JAStructE/TD-CC/2020/01 SECTION Il: LOADS & LOAD COMBINATIONS (SEVENTH REVISION) NOVEMBER, 2020 Indian Association of Structural Engineers(AStructE/TD-CC/2020/01 COMMENTARY WITH WORKED EXAMPLES FOR IRC : 6-2017 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges Section Il : Loads & Load Combinations (Seventh Revision) November, 2020 Volume 1 of 2 : Commentary cE INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERSCommentary with Worked Examples for IRC : 6-2017 (Volume 1 of 2: Commentary) All rights reserved. No part of this publication can be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior permission of the publisher. Rs. 120- + GST @ 18% Published by : Indian Association of Structural Engineers K-69A, Basement, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 (India) Tel. : +91-11-45794829 E-mail iastructe@gmail.com Website : www iastructe.co.in Printed by : Maansee Printers Pocket B-35D, Dilshad Garden, Dethi-110095 Mobile :#91-9610125541 Enmail : maanseeprinters@gmail.co.inCommentary wih worked Examples fr IRC%-2017 (Volume 1 of 2 : Commentary) Foreword The Code IRC:6-2017 for "Loads & Load Combinations" is one of a series of structural codes being prepared by the Indian Roads Congress. For Highway Bridge Designers, this code is the bible and itis not possible to practice bridge engineering in India without having any knowledge about this code. IRC codes may not be always user friendly and easy to use. There is always a demand to have some resource document which makes the use of code easy. Such resource document will also ensure better compliance of the code. wr The Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE) has been deliberating, the subject for quite some time. It was realised that there is need to provide Commentary to BIS and IRC codes and also few illustrative worked examples highlighting the application of these codes. These guidelines may be used by structural engineers in performing the structural design works. It will help in better code compliance and in minimising designerrors. IRC:6-2017 was picked up by the Publication of LAStructE as one of the code for preparation of Commentary to begin with. Other codes will follow suit. The work of preparing the initial draft of this guideline was entrusted to a team of experts led by the undersigned. A brain storming session was conducted in November 2019, wherein the draft was widely circulated and responses from the user taken. ‘The initial draft was reviewed by a team of expert panel, which was led by Prof. Mahesh Tandon. The document is finally printed in two volumes. Volume-1 gives the commentary while Volume-2 gives illustrative worked examples. I take this opportunity to thank all the contributors for sparing their valuable time in bringing out this important guideline. I am sure this guideline will be found useful by all stakeholders (Clients, Design Consultants, Independent Engineers, Proof Consultants, Contractors, Academicians) involved in the infrastructuresector. Happy Reading! Re Alok Bhowmick President, LAStructECommentary with worked Examples for RC:6-2017 (Volume 1 of: Commentary) Message from Chairman, Publication Committee Dear Colleagues, It is my pleasure to write this message while presenting to you this important publication titled “Commentary on IRC-6-2017, Standard Specifications & Code of Practice for road bridges, Section-II Load & Load combinations”. In India we have several codes of practices & standards prepared by various institutions including Indian Road Congress (IRC). However, record of code compliance is not very encouraging. One of the reasons for it is non availability of simple comprehensive code commentaries. Code commentaries help Engineers to understand the intent and meaning of various clauses of code. Itimproves code compliance. Codes can serve the desired purpose only when implemented properly. In view of this Indian Association of Structural Engineers decided to prepare and publish the commentary on this IRC code. It was also decided to publish it in two volumes. Volume-1 being the commentary and Volume-2 worked examples to explain further how to use these clauses. Publication Committee identified Mr. Alok Bhowmick to lead this project. Later an expert panel consisting of Mr. Alok Bhowmick, Prof. Mahesh Tandon, Mr. Rajiv Ahuja, Mr. GL Verma, Mr. Partha Pratim Banerjee & Dr. Lakshmy Parmeswaran was formed. I am happy that expert panel has done a fabulous job in completing this commentary with worked examples in time. It has gone through several consultations & review process. A workshop to discuss it was also organised in New Delhi. My thanks are also due to all members of Publication committee and Governing Council members of LAStructE for reviewing the document and sending the comments for its improvement. I am sure these guidelines will helpall structural engineersinvolved in design & construction of road bridges toimplement the IRC-6-2017 in aneffective manner. Dosend your feedback é& suggestions for its improvement. Bestregards,‘Commentary wih worked Examples for IR0:-2017 (Volume 1 of 2: Gommentary) About this Guideline Like many current national codes in India, the IRC code on Loads and Load Combinations (namely IRC:6-2017) isa code without a published commentary. For any structural design code, itis important for the practicing structural engineers to have a thorough understanding of the principles, the true interpretation and background of the codal clauses, which will ensure better compliance of the code. Its often found that many of the clauses presented in the code pose difficulty to some designers atleast initially for its correct application. For young engineers particularly, the unfamiliarity with the codal clauses poses huge problemsin ensuring correct interpretation and application of the code. This is the backdrop to the publication of this guideline, titled ‘Commentary for IRC:6-2017" by the Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE). The association recognised this need and had set up atask group to prepare the base documentin two volumes a. Volume-1:Commentary b. Volume-2: Illustrative Worked Examples. ‘Thefirst draft ofthis document including proposed comments on the code was prepared by a group of engineers led by Mr Alok Bhowmick. Other members of the group were Mr Rajiv Ahuja and Dr Lakshmy Parameswaran. The team was assisted by many engineers, list of which is given below. The draft document was widely circulated amongst the structural and bridge engineering fraternity and a brain-storming session was organised by IAStructE in the month of November 2019, which was attended by more than 40 participants. Many engineers, who could not attend the Brain-Storming session sent their comments thru’ email. Thereafter an expert committee was constituted by IAStructE under the convenorship of Prof. Mahesh Tandon, MD of Tandon Consultants Pvt. Ltd. and past president of [AStructE to give final shape to this guideline, ater going through al the comments teceived during and after the brain storming session. Other members ofthis expert committee are: a. MrAlokBhowmick (MD, B&S Engineering Consultants Pvt Ltd. and President, AStructE), b. MrRajiv Ahuja (independent Consultantand GC Member, IAStructE), ¢. MrGL Verma (Director, EXC Consultants Pvt.Ltd), 4. MrPartha Pratim Banerjee (Technical Director, Ayesa) and €. DrLakshmy Parameswaran (ChiefScientist, CSIR-CRRD). Mr Jatin Singla (Student Engineer, B&SECPL) assisted the team for the preparation of ilustrative worked examples. It was decided by the expert committee to segregate comments on the existing code from the Commentary and Worked Examples. Comments on the existing code are proposed to be compiled in a separate volume and handed over to IRC for consideration of B-2 Committee of IRC. The expert panel was assisted by several engincers listed. below. ‘This pubtication wil assist practicing bridge and structural engineers in building confidence in the code, which offers tools for the design of economic and innovative bridge structures, The document i rich in theoretical explanations and draws on much experience of the authors. Worked examples further illustrate the application of the code and should promote better understanding, As members of the Expert Panel, we would like to thank al the authors, peer reviewers and members ofthe oint Task Force for working efficiently and effectively in producing these documents. wi@ ian assent St ree ‘The Commentary and the Worked Examples will prove to be an authentic companion to IRC:6-2017 and deserve Raion on Poway Prof. Mahesh Tandon Fe. Alok Bhowmick Rajiv Ahuja MD, Tandon Consultants Pvt.Ltd. and President-1AStructE and Independent Consultantand CCMenberIASiucil MD,B&SEngineringConcultatsPviLid, "GC Member 1AStuct2 a Porn} oe toler Fe Partha Paton Banerjee GLVerma Drtakshmy Paramenwaran ‘Technical Director, Ayesa and ‘MD, EPC Consultants Pvt. Lid. and Chief Scientist, CSIR-CRRI and MembesIAStrec Fellow IASI Fellow IAStctE Participants and contributors in this guideline : + MsManoj Mita Me Vipul Abuja 5 aetna * DrSKDhawan * DrDulalGoldar * MrT Viswanathan + MrAKBanerjee » MrSanjay Jain + MrSoumyaaDixitt Meares Me ArpitSingka © hee Asari + Me Amitabha Gost + DeNirmalyaBandopadlyay + MrNiravMody * MrMMGhosh * MrVarunGarg, * MrKNSarvanan = MrAnirbanSengupta + MsMousumiDe + MrDeepak Kulkarni + MeAhmed ill + MeDevjotPaul + MeAchintKumar eke Aree Me Ashok Vihnot Mavi Pata ‘+ MrShubham Rastogi © MrPadamKumar + MrSurajMehra ‘+ MrBhumiReddyMaheswaraReddy + MrDSuresh + MsShreya Chandra * DeDargesiCRa MePradiyumnajest necesita * MsB.Shobhana * MrDevang Patel * MrRizwan + MrNishad Kulkarni + MrAshishKumar + MrTampreetSinghGill © MrUmeshSharma + MrJatinSingla ‘+ MrAbhishekSharma Me Ashoth Matar + MePstamjash + Me-Neorjsharma Disclaimer/ Copyright: Indian Association of StructuralEngineers All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by ‘any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior writen permission of the Indian Association of Structural Engineers (TAStructE).. The opinions reflected inthis document are those ofthe authors and the IASEructE cannot be held liable for any view expressed therein. Alladvice or information from the IAStructE is intended for those who will eoaluate the significance and limitations ofits contents and take responsibility for its use and application. No liability (including for negligence) for any loss resulting from such advice or information is accepted. Readers should note that all codes and standards published by the Indian Roads Congress are subject to revision from time to time ‘tnd therefor this guidelines applicable and rleoant tothe latest publication ofthe code available atthe time of publication ofthis document. Readers must ensure that they arein possession ofthe latest version ofthe cade for practical application.‘Commentary wih worked Examples for IR0:-2017 (Volume 1 of 2: Gommentary) Contents SINo. Particulars Page No. 1. Introduction 1 2 Beope 2 3. Clause 201 ‘Classification. 3 4 Clause 202 Loads, Forces and Load Effects 5 5 Clase 209 Dead Load 7 6 Clause 208 Live Loads 8 7 Clause 206 ‘Reduction in the Longitudinal Effect on Bridges Accommodating 2 ‘more than Two Traffic Lanes 8 Clause 206 Foot Over Bridges, Footway, Kerb, Railings, Parapet and 8 Crash Barriers: 9, Clase 207 ‘Tramway Loading ” 10. Clause 208 Impact 18 1 Clause 209 Wind Load 20 12. Clause 210 Horizontal Forces due to Water Currents 25 13 Clause2i1 Longitudinal Forces 29 14, Clause 212 ‘Centrifugal Forces 39 35. Clause213 Buoyancy 0 16. Clause 214 Earth Pressure a 7, Climsez15 ‘Temperature 6 18. Clause 217 Secondary Effects 51 19. Climsezi8 rection Eifects and Construction Loads 52 2. Clause 220 Barge Impact on Bridges st 2. Clause221 Snow Load 3 2 Clase 222 ‘Vehicle Collision Loads on Supports of Bridges, Flyover Supports o ‘and Foot over Bridges 7. Clause 223 Indeterminate Structures and Composite Structures a 24 ANNEXUREA: Hypothetical Vehicles for Classification of Vehicles and a Bridges (Revised) 25. ANNEXUREB: Combination of Loads for Limit State Design o 26. ANNEXUREC: — Wind Load Computation on Truss Bridge Superstructure Rp 27. ——ANNEXUREE: Classification of Inland Waterways of India a‘Commentary wih worked Examples for IR0:-2017 (Volume 1 of 2: Gommentary) Introduction Introduction The origin of the code IRC:6 is traced back to the Ist draft “Standard Specifications & Code of Practice for Road Bridges”, prepared by the Bridge Sub-committee of the Indian Roads ‘Congress along with the explanatory notes, which was originally printed as Paper No. 112in Vol.X of the Journal of IRCin 1946, and discussed.in the Jaipur session of IRCin February 1946. The code was eventually first published in December 1958. A close look at the development ofthis code from 1958 till date reveals many interesting facts. ‘a. The coverage of this code has shrunk with the passage of time. In 1958, this code covered not only the Loads and Load Combinations, but also covered design of structures including stresses, with working stress design philosophy. The title of the code was "Loads & Stresses' Subsequently the design related provisions were shifted from IRC‘ to IRC:21 and IRC:18 for reinforced concrete structures and prestressed concrete structures respectively and scope of this code was restricted to Loads and Stresses and Load Combinations only. With the introduction of limit state design philosophy in IRC further changes were introduced in the code. Seismic design was taken out from IRC:6 and a separate guideline introduced in IRC (Le. IRC-SP:114) b. Provisions of the code pertaining to carriageway live loads have remained more or Jess static since its first publication in 1958. IRC Loading Class AA, Class A and Class B existed even in 1958 !!. Only additions in the loading over the years are the following: i, 7ORLoading (Introduced in 1964) Congestion Factor (Introduced in 2011) iii, SVloading (Introduced in 2014), iv. Fatigue Load (Introduced in 2014) (Other transient loads of rare occurrence such as accidental load due to Vehicle collision onbridge supports, crash barriers and bargeimpact loading arelater additions. Wind loading, Earth pressure loading and Seismic loading provisions have undergone significant changes over the years. Major changes in wind loading clause ‘were introduced in 2007. Barth pressure clause has undergone major revision in the year 2014, Seismic loads have undergone modifications several times, starting from 2003 (post Bhuj-Earthquake). In the recent past (June 2018), seismic induced loading provisions were taken out from this code and placed ina separate guideline (IRCSP:114-2018). The code as printed covers all amendments upto March 2017 only. Number of changes ‘were brought about subsequent to March, 2017, till the date of publication of this guideline. ‘These changes are available in the form of amendments and will be incorporated in nextIndian Associaton of Structural Engineers Scope The Scope' f this codehas not changed since ts first publication in 1958. In the present version of the code, coverage includes, in addition to traditional dead loads, imposed loads and carriageway and footpath live loads, the force effects due to vehicle collisions, barge impact, settlement and thermal loads causing stress in the structure. Earthquake induced forces are not covered in this code. Reference may be made to IRCSP.114 for earthquake induced forces. Wave pressure on bridge and aero-elastic instability developed force effects are not covered in this code. Specialist literatures may be referred whenever such forces are encountered. ‘Some of the provisions of this code (e.g. Wind Clause) are applicable for normal span bridges with individual span length upto 150m or for bridges with height of pier upto 100m.‘Commentary wih worked Examples for IR0:-2017 (Volume 1 of 2: Gommentary) Clause 201 : Classification For the purpose of this code, bridges are classified according to the loads they are designed tocarry. Design of bridgesis primarily governed by the live load models representing truck traffic. IRC loading models are hypothetical loads, developed from historical sources, The design live loads were introduced in the pre-independence period in 1935, Over the years additional load models in terms of SV load and congestion factors have been introduced, to take into account effect of the increased loads with passage of time. Class 70R loading and Class AA loadings were termed as “The Indian Road Congress Heavy Loading”. In 1958, when the code was first published, Class 70R loading did not exist at that time, Class AA loading was there, which was restricted to be adopted within certain municipal limits; in certain existing or contemplated industrial areas; in other specified areas; and along certain specified highways. Class 70R loading came into existence with effect from 1966 and it was made clear to the designers that where class 70-R is specified as loading, it shall be used in place of Class AA loading. lass A and Class B loadings came into existence way back in 1943. Class A loading was termed as “The Indian Road Congress Standard Loading”, which was to be adopted forall roads in which permanent bridges are to be constructed, other than those which are specified for Class AA. Class B loading was termed as “The Indian Road Congress Light Loading”, which was to be adopted for temporary structures. Structures made with timber ‘were considered as temporary structures for the purpose of loading. Inthe Sth revision of the code in 2010, IRC decided to design all permanent bridges for Class 7O-R loading, which was earlier considered for only bridges in restricted areas under certain ‘municipal limits (sameas for Class AA loading). Itis a common practice currently to design bridges for either Class A or Class 70-R or a combination of Class A with Class 70R loading. In addition, new bridges may also be designed for Special Vehicle (SV) loading and/or loads with congestion factor, wherever required and wherever specified by concerned authorities. SV loading and Congestion Factors are ‘optional loads’, to be applied judiciously for bridges, depending upon the bridge location and type of traffic that is likely to ply over the bridge. The code clearly puts the onus on the authorities, for deciding whether a particular bridgeis to be designed for these optional loads or not. Class B loading was originally meant to beadopted for design of temporary structures & for bridges in specified areas. The clause content was modified in 2010 during the 5th revision. oftthe code. Atpresent, Class B loading is prescribed for timber bridges only.