BRIDGE 02 ON BOULEVARD 03, GYALSUNG

ACADEMY PROJECT, PEMATHANG

DESIGN REPORT
Document No. GI-PT-Br2-DR-1

General Information:
Bridge Length: 9.4 m
Carriageway width: 7.50 m
Walkway: 5.15 m on one side
Total width: 12.65 m
Bridge type: Reinforce Concrete box Frame
Loading: Envelope of Double Lane IRC Class A and Single
Lane IRC Class 70R(wheeled) as per IRC-6:2016.

Client: Gyalsung Infra, Consultant: JY Engineering Consultants

Thimphu Thimphu
Ph. +975 17634390
Email. jyengconsult2017@gmail.com

Dated: December 2022

Bridge 02 Design Report

Contents
Brief Background ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Design Criteria ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Bridge Type and Span Configuration........................................................................................................... 2
Span Length and Configuration ............................................................................................................ 2
Bridge type: ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Collection and Analysis of Design Data ...................................................................................................... 3
Topographic Survey .............................................................................................................................. 3
Geotechnical Investigation/Studies ....................................................................................................... 3
Bridge Location .................................................................................................................................... 3
Estimation of Design Discharge ........................................................................................................... 3
4.4.1 Catchment Area Delineation ......................................................................................................... 3
4.4.2 Catchment Characteristics............................................................................................................. 4
4.4.3 Discharge Estimation Method ....................................................................................................... 4
4.4.4 Computation of Design Discharge ................................................................................................ 6
4.4.5 Estimation of Discharge Capacity at the Bridge point .................................................................. 7
4.4.6 Bearing Capacity of the foundation statra ..................................................................................... 8
Structural Analysis and Design of Bridge Components ............................................................................. 10
Bridge Geometry ................................................................................................................................. 10
Material ............................................................................................................................................... 10
Loads ................................................................................................................................................... 11
5.3.1 Earth Pressure ............................................................................................................................. 11
5.3.2 Dead and Live Loads .................................................................................................................. 11
5.3.3 Temperature (Cl.218, IRC:6-2000):............................................................................................ 12
5.3.4 Seismic (Cl.219, IRC 6: 2016) .................................................................................................... 12
5.3.5 Shrinkage (IRC 112:20110, Cl. 6.4.2.6) ..................................................................................... 12
Analysis and Design ........................................................................................................................... 13
5.4.1 Modelling .................................................................................................................................... 13
5.4.2 Analysis Results .......................................................................................................................... 16
5.4.3 Design of Components ................................................................................................................ 17
5.4.4 Table of Design Forces + Corresponding Rebar Quantities ....................................................... 18
5.4.5 Sample Design Calculation Sheet ............................................................................................... 19
Check for Foundation Strata Bearing Capacity .................................................................................. 22

1
Bridge 02 Design Report

Brief Background
JY Engineering Consultants was awarded the contract for design of cross drainage structures (bridges
and culverts) for the projects under Gyalsung Infra.

This report covers the design of Bridge 02 on Boulevard 03, Length = 9.40 m (2 * 4.70m) at GA
Pemathang.

The scope of the design consultancy covers the following broadly:

• Catchment Analysis & hydraulic study
• Structural Design and Drawings
• Bill of Quantities
• Technical Specifications

The following data/information are provided by the Client:

• Architectural Form/Concept Design
• Topographic Survey Drawings
• Geotechnical Study Report
• Meteorological Data

Design Criteria
The geometric requirements and design criteria and per contract:
• Carriage Width: 7.50m (double lane)
• Walkway: 5.15 m wide on one side.
• Material: Reinforced Concrete
• Load Class: Envelope of Double Lane IRC Class 70R and Single Lane Class 70R as per IRC 2016

Bridge Type and Span Configuration

Span Length and Configuration
The required bridge Length was measured at 9.40 m. However, to keep the sections thin and make the
construction simpler, the required length was split in to two equal spans.

2
Bridge 02 Design Report

Bridge type:
Given the low flow discharge and the shallow depth of the crossing, two span Reinforced Concrete
box bridge/culvert was found to suitable for the location.

Collection and Analysis of Design Data

Topographic Survey
The topographic survey data and drawings were supplied by the Client.

Geotechnical Investigation/Studies
The geotechnical investigation was carried out by a consultant appointed by the client. The findings
and recommendations of the geotechnical study were used for design of the foundations of the bridge.

Bridge Location
The centerline of the bridge/culvert shall be aligned with the alignment of the road which is
Boulevard 03.

Estimation of Design Discharge

Since the flow is a highly seasonal one fed mainly by monsoon rain, the catchment characteristics and
the rainfall data were used to estimate the design discharge of the flow at the proposed bridge point.

4.4.1 Catchment Area Delineation

Google Earth image was used to estimate the catchment area for the bridge.

3
Bridge 02 Design Report

Figure 1: Catchment area for the proposed bridge location

The estimated catchment area of the bridge is 110 Sq. km.

4.4.2 Catchment Characteristics

Catchment are: 0.50 Sq. km

RL at the highest point, R1: 686 m

Rl at the point of interest, R2: 469 m
Length from the furthest point to the point of 1410 m
interest contributing to discharge, L:
Bed Slope:
Length of the path, L: 650 m
RL of the upper end, RB1: 498 m
RL of the lower end, RB2: 457 m
Long. slope of the river bed, S =((RB1-RB2)/L): 0.0630769

4.4.3 Discharge Estimation Method

4
Bridge 02 Design Report

Catchment Area Delineation

(1:50,000 Topography Map
or GIS)

Setting the Point of Interest

along Alignment

Less than 20 km2 What is the Over 1000 km2

drainage Area
Size ?

Urban Rural 20 km2 < A < 1000 km2 Specific Discharge

Drainage
Category ? Method

SCS Peak Discharge

Method

SCS Peak Design Discharge

Discharge Rational Method
Method
Design Discharge

Design Discharge Design Discharge

Most of the catchment areas falls within the area proposed to be developed for the GA Project and
hence the catchment category shall be treated as “Urban”. Therefore, the design discharge shall be
estimated by SCS Peak Method.

5
Bridge 02 Design Report

4.4.4 Computation of Design Discharge

CALCULATION OF PEAK RUNOFF BY SCS PEAK METHOD

INPUTS Fill in cells in yellow only

(1) Drainage Area, A 0.5 km2

(2) Main Drainage Length, L 1410 m

(3) Uppermost Drainage Elevation 686 m

(4) Drainage Elevation at POI 469 m

(a) Drainage Time of Concentration, T c 0.18 hr 11 min

(5) Soil Group B Select from Table A in Sheet " Ref Table"

(6) Select "Curve Number", CN 67.5 Select from Table E in Sheet " Ref Table"
Be sure to the CN is a composite average if drainage
area is not homogeneous
(b) Potential Maximum Retention, S 122.3 mm

(7) Assign Design Return Period, ARI 100 years

(8) 24-hour Design Rainfall Depth for design ARI specified 311 mm Select from Table F in Sheet " Ref Table"
in (7) above

(c) Excess Runoff 200 mm

(d) Initial Abstraction I a = 0.2S 24 mm

Rain Fraction Ia/P 0.08 -

(9) C0 2.03
Select Coefficients for Type IA
C1 -0.35
Rainfall for I a /P ratio above
C2 -0.14 Select from Table G in Sheet "Ref Table"

(e) Unit Peak Flow 0.07 m3/s/km2/mm

(10) Pond and Swamp Adjustment Factor, F p 1 - Select from Table H in Sheet " Ref Table"

Design Peak Discharge by SCS Peak Method 7

(f) m3/s

The estimated peak design discharge for 100 years return period, as per above calculation sheet, was
found to be 7.0 m3/sec

6
Bridge 02 Design Report

4.4.5 Estimation of Discharge Capacity at the Bridge point

Computation of discharge capacity from Cross Sectional Area and Bed Slope

Clear water way length: 8.6 m

Wetted Perimeter for full length, P: 8.34 m
CS area measured from HFL for full Length, A: 3.34 m2
The rugosity co-efficient, n: 0.04
Hydraulic mean depth, R (=A/P): 0.40 m
RL of upper point along the river bed: 498 m
RL of lower point along the river bed: 457
Length between the two above points: 650.00 m
Bed slope, S: 0.063077 m

From Manning's formula, Discharge, : 16.92 cum/sec

Estimated design discharge (SCS Peak method) 7 cum/sec

Owing to very small catchment area, the flow discharge is very low. Hence the height of the bridge is
determined not by the HFL but the level of the road.

Figure 2: Bridge L-section showing estimated HFL

7
Bridge 02 Design Report

4.4.6 Bearing Capacity of the foundation statra

The structure is designed as a box frame with bottom slab spread over of the entire area of the structure
which allows for more even distribution of the structure load over a bigger area. Hence there is no need
to go for deeper foundation in search of higher bearing capacity. The required BC can be achieved at
shallower depth.
PROJECT TITLE: GA PROJECT, Pemathang
DESCRIPTION: Bridge No. 2 DESIGN DATE
Rev.
REF: JY 7-Dec-22
LOCATION : Phuentsholing, Bhutan CHECK DATE
0
Estimation of Bearing Resistance of Foundation Strata 8-Dec-22

1. Geometry and Dimensions

Foundation Width, B = 16.50 m

Foundation Length, L = 14.40 m

2. Estimation of the Bearing Capacity of the foundation Soil

Soil Properties:
Angle of internal friction, φ = 30.00 ᵒ

Unit weight of Soil, γ = 18.00 KN/m3

γ= 0.00183 Kgf/cm3
Cohesion, c= 0.00 Kgf/cm3
Depth of the foundation base from ground, Df = 50 cm
Over burden pressure, q = 0.092 kgf/cm2

As per IS:6403-1981,
i. For General Shear Failure:
Ultimate bearing Capacity, q ult = q(Nq-1)sqdqiq+0.5BγNγsγdγiγW' (for cohesionless soil)

Bearing Capacity Factors (Refer Table 1):

For φ = 30.00 ᵒ
Nc = 26.37
Nq = 15.30
Nγ = 17.80

Shape Factors (Refer Table 2):

sq=1+0.2B/L = 1.23
sγ=1-0.4B/L = 0.54

8
Bridge 02 Design Report

Depth Factors (Refer Cl. 5.1.2.2):

NØ=tan2(45+φ/2) = 2.99
dq = dγ= 1+0.1(Df/B)√NØ = 1.01

Inclination Factor (Cl. 5.1.2.3):

Inclination of load to the vertical, α = 0.00 degrees
iq=(1-α/90) 2= 1.00
iγ=(1-α/φ)2 = 1.00

Effect of Water Table (Cl. 5.1.2.4):

W'= 0.50 (choose a value as per conditions above)

qult = q(Nq-1)sqdqiq+0.5BγNγsγdγiγW' = 8.96 Kgf/cm2
= 879 KN/m2

ii. For Local Shear Failure:

Ultimate bearing Capacity, q' ult = q(Nq-1)sqdqiq+0.5BγNγsγdγiγW' (for cohesionless soil)

Bearing Capacity Factors (Refer Table 1):

φ'=tan-1 (0.67tanφ) = 21.15 ᵒ
Nq = 9.39
Nγ = 9.24

q'ult = q(Nq-1)sqdqiq+0.5BγNγsγdγiγW' = 4.76 Kgf/cm2

= 467 KN/m2

\ Design Ultimate bearing resistance, q d= 467 KN/m2

The estimated ultimate BC for local shear failure = 467 KN/m2

Allowable BC = 467/3 = 156 KN/m2

9
Bridge 02 Design Report

Structural Analysis and Design of Bridge Components

Bridge Geometry
1. 1 GEOMETRY
Structure Type: Double Cell Rigid Frame Box
1. 1 GEOMETRY
Structure Type: Double Cell Rigid Frame Box

Figure 3: L-section showing dimensions

1.2 MATERIALS
Concrete:
Material
1.2 MATERIALS Grade: M25 as per IS 456
Concrete:
28-day compressive cube strength, fc'= 25 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity, Grade:
Ec = M25 as per IS
30000 456
MPa (Table 6.5, IRC 112)
28-dayCoefficient
compressive cube strength, fc'=
of thermal Expansion = 0.000012 /˚C25 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity, Ec ==
Unit Weight 30000
24.5 MPa
KN/m3 (Table 6.5, IRC 112)
Coefficient of thermal Expansion = 0.000012 /˚C
Reinforcement:
Unit Weight = Fe500 as
Grade: 24.5
perKN/m3
IS 1786
Reinforcement: Yield Strength, fy: 500 MPa
Grade: Fe500 as
Unit Weight: perKN/m3
77.00 IS 1786
Yield Strength,
Backfill soil properties: fy: 500 MPa
Dry UnitUnit Weight:
Weight, γs : 77.00
18.00 KN/m3
KN/m3
Backfill soil properties:
Angle of internal friction, ϕ: 30.00 KN/m3˚
Foundation DrySoilUnit Weight, γ s :
properties: 18.00 KN/m3
Angle of internal friction, γϕ:s :
Unit Weight, 30.00
18.00 KN/m3˚
KN/m3
Angle of internal friction, ϕ:
Foundation Soil properties: 30.00 KN/m3˚
Ultimate Bearing Unit Weight,q ult
Capacity, γ s.:: 18.00
467 KN/m3
KN/m2 (Refer separate sheet)
Angle of internal friction, ϕ: 30.00 KN/m3˚
Ultimate Bearing Capacity, q ult .: 467 KN/m2 (Refer separate sheet)

10
Bridge 02 Design Report

Loads
5.3 LOADS
5.3 LOADS
5.3.1 Earth
5.3.1 Earth Pressure
Pressure
5.3.1 Earth Pressure
Coefficient of EP at Rest, Ko =1-sin(ϕ): 0.50 (Cl. 214.1.3, IRC 6:2016)
Coefficient of EP at Rest, o =1-sin(ϕ):
WallKHeight, H:
0.50 (Cl. 214.1.3, IRC 6:2016)
5.40 m
i) Surcharge Loads: Wall Height, H: 5.40 m
i) Surcharge
Vertical Loads:
Surcharge, w: 21.60 KN/m2 (equivalent of 1.2m high earthfill as per IRC 6)
Horizontal Surchargew:= Ko*w:
Vertical Surcharge, 21.60
10.80 KN/m2 (equivalent of 1.2m high earthfill as per IRC 6)
KN/m2
Horizontal Surcharge = Ko*w: 10.80 KN/m2
ii) Earth pressure
ii) Earth pressure
Horizontal Earth pressure (values tailored for Midas civil input):
Horizontal Earth pressure (valuesPo=
tailored
Ko*w:for Midas10.80
civilKN/m3
input):
g=
Po=Ko*γ
Ko*w:
s: 10.80
9.00 KN/m3
KN/m3
g= Ko*γs : 9.00 KN/m3

5.3.2 Dead and Live Loads:

5.3.2
The Dead
5.3.2Dead
DeadLoad and
anddue Live
LivetoLoads: Loadsof the structure shall be calculated by the program.
Self Weight
1.3.2.1
The DeadSuperimposed
Load due toDead Load (SIDL)
Self Weight of the structure shall be calculated by the program.
1.3.2.1 SuperimposedAsphalt
DeadWearing Course:
Load (SIDL) 1.80 KN/m2 t:hickness 0.08m unit wt.: 22.5 KN/m3
Kerb + crash barrier:
Asphalt Wearing Course: 3.57 KN/m
1.80 KN/m2 (u.d.l due to crash
t:hickness 0.08mbarrier assumed
unit as KN/m)
wt.: 22.5 KN/m3
1.3.2.2 Live Loads Kerb + crash barrier: 3.57 KN/m (u.d.l due to crash barrier assumed as KN/m)
i) Vehicular
1.3.2.2 Live Load:
Loads
Envelope of double lane IRC Class A and Single Lane IRC Class 70R
i) Vehicular Load:
Envelope of double lane IRC Class A and Single Lane IRC Class 70R
ii: Live Load Combinations (As per Table 6A, IRC-6:2016):

ii: Live Load Combinations (As per Table 6A, IRC-6:2016):

11
Bridge 02 Design Report

ii)
ii) Walkway Live Load
ii) Walkway
Walkway Live
Live Load
Load
Walkway
Walkway LL: 4.91 KN/m2 (IRC 6)
ii) Walkway Live Load Walkway LL:
LL: 4.91
4.91 KN/m2
KN/m2 (IRC
(IRC 6)
6)
Walkway LL: 4.91 KN/m2 (IRC 6)

5.3.3 Temperature (Cl. 218, IRC:6 - 2000):

5.3.3
5.3.3 Temperature
5.3.3 (Cl.
(Cl. 218,
Temperature
Temperature IRC:6
(Cl.218,
218, -- 2000):
IRC:6 IRC:6-2000):
2000):
Highest
Highest max.
max. temperature:
temperature: 45
45 ˚C
˚C
5.3.3 Temperature Highest
(Cl. 218,max. temperature:
IRC:6 - 2000): 45 ˚C
Lowest
Lowest min.
min. temperature: 00 ˚C
˚C
Highest min. temperature:
Lowest max. temperature: 450 ˚C
Anticipated
Anticipated temp. at the time con.
con. Casting: 25 ˚C
˚C
Anticipated temp. at
at the
the time
temp.Lowest time
min.con.
Casting:
Casting:
temperature:
25
250 ˚C
Max.
Max. +ve
+ve variation:
variation: 20
20 ˚C
˚C
Max. +ve variation:
Anticipated temp. at the time con. Casting: 20
25 ˚C
Max.
Max. -ve
-ve variation:
variation: 25
25 ˚C
˚C
Max.+ve
Max. -ve variation: 25
20 ˚C
Max. -ve variation: 25 ˚C
5.3.4
5.3.4 Seismic (Cl.
Seismic 219, IRC 6:2016):
5.3.4
5.3.4 Seismic
Seismic (Cl.(Cl.219,
(Cl. 219,
219, IRC IRC 6: 2016)
IRC 6:2016):
6:2016):
Seismic
Seismic Zone: V
Seismic Zone:
5.3.4 Seismic (Cl. 219, IRC 6:2016): Zone: V
V
Zone
Zone Factor,
Factor, Fo:
Fo: 0.36
0.36
Zone Factor,
Seismic Fo:
Zone: 0.36
V
Soil
Soil type
type factor,
factor, β:
β: 1.0
1.0 (hard soil)
Soil type
Zone factor,Fo:
Factor, β: 1.0 (hard
0.36 (hard soil)
soil)
Importance
Importance Factor,
Factor, I:
I: 1.2
1.2 (Table
(Table 19,
19, IRC 6)
Soil type factor, β:
Importance Factor, I: 1.2 (Table 19, IRC
1.0 (hard soil) IRC 6)
6)
Damping:
Damping: 55 %%
ImportanceDamping:
Factor, I: 1.2 5 (Table
% 19, IRC 6)
Response
Response reduction Factor: 22 (Table 20, IRC 6)
Response reduction
reduction Factor:
Factor:
Damping: 25 (Table
(Table
%
20,
20, IRC
IRC 6)
6)
LL
LL to
to be
be consided
consided for
for seismic
seismic weight:
weight:
LL to be considedResponse
for seismicreduction
weight: Factor: 2 (Table 20, IRC 6)
In
In the
the direction
direction perpendicular
perpendicular to
to traffic: 20 %
In the direction perpendicular
LL to be consided for seismic weight: to traffic:
traffic: 20
20 % %
In
In the
the direction
direction parallel
parallel to
to traffic:
traffic: 00 %%
In the direction
In the direction parallel to traffic:
perpendicular 200 %
5.3.5 In the direction
Shrinkage (IRC parallel to traffic:
112:20110, Cl. 6.4.2.6)0 %
5.3.5
5.3.5 Shrinkage
Shrinkage (IRC
(IRC 112:
112: 2010,
2010, Cl.
Cl. 6.4.2.6)
6.4.2.6)
5.3.5 Shrinkage (IRC 112: 2010, Cl. 6.4.2.6)
Shrinkage
Shrinkage coefficient:
coefficient: 0.0002
0.0002 (Cl.
(Cl. 217.3, IRC 6:2016)
5.3.5 Shrinkage (IRC Shrinkage
112: 2010, coefficient:
Cl. 6.4.2.6) 0.0002 (Cl. 217.3,
217.3, IRC
IRC 6:2016)
6:2016)
Coefficient
Coefficient of
of thermanl
thermanl Expansion,
Expansion, c:
c: 0.000012
0.000012 /˚C
/˚C
Coefficient of thermanl Expansion,
Shrinkage coefficient:c: 0.000012
0.0002 /˚C
(Cl. 217.3, IRC 6:2016)
Change
Change in
in member Length,
Length, ΔL=c*Δt*L,
Change of
Coefficient in member
member
thermanlLength,
ΔL=c*Δt*L,
ΔL=c*Δt*L,
Expansion, c: 0.000012 /˚C
Strain,
Strain, (ΔL/L): 0.000200
Strain, (ΔL/L):
Change in member Length, (ΔL/L): 0.000200
ΔL=c*Δt*L,
0.000200
Temperature
Temperature diff.,Δt
diff.,Δt (=(ΔL/L)/c)):
(=(ΔL/L)/c)): -16.67
-16.67 ˚C
˚C
Temperature diff.,ΔtStrain,
(=(ΔL/L)/c)):
(ΔL/L): 0.000200
-16.67 ˚C
Temperature diff.,Δt (=(ΔL/L)/c)): -16.67 ˚C

12
Bridge 02 Design Report

Analysis and Design

Software: Midas Civil
Software: Midas Civil
5.4.1 Modelling
5.4.1 Modelling
The structure is modelled as plate.

Plate model of a part of the

tunnel

5.4.1.1 Loads (only a few loads shown for representation)

Static Loads:

Earth Pressure Load applied on

the sides of the wall

13

Load on CW due to concrete

Wearing Coat
Bridge 02 Design Report

Load on CW due to concrete

Wearing Coat

Moving Loads:

Load Lanes for Case 1 combination

14
Bridge 02 Design Report

Load Lanes for Case 2 combination

Class A train of vehicles Class 70R Vehicle (Wheeled)

15
Bridge 02 Design Report

5.4.2 Analysis
5.4.2 Analysis Results Results
5.4.2.1: Load Combinations
As per Appendix B, IRC 6:2016
5.4.2.2: Box Culvert

BM Values for Strength Combination at various sections along culvert width

BM Values for Service Combination at various sections along culvert width

16
Bridge 02 Design Report
5.4.2.3: Return Walls

5.4.2.3: Return Walls

Horizontal direction BM fill side-Strength Vertical direction BM fill side - Strength

Horizontal direction BM fill side-Strength Vertical direction BM fill side - Strength

5.4.3 Design
5.4.3 Design ofComponents
of the Components
5.4.3.1: Design Positions
5.4.3 Design of the Components
5.4.3.1: Design Positions

17
Bridge 02 Design Report

5.4.4 Table
5.4.3 Forces of Design Forces
+ corresponding + Corresponding Rebar Quantities
rebar values:
Design M ult. M ser. Rebar Remarks
Position (KN- (KN-
N1 m/m)20 m/m)10 ф12@150c/c
P1 102 75 ф16@200c/c
N2 242 90 ф16@150c/c+ф12@150c/c
P2 90 62 ф12@150c/c
N3 270 185 ф20@125c/c
P3 70 45 ф16@200c/c
N4 105 75 ф16@200c/c
P4 50 45 ф16@200c/c
RH1 165 110 ф20@180c/c Backfill side
RH2 140 95 ф16@150c/c Backfill side
RV1 160 106 ф20@200c/c Backfill side
RV2 ф12@150c/c Backfill side

18
Bridge 02 Design Report

5.4.5 Sample Design Calculation Sheet

Design of Sections for Moment:
Section Dimensions:
Overal depth of the section, D= 400 mm
Clear cover= 50 mm
Diameter of bar, φ= 20 mm (assume)
Effective Depth, d= 340 mm
width of the beam, b= 1000 mm

Material property:
steel, fy= 500 Mpa
concrete, fc= 25 MPa
 0 . 87 A s f y 
x u =  
 Ultimate BM, Mu = 165 KN-m
 0 . 36 f c b 
Tensile steel, Ast= 1200 mm2 (variable for iteration)
Depth of the NA, xu= 58 mm
  As f y   xu/d= 0.17 < 0.46
M = 0 . 87 A s f y d 1 −   
  bdf c   Section is under reinforced


Moment of resistance, MR= 165 KN-m (value obtained by iteration)

Bar diameter, φ = 20 mm
C/s section area of the bar, Aφ= 314 mm2
Spacing, S= 262 mm

Therefore, Provide φ 20 bars @ 180 mm c/c

Actual Ast provided = 1744 mm2

Check Longitudinal Rebar Ratio (IRC 112-2011, Cl. 16.5.1) :

Minimum Rebar Ratio:

19
Bridge 02 Design Report

20
Bridge 02 Design Report

Stress in the tensile rebar (cracked section),

σsc =nMs (de-y)/Icr= 190 MPa

kt = 0.5 (factor dependent on duration of load)

α e=n= 6.67

h=D= 400 mm

d=de= 340 mm

x=y= 89 mm
hc,ef f =min(2.5(h-d); (h-x/3);h/2) = 150 mm

Ac,ef f (=bw*hc,ef f ) = 150000 mm2

ρ p,ef f (=As /Ac,ef f ) = 0.0116296

fct,ef f =fctm = 2.20 MPa

Therefore, εsm -εcm = 0.00057

Maximum crack spacing ,

Bar diameter, φ= 20 mm (same dia. of bars used)

Clear cover for the long rebar, c= 50 mm

k1 = 0.8 (for deformed bars)

k2= 0.5 (for bending)

Rebar spacing, S= 180 mm

5(c+φ/2)= 300 mm

Since S<=5(c+φ/2)=
Sr.max =3.4c+(0.425k 1k 2φ)/ρp.ef f

Therefore, S r.max = 462 mm

Crack width, W k = 0.26 mm < 0.3 mm - OK

(Refer Table 12.1, IRC:112-2011)

21
Bridge 02 Design Report

Check for Foundation Strata Bearing Capacity

Figure 4: Applied Reactions under Service Load Combination

Maximum Reaction = 26.1/(0.5*0.5) = 104 KN/m2 (0.5m x 0.5m being the plate size in the model)
Allowable Bearing Capacity = 156 KN/m2, HENCE SAFE

---END---

22