35 views

Uploaded by Guru

- Navy Blast Resistant Structures
- IRJET-Analysis of PT Flat Slab with Drop- Considering Seismic Effect
- Chap 05
- Precast, Pre Stressed Wall Panels
- Flexural Analysis and Design of Beamns
- Strength of Materials I1
- Concrete Beam Slab Calculator v1.1
- cracks in ansys
- Composite Steel Design
- Design of Composite Columns v3_Ver1 (KJ)AMD
- Cardenas 1973
- Pushover Analysis of RC Building
- Steel
- 3.4 Shear Reinforcement
- Assignment 3
- Concrete T Beam Design
- Shear Design for Pre Stressed Beam
- Closure- Designing Compact Gussets with the Uniform Force Method.pdf
- 11cat50
- Tutorial 1

You are on page 1of 11

2. EXAMPLE BRIDGE

2.1 Bridge geometry and materials Bridge superstructure geometry Superstructure type: Spans: Width: Reinforced concrete deck supported on simple span prestressed girders made continuous for live load. Two spans at 110 ft. each 55-4 total 52-0 gutter line-to-gutter line (Three lanes 12- 0 wide each, 10 ft. right shoulder and 6 ft. left shoulder. For superstructure design, the location of the driving lanes can be anywhere on the structure. For substructure design, the maximum number of 12 ft. wide lanes, i.e., 4 lanes, is considered) Concrete Type F-Parapets, 1- 8 wide at the base 20 degrees, valid at each support location 9-8 AASHTO Type VI Girders, 72 in. deep, 42 in. wide top flange and 28 in. wide bottom flange (AASHTO 28/72 Girders) Straight strands with some strands debonded near the ends of the girders 3-6 from the centerline of the fascia girder to the end of the overhang

Intermediate diaphragms: For load calculations, one intermediate diaphragm, 10 in. thick, 50 in. deep, is assumed at the middle of each span. Figures 2-1 and 2-2 show an elevation and cross-section of the superstructure, respectively. Figure 2-3 through 2-6 show the girder dimensions, strand arrangement, support locations and strand debonding locations. Typically, for a specific jurisdiction, a relatively small number of girder sizes are available to select from. The initial girder size is usually selected based on past experience. Many jurisdictions have a design aid in the form of a table that determines the most likely girder size for each combination of span length and girder spacing. Such tables developed using the HS-25 live loading of the AASHTO Standard Specifications are expected to be applicable to the bridges designed using the AASHTO-LRFD Specifications.

2-1

The strand pattern and number of strands was initially determined based on past experience and subsequently refined using a computer design program. This design was refined using trial and error until a pattern produced stresses, at transfer and under service loads, that fell within the permissible stress limits and produced load resistances greater than the applied loads under the strength limit states. For debonded strands, S5.11.4.3 states that the number of partially debonded strands should not exceed 25 percent of the total number of strands. Also, the number of debonded strands in any horizontal row shall not exceed 40 percent of the strands in that row. The selected pattern has 27.2 percent of the total strands debonded. This is slightly higher than the 25 percent stated in the specifications, but is acceptable since the specifications require that this limit should be satisfied. Using the word should instead of shall signifies that the specifications allow some deviation from the limit of 25 percent. Typically, the most economical strand arrangement calls for the strands to be located as close as possible to the bottom of the girders. However, in some cases, it may not be possible to satisfy all specification requirements while keeping the girder size to a minimum and keeping the strands near the bottom of the beam. This is more pronounced when debonded strands are used due to the limitation on the percentage of debonded strands. In such cases, the designer may consider the following two solutions: Increase the size of the girder to reduce the range of stress, i.e., the difference between the stress at transfer and the stress at final stage. Increase the number of strands and shift the center of gravity of the strands upward.

Either solution results in some loss of economy. The designer should consider specific site conditions (e.g., cost of the deeper girder, cost of the additional strands, the available under-clearance and cost of raising the approach roadway to accommodate deeper girders) when determining which solution to adopt. Bridge substructure geometry Intermediate pier: Multi-column bent (4 columns spaced at 14-1) Spread footings founded on sandy soil See Figure 2-7 for the intermediate pier geometry End abutments: Integral abutments supported on one line of steel H-piles supported on bedrock. Uwingwalls are cantilevered from the fill face of the abutment. The approach slab is supported on the integral abutment at one end and a sleeper slab at the other end. See Figure 2-8 for the integral abutment geometry

2-2

Materials Concrete strength Prestressed girders: Deck slab: Substructure: Railings: Initial strength at transfer, fci = 4.8 ksi 28-day strength, fc = 6 ksi 4.0 ksi 3.0 ksi 3.5 ksi

Concrete elastic modulus (calculated using S5.4.2.4) Girder final elastic modulus, Ec = 4,696 ksi Girder elastic modulus at transfer, Eci = 4,200 ksi = 3,834 ksi Deck slab elastic modulus, Es Reinforcing steel Yield strength, fy = 60 ksi

Prestressing strands 0.5 inch diameter low relaxation strands Grade 270 Strand area, Aps = 0.153 in2 Steel yield strength, fpy = 243 ksi Steel ultimate strength, fpu = 270 ksi Prestressing steel modulus, Ep = 28,500 ksi Other parameters affecting girder analysis Time of Transfer Average Humidity = 1 day = 70%

110' -0" 110' -0"

2-3

1' 1/4" -8 1' -10"

9"

2.2 Girder geometry and section properties Basic beam section properties Beam length, L = 110 ft. 6 in. Depth = 72 in. Thickness of web = 8 in. Area, Ag = 1,085 in2 Moment of inertia, Ig = 733,320 in4 = 35.62 in. N.A. to top, yt N.A. to bottom, yb = 36.38 in. Section modulus, STOP = 20,588 in3 Section modulus, SBOT = 20,157 in3 CGS from bottom, at 0 ft. = 5.375 in. CGS from bottom, at 11 ft. = 5.158 in. CGS from bottom, at 54.5 ft. = 5.0 in. = 31.005 in. P/S force eccentricity at 0 ft., e0 P/S force eccentricity at 11 ft. , e11 = 31.222 in. P/S force eccentricity at 54.5 ft, e54.5 = 31.380 in. Interior beam composite section properties Effective slab width Deck slab thickness = 111 in. (see calculations in Section 2.3) = 8 in. (includes in. integral wearing surface which is not included in the calculation of the composite section properties)

2-4

Haunch depth

= 4 in. (maximum value - notice that the haunch depth varies along the beam length and, hence, is ignored in calculating section properties but is considered when determining dead load) = 1,384,254 in4 = 27.96 in. = 20.46 in. = 51.54 in. = 49,517 in3 = 67,672 in3 = 26,855 in3

Moment of inertia, Ic N.A. to slab top, ysc N.A. to beam top, ytc N.A. to beam bottom, ybc Section modulus, STOP SLAB Section modulus, STOP BEAM Section modulus, SBOT BEAM

Exterior beam composite section properties Effective Slab Width Deck slab thickness Haunch depth = 97.75 in. (see calculations in Section 2.3) = 8 in. (includes in. integral wearing surface which is not included in the calculation of the composite section properties) = 4 in. (maximum value - notice that the haunch depth varies along the beam length and, hence, is ignored in calculating section properties but is considered when determining dead load) = 1,334,042 in4 = 29.12 in. = 21.62 in. = 50.38 in. = 45,809 in3 = 61,699 in3 = 26,481 in3

Moment of inertia, Ic N.A. to slab top, ysc N.A. to beam top, ytc N.A. to beam bottom, ybc Section modulus, STOP SLAB Section modulus, STOP BEAM Section modulus, SBOT BEAM

2-5

4"

13"

8"

42" 72"

10"

10"

8"

3"

3"

CL of Bearing 109' = Span for Noncomposite Loads -0" 110' = Span for Composite Loads -0" CL Intermediate Pier 9" 3" CL of End Abutment and CL of Bearing

9"

5 spa @ 2"

2-6

C Bearing L

54' -6"

A

12' -0" 32' -6"

9"

10' -0"

Mid-length of girder

5 Spa @ 2"

Transfer Length of 6 Strands = 2' -6" Point where bonding begins for 6 strands Transfer Length of 6 Strands = 2' -6" No. of Bonded Strands = 38 No. of Bonded Strands = 44

Symmetric

2-7

Section A-A

Section B-B

For location of Sections A-A, B-B and C-C, see Figure 2-5 Figure 2-6 Beam at Sections A-A, B-B, and C-C

2-8

5 spa @ 10' 7/16" along the skew -7 Cap 4' 4' x 2' 2' 4'

CL Exterior Girder

22' -0"

3'

4' 5/8" -8

4' 5/8" -8

Girder

Approach Slab

Expansion Joint

Sleeper Slab

Highway Pavement

Bedrock

CL Exterior Girder

18' -0"

2-9

2.3 Effective flange width (S4.6.2.6) Longitudinal stresses in the flanges are distributed across the flange and the composite deck slab by inplane shear stresses, therefore, the longitudinal stresses are not uniform. The effective flange width is a reduced width over which the longitudinal stresses are assumed to be uniformly distributed and yet result in the same force as the non-uniform stress distribution if integrated over the entire width. The effective flange width is calculated using the provisions of S4.6.2.6. See the bulleted list at the end of this section for a few S4.6.2.6 requirements. According to S4.6.2.6.1, the effective flange width may be calculated as follows: For interior girders: The effective flange width is taken as the least of the following: One-quarter of the effective span length = 0.25(82.5)(12) = 247.5 in.

12.0 times the average thickness of the slab, = 12(7.5) + 8 = 104 in. plus the greater of the web thickness or one-half the width of the top flange of the girder = 12(7.5) + 0.5(42) = 111 in. The average spacing of adjacent beams = 9 ft.- 8 in. or 116 in.

The effective flange width for the interior beam is 111 in. For exterior girders: The effective flange width is taken as one-half the effective width of the adjacent interior girder plus the least of: One-eighth of the effective span length 6.0 times the average thickness of the slab, plus the greater of half the web thickness or one-quarter of the width of the top flange of the basic girder = 0.125(82.5)(12) = 123.75 in. = 6.0(7.5) + 0.5(8) = 49 in. = 6.0(7.5) + 0.25(42) = 55.5 in.

2-10

Therefore, the effective flange width for the exterior girder is: (111/2) + 42.25 = 97.75 in. Notice that: The effective span length used in calculating the effective flange width may be taken as the actual span length for simply supported spans or as the distance between points of permanent dead load inflection for continuous spans, as specified in S4.6.2.6.1. For analysis of I-shaped girders, the effective flange width is typically calculated based on the effective span for positive moments and is used along the entire length of the beam. The slab thickness used in the analysis is the effective slab thickness ignoring any sacrificial layers (i.e., integral wearing surfaces) S4.5 allows the consideration of continuous barriers when analyzing for service and fatigue limit states. The commentary of S4.6.2.6.1 includes an approximate method of including the effect of the continuous barriers on the section by modifying the width of the overhang. Traditionally, the effect of the continuous barrier on the section is ignored in the design of new bridges and is ignored in this example. This effect may be considered when checking existing bridges with structurally sound continuous barriers. Simple-span girders made continuous behave as continuous beams for all loads applied after the deck slab hardens. For two-equal span girders, the effective length of each span, measured as the distance from the center of the end support to the inflection point for composite dead loads (load is assumed to be distributed uniformly along the length of the girders), is 0.75 the length of the span.

2-11

- Navy Blast Resistant StructuresUploaded byjakejohns
- IRJET-Analysis of PT Flat Slab with Drop- Considering Seismic EffectUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Chap 05Uploaded byKhaled Abdelbaki
- Precast, Pre Stressed Wall PanelsUploaded byDiego Betancourt Mejia
- Flexural Analysis and Design of BeamnsUploaded byAdil Javed Chaudhary
- Strength of Materials I1Uploaded byMadhusudhanan Chelliah
- Concrete Beam Slab Calculator v1.1Uploaded byglenn
- cracks in ansysUploaded byAhmedSakr
- Composite Steel DesignUploaded byscegts
- Design of Composite Columns v3_Ver1 (KJ)AMDUploaded byImran Saikat
- Cardenas 1973Uploaded bymashrur fateh
- Pushover Analysis of RC BuildingUploaded bySamir Prajapati
- SteelUploaded bykavitamehtajalandhar
- 3.4 Shear ReinforcementUploaded byRoberto Galindo
- Assignment 3Uploaded byLUKMAN
- Concrete T Beam DesignUploaded byGS
- Shear Design for Pre Stressed BeamUploaded byVenkat Balaji
- Closure- Designing Compact Gussets with the Uniform Force Method.pdfUploaded byAndres Marihuen Fuentealba
- 11cat50Uploaded byBecleanAlexandra
- Tutorial 1Uploaded byAlbie Dahal
- Full TextUploaded byHemanth Rao
- DynamicUploaded byGeuchy Mohammed
- h 0545567Uploaded byMohammed Attia
- nehrp2003_P11Uploaded byAhmed Ben Hmida
- Final Exam AarstrcUploaded byRobbie Calangian
- AISC Beam Design Singularity FunctionsUploaded byd_maziero
- Dcs 2 Sessional PaperUploaded bymaniram7
- A 1Uploaded byCalabria Calabria
- 05-015_OlivaUploaded byAbdelkader Benyoucef
- New Text DocumentUploaded byJayakrishnan Jk

- 6 StoenescuGUploaded bymaracs
- Advantages of CSPF over EERUploaded byChia Yi Meng
- 1-s2.0-0304386X9090018W-mainUploaded bywanyiwan
- Bore YieldUploaded byanbuje
- Solids Removal From a Coldwater Recirculating SystemUploaded bylolcura
- Multiphase Systems.pdfUploaded byDicky Hartanto
- FluidTI 89 92 Voyage IDGAS Docu EngUploaded byKhai Huynh
- Durbar_Datasheet.pdfUploaded bybastonspestalode
- THE INFLUENCE OF THE CONNECTION TECHNOLOGY of DG on grid stabilityUploaded byapi-3738286
- Ring FrameUploaded byamreen1985
- LOAD BALANCING AND POWER FACTOR CORRECTION FOR MULTIPHASE POWERUploaded byIAEME Publication
- grupo 1Uploaded bySuspirito Morocho
- pyhsic for the engineersUploaded bymertcan
- SPR Sensors Based on Diffraction Gratings and Prism Couples Sensitivity ComparisonUploaded byAdrian Losoya Leal
- Jensen e HaiseUploaded byArthur Suassuna
- insitu combustion projectsUploaded byparthkapadia1234
- Magnetism and Electricity TestUploaded bymrshong5b
- UZVUploaded byGoran Mali
- LCI Install GuideUploaded bygonzalo
- Analysis of Materials Effects on Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields in Human HeadUploaded byAndri Januar Pratama
- De ApplicationsFirstOrderUploaded byMerv Derek Camado
- Dynamics of Machine Sessional PaperUploaded bySanjay Gomasta
- Seal Application Data Sheet | Mechanical Shaft SealUploaded bylubangjarum
- water structure and properties.pdfUploaded byfajar_setia
- Aluminum 3003 H14Uploaded bymercab15
- Automated MORUploaded bysmriti_hunny5969
- Fiber Solutions CatalogUploaded bygladwyn_hallatu
- Recommend Postearthquake Evaluasion and Repair Criteria for Welded Steel Moment - Frame BuildingUploaded byTân Nguyễn
- ALT spec_2005_motoalt_motocalt1Uploaded byryan
- HP_Hamiltonian Formulation of General RelativityUploaded bysamuelfsj1472