-tee and, due to its shape, provides enhanced
handling and erection stability even at longer spans. Greater economy is also anticipated due to larger
girder spacing and reduction in girder lines. Sections have been developed for both pretensioning alone
as well as combined pre- and posttensioned sections in some states. For longer span lengths, special
permit requirements must be verified for hauling and consideration of trucking routes and erection.
Other girders that are less commonly used include girders with trapezoidal, double-tee, and rect-
angular cross sections as well as box girders. These are sometimes used for cost effectiveness and aes-
thetics, particularly for off-system bridges. Precast box girders are often used for railway systems and
relatively short span lengths ranging from 40 to 100 ft.

© 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

4 Bridge Engineering Handbook, Second Edition: Superstructure Design

FIGURE 1.2  California wide-flange girder.

TABLE 1.1  Girder Types and Applicable Span Length

Girder Type Possible Span Length Preferred Span Length
I-girder 50' to 125' 50' to 95'
Bulb-tee girder 80' to 150' 95' to 150'
Bath-tub girder 80' to 150' 80' to 100'
Wide-flange girder 100' to 200' 100' to 180'
Voided slab 20' to 70' 20' to 50'
Precast box girder 40' to 120' 40' to 100'
Precast delta girder 60' to 120' 60' to 100'
Precast double T girder 30' to 100' 30' to 60'

It should be noted that using bridge depth-to-span ratios to decide girder depth is approximate, but it
is a reasonable starting point for initial design and cost estimates. Normally, girder spacing is approxi-
mately 1.5–2.0 times the bridge superstructure depth. When shallow girder depth is required, girder
spacing may have to be reduced to satisfy all design criteria; however, this may result in increased cost.

1.2.2  Typical Girder Span Ranges

Each girder type has its own economical and practical span length range and span length limits.
Table 1.1 lists the range of the span length of each girder type.
Local fabricators should be consulted and coordinated with for the form availability of all differ-
ent girder shapes.

1.2.3  Primary Characteristics of a Precast Girder

For a precast girder, the following three basic stages of performance are addressed in design: transfer,
service, and strength.
The stage of transfer refers to the time at which the prestressing force in the strands is transferred to
the precast girder at the plant, typically by cutting or detensioning the strands after a minimum concrete
strength has been verified. Because only the girder self-weight acts at this stage, the most critical stresses
are often at the ends of the girder, midspan, or harping points (also known as drape points). Both tensile
and compressive stresses are checked. Service refers to the stage at which the girder and slab self-weight
act on the noncomposite girder, and additional dead loads (e.g., barrier and wearing surface) together with

© 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Precast–Pretensioned Concrete Girder Bridges 5

C C T T < 0.0948√ f'ci

N/A
+ + =

T C C C
(Mg/s) (P/A) (Pe/S) Temporary
self-weight prestress prestress condition
(a)

T C C

N/A

+ =

C T C
Temporary (Ms/S)
condition slab DL
(b)

C C C

C C
New
N/A

+ =

C T T < 0.19√ fć

(MLL+I)/S
DL + ADL HL – 93 Service loads
(c)

FIGURE 1.3  Concrete flexural stress distribution at section near midspan—at transfer, deck pour, and service.
(a) At transfer (noncomposite section). (b) At deck pour (noncomposite section). (c) At service under dead and live
loads (composite section).

the live load act on the composite girder. This stage is checked using the AASHTO LRFD Service I and
III load combination. Flexural strength is provided to satisfy all factored loads. Figure 1.3 illustrates the
different concrete flexural stress distributions at transfer, deck pour, and full service loading.

1.2.4  Prestressing Strand Profile

At the heart of the prestressed concrete design philosophy is the positioning of the prestressing strands
within the precast girder: the center of gravity of the strands (cgs) is deliberately offset from the ­center
of gravity of the concrete section (cgc) to maximize the eccentricity, which is defined as the distance

© 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Water Quality:
- Salinity
- Soil Permeability
- Toxicity
The emphasis here on water salinity

Fresh less than

Brakish in Between Saline Greeter than
TDS=1000-1500 ppm
or equal to 30,000 ppm

TDS (Total dissolved Solids)

Parts per million (ppm)
1 mmhos = 640 ppm
 Reports

Jörg Schlaich at 80 DOI: 10.1002/stco.201420040

Annette Bögle
Karl-Eugen Kurrer

The Stuttgart School was the first movement to combine the style of and training in ar- a creative engineering approach can
chitecture, taught and supported at the Stuttgart College of Technology. The Stuttgart be built.
School of Building Design is losing visibility just as the profile of architects in society is
rising. However, a thoroughgoing analysis of its particular qualities is overdue, especially Practice and science
in the context of creative construction engineering. For example, Bill Baker (*1953), a
Structural and Civil Engineering Partner at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (SOM), Chi- One special feature of the Stuttgart
cago, USA and winner of the 2009 Fritz Leonhardt prize, has described the creative ap- School of Building Design is the con-
proach as a key element in (civil engineering) training at the University of Stuttgart. To- nection between practice and science,
wards the end of the 20th century, the Stuttgart School of Building Design was greatly in- which can be represented as a trinity
fluenced by Jörg Schlaich (*17th October 1934), whose working, teaching and research with industry and management on
methods also helped inspire the creative approach praised above. one side, and science on the other.

(1872–1950), Fritz Leonhardt (1909–

1999) and Jörg Schlaich (Fig. 1). We
can identify the close interaction of
practice and research, the relation-
ship between complexity and simplic-
ity, and the integrated approach to
design and construction as major fea-
tures throughout the School’s exist-
ence. These are foundations on which Fig. 1.  Jörg Schlaich (*1934) (Source: Amin Akhtar)

Steel Construction 7 (2014), No. 4 279

 Water Transport (Conveyance)

Irrigation Canals

BANK BANK
D Free Board
BERM BERM AGR. LAND
WATER LEVEL

t:1 Side
BED
Slope

Water Disposal
Agricultural Drains
BANK BANK
2:1
AGR. LAND BERM BERM AGR. LAND

WATER LEVEL 3:2

3:2
BED
 Lecture (2)
Traditional Water Resources
Surface Water: (Rivers and Fresh Water Lakes)
Divide

a a

Str
eam
Precepitation
m
rea
St

b
b
R

Section a-a Watershed

Lake
Precepitation Ri
River ve
r

Str
R

eam
b
Section b-b
Groundwater : (Phreatic and Confined Aquifers)

Patm

Shallow W ell

Aquifer B

Pheratic Confined Leaky Artesian Confined

Leaky
Recharge
area

Ground Surface Perched Water

Flowing
Well
Piezometric Surface (B)
Piezometric Surface (C)

Sea
Water Table
Leakage
Aquifer A
Interface

Aquifer B
Leakage Sea
Water
Interface
Aquifer C
2210
science to the level of structural art”. In addition, these days
the sustainability aspects need to be incorporated in the
conceptual design for the sake of posterity.
3 | PROCESS OF CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN
3.1 | History of conceptual design
Historically, there is no evidence of scientific process
being evolved for conceptual design. In general, the
FIGURE 2 “Four hats of creation” by R Gold (redrawn with
the conceptual design of Maillart's Salginatobel)
FIGURE 3 Symposium on conceptual design of structures
HEGGADE
term “concepts” were being used loosely. Almost three
decades ago, Billington7 introduced the terms effi-
ciency, economy ,and elegance as a theme of approach
to bridge design and promoted it as a conceptual
design approach to the numerous anonymous, too fre-
quent ugly utility structures based on mere technical
and economic criteria.
Thus, there was a longstanding concern by profes-
sionals to address the issue of conceptual design. An
Printed by [Special Products: All Wiley Journals FF - 156.217.234.033 - /doi/epdf/10.1002/suco.202000399] at [25/06/2021].
international symposium (Figure 3) on conceptual design
organized at the University of Stuttgart by Prof. Jörg
Schlaich in 1996 was probably the first event of this kind
to address the issue. The theme stated below in the pro-
logue summarizes the state of the art of conceptual
design at that time which is not very different even on
the day.
“The overall quality of many structures
today leaves much to be desired. The rapid
technological progress does not reflect ade-
quately in their variety, beauty and sensitiv-
ity. Too often, structural engineers neglect
the creative conceptual design phase by
repeating standard designs and not suffi-
ciently contributing with [their] own ideas to
the fruitful collaboration with architects.
Engineers thus often waste the chance to
create building culture.”
HEGGADE
Though the symposium was a great success with
some of the renowned designers of the time, could not
come to a conclusion as to the definition of conceptual
design.
Under the Design chapter, a section was introduced
in fib model code for concrete structures 2010 on concep-
tual design. In the background paper Sound engineering
through conceptual design according to the fib Model
Code 2010 by H. Corres-Peiretti, published in fib journal 8
Structural Concrete 14 (2013), No. 2, it is explained that
Jean François Klein at a meeting of fib Special Activity
Group 5, New Model Code, in Lausanne, proposed a flow
chart (Fig re 4) as a basis for introducing the process of
conceptual design into the new Model Code 2010.
Recently in September 2019 an International fib sym-
posium on conceptual design (2019) of structures under
the scientific chair of Dr Hugo Corres Pieretti was orga-
nized in Madrid where some of the renowned structural
engineers and architects delivered key note lectures and
brainstormed on the theme.
FIGURE 4 Methodological flow chart for conceptual design
(Source: fib model code 2010)
2211
The fib has constituted a task group TG 10.1 for the
preparation of model code 2020 and the work is in pro-
gress. In the task group meetings held in Tokyo on 13 to
14th December 2019, Dr Hugo Corres and Dr Akio
Kasuga made presentations proposing improvisation in
the methodology flow chart for conceptual design imbib-
ing some of the conclusions of fib symposium at Madrid
including sustainability aspects.
Printed by [Special Products: All Wiley Journals FF - 156.217.234.033 - /doi/epdf/10.1002/suco.202000399] at [25/06/2021].
ss
chart (Figure 5)
ructure in Tokyo
while deliberating on structural sustainability in concep-
tual design. The conceptual design is a part of overall
design process of a structure and ends by providing out-
put as the basis for detailed design. In fact, the design
basis report (DBR) and departmental project report
(DPR) should logically be the output of conceptual design
that is meant to be used as an input for detailed design.
Structural sustainability is most important aspect of
conceptual design.Dr Kasuga goes on to define structural
sustainability as:
• Is the way of thinking to recall creativity.
• Is mostly considered to solve constraints in conceptual
design.
• Can deal with three aspects of sustainability.
• Solutions can be defined as performance requirements
and verified.
• Solutions derive optimized structures which lead to
sustainable performance of the object during its life
time including construction and demolition.
• Makes structure elegant.
Dr Hugo Corres10 presented an improvised model of
methodological flow chart (Figure 6) of conceptual design
in Tokyo on the basis of Madrid symposium where inspi-
ration, data collection, creativity and materialization got
incorporated in the model. After this incorporation, the
model has a striking resemblance to R Gold's creativity
model (Figure 2) of “Four hats of creation”.
The constraints like external input, service criteria
and performance requirements for conceptual design is
well understood and to a large extent practiced and also
specified and codified. The external input and service
criteria generally are:
• Accelerated construction
• Low environmental impact
• Minimum cost
Irrigation Water Delivery System: (Distribution System)
al Lake
Can
d ary
e con
or S
Br.
Escape Regulator
P.S. or Pumping Station

Series of
falls, culvert, Main Drain
and P.S.
Syphon
Tail Escape Escape Aqueduct & Intermediate Escape

- Canals and drains

- Bridges

Main canal
- Dams
Roadw
ay
- Barrages/regulators
Culvert e
Culvert Bridge Bridg
Bridge

Village
- Culvert
t men
Embank

- Aqueduct
al
h Can
in
Levee or

h Dra
al
h Can

Branc

- Syphon
Branc
Branc

d
Heaulator
Reg
- Tail escape
canal
Barrage Main
& Lock Head
Regulator - P.S.
Dam and Spillway

Reservoir
Lake

CANAL CANAL
DRAIN