Design of Curved Spliced Precast Concrete UBeam Bridges

A PCI Report
200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

Phone: 312-786-0300 I Fax: 312-621-1114 I www.pci.org
Guide Document
for the Design of

Curved, Spliced Precast
Concrete U-Beam Bridges
Balloted by t h e
PC I Com mit tee on Br idg e s
and t he PC I Tec hn i c a l
Ac t ivit ies Coun c i l
This mater ial is disseminated under the
sponsorship of the U.S. D epar tment of
Transpor tation in the interest of infor mation
exchange under DTFH61‐13‐D‐00010 Task
No. 5009. The U.S. G over nment assumes no
liabilit y for the use of the infor mation. The
U.S. G over nment does not endorse produ c ts or
manufac turers. Trademar ks or manufac turers’
names appear in this mater ial only because
they are considered essential to the objec tive
of the mater ial. They are included for
infor mational pur poses only and are not
intended to reflec t a preference, approval, or
endorsement of any one produc t or entit y.
Fir st Edit ion

CB -03-20
Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60606 Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60606 Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 6
Phone: 312-786-0300 Phone: 312-786-0300 Phone: 312-786-030
Fax: 312-621-1114 Fax: 312-621-1114 Fax: 312-621-1114
www.pci.org www.pci.org www.pci.org
A PCI Report
Guide Document
for the Design of

Curved, Spliced Precast
Concrete U-Beam Bridges

Balloted by t h e
PC I Com mit tee on Br idg e s
and t he PC I Tec hn i c a l
Ac t ivit ies Coun c i l
This mater ial is disseminated under the
sponsorship of the U.S. D epar tment of
Transpor tation in the interest of infor mation
exchange under DTFH61‐13‐D‐00010 Task
No. 5009. The U.S. G over nment assumes no
liabilit y for the use of the infor mation. The
U.S. G over nment does not endorse produ c ts or
manufac turers. Trademar ks or manufac turers’
names appear in this mater ial only because
they are considered essential to the objec tive
of the mater ial. They are included for
infor mational pur poses only and are not
intended to reflec t a preference, approval, or
endorsement of any one produc t or entit y.
Fir st Edit ion

CB -03-20
Copyright © 2020
By Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute
First printing, 2020
This document has been prepared and reviewed through an extensive Precast/Prestressed
Concrete Institute (PCI) Committee process to present a Guide Document on The Design
of Curved, Spliced U-Beam Bridges. Substantial effort has been made to ensure that all
collected data and information included in this report are accurate. PCI, the committee
members, the authors, and the quoted agencies cannot accept responsibility for any errors
or oversights in this report, the use of this material, or in the preparation of any design
and engineering plans. This document is intended for reference by professional personnel
who are competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its contents and who are
able to accept responsibility for the application of the material it contains. Actual condi-
tions on any project must be given special consideration and more specific evaluation and
engineering judgment may be required that are beyond the intended scope of this work.
The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the agencies men-
tioned, and do not constitute a standard or policy for design or construction.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020937997

Print book ISBN 978-1-7335488-8-5
Ebook ISBN 978-1-7335488-9-2
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the written
permission of the Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, except by a reviewer who wishes to
quote brief passages in a review written for inclusion in a magazine or newsletter.
Publisher’s Cataloging-In-Publication Data

(Prepared by The Donohue Group, Inc.)
Names: PCI Committee on Bridges, issuing body. | PCI Technical Activities Council, issu-
ing body. | Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, issuing body, publisher.
Title: Guide document for the design of curved, spliced precast concrete u-beam bridges /
balloted by the PCI Committee on Bridges and the PCI Technical Activities Council.
Description: First Edition. | [Chicago, Illinois] : Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute,
[2020] | “A PCI report.” | Includes bibliographical references.
Identifiers: ISBN 9781733548885 (print) | ISBN 9781733548892 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Bridges--Design and construction--Handbooks, manuals, etc. | Precast
concrete construction--Handbooks, manuals, etc.
Classification: LCC TG300 .G85 2020 (print) | LCC TG300 (ebook) | DDC 624.2/5--dc23
Printed in U.S.A.
FOREWORD
Precast, prestressed concrete has been used extensively in the nation’s highway bridges beginning in
1949. The rigorous construction of the interstate highway system in the 1950s, and the subsequent
development of higher performance materials and methods, resulted in the recognition that precast,
prestressed concrete is the most durable, cost-effective bridge construction solution for the span
ranges in which it is applicable.
PCI is acknowledged to be the body of knowledge of the precast and precast, prestressed concrete
industry. Since 1954, PCI has researched, refined, and published the technology of this industry. PCI
developed comprehensive guidelines and standards for drafting, design, production, quality control,
and installation of precast concrete. It administers the industry’s first and most comprehensive family
of certification programs for personnel, production, and erection of precast concrete―all of which are
predicated on a continuous process of quality improvement.
This Guide Document for the Design of Curved, Spliced Precast Concrete U-Beam Bridges has been
developed as a resource for bridge engineers. In nine chapters, the guide documents the advancement
of curved, spliced U-beam bridge technology. This technology, which originated and progressed initially
in Colorado over approximately 20 years, has evolved through the collaboration of designers,
contractors, and owners. Much of the current technology is in its second or third generation. Agencies
and builders have shown interest in replication of curved, spliced U-beam bridge technology in several
areas of the United States. However, there are certain areas of practice that have not been quantified.
This has made it difficult for owners and the design community to fully embrace the technical solutions
needed to design, construct, deliver, and maintain curved, spliced U-beam bridge systems.
There was a great need to capture the new advancements in complex and simple concrete bridge
technologies. With assistance provided by the Federal Highway Administration and in collaboration
with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, PCI enlisted a team of
subject matter experts and educational course developers to meet this need. In addition to this guide,
four training courses have been developed to facilitate the use of the curved, spliced concrete
technology and will be available through the PCI eLearning Center. All participants in developing the
guide and the associated courses have practical experience in the design of concrete bridge solutions,
and many have conducted university research and have NCHRP research program development
experience. Teams of subject matter experts reviewed and critiqued each new manual and course.
iii
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIOANLY.
iv
TRAINING
This Guide Document for the Design of Curved, Spliced Precast Concrete U-Beam Bridges has been
developed as a resource for bridge engineers. Four companion courses based on this document also
have been developed. In nine chapters and appendices, the guide document presents a summary of
current curved, spliced U-beam bridge technology through reference to completed projects and via the
use of a prototype example to step though the basics of the design and engineering of these bridge
structures.
Four instructor-led training (ILT) courses have been developed and delivered to facilitate the use of
this guide. These are now being converted to eLearning modules. The correlation between the chapters
of the guide and the four courses is shown in the figure below.
Correlation between the Guide Document for the

Design of Curved, Spliced Precast Concrete U-Beam Bridges and training courses
The Guide Document for the Design of Curved, Spliced Precast Concrete U-Beam Bridges and the related
courses present aspects of current technologies through generous reference to past projects and the
use of a prototype example. In the example, important aspects of curved, spliced precast concrete U-
beam bridge design are discussed and presented in sufficient detail to allow competent designers to
replicate and extend this technology.
The target audience of the Guide Document for the Design of Curved, Spliced Precast Concrete U-Beam
Bridges and its related courses includes bridge engineers of all experience levels, owners, and
contractors with interest in learning about and delivering this developing technology. There is no cost
to enroll in of the courses.
Training Course T350

Title: Introduction, Implementation and Delivery
This broad-based course is summarizes the history and more recent development of curved, spliced
precast concrete U-beam bridges primarily through reference to several projects. In addition,
terminology for components used in this and later courses are defined. An overview of project delivery,
selection of design criteria, and specifying a U-beam bridge are presented in five submodules as
follows:
v
1 Develop understanding of curved, spliced, U-Beam technology
• Early development
• Typical applications
2. Understand U-beam cross sections, major components of U-beam systems, and fabrication
techniques
• Precast cross sections
• Precast fabrication
• Handling and transportation
• Components of curved, spliced U-beam systems
3. Understand the role of the designer, specialty engineer, and project specifications in project
delivery
• Designer role and stated assumptions
• The role of the specialty engineer
• Project technical specifications
• Construction engineering report
• Geotechnical topics
4. Understand the role of design criteria in stating important design assumptions, especially those not
clearly defined in current design codes
• Emerging technology, emerging design codes
• Design assumptions
• Limit states – permanent structure
• Limit states – construction phase
5. Understand critical elements and constraints for preliminary layout and sizing of a curved, spliced
U-beam bridge
• Typical Section
• Falsework towers, strongbacks, and ground splices
• Preliminary design guidance
After completing this course, the student will to understand the following:
• History and development of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridge technology
• Major components associated with curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges
• Design and contractual elements related to project delivery
• Applicability of concept and preliminary design engineering

Title: Modeling, Analysis and Design Considerations
vi
The second course uses a prototype bridge to develop an understanding of the methodologies and
techniques used to model, analyze, and design curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges. Two
submodules are presented as follows:
1. Assumptions and techniques to develop a structural model to analyze the bridge
• Define prototype bridge
• Materials
• Section properties
• Construction sequence
• Model layout
• Temporary works and support conditions
• Pier fixity
• Results
• Time-dependent forces and stresses
• Deflections, camber, and buildup
2. Critical items for design during temporary phases of construction and in the permanent condition
• Handling, transport, and lifting out of forms
• Sectional design for ultimate limit states
• Sectional design for service limit states
• Geometry control
After completing this course, the student will understand:

• Modeling and analysis of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges
− Development of model
− Staged construction
− Time-dependent effects
• Superposition of stage forces and stresses
• Structural behavior and deformations
• Basics of plan preparation and deliverables

Title: Design Details
Curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges require component design of various details. The
third course contains one module covering the topics listed below. The course content illustrates
possible details for U-beam bridges based on past projects and an understanding of engineering
principles for these elements:
• Typical section and post-tensioning
• Lid slab and deck
• Precast tongue section
• Interior haunch
• Blisters
vii
• Diaphragms
• Bearings
After completing this course, the student will be able to understand fundamental concepts related to
the design and engineering of various design details of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam
bridges.

Title: Design Example
The fourth course uses examples developed for the prototype bridge. Detailed calculations are
presented with commentary related to the engineering of these components. Reference is made to the
design criteria presented in the first course.
The course is presented in one module and steps through design examples as follows:
• Sample index of calculations
• Flexure at service limit state
• Flexure at strength limit state
• Web design at service limit state - principal tensile stress
• Web design at strength limit state
• Camber and buildup
After completing this course, the student will be able to:

• Understand the scope of design for a curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridge
• Prepare calculations for various components of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges
• Understand important design principles of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges
viii
DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW
Throughout the development of this document, strict adherence to PCI policies has been followed,
including a series of comprehensive reviews. The outline and each draft were reviewed by the PCI
Committee on Bridges and the AASHTO Committee on Bridges, Technical Subcommittee on Concrete
(T-10). The PCI Committee on Bridges reviewed and balloted the final draft. The document was
submitted to the PCI Technical Activities Council (TAC) for assurance that it meets the institute’s
standards for technical content and quality guidelines for presentation. Primary and secondary
comments resulting from these ballots were resolved by the primary authors and subsequently
approved by the reviewing committees.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During the development of this document, the primary authors, along with PCI members Gregg Reese,
Maher Tadros, Ozzie Bayrak, Andy Mish, and Reggie Holt spent time to resolve many of the outstanding
issues related to known best practices. Their hard work and determination to bring this manual and
training forward is appreciated.
Many others in addition to the contracted team engaged in discussions at the meetings and read one or
more of the progression of drafts. PCI wishes to thank all these professionals for their time and
expertise. Many of the state highway officials who participated in the writing and review of this
document are acknowledged below.
This PCI document was developed with the oversight of the PCI Committee on Bridges. The following is
a list of the active voting members of this committee at the time this document was balloted.
Finn Hubbard, Chair Reid Castrodale Andy Ko
Fickett Structural Solutions Castrodale Engineering STV Incorporated
Consultants, PC
Glenn Myers, Vice-Chair William R. Cox (retired) Todd Lang
Atkins North America American Segmental Bridge HDR
Institute
Steve Seguirant, TAC Liaison David Deitz Michael Laviolette
Concrete Technology Corp. Palmer Engineering HDR
Sameh S. Badie Kevin R. Eisenbeis Z. John Ma
George Washington University Burns & McDonnell University of Tennessee-Knoxville
Mr. Gregory Aaron Banks, PE Roy L. Eriksson Eric E. Matsumoto
WSP Eriksson Technologies, Inc. California State University
Oguzhan Bayrak Hussam (Sam) Fallaha Michael L. McCool
University of Texas at Austin Florida Dept. of Transportation Beam, Longest & Neff LLC
Shrinivas Bhide R. Jon Grafton Richard Miller
Consultant Formerly Oldcastle Precast, Inc. University of Cincinnati
JP Binard Mark Hoppe (Retired) Andrew Mish
Precast Systems Engineering Kansas DOT Modjeski and Masters Inc.
Richard Brice Troy Jenkins Andrzej S. Nowak
Washington State Dept. of Northeast Prestressed Products Auburn University
Transportation LLC
ix
Active voting members of PCI Committee on Bridges (cont.)
Pinar Okumus Gregg Reese Eric Steinberg
SUNY, University at Buffalo Modjeski and Masters Inc. Ohio University
Michael Oliva Bruce W. Russell Yuhe Yang
University of Wisconsin Oklahoma State University PCI Northeast
Tanarat Potisuk Francesco M. Russo William N. Nickas, Staff Liaison
Oregon Dept. of Transportation Michael Baker International (Non-voting)
Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Institute
Chuck Prussack (Retired) Monica Schultes
Oldcastle Precast Inc. MM Schultes Consulting
Mary Lou Ralls Newman Rita Seraderian
Ralls Newman LLC PCI Northeast
The following are consulting members of the PCI Committee on Bridges. Consulting members are not
held to the same strict attendance standards as voting members as set forth in the PCI Group Operations
Manual. Many of these members attended numerous meetings and participated in committee work
including oral and written reviews of the documents.
Tess Ahlborn William Colquett Zhengzheng Fu
Michigan Technological University Alabama Dept. of Transportation Louisiana Dept. of Transportation
& Development
Musa R. Alawneh John S. Dick David Garber
e.construct Fz LLC J. Dick Precast Concrete Florida International University
Alex Aswad (Retired) Daniel Dowling James S. Guarre
Pennsylvania State University Michael Baker International Berger ABAM/WSP
James M. Barker Bill Dreher (Retired) Antonio M. Garcia
The Collaborative Inc. Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation Garcia Bridge Engineers
Dean Bierwagen D. Scott Eshleman Silvio Garcia
Stanley Consultants Stanley Consultants Inc. Hardesty & Hanover
Scott R. Canfield Mohamed Essili Hossein Ghara
Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson Consultant Volkert
Inc.
Vijay Chandra Jim Fabinski Michael Haas
VC Consulting LLC EnCon United Collins Engineers Inc.
Dave Chapman Jr. Matt Farrar Ziad Hanna
Knife River Corporation Northwest Idaho Dept. of Transportation Alfred Benesch & Company
Francisco De Jesus Chitty Pedro Fernandez Susan Hida
Florida International University David Evans & Associates Caltrans
Mi Geum Chorzepa Gregg Freeby Fouad Jaber
University of Georgia Formerly Texas Dept. of Nebraska Dept. of Roads
Transportation
x
Consulting Members of the PCI Committee on Bridges (cont.)
Brian Jenner Robert J. Peterman Christopher Michael Vanek
Forterra Building Products Kansas State University WSP
Bruce Johnson (Retired) Scott Phelan Colin Wayne Van Kampen
Oregon Dept. of Transportation David Evans and Assoc. Modjeski and Masters Inc.
Sam Keske Basile G. Rabbat (Retired) Edward Wasserman
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates Consultant Modjeski and Masters Inc.
Inc.
Bijan Khaleghi Hugh David Ronald Daniel Werner
Washington State Dept. of Atkins North America Plum Creek Structures
Transportation
Mary Ellen Kimberlin Joe E. Salvadori Kevin Western
Ohio Prestressers Association Michael Baker International Minnesota Dept. of
Transportation
Charles W. Leidholdt Steven L. Schwarz Chris White
Hamilton Form Company Ltd. HR Green Inc. Volkert
Lisette Shana Ludena Gudmund Setberg Hartanto Wibowo
T.Y. Lin International Group Caltrans Iowa State University
Tom Macioce Mohsen A. Shahawy Christopher S. Williams
Pennsylvania Dept. of SDR Engineering Consultants, Inc. Purdue University
Transportation
Marc Maguire C. Shawn Sun Brian Witte
University of Nebraska – Lincoln Louisiana Technical University Parsons
Farshad Mazloom C. Douglas Sutton (Retired) Carin L. Roberts-Wollmann, PE
Kie-Con Inc. Purdue University Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University
Bob Mills Maher Tadros Wael Zatar
Hamilton Form Company, Ltd. e.Construct Marshall University
George Morcous David A. Tomley Miloslav Zeman
University of Nebraska – Lincoln Thompson Engineering Dura-Stress Inc.
Azam Nabizadeh Kyle Turner
University of Wisconsin – Michael Baker International
Milwaukee
The following current and past members of the AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges served on the
Technical Committee for Concrete (T-10). Many of these engineers are also voting and consulting
members of the PCI Committee on Bridges. They also served as an advisory group with the FHWA-
AASHTO-PCI Contract task order no 5010 (DTFH61-11-D-00010-T-5010), “Advanced Precast Element
Design and Construction State of Practice,” under which this product was developed.
xi
Many state highway agency employees and AASHTO staff reviewed draft documents and work plans.
Below are listed those that routinely participated in this multiyear endeavor.
Kevin Western (Chair T-10) Strat Cavros Arielle Ehrlich
Minnesota Dept. of Transportation AASHTO Staff Minnesota Dept. of Transportation
Matt Farrar (Vice Chair T-10) Nancy Daubenberger (past Jamie Farris
Idaho Dept. of Transportation member) Texas Dept. of Transportation
Minnesota Dept. of Transportation
Patrica Bush Bill Dreher (Retired) Gregg Freeby (Retired)
AASHTO Staff Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation Texas Dept. of Transportation
Zhengzheng (Jenny) Fu Bruce Johnson (past member) Tanarat Potisuk
Louisiana Dept. of Transportation Oregon Dept. of Transportation Oregon Dept. of Transportation
& Development
Sue Hida (past member) Bijan Khaleghi Will Potter
Caltrans Washington State Dept. of Florida Dept. of Transportation
Transportation
Mark Hoppe Robert Landry (retired) Gudmund Setberg
Kansas Dept. of Transportation New Hampshire Dept. of Caltrans
Transportation
Reggie Holt (Ex Officio member) Tom Macioce Loren Risch (Retired)
Federal Highway Administration Pennsylvania Dept. of Kansas Dept. of Transportation
Transportation
Fouad Jaber Jim McDonnell
Nebraska Dept. of Roads AASHTO Staff
PCI staff and the institute’s many dedicated members would like to express their gratitude to Jim
McDonnell, Patricia Bush, and Strat Cavros of the AASHTO staff for the opportunity to serve as
subconsultant on this Federal Highway Administration assignment. Their project management,
guidance, and patience throughout this assignment have been invaluable and are deeply appreciated.
The forward-thinking conceptualization of the need for this guide by Reggie Holt of the Federal
Highway Administration should also be acknowledged as key to the project’s success. Kris Brown, John
Dick, and Henry Russell served as technical editors for this document and the courses.
Lastly, a thank you to the primary authors, Bob Anderson and Trevor Kirkpatrick of AECOM Technical
Services, Inc. Their willingness to meet multiple times with interested engineers, the PCI Committee on
Bridges, and AASHTO T-10, the technical committee on concrete design, to harmonize the text of this
guide and its four companion courses is a great contribution to advancing the use of this emerging
concrete bridge technology, today and for generations to come.
xii
INFORMATION FOR USERS
U1.0 About This Document
This document is available as an electronic “eBook” and in a hardcopy version. A simple log-in to the
PCI website is all that is needed to download this and other free resources. The print on demand
hardcopy version must be purchased through the PCI Bookstore for a small fee.
U1.1 Structure of the Document

U1.1.1 Using Links
Links are provided from the Table of Contents to all numbered sections. The user may conveniently
jump to a page number or to a section number. Links are provided to the websites of many of the cited
references and to topics for additional information.
U1.1.2 Numbered Paragraphs

Each main section in the text is identified with a decimal numbering system similar to the system used
for various AASHTO specifications and the PCI Bridge Design Manual. This is the system used to
organize this page you are reading. The hierarchy of the system is also apparent by the type size and
font used in the titles of the sections.
U1.1.3 Page Header

The header on every page identifies the subject and the title of the document.
U1.1.4 Page Footer

The lower right corner shows the month and year of publication. In the center is the page number.
Revised pages will show “a,” “b,” etc. following the page number and a new date in the right corner. This
method will be useful in determining the most current revision.
U1.1.5 Figures and Tables

All figures and tables are numbered to indicate the section where they first appear. Example: Figure
3.2-1 is found in Section 3.2 and Figure 3.2-2 is the second figure to appear in the same section.
Figures and tables referenced in the text are in bold type.
U1.2 Revisions and Registration

Revisions to this document are expected. To receive revisions, or notices of revisions, it is necessary to
register your copy of the guide. This registration is automatically created if you use the PCI Bookstore
to download your eBook copy.
U1.2.1 Registering Your Copy

There is no cost or obligation to be registered. Those obtaining an eBook through the PCI website will
be automatically registered to the email address registered.
U1.2.2 Errors and Omissions

Your help will be appreciated in locating errors and identifying omissions. Please contact PCI with your
suggestions at PCIBridgeManual@pci.org.
xiii
U1.2.3 Dissemination of Corrections
Corrections to this document if required will be assembled and a notice emailed to those registered.
The replacement pages will readily identify the change and the page will be identified as revised in the
footer.
Two methods are used to disseminate changes. Simple corrections, revisions, and improvements will be
posted as “Errata” on the PCI Publications website, https://www.pci.org/publicationerrata. Or, select
“Errata” on the Publications home page, then look for the title of this document.
Complex revisions that involve more than a few pages may require the user to redownload the entire
document. There will be no cost for this download. Instructions will be emailed as noted above.
In the future, when a new edition is required, an email will notify registered users. Please keep your
contact information current so you can be notified.
U1.3 Exchange of Suggestions

U1.3.1 Send Your Suggestions
Your suggestions and comments concerning this document will be greatly appreciated. Call, write or e-
mail to “Bridge Engineer” at the location and telephone number on the inside cover page, or email
PCIBridgeManual@pci.org.
U1 3.2 Our Suggestion

We strongly urge the designer, in the early stages of a project, to contact one or more PCI-Certified
precast concrete manufacturers. The manufacturer can advise about local experience and capability.
The producer can often help with suggested solutions and cost estimates. They can provide specific
design information about special local, state or regional precast sections. A current list of PCI-Certified
producers is readily available on the PCI website at www.pci.org.
xiv
DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES___TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... TOF-1
CHAPTER 1 CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM CONCEPT ....................................... 1-1
1.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 OBJECTIVE................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3 LIMITS OF APLICABILITY.................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 DEFINITIONS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................... 1-2
1.5 NOTATION................................................................................................................................................. 1-4
1.5.1 Loads................................................................................................................................................... 1-4
1.5.2 General ............................................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.6 UNITS .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.7 REFERENCE CODE ................................................................................................................................. 1-6
CHAPTER 2 - IMPLEMENTATION OF CURVED, SPLICED U-BEAM SYSTEM .................................... 2-1
2.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Review of Projects ......................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.2 U-Beam Cross Section .................................................................................................................. 2-3
2.1.3 Span-to-Depth Ratios ................................................................................................................... 2-3
2.2 FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................. 2-4
2.2.1 U-Beam Fabrication ...................................................................................................................... 2-4
2.2.2 Transportation in Yard ................................................................................................................ 2-7
2.2.3 Transportation to and at Site .................................................................................................... 2-9
2.2.4 Temporary Falsework and U-Beam Placement .............................................................. 2-11
2.2.5 Lid Slabs.......................................................................................................................................... 2-14
2.2.6 Closure Joints................................................................................................................................ 2-15
2.2.7 Post-Tensioning........................................................................................................................... 2-15
2.2.8 Deck Screeding............................................................................................................................. 2-18
CHAPTER 3 - PROJECT DELIVERY..................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 DESIGNER ROLE AND STATED ASSUMPTIONS .......................................................................... 3-1
3.2 SPECIALTY ENGINEER ROLE AND SUBMITTALS ...................................................................... 3-2
3.3 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.1 Erection Plan ................................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.2 Geometry Control Procedures .................................................................................................. 3-4
CHAPTER 4 - DESIGN CRITERIA ........................................................................................................................ 4-1
TOC- 1 (April 2020)

4.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 LIMIT STATES – CONSTRUCTION PHASE ..................................................................................... 4-1
4.3 TORSIONAL CHECKS ............................................................................................................................. 4-2
CHAPTER 5 - PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND SPAN LAYOUT ...................................................................... 5-1
5.1 USE OF STRAIGHT AND CURVED SECTIONS ............................................................................... 5-1
5.2 LID SLAB AND DECK.............................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.3 FALSEWORK TOWERS.......................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.3.1 Temporary Tower Size and Configuration........................................................................... 5-3
5.3.2 Lateral Loads and Sway Bracing in Towers ......................................................................... 5-3
5.4 STRONGBACKS ........................................................................................................................................ 5-4
5.5 GROUND SPLICING................................................................................................................................. 5-4
5.6 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR SERIVE LIMIT STATE......................................................................... 5-5
5.6.1 Span-to-Depth Ratio ..................................................................................................................... 5-5
5.6.2 Parametric Data .............................................................................................................................. 5-5
5.6.3 Effect of Radius ............................................................................................................................... 5-9
5.6.4 Effect of Pier Fixity ..................................................................................................................... 5-10
CHAPTER 6 - MODELING AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 SELECTION OF PROTOTYPE BRIDGE ............................................................................................. 6-1
6.2 MATERIALS ............................................................................................................................................... 6-2
6.3 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND AGE AT CONSTRUCTION ................................................. 6-2
6.4 SPLICE LOCATIONS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ................................................................ 6-8
6.5 SECTION PROPERTIES ......................................................................................................................... 6-8
6.6 TEMPORARY WORKS ......................................................................................................................... 6-11
6.7 DISTRIBUTION FACTOR ................................................................................................................... 6-11
6.8 PIER FIXITY ............................................................................................................................................ 6-12
6.9 THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELING – FLEXURE, SHEAR, AND TORSION ...................... 6-12
6.10 PRINCIPAL WEB STRESS .............................................................................................................. 6-15
6.11 TRANSVERSE DECK SLAB ............................................................................................................ 6-16
6.12 GEOMETRY CONTOL PROCEDURES ........................................................................................ 6-17
6.12.1 Camber Requirements .............................................................................................................. 6-17
6.12.2 Rotation of U-Beam Section .................................................................................................... 6-18
6.12.3 Build-Up Calculation and Deck Screeding ......................................................................... 6-19
CHAPTER 7 - DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................... 7-1
7.1 PLANT HANDLING, TRANSPORT, AND LIFTING OUT OF FORMS ....................................... 7-1
TOC- 2 (April 2020)

7.1.1 Internal Bracing .............................................................................................................................. 7-2

7.1.2 Overturning ...................................................................................................................................... 7-3
7.1.3 Lifting ................................................................................................................................................. 7-3
7.2 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE ................................................................. 7-7
7.2.1 Longitudinal Reinforcing Check ............................................................................................... 7-8
7.2.2 Transverse Web Reinforcing ..................................................................................................... 7-8
7.2.3 Reinforcing Parameters............................................................................................................... 7-9
7.3 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR SERVICE LIMIT STATE ................................................................... 7-10
7.3.1 Longitudinal Stress Check ....................................................................................................... 7-10
7.3.2 Principal Stress Check ............................................................................................................... 7-10
CHAPTER 8 - DESIGN DETAILS .......................................................................................................................... 8-1
8.1 TYPICAL SECTION AND POST-TENSIONING ............................................................................... 8-2
8.2 LID SLAB AND DECK DETAILS .......................................................................................................... 8-4
8.3 PRECAST CONCRETE TONGUE ......................................................................................................... 8-5
8.4 INTERIOR HAUNCH CONNECTION.................................................................................................. 8-8
8.5 BLISTERS ................................................................................................................................................ 8-10
8.6 DIAPHRAGM .......................................................................................................................................... 8-13
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................... Ref-1
APPENDIX A - ABBREVIATED STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA .........................................................A-1
A.1 INTRODUCTION TO ABBREVIATED STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA .................................A-1
APPENDIX B – DESIGN DETAILS ........................................................................................................................B-1
APPENDIX C – SAMPLE SPECIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................... C-1
APPENDIX D - INTRODUCTION TO EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS ........................................................... D-1
D.1 EXAMPLE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR CALCULATIONS .............................................................. D-2
D.2 FLEXURE AT SERVICE LIMIT STATE .................................................................................................. D-6
D.3 FLEXURE AT STRENGTH LIMIT STATE ........................................................................................... D-20
D.4 WEB PRINCIPAL AT SERVICE LIMIT STATE PRINCIPAL TENSILE STRESS ...................... D-37
D.5 WEB DESIGN AT STRENGTH LIMIT STATE.................................................................................... D-40
D.6 CAMBER........................................................................................................................................................ D-59
APPENDIX E - PCI STANDARDS ........................................................................................................................... E1
APPENDIX F - PCI-PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES ................................................................... F-1
TOC- 3 (April 2020)

THIS PAGE INTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
TOC- 4 (April 2020)

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES______TABLE OF FIGURES
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Comparison of cross sections of U-beams used for recent projects in Colorado and
Florida. ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Figure 2.2 Specialized casting forms. ............................................................................................................... 2-5
Figure 2.3 U-beam reinforcing details. ............................................................................................................ 2-6
Figure 2.4 Precast concrete section with thickened bottom slab. ........................................................ 2-6
Figure 2.5 U-beam section and straddle carriers. ....................................................................................... 2-7
Figure 2.6 Steel lifting spreader. ........................................................................................................................ 2-8
Figure 2.7 Spreader bar attachments. .............................................................................................................. 2-8
Figure 2.8 Transportation of U-beam to site. ............................................................................................. 2-10
Figure 2.9 Transportation of U-beam at site. ............................................................................................. 2-10
Figure 2.10 Temporary falsework towers .................................................................................................. 2-12
Figure 2.11 U-beam framing. ............................................................................................................................ 2-13
Figure 2.12 U-beam lid slab examples. ......................................................................................................... 2-15
Figure 2.13 U-beam with tongue section. .................................................................................................... 2-17
Figure 2.14 Post-tensioned details. ................................................................................................................ 2-18
Figure 2.15 Deck screeding preparations for U-beam bridge. ............................................................ 2-19
Figure 5.1 Typical layout of deck slab reinforcing. ..................................................................................... 5-1
Figure 5.2 Ground splice. Photo: AECOM........................................................................................................ 5-4
Figure 5.3 Span versus span-to-depth ratio of composite U-beam. ..................................................... 5-6
Figure 5.4 Span versus gross area of U-beam section. .............................................................................. 5-6
Figure 5.5 Span versus average weight of post-tensioning. .................................................................... 5-7
Figure 5.6 Span versus maximum web shear reinforcing (per web)................................................... 5-7
Figure 5.7 Extreme top and bottom compression fiber for precast and composite cross
sections. ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5-9
Figure 6.1 Prototype bridge elevation and typical section. ..................................................................... 6-3
Figure 6.2 Assumed construction sequence .................................................................................................. 6-4
Figure 6.2 (continued) Assumed construction sequence. ........................................................................ 6-5
Figure 6.2 (continued) Assumed construction sequence. ........................................................................ 6-6
Figure 6.3 Analysis model for prototype bridge. ......................................................................................... 6-9
Figure 6.4 Section properties. .......................................................................................................................... 6-10
Figure 6.5 Flexure in right U-beam from permanent loads. ................................................................. 6-13
Figure 6.6 Flexure in right girder. .................................................................................................................. 6-14
Figure 6.7 Shear in right girder. ...................................................................................................................... 6-14
TOF- 1 (April 2020)

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES______TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 6.8 Torsion in right girder. .................................................................................................................. 6-15

Figure 6.9 Principal web stress........................................................................................................................ 6-16
Figure 6.10 Global longitudinal modeling of transverse section. ....................................................... 6-17
Figure 6.11 U-beam build-up (exaggerated view). .................................................................................. 6-20
Figure 7.1 Torsional analysis and demand. ................................................................................................... 7-4
Figure 7.2 Spreader bar and lifting hooks. ..................................................................................................... 7-4
Figure 7.3 Lifting, transport, and falsework evaluations. ......................................................................... 7-5
Figure 7.4 Deformations and stress on U-beam segment. ....................................................................... 7-7
Figure 8.1 Typical section of prototype bridge. ........................................................................................... 8-2
Figure 8.2 Post-tensioning of prototype bridge. .......................................................................................... 8-3
Figure 8.3 Post-tensioning coupling details at field splice. ...................................................................... 8-4
Figure 8.4 Typical slab reinforcement. ............................................................................................................ 8-4
Figure 8.5 Typical lid slab reinforcement before main deck placement. ........................................... 8-5
Figure 8.6 Typical slab reinforcement detail over top flange. ................................................................ 8-5
Figure 8.7 Tongue extension elevation reinforcement. ............................................................................ 8-6
Figure 8.8 Tongue extension section reinforcement.................................................................................. 8-7
Figure 8.9 Tongue extension isometric view of reinforcement. ............................................................ 8-7
Figure 8.10 Haunch detail at piers. ................................................................................................................... 8-8
Figure 8.11 Haunch reinforcement detail (assuming construction joint). ........................................ 8-9
Figure 8.12 Plan view of top blister. .............................................................................................................. 8-10
Figure 8.13 Partial elevation of top blister.................................................................................................. 8-11
Figure 8.14 Section of top blister. ................................................................................................................... 8-11
Figure 8.15 Isometric view of top blister. .................................................................................................... 8-12
Figure 8.16 Block-out for top flange post-tensioning blister. .............................................................. 8-12
Figure 8.17 Elevation view of interior diaphragm at pier 2. ................................................................ 8-13
Figure 8.18 Concrete box with centered bearing, similar to diaphragm for prototype. ........... 8-14
Figure 8.19 Diaphragm loads for shear. ....................................................................................................... 8-14
Figure 8.20 Diaphragm beam action due to applied torsional loads. ............................................... 8-15
Figure 8.21 Qualitative strut-and-tie models for diaphragm. .............................................................. 8-16
Figure 8.22 Strut-and-tie model for tendon anchorage force distribution into the diaphragm at
ends of unit. ............................................................................................................................................................. 8-17
Figure 8.23 Transverse view of bearing. ...................................................................................................... 8-18
Figure 8.24 Longitudinal view of grouted fixed bearing. ...................................................................... 8-19
TOF- 2 (April 2020)

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES_______________CHAPTER 1
CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM CONCEPT
CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM

CONCEPT
1.1 GENERAL
In North America, the advancement of curved, spliced U-beam bridge technology originated
and progressed principally in Colorado over approximately 20 years and has evolved through
the collaboration of designers, contractors, and governing agencies. Much of the current
technology is in its second or third generation. Many of the predecessor projects were
delivered under contractor alternative design proposals, which were supported by the
governing agency, and with alternative project delivery systems. This has allowed the
technology to receive direct contractor input to obtain constructible and economically feasible
solutions.
Agencies and builders have shown interest in replicating curved, spliced U-beam bridge
technology in several areas of the country. Indeed, the popularity of the curved, spliced U-
beam system as described in this document is increasing exponentially. As more information
and design guidance become available, including this document, more technical solutions will
be available to governing agencies and the design community to design, construct, deliver, and
maintain curved, spliced U-beam bridge systems.
In nearly all documented cases, curved, spliced U-beam bridge systems have resulted in
significant savings in initial cost compared with more traditional solutions. Furthermore, this
design solution could provide even greater benefits with respect to aesthetics and the life-cycle
costs related to longevity and maintenance.
1.2 OBJECTIVE
The objective of this document is to provide up-to-date guidelines for preliminary and final
design of curved, spliced U-beam systems. Primarily through examples and references to
constructed projects, information is presented for the design and detailing of the primary
components of curved, spliced U-beam bridge systems. This document is not intended to be all-
encompassing, nor should it limit the ingenuity of design professionals in developing
innovative solutions. Rather, it serves to communicate the current state of the art as
represented by recent successfully completed projects. This document draws on PCI’s State-of-
the-Art Report CB-01-12, Curved Precast Concrete Bridges,1 for examples of bridges that have
been successfully constructed during the past 20 years. The U-beam system presented in this
document relies heavily on the concept of lid slabs, which was developed for those projects in
Colorado around the year 2000. The intent of this document is to describe the design and
construction of over 20 bridges during the past 15 years. The contemporary prototype
example presented is representative of the majority of projects that have been constructed.
It is assumed that individuals employing this document possess a fundamental understanding
of pretensioned and post-tensioned concrete. Also, an understanding of modeling and analysis,
including behaviors produced by time-dependent effects of concrete, is recommended.
1-1 (April 2020)

This document introduces and defines an example bridge for demonstration purposes. The
example bridge is considered representative of curved, spliced U-beam bridge systems and is
referred to throughout this document.
1.3 LIMITS OF APLICABILITY

This document has been prepared and reviewed through an extensive PCI committee process
and is intended for use by practicing engineers. It provides information related to the state-of-
the-art analysis, modeling, design, and detailing of curved, spliced U-beam bridges. It is
intended to supplement and complement existing documents from the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Substantial effort was made to
ensure that all collected data and information included in this document are accurate. PCI, the
committee members, the authors, and the quoted agencies cannot accept responsibility for any
error or oversights in the guide document, the use of this material, or in the preparation of any
design or engineering plans.
Furthermore, this document is intended for use by individuals who are competent to evaluate
the significance and limitations of its content and recommendations, and who will accept
responsibility for the application of the material herein. Actual conditions on any project must
be given special consideration, and more specific evaluation and engineering judgment may be
required that are beyond the scope of this work. It is the responsibility of the user of this
document to identify, follow, and implement all relevant and appropriate health and safety
practices. The user must determine the applicability of all regulatory limitations before
applying this document and must comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including
but not limited to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) health and
safety standards. This document does not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the
agencies mentioned, and does not constitute a standard or policy of design or construction.
1.4 DEFINITIONS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMS

The following terms are used in this document.
Camber — The deformation of the concrete profile at the stage of construction under
consideration due to the additive effects of prestress, dead load, support removal, and time-
dependent deformations (creep and shrinkage).
Casting bed — A special formwork arrangement, usually consisting of moveable bulkheads of
the cross-section shape with side and interior molds capable of horizontal movement,
designed and fabricated into an assembly for making single or multiple superstructure spliced
U-beam segments.
Closure joints — Cast-in-place concrete sections located between U-beam segments
and/or diaphragms. (During erection, all U-beam segments of a span or multiple spans are
supported by falsework, strongbacks, or other techniques until the closure joints are placed
and have met or exceeded the specified compressive strength and the longitudinal post-
tensioning has been installed to make them self-supporting as indicated on the plans.)
1-2 (April 2020)

Cover, concrete — Distance between the outermost surface of embedded reinforcement
and the closest surface of the concrete.
Deflection — Movement, both translation and rotation, of a member under an applied load.
Development length — The distance required to develop the specified strength of a
reinforcing bar or prestressing strand.
Discontinuity — Abrupt change in geometry or loading.
Effective depth of section — Distance measured from extreme compression fiber to
centroid of longitudinal tension reinforcement.
Effective prestress — Stress remaining in prestressing steel after all losses have occurred.
Embedment length — Length of reinforcement o r a n c h o r provided beyond a critical
section over which transfer of force between concrete and reinforcement may occur.
Erection elevation — The elevation at which a segment is set in the structure at the time it is
erected. (This is profile grade corrected by the amount of deflection calculated to occur from
that stage onwards. See also “camber.”)
Ground splice - Two U-beam segments properly blocked and made into a single segment on
the ground by casting a closure joint between the U-beam segments and subsequently post-
tensioning. The combined U-beam segments are then incorporated as one U-beam segment
into the permanent structure.
Headed deformed bars — Deformed bars with heads attached at one or both ends to
mechanically anchor reinforcement bars in tension as an alternative to standard hooks or
development lengths.
Lid slab — A field-cast or precast partial-depth portion of the deck slab located between the
top flanges of a single U-beam.
Stirrup — Reinforcement used to resist shear and torsion stresses in a structural member.
Stirrups are typically bars, wires, or welded-wire reinforcement either single leg or bent into L,
U, or rectangular shapes, perpendicular to or at an angle to longitudinal reinforcement.
Strength, design — Nominal strength multiplied by a strength reduction factor Φ.
Strength, nominal — Strength of a member or cross section calculated in accordance
with provisions and assumptions of the strength design method before application of any
strength- reduction factors.
Strength, required — Strength of a member or cross section required to resist factored
loads.
Strut-and-tie model — A framework or truss model of a structural member or of a D
region in such a member, made up of struts and ties connected at nodes and capable of
transferring the factored loads to the supports or to adjacent B regions.
Transfer length — Length over which the effective pretensioning force is transferred to the
concrete by bond and friction in a pretensioned member.
1-3 (April 2020)

U-beam segment — A modular section of the superstructure consisting of the U-beam cross-
section shape and length as detailed in the plans. U-beam pier segments may have a variable-
thickness bottom slab that can be cast monolithically, or as a secondary placement, as detailed
in the plans.
1.5 NOTATION
This section defines notation used in this document. Notation used in the appendices is defined
in those sections.
1.5.1 Loads
Permanent loads:
CR = force effects due to creep
DC = dead load of structural components and nonstructural attachments
DW = dead load of wearing surfaces and utilities
EH = horizontal earth pressure load
EL = miscellaneous locked-in force effects resulting from the construction process
PS = secondary forces from post-tensioning for strength limit states; total prestressing
forces for service limit states
SH = force effects due to shrinkage
Transient loads:
BR = vehicular braking force
CE = vehicular centrifugal force
CEQ = construction equipment
CLL = construction live load
CT = vehicular collision force
CV = vessel collision force
DIFF = differential (unbalanced) dead load from one cantilever
EQ = earthquake load
EL = locked in forces/stresses from primary and secondary effects of post-tensioning
FR = friction load
IM = vehicular dynamic load allowance
LL = vehicular live load
LS = live load surcharge
PL = pedestrian live load
1-4 (April 2020)

SE = force effect due to settlement
TG = force effect due to temperature gradient
TU = force effect due to uniform temperature
WA = water load and stream pressure
WL = wind on live load
WS = wind load on structure
1.5.2 General
A = member cross-sectional area
Acp = total area enclosed by outside perimeter of concrete cross section
Af = area of reinforcement required for transverse flexure
Aps = area of prestressed reinforcement steel on the tension face of the beam
As = area of nonprestressed steel in flexural tension zone; or, area of nonprestressed steel
in the tie of a strut-and-tie model
Astrand = area of a single prestressing strand (0.217 in.2 for 0.6 in. diameter strands)
Av = area of reinforcement required for longitudinal shear and torsion
b = width of compression face of member
c = distance from extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis
d = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of longitudinal tension
reinforcement
D = depth of composite section
f’c = compressive strength of concrete for use in design
f’ci = design concrete compressive strength at time of transfer of prestress for pretensioned
members and at time of initial loading for nonprestressed members; design concrete
strength at time of application of tendon force for post-tensioned members
fpc = compressive stress in concrete after all prestress losses have occurred either at the
centroid of the cross section resisting transient loads or at the junction of the web and
flange where the centroid lies in the flange.
fpe = effective stress in prestressing steel after allowance for all losses
fpu = nominal ultimate stress of prestressing steel (270 ksi for low-lax strands)
fr = modulus of rupture of concrete
I = moment of inertia
L or l = span length
M = moment
N = number of post-tensioning strands
1-5 (April 2020)

pc = total length of outside perimeter of concrete cross section
P = factored applied post-tensioning force
R = radius
R = reaction
tBF = thickness of U-beam bottom flange
T = torsion
Tcr = nominal torsional cracking resistance
Tu = applied factored torsional moment
V = shear
ρ = reinforcement ratio
 = resistance factor
σallow = allowable tensile stress
σservice-PT = service stress without post-tensioning
1.6 UNITS
This document uses primarily U.S. customary units.
1.7 REFERENCE CODE

All references to the AASHTO LRFD specifications refer to the eighth edition of the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications.2 Notation and definitions used here generally conform to those of the eighth
edition AASHTO LRFD specifications, but may differ in some cases if needed for the purposes
of this document.
1-6 (April 2020)

IMPLEMENTATION OF CURVED, SPLICED U-BEAM SYSTEM
IMPLEMENTATION OF CURVED, SPLICED U-BEAM

SYSTEM
2.1 GENERAL
Curved, spliced U-beams have been implemented in more than 30 projects since the 1960s,
and this number continues to grow. With each success, the scope of such projects broadens.
Numerous areas become more refined and more fully developed with the further application
of curved, spliced U-beams, including:
• consistency of design requirements, including those related to handling and transport
• design guidance for concrete torsion
• increased use of high-performance materials, including lightweight concrete
• more efficient cross sections and longer spans
• application of external tendons
This document gives practical guidance for the implementation of curved, spliced U-beams for
typical applications related to the current state of the art. This guidance is not meant to limit
innovation of designers, fabricators, or builders. Rather, it provides a basis for professionals in
the design and construction industry to progress the vital topic of curved, spliced U-beams.
2.1.1 Review of Projects

This document builds on the significant body of work presented in PCI’s State-of-the-Art
Report CB-01-12, Curved Precast Concrete Bridges,1 which discusses the development and
evolution of curved precast concrete structures.
Table 2.1 summarizes recent U-beam designs undertaken in Colorado and Florida. The Florida
designs have generally used the standard PCI U-beam shapes presented in appendix F. PCI
developed these standards over the past decade through industry collaboration, to promote
consistent shapes and span ranges for projects nationwide.
2- 1 (April 2020)
Table 2.1. Partial summary of recent U-beam designs
Bridge name Location Span Back span/ Cross Cross Deck Span/depth Beam
configuration, ft main span section section
thickness (deck + U- spacing
@ midspan @ pier beam)*
RampK,I- CO 158-200-200- 0.79 7 ft 7 ft 9.0 in. 25.8 24 ft 2 in.

25/SH-270 200-200-158 (tBF = 6 in.)† (tBF = 1 ft 6
in.)
Austin Bluffs CO 132-210-140-110 0.67 7 ft 7 ft 10.0 in. 26.8 25 ft 4 in.

Overpass (tBF = 8 in.) (tBF = 2 ft 0
in.)
Ramp A, SH- CO 154-205-235-187, 0.8, 8 ft 8 ft 10.0 in. 26.6 19 ft 0 in.

58/l-70 (tBF = 8 1/8 (tBF = 8 1/8
148-205-186, 0.91, in.) in.)
187-200-200-187 0.94
West Bijou St. CO 106-135-148-86 0.71 5 ft 5 ft 9.0 in. 25.7 20 ft 4 in.

over (tBF = 6 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 4
in.)
Monument
Creek
I-25 over US- CO 153-240-154 0.64 7 ft 2 in. 7 ft 2 in. 9.0 in. 30.3 18 ft 8 in.
85 (tBF = 6 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 8
in.)
SH-120 / CO 81-112-145-71 0.49 4 ft 4 ft 8.5 in. 30.8 24 ft 2 in.

Arkansas (tBF = 6 in.) (tBF = 6 in.)
I-95 FL 145-200-231-191, 0.83, 0.73, 7 ft 7 ft 9.0 in. 29.8 23 ft 9 in.

Interchange (tBF = 6 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 8
191 -229-1 55 0.68 in.)
@ SR 202
SH-85 over CO 147-188-147 0.78 6 ft 6 ft 9.0 in. 27.9 19 ft 4 in.

Platte River
Bronco CO 86-148-135 0.58, 0.91 6 ft 6 ft 8.0 in. 22.2 25 ft 0 in.
Ramp 1, I- CO 145-191-147, 0.77, 6 ft 6 ft 9.0 in. 28.6 22 ft 0 in.

25/SH-85 (tBF = 8 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 6
149-170-193-139, 0.72, in.)
119-177-187-131 0.7
C-470 over CO 133-110-132- 0.93 6 ft 6 ft 8.0 in. 24.8 17 ft 6 in.

SH-85 165-160-148 (tBF = 8 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 6
in.)
Arbor Road CO 141-135 3 ft 9 in. 3 ft 9 in. 6.0 in. 33.2 9 ft 4 in.

(tBF = 5 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 0
in.)
Boggy Creek FL 141-216-202-157, 0.65, 0.78, 7 ft 7 ft 9.5 in. 27.7 25 ft 8 1/2

(tBF = 9 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 9 in.
157-189-216-127 0.59 in.)
I-25 Trinidad CO 115-131-250- 0.7 6 ft 5 in. 9 ft 9.5 in.§ 25.5‡ 13 ft 0 in.

175-181
Ramp Y CO 100-190-228- 0.78 7 ft 2 in. 7 ft 2 in. 8.5 in. 29.2 17 ft 6 in.

228-230-177 (tBF = 8 in.) (tBF =1 ft 8
in.)
408/417 FL 129-159-159- 0.81, 0.81, 7 ft 7 ft 10.0 in.§ 24.7 19 ft 9 in.

Interchange 159-129 (tBF = 9 in.) (tBF = 1 ft 9
0.81, 0.97 in.) 19 ft 9 in.
129-159-164-159
0.82, 0.99, 24 ft 10
139-169-168 in.
0.73, 0.88,
134-183-193-169 24 ft 10
0.83 in.
149-179-149
24 ft 9 in.
Note: tBF = thickness of U-beam bottom flange.
* Longest span of the bridge is used for span-to-depth ratio.
† tBF is used if the U-beam is internally haunched.
‡ Depth of composite section at pier (haunched section) is used to calculate span-to-depth ratio.
§ Includes ½ in. sacrificial wearing surface.
2- 2 (April 2020)
For the projects presented in Table 2.1, the average span-to-depth ratio (L/D) equals 28 for the
composite U-beam, beam plus deck slab, with a range from 22 to 33 depending on the project.
Appendix F provides additional information pertaining to parameters from numerous
constructed projects.
2.1.2 U-Beam Cross Section

The conception and evolution of curved, spliced U-beams has been presented previously.3
Figure 2.1 compares 84 in. deep cross sections for recent projects in Colorado and Florida.
Figure 2.1.
Comparison of cross sections of U-beams used for recent projects in Colorado and Florida.
Figures 2.1 shows that the PCI Type U84-4 uses a 10 in. thick web, compared with the 9 in. web
thickness shown and commonly used for the Colorado section. The Colorado cross section was
designed to allow variable web thicknesses from 7.5 to 10 in., which was achieved by varying
the internal forms. The thicker web allows installation of larger tendon ducts and hence larger
post-tensioning forces. By contrast, the area and weight of the PCI-U84-4 is slightly larger than
the Colorado section. The PCI sections, presented in appendix F, were developed with industry
inputs from governing agencies, contractors, designers, and precasters, and represent the most
recent evolution of the current state of the art.
2.1.3 Span-to-Depth Ratios

Spliced, curved U-beam systems are able to achieve slender span-to-depth ratios of 30:1 and
greater with:
• attention to the span layout
• suitable beam spacing
2- 3 (April 2020)
• use of continuous span units
• moderate curvatures from 750 to 1000 ft in the alignments
Simple spans, inefficient end-span layouts of continuous units, and highly curved alignments
less than 750 ft may lead to span-to-depth ratios of less than 30:1.
2.2 FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION

This section offers a stepwise discussion on fabrication and construction aspects of spliced,
curved U-beam bridge systems, from form procurement through integration of the product
into the final structure.
2.2.1 U-Beam Fabrication

Formwork for spliced curved U-beams generally has the following characteristics:
• ability to articulate in the horizontal plane
• outer form
• interior mold
Section 6.12 includes additional discussion related to precast concrete formwork and
geometry control.
Horizontally curved U-beams are cast in sections in steel forms, which can be set to
accommodate various radii. Figure 2.2 shows two such forms. The formwork used to cast U-
beams is generally chorded at 5 to 8 ft intervals based on what is currently available. The
chorded surfaces blend together to give the appearance of a smooth, curved surface. Precast
concrete beam manufacturers currently have the ability to cast U-beams with a radius as small
as 500 ft; however, smaller radii may be achieved through careful design and construction
coordination with local suppliers.
Figure 2.2 shows an example of an outer form and inner mold. The use of self-consolidating
concrete has been found to be beneficial to accommodate single-stage concrete placement.
Generally, prestressing is applied in phases. Stage 1 prestressing is for individual sections,
especially to address handling and transportation conditions, and most commonly consists of
internal bonded post-tensioned tendons or pretensioned strands. Unbonded internal or
external post-tensioned tendons, or unbonded post-tensioned monostrand tendons, have been
suggested for stage 1 prestressing; however, there is no known application of unbonded
tendons in existing bridge inventories. These prestressing scenarios may be applied in the
yard for lifting and transport and may or may not be considered in final design, depending on
local practice. Stage 2 post-tensioning for continuity of the full unit is applied in the field after
the sections have been lifted into place and lid slabs, splice closures, and diaphragms have
been cast. The prestressed structure then resists remaining dead loads, support removal loads,
superimposed dead loads, live loads, and other transient loads. To satisfy unique scenarios,
and where deck replacement is not an issue, the designer may use stage 3 post-tensioning,
which is applied after the deck has been constructed and gains strength. Additionally, the lid
slab may be cast before shipping, if not precluded by weight restrictions.
2- 4 (April 2020)
As will be discussed in section 7.1, it is structurally advantageous to add prestress after lifting
the member from the form and transporting the precast concrete section in the yard and
before leaving the plant, to give greater torsional capacity and to control cracking. Reiterating,
the initial post-tensioning (stage 1) is normally done all at the same time, generally after the U-
beams are lifted from the forms while in yard storage, and always before the tubs are placed
on the delivery vehicle. To date, and as discussed in the previous paragraph, projects have
used pretensioned strands and bonded and grouted initial post-tensioning tendons to provide
the initial prestressing required for stage 1. For the bonded, grouted systems, round and flat
ducts have both been used with flat ducts, potentially providing more compact duct
arrangements and smaller anchorage zone dimensions. Nevertheless, the use of flat ducts is
cautioned in situations where the fluid head of concrete is significant and may result in
unacceptable deformations to the ducts during casting.
The precast concrete U-beam sections contain post-tensioning ducts in the bottom flange and
webs, and for pier segments, in the top flanges and webs. The sections may be removed from
the forms as mildly reinforced members or may be partially post-tensioned if needed to
control handling stresses. In some cases, the bottom flange may contain special monostrand
tendons that are tensioned before lifting the U-beam from the bed. However it is done, all
sections are generally prestressed by post-tensioning before leaving the plant. There are
exceptions, where the beam length is short and the radius is large, that will meet criteria with
only mild reinforcing steel.
a) Steel casting form. Precast concrete lid b) Section of interior mold for casting
slabs are visible in the background. trapezoidal U-beam.
Figure 2.2
Specialized casting forms.
2- 5 (April 2020)
Reinforcing bar cages with post-tensioning ducts installed are prefabricated, or “pre-tied”, and
lifted into the formwork systems (Fig. 2.3). Cages may also be tied in the formwork based on
preference. Figure 2.3(a) shows welded-wire web reinforcement bent in a custom bending
machine. Figure 2.3(b) shows the finished fabricated reinforcement cage ready to be inserted
in the tub form. The headed reinforcing bar terminations may be used to reduce congestion of
this reinforcement as it protrudes into the deck slab.
a) Custom hydraulic machine to bend b) Preassembled reinforcing cage with post-

fabricated no. 5 welded-wire reinforcement. tensioning ducts.
Figure 2.3
U-beam reinforcing details.
a) Prepared for secondary concrete b) Monolithically cast thickened bottom slab.

placement. Photo: Modjeski and Masters.
Figure 2.4
Precast concrete section with thickened bottom slab.
2- 6 (April 2020)
Figure 2.4(a) shows a two-stage approach to thicken the bottom flange of the precast concrete
U-beam. The precast concrete section in Fig. 2.4(a) has threaded reinforcing bar inserted into
form savers on the interior faces at the bottom of the webs. The concrete surface has been
intentionally roughened to ¼ in. amplitude to improve bond with the secondary concrete
casting. This approach saves weight for U-beam segment transportation and eliminates the
required modification of the interior form to accommodate the thickening if cast with the U-
beam. However, this approach adds labor and materials for the tying of reinforcing bar and the
casting of the secondary concrete placement in the field, and necessitates design checks for
shear stress and shear reinforcement across the cold joint. For recent bridges in Florida, the
contractor was given the option to construct the bottom slab thickening as either precast in the
form or as a secondary placement, for which the monolithic option was chosen.4 Figure 2.4(b)
shows a monolithically cast thickened bottom flange.
2.2.2 Transportation in Yard

Figures 2.5 through 2.7 show straddle carriers, spreader bars, and attachment details used for
lifting and handling the U-beams in the casting yard. Straddle carriers are used to lift and
maneuver the U-beams. Depending on the precaster’s equipment, spreader bars may be offset
to align the lifting force in the same plane as center of gravity of the U-beam section (Fig. 7.3).
Clevises and straps are generally used to transfer the horizontal component of the lift weight
to the spreader bar.
Figure 2.5
U-beam section and straddle carriers.
Photo: Dura-Stress
2- 7 (April 2020)
Figure 2.6
Steel lifting spreader.
Figure 2.7
Spreader bar attachments.
2- 8 (April 2020)
2.2.3 Transportation to and at Site
Figure 2.8 shows a steerable trucking configuration for transporting precast concrete sections
of spliced U-beams. The beams are supported approximately 15% of the overall length from
the ends of the unit, that is, near the 0.15 points, to increase the cantilever overhangs and
reduce longitudinal and torsional moments at midspan. With this arrangement, negative
moments in the cantilevers are increased and both top and bottom compression and tension
limits need to be checked. Moreover, the support location should be determined for each stage
of construction such as during storage, transport, and handling. Variations of curvature, length,
thickened slabs, end diaphragms, and tongue details are factors that affect: 1) the location of
the U-beam centroid; 2) the design of stage 1 prestressing; and 3), the selection and
optimization of support locations. Similar to spreader bars, and depending on the equipment
available to the hauler, the tub can be placed so the centroidal axis of the U-beam align with the
center of truck support resistance without inducing overturning into the system. The stresses
induced in the U-beam due to these various support locations that exist during construction
must be countered with the stage 1 prestressing in order to keep them within allowable limits.
Some longitudinal prestressing must be installed before transport to assist the section in
resisting applied forces including torsional cracking limits. As explained in section 7.1 and
appendix A, it is recommended by Washington DOT that the section is designed to resist its
own self-weight plus dynamic allowances of 20% of self-weight upwards and 20% of self-
weight downwards for transport.5 The designer may elect to increase these percentages
considering the feasibility of the selected shipping route, hauling equipment, and consideration
of local practice. Further discussion in section 7.1.3 indicates that when the beam is erected on
temporary supports and before stressing continuity post-tensioning is likely the controlling
temporary load case. For more information regarding transportation analysis methodologies,
see the PCI Bridge Design Manual.11
a) U-beam at plant, ready for transport. b) Arrival of U-beam at site. Photo: Modjeski
and Masters.
2- 9 (April 2020)
c) Arrival of U-beam at site.

Figure 2.8
Transportation of U-beam to site.
Figure 2.9
Transportation of U-beam at site.
Photo: Modjeski and Masters.
Figure 2.9 shows a photo of a U-beam handled at the job site with eccentric spreader bars,
which help to balance U-beam twist associated with a two-crane pick.
2- 10 (April 2020)
2.2.4 Temporary Falsework and U-Beam Placement
An advantage of curved precast concrete construction is that it employs minimal shoring
compared with cast-in-place construction. Correspondingly, the layout of temporary
falsework, if used, is an important aspect of design. The length of U-beam segments may be
influenced by precaster plant lifting capacity, shipping limits, and contractor crane capacity.
Site constraints such as clearances to traffic lanes and shoulders, utility interferences and
obstructions, and available falsework locations may also dictate the length of U-beam
segments. Figure 2.10 shows several examples of feasible tower layouts. In general, the towers
are roughly placed at the span’s points of contraflexure to minimize forces at the closure joints.
The layout of falsework towers need not be perpendicular to the centerline alignment. For
example, the temporary towers can be skewed for a pair of U-beams and the concrete framing
of the diaphragms and closure joints can be offset. Also, U-beam lines can be designed
completely independently with different splice locations if necessary due to site constraints.
Where insufficient space exists for support from towers below, U-beams can be suspended
from above by strongbacks [Fig. 2.11(a)]. Strongbacks are attached to an adjacent U-beam and
cantilevered to hang an adjacent U-beam; the other end is typically supported by a shoring
tower or permanent pier. In the case of strongbacks, and depending on the length of the
cantilevering U-beam, significant additional top post-tensioning, temporary and/or
permanent, is generally required to control stress conditions over the piers. Straddle bents and
cantilevered shoring bents are other options when there is insufficient space for a
conventional tower.
a) Temporary towers located at U-beam splices and resting on foundations supported by

precast concrete piles. Photo: J Dick Precast Concrete Consultant.
2- 11 (April 2020)
b) Single tower used at splice location are c) Temporary cast-in-place concrete columns
cross-braced to withstand hurricane-force with sand jacks and steel positioning beams
winds. to support the U-beams at splices. The
columns are later removed and discarded.
Figure 2.10
Temporary falsework towers
a) Cantilevered U-beams made integral at b) U-beam supported at integral pier before

pier. Note the drop-in U-beam hung from casting of bedding grout.
strongbacks over traffic. Photo: Modjeski and Masters.
Photo: Modjeski and Masters.
2- 12 (April 2020)
c) U-beam tongues support U-beams at abutment.

Figure 2.11
U-beam framing.
Figures 2.11(a) and 2.11(b) show framing configurations with integral pier bents. Whether
integral or on bearings, mild steel or transverse post-tensioning is commonly used and extends
through the diaphragm and U-beam. In Fig. 2.10(b), the U-beam is temporarily supported by
the falsework towers until bedding grout beneath the U-beam is cast. Integral bents eliminate
bearings and provide advantages for both initial cost and long-term maintenance. Nonetheless,
the use of integral bents needs to be evaluated with attention paid to the articulation of the
entire structure composed of superstructure, substructure, and temporary works. The
demands primarily due to shrinkage, temperature, redistribution of forces caused by creep,
and the associated costs of substructures to accommodate these loads should be considered. In
all cases, continuity post-tensioning and the associated compatibility and equilibrium of the
continuous system affect pier forces.
Figure 2.11(c) shows the U-beam segment supported by a tongue section at the abutment. The
tongue section is also presented in Fig. 2.12, section 8.3, and appendix B. The main function of
the tongue section is to install the U-beam directly on the permanent bearing during erection.
This eliminates the need for falsework and accommodates thermal movements during
construction more reliably than temporary shoring. Early projects had the U-beams stop short
of the bearing location and a full-depth diaphragm was cast, which accomplishes the same
result as far as the final design is concerned. Thus, the tongue section is primarily a
constructability feature. The use of the tongue also allows setting of the U-beam segment while
providing a second-stage post-tensioning anchorage zone interface. The remainder of the end
2- 13 (April 2020)
diaphragm construction is accomplished in the field. The tongue section allows reduction of U-
beam segment weight for transport and handling, aids for fit-up tolerances at the abutments, a
precast concrete bearing seat, and field installation of the post-tensioning anchorage zone.
During a short window of time in the field operations, that is, before the load is transferred to
permanent U-beam bearings at piers, the system is on falsework, closure joints are cast, and
before post-tensioning, the U-beam system is sensitive to the effects of settlement at the
falsework towers, which will induce tensile stresses over the piers. Design and field inspection
protocols should be established to monitor settlement of temporary shoring. Concerns related
to settlement at the falsework towers can be mitigated and remedied by: using low bearing
pressures for spread footing design, use of deep foundations, monitoring settlements over a
period of time before grouting bearings and casting closures, and developing contingency
plans including shimming or jacking to correct settlements and/or misalignments. Second-
stage post-tensioning should occur shortly after the closures gain strength to limit the time
window for potential settlement and also cyclical events related to thermal and shrinkage
stresses imposed on early-age (and low-early-strength) closure joint concrete.
2.2.5 Lid Slabs

Lid slabs, for which cast-in-place and precast concrete solutions have been employed, are used
to close the open cross section and give more torsional resistance to each U-beam of the bridge
system. Figure 2.12 shows examples of lid slabs. Lid slabs may be constructed in the precast
concrete yard; however, they are generally cast/constructed in the field after the beams are
erected on falsework, along with the closure joints between U-beam segments and before the
application of main longitudinal post-tensioning. This sequence saves weight during
transportation and erection of the U-beams and extends the length of the U-beam segments,
which are generally constrained by transport weights. Local practice may allow other lid slab
options meeting structural performance and constructability needs.
For either lid slab solution, cast-in-place or precast, the means and methods used for
construction are fairly conventional. The designer is alerted to make adequate checks to
accommodate horizontal shear flow at the interface of the lid slab and top flanges of the U-
beams where the transfer of stresses, due primarily to vertical shear and torsion, occurs.
Additionally, cast-in-place or stay-in-place concrete panels contribute to the ultimate positive
moment capacity of the section and therefore shear flow across the interface between the lid
slab and deck slab should be checked per code provisions.
Field surveys of the U-beams erected on the temporary supports are required to establish the
benchmarks for calculating the lid slab elevation at this phase of construction. During erection
of the lid slabs (precast or cast-in-place), field survey procedures must be established to set
the haunch thickness to the correct geometry and assure the lid slabs are cast to the correct
elevation. The lid slab elevation and lid slab haunch must account for anticipated cambers and
deflections during subsequent stages of construction.
2- 14 (April 2020)
a) U-beam at abutment with forms ready for c) Precast concrete lid slabs stored in the
the cast-in-place concrete lid slabs. Photo: J precast concrete plant.
Dick Precast Concrete Consultant.
b) Precast concrete lid slabs with deck d) Removable grout bedding form under
overhang cantilevers and precast concrete precast concrete deck panels.
stay-in-place deck panels between U-beams.
Figure 2.12
U-beam lid slab examples.
2.2.6 Closure Joints

Casting closure joints connecting the ends of the precast concrete U-beam segments is a
necessary step before application of second-stage post-tensioning. In general, a minimum gap
of 2 ft for the closure joints allows enough space to correct small misalignments of post-
tensioning ducts, perform watertight field coupling of ducts in accordance with local practice,
give appropriate space and cover to reinforcing at the gap, and allow transition between U-
beams erected with slightly different cross slopes or elevations. Thickened sections around the
perimeter at closure pours have also been used in shorter splices (approximately 2 ft) to
relieve congestion. Gaps of 3 to 4 ft have been used to give more room for post-tensioning
jacking and for installation of reinforcing bar at closures.
2.2.7 Post-Tensioning
The normal application of first-stage (in the yard) and second-stage (in the field) post-
tensioning offers some challenges. For the first-stage post-tensioning (the first-stage may also
be pretensioned), there is the need to define this work scope for either the precaster or the
2- 15 (April 2020)
contractor. The contractor may prefer a sole source for the U-beams, while the precaster may
or may not want to self-perform this work item. Hence, the division of work is a contractual
issue to be addressed between the contractor and precaster, and is generally within the scope
of the post-tensioning supplier/subcontractor. For the installation of second-stage post-
tensioning, attention should be given to the physical space for jacks, the trimming of strands
during the post-tensioning process, the amount of loss along the tendon length, and
installation of strands over long runs of duct. During stressing, and because U-beams can move
relative to each other, the post-tensioned structure should be treated as a system and the
sequence of stressing examined. This includes the consideration of intermediate diaphragms
and possibly deck forms.
In recent projects, a gap of 3 ft at closures and 4 ft at expansion joints has been adequate to
successfully tension four 15-strand tendons using end U-beam segments incorporating a
tongue section (Fig. 2.13).4 Nonetheless, these distances are considered minimums; second-
stage post-tensioning can be difficult and professional installation is recommended. Some
suppliers may need more than these minimums, and jacking clearance aspects should be
resolved in the design phase or subsequently in review of the shop drawings. Large elongations
of several feet can be expected for the initial stressing of a continuity tendon, so a full-size jack
stressing from an open end is recommended if possible. Stressing from the opposite end is also
common to account for losses along the length of the tendon and can normally be accomplished
with a short-stroke jack. Tendon lengths of 890 ft with (19) 0.6 in. strand in 4 in. nominal
diameter ducts, and about 1345 ft with (27) 0.6 in. strand in 4.75 in. diameter ducts, have been
successfully installed.
Figures 2.14(a) and 2.14(b) show typical post-tensioning details. In Fig. 2.14(b) the closure is
the width of the web. Also, because of space limitations and potential post-tensioning and
reinforcement congestion, well-consolidated concrete should be achieved. High-flow concrete,
self-consolidating concrete, or simply smaller aggregate sizes may be considered to attain good
results.
The decision to use unbonded or bonded post-tensioning and the amount of each is left to the
designer and the governing agencies. Unbonded (greased and sheathed tendons) are
commonly protected at their ends by proprietary caps. For bonded tendons, grouting proceeds
subsequent to the tendon stressing. Governing specifications generally prescribe grouting
within two weeks after the tendons are seated to their final stress, to prevent corrosion of the
strands in the humid environment of the ducts. Procedures and materials for grouting will
follow normal protocols established by the engineer and governing agency. This discussion is
outside the scope of this document. The designer is alerted to show details and locations for
inlets at low points and grout vents to allow for burping of accumulated air, negate voids, and
uniform protection of the strands by the grout. Refer to PTI M50.3-12, Guide Specification for
Grouted Post-Tensioning,8 for the latest industry guidance related to the grouting of post-
tensioning tendons.
2- 16 (April 2020)
Figure 2.13
U-beam with tongue section.
2- 17 (April 2020)
a) Post-tensioning anchorages installed at b) Duct splices and reinforcement ready for

abutment diaphragms. closure placement at section splice.
Figure 2.14
Post-tensioned details.
2.2.8 Deck Screeding

Deck screeding is performed very similarly to a conventional prestressed concrete beam
system (Fig. 2.15). The use of standard overhang brackets is common. The profiles of the
beams are surveyed after the second-stage post-tensioning has been applied. The rails for the
screed machine are set to account for this as-built survey so that the deck thickness is
maintained within the general tolerance specified by the governing agency. The rails are set to
produce the target profile taking into account all losses and long-term camber and deflection,
as well as creep and shrinkage, from the casting of the deck to a target day (ranging from 4000
days to infinity, depending on preferences of the engineer and governing agency).
For some governing agencies, it is important to consider deck replacement during the design
process. In some areas, a major deck rehabilitation or replacement may be necessary during
the service life of the bridge. For deck replacement, it is not necessary to reshore the bridge,
provided that all post-tensioning was applied before deck placement, and the lid slab, if
evaluated to be in good condition, remains in place. If the lids slabs are removed during a deck
replacement, it may be necessary to reshore the structure with temporary falsework. Also,
lateral forces in the webs due to post-tensioning would need to be accounted for in the
rehabilitation if the lid slab is removed, resulting in an open section. For rehabilitations, the
entire structure should undergo design checks, including sizing and locations of setting jacks.
2- 18 (April 2020)
To summarize, an engineer should evaluate the need for temporary shoring and the effects of
removal of the deck slab to determine whether the lid slab should remain and only a partial
deck removal specified.
Figure 2.15
Deck screeding preparations for U-beam bridge.
Photo: AECOM.
2- 19 (April 2020)
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2- 20 (April 2020)
PROJECT DELIVERY
PROJECT DELIVERY
Depending on the project delivery method, the contract documents developed by the
governing agency, engineer of record (EOR), and contracting team may vary.
For a design-build project, the governing agency may prescribe various performance
requirements in terms of the roadway geometrics, horizontal and vertical clearance, load
carrying capacity, and durability expectations. Many of the engineering tasks are performed by
the design-build contracting team, including the EOR, during the pre-bid to communicate the
bidder’s intention, and post-bid to prepare construction documents necessary to build the
structures and for governing agency review to confirm compliance with the project’s
performance specifications.
For a design-bid-build project, the EOR is employed by the governing agency and generally the
contract documents are developed to greater detail during the pre-bid phase. Indeed, the
development of precise design-bid-build contract documents is encouraged; nonetheless, they
are not intended to preclude innovation and need to provide flexibility for the contractor and
his specialty engineer and precast concrete fabricator. The contract documents need to
communicate a feasible way to construct the bridge structure and may be modified by the
contracting team to suit the chosen means and methods.
This section describes many of the typical design considerations and construction practices
that are now being used to build curved, spliced U-beam bridges.
3.1 DESIGNER ROLE AND STATED ASSUMPTIONS

Paragraph 2.5.3 of the AASHTO LRFD specifications2 identifies constructability issues that
should be considered during design. The EOR should clearly state any assumptions made in the
contract documents, and these should be confirmed by the governing agency. The following list
discusses several items that the governing agency may desire to be shown.
• stress limits at various stages of construction including
- transfer of prestress and lifting from bed
- transportation
- erection
- temporary erection stresses
- final stresses, including live load
(Refer to section 4 and appendix A for further discussion related to design stress limits.)
• assumed construction loads
• post-tensioning loss assumptions
• post-tensioning staging, sequence, and verification of jacking clearances
• transportation and construction loading criteria and construction load factors
• determination of splice regions
3-1 (April 2020)

PROJECT DELIVERY
• U-beam lifting, bracing, pick points, and storage locations
• U-beam erection and stressing sequences, including age of U beams, cast-in-place
closure joints, f’c, and f’ci
• expected short- and long-term deflections and cambers
• expected build-ups
3.2 SPECIALTY ENGINEER ROLE AND SUBMITTALS

The project specifications for curved, spliced U-beam projects generally require that the
contractor retain a competent, knowledgeable specialty engineer who is registered in the
project’s state and has a minimum amount of experience in the design and construction of
complex post-tensioned concrete structures, staged construction, and temporary works.
Specific recommendations for registration and length of experience records are the purview of
the governing agency and EOR. The specialty engineer often works with the contractor to
identify possible savings that can be realized through adjustment of section lengths or other
procedures that take advantage of the contractor’s specific expertise and equipment. All such
revisions are normally coordinated with and approved by the EOR. Depending on the project
delivery method and contractual setup, the EOR and specialty engineer may be the same or
separate entities, and may be a representative to either the governing agency or the
contractor.
The owner often specifies the duties and responsibilities of the specialty engineer. These
duties may include the following:
• Step-by-step erection sequence, ages of U-beams at erection and closure pours .
• Temporary works and bracing.
• U-beam lifting, bracing, pick points, and storage locations.
• Define construction loads.
• Falsework locations and loads.
• Construction controls: define maximum deflections, cambers, and build-up
thicknesses.
• Post-tensioning and grouting procedures and equipment; quality assurance.
• Field survey and geometry control.
• Time-dependent analysis with stress and force summary is recommended and should
be specified in the contract documents.
• Truck and crane placement with radius of operation diagrams.
• If a thickened bottom slab is required, determine details and whether it should be
field-cast or plant-cast.
• Determine location and forming for interior post-tensioning blisters and stressing
buttresses (if required). Note that locations of interior post-tensioning blisters should
3-2 (April 2020)

PROJECT DELIVERY
be clearly called out on the contract documents and are only the responsibility of the
specialty engineer if there is a material change.
• Temporary supports or strongbacks.
• Lid slab design and detailing.
• Construction sequence.
As recommended industry practice, the sample technical specification included in appendix C
provides for a separate pay item for specialty engineering of curved, spliced, precast,
prestressed concrete U beams.
3.3 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Appendix C contains an example set of technical specifications for a representative design-bid-
build project and for the bidding of an alternate bridge design. Key elements of the
specifications are highlighted in the following sections. To clarify that the erection plan in
section 3.3.1 is a required submittal document, it may be worthwhile to include a bid item for
this component in design-bid-build project delivery scenarios.
The contractor, or his agent, shall coordinate submittals and information included in the
erection plan. Specific guidance related to this topic is beyond the scope of this document;
further information can be found in Brice (2018).9
3.3.1 Erection Plan

The erection plan is a submittal document developed by the contractor’s specialty engineer
that communicates intended means and methods to be used during erection of the U-beams
and includes the basis of design, erection sequence and operations, and geometry control
procedures. The erection plan may follow the construction sequence outlined in the contract
documents or, with approval of the EOR, the design scheme presented in the contract
documents can be modified by the specialty engineer to recognize unique project
requirements and innovations developed by the contractor.
Significant components of the erection plan are the contractor’s intended construction
sequence and means and methods to achieve the U-beam erection. Steps of an example
construction sequence, with discussion related to means and methods, are listed as follows:
• Construct foundations, piers, and abutments; post-tension pier caps if necessary and
grout ducts.
• Erect temporary supports or strongbacks.
• Fabricate U-beams; tension and grout bottom flange ducts.
• Erect shoring towers. Some U-beams may be spliced together on the ground, but this
is unusual and requires large cranes for the heavier lifts.
• Erect U-beam segments with bracing.
• Cast all bottom slab thickening, closure joints, and diaphragms over interior piers
including expansion piers.
3-3 (April 2020)

PROJECT DELIVERY
• Connect substructure to superstructure if made integral.
• Close open topped U-beams by forming and casting relatively thin (approximately 4¼
in. thick) lid slabs, or place and grout precast concrete lid slabs to make the section
torsionally rigid. Grout for precast concrete lid slabs should be confined to the limits
of the lid slab to leave the rest of the top flange available for forms or precast concrete
slabs that span between U-beams.
• Tension full-length tendons. During this stage, the U-beams lift off the temporary
supports and only bear on permanent supports.
• Tension bottom or top continuity tendons, if required.
• Grout all ducts.
• Remove shoring towers.
• Form and cast the full-thickness deck slab, or install precast concrete stay-in-place
deck panels between U-beams and cast the remaining structural deck. Options may
exist to cast the deck shored or unshored. A later stage of post-tensioning may also
be possible after the deck has been cast.
• Cast approach slabs and bridge rails.
• Install expansion joints.
• Install membrane or latex-modified concrete topping, if required.
While not always specific requirements, the preceding list describes components that are
commonly required by the contract documents.
3.3.2 Geometry Control Procedures

U-beam casting is similar to any other precast concrete girder, with the additional concern of
setting the curved forms on the desired radius before casting. The setup in the precast
concrete yard includes capability for assessing the geometry of the setup before casting and
transport.
The geometry control procedures cover all geometry control operations in the precast
concrete yard and at the project site and is compatible with the chosen methods of casting and
erection, including erection survey, elevation and alignment control.
The geometry control procedures portion of the erection plan includes:
• A geometry control procedure for survey controls and procedures, observations,
checks, computational and/or graphical methods and correction techniques. The
length, sweep, and camber for the precast concrete U-beam segments fall under
owner tolerance specifications, which are followed by the EOR and specialty
engineer with camber calculations and later measurement.
• U-beam setting elevations for temporary falsework and permanent piers and
proposed methods to make adjustments to these elevations to account for
tolerances and settlement of the temporary foundations.
3-4 (April 2020)

PROJECT DELIVERY
• The U-beam build-ups at each web to be set in the field include the theoretical
geometric horizontal alignment, profile grade, and superelevation appropriately
combined with the camber accounting for future deformations. The U-beams are
set on falsework; for lid slabs, survey the construction elevations (fills) at tenth or
twentieth points, and then survey to determine the construction elevations (fills)
for casting the deck. U-beams do not require complex geometry control plans like
those of segmental bridges and are essentially no different than conventional
girders except that pairs of webs for a particular beam rotate about the U-beam
axis.
3-5 (April 2020)

PROJECT DELIVERY
3-6 (April 2020)

DESIGN CRITERIA
DESIGN CRITERIA
4.1 GENERAL
Articles 5.12.3 and 5.12.3.4 of the AASHTO LRFD specifications2 give the primary code
guidance regarding design aspects of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam bridge systems.
Topics including shear and torsional checks and guidance related to erection stage analysis
may be considered by the design professional and the governing agency. This document
echoes that guidance. AASHTO LFRD specifications Article C3.12.3 gives guidance related to
the exclusion of thermal gradient effects based on local performance experience. As the state of
the art moves forward, there will be further consensus developed for the interpretation of
AASHTO LRFD specifications and it is likely design specifications will be broadened to fully
encompass the general case of curved, spliced precast concrete U-beam design. AASHTO LRFD
specifications provides supplementary guidance in Article 5.12.5 for special concrete design
cases.
Note that the discussion of this section is brief and will be expanded on by use of example in
later sections and by information found in the appendices.
4.2 LIMIT STATES – CONSTRUCTION PHASE

Construction of the U-beam system includes the following load phases:
• Plant handling:
- cast U-beams and move to storage (with or without prestress);
- consider pick points and dunnage locations and stress limits.
• Transportation to site:
- post-tension U-beams before transport;
- support conditions during transport.
• Erection at site:
- placement of U-beams on falsework;
- weight of casting diaphragms, closures and lid slabs on erected U beams;
- effects of longitudinal temperature changes and construction live loads;
- effects of wind on bridges during construction;10
- stressing of any partial continuity tendons, if appropriate;
- support of drop-in U-beams on strongbacks, if appropriate;
- cast remaining closures, check effects of temperature changes;
- stress longitudinal continuity post-tensioning;
- remove falsework towers;
4-1 (April 2020)

DESIGN CRITERIA
- add weight of wet deck concrete;
- add superimposed loads on composite deck and U-beam.
At each of these steps, checks are performed to ensure the service and strength limits of the U-
beams and other associated elements, including temporary works, are satisfied and the bridge
system remains stable.
As stated in section 3.1, assumptions by the EOR are included in the contract documents. A
description of construction loads and suggested load combinations are found in appendix A,
section A3.7. For service level checks, the stresses derived from the appropriate limit state
combinations are compared with the limits found in appendix A, section A5.2.
4.3 TORSIONAL CHECKS

On projects that have been constructed to date, open U-beam sections have demonstrated
sufficient torsional strength and rigidity for all construction loadings considering self-weight
and reasonable construction live loadings for typical beam lengths of approximately 100 ft.
While sections that have currently been used have been robust in this regard, longer U-beams
with thinner webs with external post-tensioning have been suggested that did not have
surplus torsional strength and rigidity, which presented serious difficulties in transport and
handling. It is essential to close the cross section as soon as possible in the construction
process to avoid potentially negative outcomes from loss of rigidity due to undesirable
cracking, and certainly before casting the deck slab.
Torsional checks are made at the service and ultimate limit states during construction and
after the structure has been erected in its permanent configuration. Following the guidance of
AASHTO LFRD specifications, torsional effects are recommended to be investigated when Tu >
0.25Tcr, where the cracking torque Tcr is derived based on St. Venant’s principles.
Furthermore, it is recommended that service level torsion be limited to 0.5Tcr to prevent
torsional cracking and unacceptable distortions.7 It is acknowledged that the torsional
behavior of the open section is complex and involves many contributing stress behaviors.
Nonetheless, by placing pick points and dunnage at locations to reduce torsional demands
below the cracking torque limit derived using AASHTO recommendations, this service limit
state is addressed.
4-2 (April 2020)

PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND SPAN LAYOUT

5.1 USE OF STRAIGHT AND CURVED SECTIONS
This document focuses on the implementation of a curved, spliced U-beam bridge system.
There are situations when the radius of the baseline curve is so large it approaches a straight
line; consequentially, the curved structure in this situation can be accommodated using a
chorded (tangent) beam segment approach. The PCI Bridge Design Manual,11 chapter 12, states
that it is desirable to limit the arc-to-chord offset to 1.5 ft and that the edge of the top flange of
the beam is no closer than 0.5 ft to the slab edge. Rather than making a specific
recommendation about where the cutoff should be made, the decision of whether to use
straight or curved segments is left to the designer and governing agency to meet the overall
goals of the project in terms of costs and aesthetics.
5.2 LID SLAB AND DECK

Cast-in-place concrete lid slabs are used between webs of the precast concrete U-beams to
create a closed section and control box distortion during intermediate stressing of post-
tensioning tendons and placement of the cast-in-place concrete deck. For the prototype bridge
discussed in section 6, the total concrete deck thickness was assumed to be 10 in. over the
concrete U-beams and overhang, and 8.75 in. between the concrete U-beams, including a ½ in.
sacrificial thickness.
The designer should be aware that with an often-used 4.25 in. thick lid slab, the bottom cover
to the top layer of reinforcing will dictate the deck slab thickness at the interior of the girders
(Fig. 5.1). This figure shows that for an 8.75 in. deck and 4.25 in. lid slab with no. 6 and 5
longitudinal and transverse top reinforcing, respectively, the bottom cover to the top
longitudinal bars to the lid slab will be 5/8 in. which does not provide adequate clearance
based on the size of aggregate typical to deck slab concrete.
Figure 5.1
Typical layout of deck slab reinforcing.
5- 1 (April 2020)
The typical section shown in Fig. 5.1, including U-beam and deck, is well suited for a 44 ft wide
bridge using stay-in-place deck forms, but the optimum solution may vary significantly based
on approved materials and local preference. Overhangs of 6 ft are considered unusual and
difficult to form in many locations, and may drive the design. Thinner lid slabs have been used:
3½ to 4 in. for cast-in-place and 3 in. for precast concrete panels. These designs lessen
reinforcing bar cover for the lid slab and allow more tolerance in deck steel placement.
Additionally, smaller aggregate sizes can be used to provide more flexibility in deck steel
placement.
5.3 FALSEWORK TOWERS

Significant to the design of the falsework towers is their placement and application of factored
loads. The design engineer locates the towers to facilitate a feasible solution, including the
determination of length and weight of girders. Section lengths are selected to consider
transport weight and facilitate placement of temporary towers to avoid traffic or other
obstacles. Generally, the EOR makes the original determination, often by assuming a maximum
length and transport weight of about 100 ft and 250 kip, respectively; however, it is
recommended to confirm these assumptions with the governing agency. Additionally, splice
regions are usually located near inflection points, if possible, to minimize longitudinal flexural
demands at the closure placements. In general, splice regions are best located where it is most
advantageous either for design or for construction, and designed accordingly. Poor location of
splice regions can force significant modifications by the construction engineer prior to
construction. Further, the construction engineer may optimize falsework tower placement to
leverage the contractor’s chosen means and methods. In either case, the placement of
falsework is a fundamental objective of curved, spliced U-beam analysis and design. The
falsework tower placement needs to address structural aspects of the U-beam bridge system
and the functional points, including maintenance of traffic, delivery and laydown of the field
sections, crane placement, and interface with utilities and drainage structures. As horizontal
clearance from traffic loads is a very important design condition, maintenance of traffic should
be considered when developing the location and design of falsework towers and may require
the use of straddle bents. Limitations in placement of shoring near live traffic during
construction should be determined by the governing agency or EOR and design loadings
identified. Proximity to traffic may require unacceptable design impact loads that must be
designed for or protected against during construction. Locations where these conditions may
exist, as well as all relevant design assumptions and requirements, should be included in the
contract plans.
Towers require foundations, vertical support members, and girder support frames. The frame
supports may use sand jacks and/or shims used to accurately support the girder section at the
correct cross slope and elevation at the closure pours and diaphragms. Experience suggests
using a separate tower under each girder line for flexibility of adjustments is particularly
useful in locations with poor soils. Foundations in poor soils may need deep foundations to
reduce the footprint, minimize settlement, or to resist uplift. Towers are generally designed by
the contractor’s specialty engineer, and the EOR’s design plans usually provide horizontal and
vertical girder reactions. Wind loadings for girders on towers should be considered. The initial
5- 2 (April 2020)
build-out condition of a single girder on a tower that will eventually support two girders
should be investigated for stability.
Tolerance to build falsework towers should be anticipated. Commonly, shims and sand jacks
provide for suitable vertical tolerance of the tower legs and have been successfully employed.
Shims may be wooden, neoprene, or steel plate, and these may be used in combination and will
allow precise placement of field sections for the benefit of geometry control of the U-beam
system. Field surveys of the temporary pads at the falsework towers occur as a step in the
contractor’s geometry control plan.
5.3.1 Temporary Tower Size and Configuration

Shoring towers with a capacity of 400 kip typically use an 8 × 8 ft pattern with tower legs
commonly offset 4 ft from the centerlines of the closure placements. The offset produces a
structural system that:
• reduces the effective span of the U-beam segments;
• creates a footprint for the temporary structure to resist overturning;
• allows room for an effective lateral bracing system of the falsework towers.
During the build-out and under certain load conditions, particularly when the girders are made
continuous and the second-stage post-tensioning is applied, pairs of legs may see a reduction
of load to the point of becoming non-load-supporting. This means all load may be supported by
two or four of the falsework tower legs. An analysis program incorporating staging, tower leg
stiffness, and fuse elements can be used to model this situation. Nevertheless, determining the
type of shoring that may be used is not entirely possible during the design-bid-build process
and will vary greatly depending on the means and methods used by the contractor. Sensitivity
of the design to a variable such as the stiffness of temporary works may be desirable and, if
significant, should be clearly detailed in the contract plans. Temporary works are best when
designed to be simple structures that tolerate variable site conditions such as variable soil,
settlement, and workmanship.
The designer communicates the assumptions made in the original design, such that, they can
be confirmed and managed by the construction engineer. For example, the vertical and lateral
loads are best noted on the plans, and these confirmed during the development of the bid
price. The plans shall note the layout and geometry assumed for the falsework towers. The
EOR generally reviews a falsework submittal from the contractor to ensure that the proposed
system fits with the design parameters used for the structure.
5.3.2 Lateral Loads and Sway Bracing in Towers

Falsework towers resist vertical and lateral loads. Vertical loads will be primarily from gravity.
Lateral loads, primarily from wind and possibly other effects if advised by the governing
agency, will likely be the predominant lateral force effects. Lateral loads, which produce both
horizontal and overturning forces, are carried from their point of application to the
foundations. Lateral bracing of the falsework towers carry load through truss action and also
help to brace the column elements at the four corners of the towers.
5- 3 (April 2020)
5.4 STRONGBACKS
Most commonly, strongbacks are used to support midspan field segments in situations where
falsework towers cannot be placed due to restrictions below and should be considered during
the design phase. In practice, the use of strongbacks is complicated by the weight of the field
sections and by stress limits of the U-beam segment over pier cantilever. For both points,
additional temporary or permanent post-tensioning may need to be applied to meet stress
conditions during erection and when construction is finalized. The anchorage of the post-
tensioning and its interface with the strongback hardware must be checked to assure fit-up of
all pieces. Furthermore, the length of the free cantilever will affect the magnitude of bending
moment and stress over the pier. The cantilevers are usually kept as short as possible to limit
the amount of stress; however, the configuration of the strongbacks must consider stresses at
all the points of the U-beam system and should be incorporated into the time-dependent
analysis of the structure during design.
5.5 GROUND SPLICING

Ground splicing is used when a section of the bridge is too long and/or too heavy to fabricate
as a full length girder, or where jobsite constraints do not allow temporary falsework towers.
Splicing U-beam segments on the ground in the field is accomplished by connecting two U-
beam segments on the ground with cast-in-place closures and post-tensioning. The advantage
of ground splicing is that the weight of the pieces that are transported from the plant to the site
is reduced. The disadvantage is that they create additional complexity for the anchorage of
post-tensioning and create larger, heavier pieces for crane transport. The use of ground
splicing is a design decision that must occur early in the project and be weighed with overall
project goals and constraints. Figure 5.2 shows an example of a ground splice.
Figure 5.2
Ground splice.
Photo: AECOM.
5- 4 (April 2020)
5.6 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR SERIVE LIMIT STATE
The following sections discuss guidelines for preliminary design of precast concrete U-beam
bridges.
5.6.1 Span-to-Depth Ratio

Composite structure span-to-depth ratios of 25 to 30 for interior and end spans have been
found to be reasonable for design. Greater values may be achieved with some effort by varying
the overall section depth or by applying additional post-tensioning in the negative moment
region over the piers.
Industry experience has shown when larger span lengths are sought after, the design is
controlled by service tensile stress limit at splice locations or at the piers. As span lengths
increase, the splice locations may deviate from the optimal quarter points simply because
girders get too heavy or too long to fabricate, transport, or construct. Falsework locations,
typically constrained by the site conditions, also affect optimization. U-beam designs are
largely governed by splice locations and along with it, service level stresses in positive and
negative moment regions. Furthermore, span arrangements based on practical limitations may
be difficult to optimize.
5.6.2 Parametric Data

Figures 5.3 through 5.6 show relationships between maximum bridge span and design
parameters. The data presented in the graphs is derived from parametric analysis studies and
industry surveys.
Figure 5.3 shows the maximum span versus span-to-depth ratios of the composite U-beam
section. Figure 5.4 shows the maximum span versus the gross area of the U-beam section. Data
are shown for the gross area at midspan as well as the gross area at the piers (where thickened
bottom slabs are employed). Figure 5.5 shows maximum span versus the average weight of
post-tensioning. The weight of post-tensioning is calculated as the total weight divided by the
plan area of the entire bridge deck (lb/ft2). Finally, Fig. 5.6 shows the span versus the
maximum amount of transverse reinforcing (web shear reinforcing). The transverse
reinforcing is represented as square inches per foot per web at the controlling location in the
maximum span.
5- 5 (April 2020)
Figure 5.3
Span versus span-to-depth ratio of composite U-beam.
Figure 5.4
Span versus gross area of U-beam section.
5- 6 (April 2020)
Figure 5.5
Span versus average weight of post-tensioning.
Figure 5.6
Span versus maximum web shear reinforcing (per web).
The values for span presented here are for initial design and planning purposes. The collected
data may not capture the effect of nonuniform spans, skewed piers, optimized end-span length,
or other design considerations one is likely to encounter during a typical project. For these
reasons, the design values presented here are to be verified by the engineer during the design
process.
5- 7 (April 2020)
The maximum span versus average weight of post-tensioning graph includes both 15 and 19
strands for the continuity tendons. In some instances, it is desirable to use a particular U-beam
size for portions of the bridge with spans that are less than the maximum possible span. In this
case, economy may be achieved by reducing the number of strands in the continuity or spot
tendons. Other projects, including some listed in appendix F, showed prestressing quantities
varies roughly between 4.0 and 6.0 lb/ft2 (pretensioning and post-tensioning).
Neglecting secondary effects and assuming an approximate tendon eccentricity, the required
number of strands at either the positive or negative moment region may be approximated by
the following equations:
𝜎𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒 −𝑃𝑇 − 𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤
𝑁=
1 𝑒𝑦
𝑓𝑝𝑒 𝐴𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 +
𝐴 𝐼 (ksi or psi)
Where
N = number of post-tensioning strands
 allow = allowable tensile stress
 service− PT = service tensile stress without post-tensioning (assumed to be the same sign as
sigma allow)
A = member cross-sectional area of the precast or composite section
f pe = effective stress in post-tensioning after allowance for all losses (approximated as
0.6 f pu )
f pu = nominal ultimate stress of prestressing steel (270 ksi for low-relaxation strands)
Astrand = area of post-tensioning strand (0.217 in.2 for 0.6 in. diameter strands)
e = strand eccentricity at the section being considered (calculated assuming the
strand eccentricity is approximately 0.85 of the depth of the U-beam)
y = distance from extreme top or bottom compression fiber to the neutral axis of the
precast or composite section
I = moment of inertia of the precast or composite section
Figure 5.7 shows the distance from the extreme top and bottom compression fiber for the
precast concrete U-beam, precast concrete U-beam with lid slab, and precast concrete U-beam
with lid slab and concrete deck (see Figure 6.4 for values). The precast U-beam carries the
weight of the wet lid slab, the precast concrete U-beam with lid slab carries the weight of the
wet concrete deck, and the precast concrete U-beam with lid slab and concrete deck carries
live load and superimposed dead load. Generally using the composite values of A, I and y will
result in the most conservative approximation of the number of strands required. The actual
strand quantity will be refined as the design proceeds.
5- 8 (April 2020)
a) Precast U-beam
b) Precast U-beam with Lid Slab
c) Precast Concrete U-beam with Lid Slab and Concrete Deck

Figure 5.7
Extreme top and bottom compression fiber for precast and composite cross sections.
5.6.3 Effect of Radius

For a straight bridge, adjacent girders are the same length, and concentric gravity loads are
equally shared by the girders. As the radius of curvature of a bridge decreases, the length of the
girder on the outside of the curve becomes longer than the length of the interior girder, and the
proportion of gravity loads distributed to the outside girder increases. For this reason, the
outside girder (the longest girder) likely limits the design.
For comparison, Table 5.2 shows the approximate length of the outside girder for a typical
span of the prototype bridge developed in section 6 for the radii discussed in Section 2.1.3.
The radius of curvature has a small to moderate effect on the longitudinal design moments of a
closed U-beam section at typical levels of curvature. If the outside girder length increases a 200
ft span to an effective span of 205 ft for a 500 ft radius, the length increases by 2.5% and the
5- 9 (April 2020)
longitudinal and torsional moments increase by 5% (the length squared). The outside girder
line will always be subjected to more dead load and live load, yet the inside and outside girders
are nearly always designed similarly. Furthermore, if a single spine model is used, proper
determination of the distribution factor for live load for the outside girder line is significant.
Experience has shown that determination of the live-load distribution factor can be
conservatively determined by using the lever rule or other methods which are also not
significantly affected by curvature. Special situations may also apply. For example, if piers are
not radial but parallel, girder lengths can be roughly equal or even shorter on the outside
girder line. Furthermore, if the girder lines are shifted, the deck can produce counterbalancing
torsions for composite loads and shift deck dead loads away from the exterior girder to the
interior.
Article 4.6 of the AASHTO LRFD specifications discusses the analysis type recommended for
varying degrees of curvature. Indeed, section 4.6.1.2.3 states that a three-dimensional single
curved girder line model is sufficient if the degree of curvature within a single span is between
12 and 34 degrees. The designer should decide, in developing the model, the significance of the
degree of curvature, force effects (including torsion) to the outside girder, and application of
distribution factor. It is noted that a dual spine model accounts for the girder length effect and
live-load distribution factor within the model.
Table 5.2. Girder lengths for 200 ft curved span (22 ft 8 in. girder spacing)
Bridge Column A Column B
centerline B/A
Length of interior girder, ft Length of outside girder, ft
radius, ft
Straight (R =
200 200 1.00
infinite)
1000 198 202 1.02
750 197 203 1.03
500 195 205 1.05
5.6.4 Effect of Pier Fixity

Curved U-beam bridges are generally well suited for flyover ramp bridges, where the piers are
relatively tall and slender, and the number of bearings can be reduced due to the relative
flexibility of the substructure. To lower the cost of bearings and bearing maintenance, it may
be advantageous to examine the super- to substructure articulation by using integral piers or
fixed bearings versus expansion bearings. Generally, multiple fixed piers provide more piers to
spread any longitudinal loads such as braking, wind, earthquake, and the like, and makes the
center of motion more certain than with many sliding bearings. However, fixing bearings or
making piers integral increases forces in the substructure due to post-tensioning, time-
dependent effects, and temperature. Increased substructure and foundation costs must be
weighed against potential cost savings through the use of bearings.
Foundation costs due to the extra moments can be mitigated by using drilled shafts (if
economical), oriented such that they do not pick up axial load from longitudinal superstructure
loads. Pier fixity is achievable with shorter piers provided there is sufficient foundation
5- 10 (April 2020)
longitudinal flexibility. The foundation conditions will typically determine if frame action
between the substructure and superstructure is feasible and that the frame has sufficient
strength and flexibility to accommodate volume changes. Very stiff foundations, such as
footings founded on multiple piles can generate large forces under design movements when
combined with inflexible piers. Locally stiff piers may still be used in a rigid frame if they are
combined with taller, more flexible piers. Locating the center of rigidity of the frame to limit
movement at stiffer pier locations is a design methodology to accommodate stiff substructure
and foundation elements. Girder lines can also have independent supports. The designer may
also take advantage of flexibility from creep effects in the structural system and a reduction in
stiffness due to permissible column cracking.
The prototype bridge discussed in section 6, and shown in Fig. 6.1, was analyzed for
combinations of fixed bearings and integral piers. The piers analyzed were 20 ft tall from the
top of foundation cap to top of beam seat. Table 5.3 shows the resulting bottom of column
longitudinal moment for the controlling pier in each case. The effects of longitudinal wind and
temperature gradient are neglected for this study because they do not contribute to the
Strength I load case. Braking loads are distributed equally according to the number of fixed
bearing or integral piers. Live load is for HL-93 loading placed for maximum longitudinal
moment at the base of the column. Time-dependent effects are for long term losses. Axial loads
and transverse moment caused by the bridge curvature or eccentric loading is not shown here
but contribute to the loading demands on the piers and must be considered for design. The
base of column was assumed fixed for all cases.
Table 5.3. Longitudinal moment resultants for pier fixity study
Longitudinal moment for controlling pier, kip-ft
Fixed bearing Integral

Load
Load Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6
factor
Piers Piers
Pier Piers Pier Piers
2, 3, and 2, 3, and
3 3 and 4 3 3 and 4
4 4
DC 1.25 -2 1400 2647 378 4253 2716
EL-PT 1.00 20 -16,759 -31,616 -38 -16,607 -30,550
CR&SH 1.00 -9 935 3414 -771 1758 2600
TU 0.50 0 -9903 -19,237 0 -9823 -19,231
LL 1.75 51 -4387 -2690 9311 -4021 -2739
BR 1.75 2254 -1127 -751 1127 -564 -376
Strength I N/A 4043 -28,675 -40,534 17,929 -22,468 -39,622
Table 5.3 shows that there is significant increase in the longitudinal moment at the base of the
columns for cases with more fixed bearings or integral piers. The predominant component of
longitudinal moment is secondary effects of post-tensioning and uniform temperature.
5- 11 (April 2020)
Cases 2 and 3 have similar base moments as cases 5 and 6 (multiple fixed bearing and multiple
integral piers, respectively). Although the piers in cases 5 and 6 are subject to double
curvature, in this study the long spans of the superstructure are relatively flexible compared
with the substructure, providing relatively little restraint to the top of the column for load
cases involving superstructure axial shortening. In this study, the moment at the top of the
column for case 6 uniform temperature loading is approximately 8000 kip-ft, or approximately
40% of the base moment.
In contrast, the results of cases 1 and 4 (one fixed bearings or integral pier) differ. The
predominant difference is due to compatibility between the superstructure and substructure
for live loading for the case with integral piers. In the fixed bearing case, superstructure
rotations are accommodated through bearing rotation, and the rotations do not result in
significant column moment.
For the integral pier case, the total axial force in the superstructure is higher, necessitating
additional post-tensioning to control stresses in the superstructure. The effect in this study
likely results in 2 to 3 additional strands at the pier location. The effect of axial loads and
differential stiffness between the substructure and superstructure is lessened for taller, more
flexible piers. It is clear from the study that design related to fixed and integral scenarios
points to the need for an articulation study early in the design process.
5- 12 (April 2020)
MODELING AND ANALYSIS

6.1 SELECTION OF PROTOTYPE BRIDGE
This section uses a prototypical example to describe representative modeling and analysis
techniques used with curved spliced precast concrete U-beam bridges. The prototype was
chosen to be representative of typical curved bridge applications and was selected to be a 700
ft long unit comprising four spans with lengths 150, 200, 200, and 150 ft, respectively. The
prototype bridge is on a curved alignment with a radius of 750 ft about the centerline of the
deck. The curvature was such that the right U-beam is longer than the left U-beam (that is, the
beams curve left as looking at the stations ahead).
The prototype bridge is 45 ft 1 in. wide with two 1 ft 6½ in. barriers, a 12 ft inside shoulder,
two 12 ft lanes, and a 6 ft outside shoulder. Two precast concrete U-beams (PCI Type U84-4)
spaced 11 ft 4 in. from the centerline of the bridge support the superstructure. An optimized
arrangement puts the U-beam centerlines approximately 22 ft apart with roughly 12 ft
between the tips of the flanges and 6 ft cantilever overhangs. To conform to the AASHTO LRFD
specifications,2 the slab depth is 10 in. at the cantilever and interior of the beams and 8.75 in.
between beams. All deck thicknesses propose the use of ½ in. sacrificial thickness.
Additionally, the 10 in. thickness interior to the beams is set to provide cover under the top
layer of reinforcing bar of greater than ½ in., as discussed in section 5.2.
The span length divided by the depth of composite U-beam for the interior span is 25.5, a value
consistent with the partial summary of recent U-beam designs discussed in chapter 2.
Depending on the span arrangement and other design factors, including bridge width and
beam spacing, a deeper or shallower U-beam section may be appropriate.
Figure 6.1 shows the elevation and cross section of the prototype bridge, and further attributes
are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs and expanded on in later sections.
The beginning of the bridge was assumed to be supported by an end bent with an idealized
roller support. The end of the bridge was assumed to be supported by an expansion pier with
an idealized roller support, showing the possibility of adjacent units. The first and last interior
piers were assumed to be on expansion bearings idealized as roller support, and the middle
interior pier were assumed to support the superstructure on fixed bearings idealized as pins.
Although Fig. 6.1 shows the bridge supported on pile foundations, the foundations were not
analyzed, and with the pier height and corresponding flexibility the superstructure design and
layout are not significantly affected by the choice of foundation. There may be conditions
where foundation type will be significant, such as with spread footings and with unbalances
during the staged construction. Foundation systems should always be addressed in
consultation with geotechnical professionals.
Depending on the complexity of the structural and project requirements, the bridge could be
modeled as one of the following:
• three-dimensional beam line model
• multiple beam line model with transverse beam grillage
6-1 (April 2020)

• multiple beam line model with transverse finite element deck elements
• finite element U-beam and deck
The prototype bridge was modeled as a three-dimensional grillage model using longitudinal
beam elements to represent the U-beams and transverse beam elements to represent the
concrete deck because it represents a good balance between modeling complexity and
sophistication. The choice of modeling technique is left to the designer based on the
requirements of the project. See chapter 5 for further discussion on the effect of radius and
choice of modeling techniques. Finite element modeling is likely reserved for investigating
details rather than global longitudinal effects. In any case, the model chosen must account for
the staged construction during build-out, time-dependent effects of the structure, losses in
post-tensioning, and potentially other items discussed in this chapter.
6.2 MATERIALS
The U-beams of the prototype bridge were assumed to have a 28-day concrete compressive
strength of 8.5 ksi. The cast-in-place concrete portions of the U-beams (closure placements,
diaphragms, blisters, haunched bottom slab) were assumed to have a 28-day compressive
strength of 6.5 ksi. The bridge deck and lid slab were assumed to have a compressive strength
of 4.5 ksi. Creep and shrinkage properties were according to CEB/FIP.12 High-slump concrete
was assumed for better placement in the precast concrete U-beam forms.
Reinforcing steel was assumed to be ASTM A615, Grade 60. Prestressing strand was assumed
to be 0.6 in. diameter ASTM A416 Grade 270 for low-relaxation strands, and prestressing bars
were assumed to be ASTM A722 Grade 150. Tendons and bars for the prototype bridge were
assumed to be grouted and bonded.
Appendix A provides a more complete description of the material properties.
6.3 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND AGE AT CONSTRUCTION

Figure 6.2 shows the assumed construction sequence for the prototype bridge.
6-2 (April 2020)

Prototype bridge elevation and typical section.

Figure 6.1
6-3 (April 2020)

Stage 1Erect substructure and falsework towers.
6-4
Stage 2: Erect U-beams (bottom tendons not shown).
Stage 3: Cast bottom flange thickening, closures, intermediate diaphragms, and end diaphragms.
(April 2020)
Figure 6.2
Assumed construction sequence
Stage 4: Stress transverse post-tensioning in diaphragms (if used).
6-5
Stage 5: Cast lid slab.
Stage 6: Stress continuity and top tendons.
Figure 6.2 (continued)
(April 2020)
Assumed construction sequence.
6-6
Stage 7: Remove temporary supports and cast deck.
Stage 8: Finish works.
Figure 6.2 (continued)
(April 2020)
Assumed construction sequence.
To capture the effects of creep and shrinkage and locked-in forces, the prototype bridge was
modeled using a time-dependent analysis that incorporated the construction sequence,
including the age of the bridge components at the time of erection. The substructure elements
were assumed to be three months old when the beams were set. Table 6.1 provides a detailed
description of the construction stages shown in Fig. 6.2.
Table 6.1. Construction sequence

Total
Stage Description of work
days
a Construct substructure
b Erect falsework to support girder segments
c Cast beams at casting yard, including variable bottom slab 0
d Install bracing, if needed 6
1
e Perform stress checks for lifting; lift beams out of forms 6
f Cast girder ends 6
g Stress and grout bottom flange post-tensioning 9
h Perform stress checks for transport; transport beams to site 33
a Lift bearings to substructure

b Mobilize cranes to erect girders
2 c Transport girders to site
d Erect beam segments on temporary supports per sequence 33
e Set and grout permanent bearings 34
a Cast all closures 40

3 b Cast interior diaphragms at integral piers and bearing piers 40
c Cast first-stage diaphragms at expansion piers 40
4 a Stress transverse post-tensioning in diaphragms if applicable 45
a Place stay-in-place forms 47

5
b Cast lid slab 49
a Stress continuity tendons 56
b Stress top flange tendons 56

6
c Grout all tendons 57
d Cast second-stage diaphragms at expansion piers 57
a Remove all temporary supports 57

7 b Install deck overhang formwork 58
c Cast deck per placement sequence (three days per placement) 72
a Finish deck details 76

8 b Cast barriers 80
c Open to traffic 120
6-7 (April 2020)

Variations in the construction sequence are possible. For example, the top flange or one
continuity post-tensioning tendon may be installed in the U-beam before casting the lid slab to
control stresses in the U-beam during casting of the lid slab. Installing post-tensioning after the
lid slab is cast has the benefit of providing precompression to the lid slab, but must be weighed
against the disadvantage of potentially providing less precompression to the U-beam, and the
negating effects of secondary forces due to fixed piers.
6.4 SPLICE LOCATIONS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Splices were provided between each precast concrete U-beam segment. For the prototype
bridge, each segment was assumed to be supported on permanent piers or temporary support
towers, with splices being made after the beams were erected. Alternatively, to reduce the
number of temporary towers, splices between segments could be made on the ground, and
longer segments could be lifted onto permanent piers or temporary supports. Ground splicing
would change the design from what is shown and is not simply a change of sequence and
means and methods. One effect of ground splicing is that additional bottom flange post-
tensioning is generally required.
The precast concrete U-beam segments were assumed to be supported on compression-only
pin supports when they were initially erected. The permanent bearings were assumed to be
grouted (activated and replacing the temporary supports) before casting the closure
placements (stage 2e from Table 6.1).
The superstructure was supported on pinned bearings at pier 3. At end bent 1, pier 2, pier 4,
and expansion pier 5, the superstructure was supported on guided bearings. One bearing
supported each precast concrete U-beam at each end bent or pier. All permanent bearings at
expansion piers were released in the longitudinal direction, while the permanent bearings at
expansion piers supporting the right precast concrete U-beam were fixed in the transverse
direction.
The permanent piers and temporary towers were assumed to be fixed and pinned at the
ground elevation, respectively. End bent 1 was modeled as a rigid point support directly below
the temporary and permanent bearings.
6.5 SECTION PROPERTIES

The prototype bridge was modeled using two spines, with beam elements representing each
composite U-beam section. Section properties were calculated according to the member
proportions, including changes in section along the length of the bridge such as the bottom
flange thickening near the interior piers. Section properties were recalculated automatically by
the program per user instruction at relevant stages of the construction sequence to account for
the build-out.
Section properties for the spine elements were calculated for the following conditions:
• precast concrete U-beam
• precast concrete U-beam with lid slab
• precast concrete U-beam with lid slab and concrete deck
6-8 (April 2020)

• precast concrete U-beam with lid slab and concrete deck assuming deck has cracked
The analysis intent of the last condition in the list is to modify the flexural stiffness to
redistribute negative moments to the positive moment regions once the section has cracked.
Internally the moment redistribution caused by cracking is considered in the sectional design.
For the prototype bridge, service stresses were enough to crack the deck, and cracked section
properties were used. The section at the piers was considered cracked when the deck stress
exceeded the modulus of rupture fr of 0.237 × f’c0.5 (ksi). The extent of cracking was
approximately 5 ft on each side of the pier centerline.
The spine elements were connected transversely with slab elements representing the stiffness
of the concrete deck by rigid links from the center of gravity of the spine to the center of
gravity of the slabs. For the prototype structure, the slabs were beam elements with section
properties based on the deck thickness and node and member spacing. Figure 6.3 shows a
graphic of one model used for the prototype structure.
Figure 6.3
Analysis model for prototype bridge.
The gross-section properties of the permanent piers were determined according to the
proportions of the piers, which were assumed to be rectangular for the prototype bridge
analysis. Cracking of the piers was not considered for the prototype analysis.
Figure 6.4 shows the section properties used for the prototype bridge. Thickened bottom
flange properties are not shown but were also developed and used for the prototype bridge.
Torsional moment of inertia is shown as it is required for the stiffness analysis. The warping
constant, required to calculate torsional stresses due to loads applied away from the shear
center, is not shown. See chapter 7 for a discussion on torsion of U-beam segments.
6-9 (April 2020)

Cross section Section property
Precast concrete U-beam
Neutral axis = 37.6 in. (from bottom)

Area = 2428 in.2
Moment of inertia = 1,936,000 in.4
Torsion moment of inertia = 83,180 in.4
Creep-exposed perimeter = 507.7 in.
Precast concrete U-beam with lid slab

Area = 2828 in.2
Torsion moment of inertia = 3,904,000 in.4
Precast concrete U-beam with lid slab and concrete deck

Area = 4423 in.2
Precast concrete U-beam with lid slab and concrete deck

assuming deck has cracked

Area = 3301 in.2
Figure 6.4
Section properties.
6 - 10 (April 2020)
6.6 TEMPORARY WORKS
Section 5.3 discusses the use and design of temporary towers. In the prototype example,
temporary towers were used to support the precast concrete U-beam segments before making
closure and stressing post-tensioning continuity tendons. Because the statical system of the U-
beams changed from simple supports in the initial stages to continuous supports at the later
stages, the stiffness of the temporary towers affected the distribution of forces in the
superstructure, and the stiffness of the temporary towers was included in the time-dependent
analysis. Settlement of the temporary towers should be addressed when the closure
placements are made and bearings over the piers are engaged, and before significant
longitudinal post-tensioning is applied. Because this window of time is generally not long, and
because the change in load is small, settlement is generally not a significant concern, provided
attention is given the bearing pressures of the founding materials.
Parametric studies will help to determine if shoring stiffness is a significant design condition
for stresses or deflections and build-ups. If so, the proper measures to accommodate the
chosen shoring stiffness should be included in the contract plans, and the specialty engineer
will also need to consider these in the design of temporary works.
The stiffness of the temporary towers was approximated using spring supports with stiffness
equal to the axial stiffness of typical temporary falsework.
Additionally, post-tensioning operations and casting the lid slab introduced uplift at some
bearings on the temporary towers. For this reason, compression-only supports were used for
the bearings on the temporary towers. The compression-only springs tracked the total force in
the bearing elements through the construction stages and became inactive when the sum of
forces in the bearings at a particular construction stage became negative. In the prototype
example, the support towers did not lift off simultaneously; thus, compression-only springs
become a convenient way to address step-wise liftoffs without adding more stages.
6.7 DISTRIBUTION FACTOR

The time-dependent model for the prototype structure was a full three-dimensional structural
model built using spine elements for the U-beams and slab elements representing the concrete
deck. Member self-weight was calculated directly in the model. Additional dead loads were
applied at locations representative of the physical structure and were distributed according to
the analysis.
Calculated live-load distribution factors were not used for this analysis. Rather, live-load lanes
were defined along the length of the bridge at the spine elements and slab elements
representing the concrete deck. The lanes were defined with offsets to the spine elements to
account for lateral distribution of the loaded lanes. The slab elements distributed the live
loading to the spine elements. Several design lanes were defined to capture the envelope of
live-loading force resultants.
Although the AASHTO LRFD specifications indicate horizontal curvature may be neglected if
certain geometric conditions are met, experience shows that neglecting curvature may slightly
to moderately underestimate shear and flexure design forces for the outside girder. In NCHRP
Report 620, Development of Design Specifications and Commentary for Horizontally Curved
6 - 11 (April 2020)
Concrete Box-Girder Bridges,13 rigorous parametric studies were performed that led to the
following span L over radius R ratio recommendations when:
• L/R < 0.2, designed as straight and ignore torsions;
• 0.2 < L/R < 0.8, analyzed as a curved single-spine girder; and,
• L/R > 0.8, analyzed using the finite element method or more sophisticated analysis.
Using these parameters for the prototype example with R = 750 and L = 200, L/R = 0.267,
which is just above the threshold where curvature is ignored which is consistent with the
AASHTO LRFD specifications. To provide an example that can be used for a moderate
curvature, the prototype analysis uses dual longitudinal spine elements and transverse slab
elements. The design professional may choose a more simplified analysis, using a single spine,
and neglecting curvature if indicated by layout parameters.
The ratio of midspan moment determined using dual curved longitudinal spine elements and
transverse slab elements and the lever rule applied to a straight, single-spine model was 7006
kip-ft (analysis)/8720 kip-ft (lever rule) = 0.80.
6.8 PIER FIXITY

As discussed in section 5.6.3, the number of fixed piers affected the longitudinal force imparted
on the substructure. It was desirable to distribute longitudinal forces due to longitudinal wind
and braking force to as many fixed piers as possible. An efficient design introduces an optimum
number of fixed piers that considers substructure forces due to temperature, creep and
shrinkage, and post-tensioning, as well as the distribution of longitudinal forces from wind,
braking, and friction.
For the prototype bridge, one fixed pier (pier 3) was selected. The fixed pier was chosen to
support the superstructure on bearings restrained against longitudinal movement, but pier
fixity could also be established using integral piers.
6.9 THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELING – FLEXURE, SHEAR, AND TORSION

The previously discussed time-dependent model discussed was analyzed using a robust
platform that accommodated relevant construction stages and loading conditions. Selected
results are discussed in this section.
Figure 6.5 plots service flexure in the right U-beam due to dead loads, primary and secondary
post-tensioning, and the effects of creep and shrinkage at time equals infinity. The summation
of these loads and effects are also plotted.
6 - 12 (April 2020)
Figure 6.5
Flexure in right U-beam from permanent loads.
Based on the results of Fig. 6.5, the post-tensioning moment counteracts the dead load
moments. While the effects of creep and shrinkage are relatively small compared with dead
loads, they add to the dead load moment and must be considered in the design.
Figures 6.6 through 6.8 show flexure, shear, and torsion in the right U-beam due to the
permanent loads in Fig. 6.5 and live loads. Note that results due to temperature loadings not
plotted because they are relatively small for the prototype bridge, but are dependent on the
fixity of the structure and may be larger for differing bridge layouts. For example, temperature
loads can be a concern with longer spans and shorter (more fixed) piers.
6 - 13 (April 2020)
Figure 6.6
Flexure in right girder.
Figure 6.7
Shear in right girder.
6 - 14 (April 2020)
Figure 6.8
Torsion in right girder.
Section 7.2 discusses additional results of the model.
6.10 PRINCIPAL WEB STRESS

Principal web stresses are the combination of axial and shear stress in the web. Excessive
principal web tension can lead to cracking of the web under service conditions. Principal web
stresses were computed for the prototype bridge using classical beam theory and the
principles of Mohr’s circle. Many analysis programs are capable of computing principal web
stresses directly or reporting concurrent axial and shear stresses, which was done for this
analysis.
Figure 6.9 shows the principal web stresses for the right U-beam due to dead loads, post-
tensioning, creep and shrinkage, and live loadings.
It is noted that the eighth edition AASHTO LRFD specifications do not prescriptively require
principal web stresses to be checked for U-beam bridges. However, per Article 5.12.5 and
other articles in the AASHTO LRFD specifications, principal web stresses may be considered at
the designer’s discretion. See Section 7.3.2 and Appendix A for more discussion about principal
web stress.
6 - 15 (April 2020)
6.11 TRANSVERSE DECK SLAB
The transverse deck slab functions as the roadway surface. It transfers live loading
transversely to the longitudinal U-beams and is part of the longitudinal and transverse
structural systems. For the longitudinal system, beam elements were used to model the lateral
transfer of live loading between the U-beams (Fig. 6.10). The beam element thickness was the
same as the deck thickness, and the width of the beam elements was based on the tributary
spacing between adjacent nodes. Beam elements were defined between the spine elements
with member eccentricities representing the edge of the U-beam top flanges.
Figure 6.9
Principal web stress.
6 - 16 (April 2020)
Figure 6.10
Global longitudinal modeling of transverse section.
The design of the conventionally reinforced deck slab and contribution of web bending due to
loading of the transverse deck cross section may be captured through traditional influence
surfaces or by modern modeling techniques, such as finite element analysis. Section 7.2
discusses this in more detail. The prototype example focuses on the longitudinal U-beam
design.
6.12 GEOMETRY CONTOL PROCEDURES

As discussed in section 3.3.2, the erection plan and geometry control procedures integrate the
design plans, the contractor means and methods, and the erection engineering analysis to
provide horizontal and vertical controls for bridge elements through particular stages of
construction. The geometry control procedures are submitted by the contractor before
construction as part of the erection plan. At particular stages of construction, the locations of
bridge elements are checked against the predicted locations defined in the geometry control
procedures.
Predicted camber and build-up based on the erection engineering analysis are also provided in
the geometry control procedures.
6.12.1 Camber Requirements

Predictions of vertical deflection of the beam due to permanent loads, including dead,
superimposed, and post-tensioning including long-term effects, are used to calculate the
cambered position of the beam such that the beam follows the theoretical profile once these
deformations take place. For prestressed girders, in contrast to U-beams, it is desirable to
provide adequate prestressing such that the initial camber of the beam field section at release,
including the effect of the dead load of the beam, lifts the beam off the precast concrete form.
Some agencies require at least ½ in. initial midspan camber for prestressed beams.
6 - 17 (April 2020)
Because the amount of prestressing or post-tensioning in the casting bed is small for precast
concrete U-beams relative to precast concrete I-beams, the requirement for initial camber is
less applicable. Instead, adequate mild, or preferably prestressing, reinforcing is provided to
limit stresses in the precast concrete U-beam during handling, transport, and lifting. Section
7.1 discusses handling, transport, and lifting in more detail.
Compared with precast concrete I-beams, camber growth in precast concrete U-beams is
relatively small, typically ½ in. or less, due to the relatively small amount of initial prestressing
and short time duration between casting and erecting the beams and ultimately the closure of
the system. Deflections can be made more predictable by balancing prestress deflection
against deadload deflection. This can be especially useful for unbalanced span ratios.
Pretensioning of members can occur in straight parts of bridges with both straight and curved
alignments. Pretensioning is usually much less expensive than post-tensioning, especially if
fewer tendons can be used.
6.12.2 Rotation of U-Beam Section

Cast-in-place closure placements at splices between adjacent U-beam segments provide
structural continuity and accommodate geometric differences caused by rotation of the U-
beam segments.
Precast concrete U-beams can be cast straight or with a curve to accommodate roadways with
a curved alignment. For economy of casting beds, it is desirable to cast as many U-beams as
possible with the same radius. For this reason, U-beams on a curved alignment are not
concentric with the bridge radius, and the ends of adjacent U-beam segments at a splice are not
parallel. Regarding the radius, the theoretical transverse sweep of the cross sections less the
average radius, are typically less than half of the PCI casting tolerance for a 100 ft girder
length. Similarly, the difference between ends of adjacent girders is generally so small as to be
nearly imperceptible when it is due solely to casting girders on an average radius. The same is
true for U-beam segments placed to accommodate a vertical curve profile.
Roadway superelevation on a bridge is normally accommodated by placing U-beams in a
rotated position. In areas of the bridge with constant superelevation, the U-beam top flanges
are parallel to the top of the concrete deck; however, in areas of superelevation transition, U-
beams are placed at a rotation angle that differs from the bridge superelevation (Fig. 6.11). The
average of the bridge superelevation along the length of the U-beam segment is a convenient
rotation angle for setting the U-beam. Future advancements of forming systems will likely
accommodate both camber and twist of the segments, though significant setup costs may limit
variation of the camber and twist to only a few segments.
For practical considerations, the out-of-plane difference between adjacent U-beam ends should
target approximately 1 in. maximum for a typical 2 or 3 ft closure placement. Limitation of the
out-of-plane difference across splices cannot always be controlled or specified. Severe
transitions on cross fall in short distances may require offsets greater than 1 in. While 1 in. is a
desirable limit, the bridge geometry may not allow it, and the designer should consider
whether additional measures to smooth the transition, such as larger closure placements,
adjusting the post-tensioning profiles, or reinforcing for out-of-plane effects, are necessary.
6 - 18 (April 2020)
6.12.3 Build-Up Calculation and Deck Screeding
The build-up, sometimes referred to as the haunch, makes up the difference between the
bottom of the concrete deck (based on the roadway finish grade elevations) and the top of the
precast concrete U-beams. The build-up is calculated for construction phases based on
predicted deflections of the U-beams during the build-out, varies along the length of the U-
beams, and is a function of the following:
• prescribed minimum build-up
• prescribed minimum difference in build-up between adjacent segments
• finish grade elevations
• concrete deck thickness
• U-beam segment camber due to prestressing and self-weight
• deflection of the U-beam during the build-out (may be the same or different for each
web)
• rotation of the U-beams to accommodate bridge superelevation
• stiffness of temporary tower supports
Figure 6.11 shows an exaggerated view of the build-up of a representative U-beam. A case with
upward beam camber is shown (build-up is less at midspan than at the ends), but, as discussed
in section 6.12.1, the beam camber could be such that the build-up is greater at midspan than
at the ends. For the reasons discussed in section 6.12.2, build-up is specified for both the left
and right webs of the U-beam. The deck screed and formwork for the concrete deck are set
based on the calculated build-up. A minimum build-up of 1 in. is recommended, and
corresponds to the build-up at the left web at the beam centerline in Fig. 6.11.
Table 6.2 is a sample table that may be used for drawing production. The table shown is for the
right web of the right U-beam. Similar tables are required for each web. Appendix D provides a
sample calculation for build-up of a select location on the prototype bridge.
6 - 19 (April 2020)
Figure 6.11
U-beam build-up (exaggerated view).
The information presented in Table 6.2 will allow the contractor to calculate the following key
elevations during construction:
• elevation of lid slabs
• final deck elevations for deck casting
6 - 20 (April 2020)
Table 6.2. Example partial U-beam build-up and deflection data
6 - 21 (April 2020)
The “analysis points” column in Table 6.2 is the length along the top flange at the midpoint of
the top flange. The total deflection at each construction stage is the deflection at the end of
each stage after all loads were applied and time-dependent effects occurred.
The theoretical deflections, elevations, and build-ups from the design phase were based on an
assumed construction sequence. In the construction phase, theoretical deflections, elevations,
and build-ups should be verified by the contractor and the erection engineer based on the
actual construction sequence, including variations from the timeline assumed in design. Field
survey and dry-run measurements are required by the contractor to confirm screed elevations
before casting the concrete deck.
Deflections of spliced girders during construction are significantly less than conventional
simple span prestressed girders. The inherent stiffness from continuity and the lower amounts
of required prestressing force, combined with the load-balancing effect of the continuity post-
tensioning, greatly reduce movements of the structure during construction and over time.
Appropriate setting of deck grades is much less critical than with long-span, conventional
precast concrete girder bridges.
Because actual construction schedules usually vary from what is assumed in design, the
specifications typically require the specialty engineer to recalculate these values. Therefore,
presentation of build-ups in the design plans for design-bid-build contract delivery may be
redundant and their inclusion is a decision made by the governing agency.
6 - 22 (April 2020)
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
This section discusses critical items for the design of U beams during temporary phases of
construction and in the permanent condition. This section builds on the analysis discussion of
the previous chapter and is supplemented by the sample design criteria and calculations in
appendices A and D.
7.1 PLANT HANDLING, TRANSPORT, AND LIFTING OUT OF FORMS

A critical aspect of precast concrete U beams relative to lifting out of forms and transport
restrictions is segment weight and length. It is advantageous to omit additional dead loads
such as diaphragms, slab thickening, and lid slabs in the casting yard to reduce the lifting and
transport weight of the U-beam segments. Instead, additional dead loads are cast-in-place after
the segments are erected at the site. An exception, which requires more consideration, is
bottom slab thickening where the design strength of concrete may be critical and more
predictable if accomplished in the casting yard. U-beam segments must be analyzed for the
casting and construction sequence, checking stresses and providing necessary details in the
plans.
For the prototype example, beam segment lengths were limited to a U-beam segment weight of
approximately 250 kip (about 100 ft), which is a practical weight for most regions and road
conditions. U-beam segments up to approximately 325 kip have been successfully used in
regions with flat terrain and accessible roadways with few obstructions.
Precast concrete U beams are cast in special forms that are adjustable for varying radii and
beam depths. With the exception of the Satus Creek Bridge in Washington state, pretensioning
of curved U beams is generally not used.14 Instead, prestressing force in curved U beams is
introduced by post-tensioning. Post-tensioning that is anchored within the precast concrete U
beam is stressed and grouted in the casting yard before transport to the site.
As noted in section 6.12.1, it may be desirable to provide precompression for precast concrete
U beams; however, in certain cases with shorter segment lengths, the crack width checks given
in the AASHTO LRFD specifications2 are compliant for lifting and transport as a reinforced
member. U beams have significant capacity as reinforced concrete members, which can be
successfully used during construction. The preference for a minimum amount of compression
or limiting crack width during plant handling, U-beam transport, and the lifting of segments at
the jobsite may be advised by the governing agency or follow AASHTO guidelines.
To account for dynamic effects, a specialized load case for temporary stresses is checked
during transport. Loads calculated during transport include effective prestress, permanent
loads, and dynamic load allowance (impact) during transport. See section 2, appendix A, and
McGormley and Lindenberg (2016)6 for discussions on dynamic load allowance during
transport.
Sections 7.1.1 through 7.1.3 discuss details necessary for handling, transport, and lifting more
extensively.
7- 1 (April 2020)
7.1.1 Internal Bracing
The curvature of a U-beam segment results in torsional moments along the length of the
segment. Before casting the lid slab, torsion moments on the open section are resisted by a
combination of St. Venant and warping torsion. The torsional stiffness is reduced by cracking
of the concrete. If torsional stresses in the open section exceed the code limits, control of
torsional stresses may accomplished by the early addition of the lid slab, temporary internal
bracing, and/or the introduction of prestressing force. Further, the introduction of thin web
cross sections may require bracing or casting of a lid slab before transport, depending on the
cross section used.
The addition of the lid slab increases the torsional stiffness of the segment by as much as 50
times or more, depending on the precast concrete section used (Fig. 6.4). The actual build-up
of torsional stresses is incremental. The open section is subjected to torsional stresses due to
the self-weight of the U-beam. The open section also supports the weight of the lid slab. The
closed section created by the lid slab and U-beam resists additional incremental loads. The
connection between the lid slab and U-beam must be designed and detailed to be sufficiently
strong to resist the incremental torsional stresses that occur after the connection is
established. Alternatively, the engineer may choose to design and detail a more robust
connection that does not account for the incremental build-up of torsional stresses. In all
projects constructed to date, the lid slab to U-beam connections have performed well.
Internal bracing or concrete diaphragms may be required during some stages of construction
to control deformations and stresses of an open web box system. Internal bracing spanning
between the top flanges has been previously used, including:
• horizontal struts at lifting points only, discussed in more detail in section 7.1.3
• horizontal ties at regular intervals along the segment to limit web deflections when
setting overhang brackets and casting the deck
• horizontal struts at regular intervals along the segment with diagonal bracing between
horizontals to create a torsional “truss”
U-beam cross sections are generally sufficiently robust that internal bracing outside lifting
points does not contribute greatly to load capacity. Conversely, this bracing will increase costs
and create interferences and difficulties during construction. The early placement of the lid
slab generally eliminates the need for internal bracing for the girders that are described.
Horizontal struts along the length of the girder do not affect torsional stresses unless they are
connected by diagonals to create a truss, similar to steel tubs to control torsions. Lid slabs are
more desirable as they can be incorporated into the permanent structure.
Stresses due to torsional moments may also be controlled by introducing prestressing force
before casting the lid slab. Based on the recommendations of the AASHTO LRFD specifications
Eq. 5.8.2.1-3, consider torsional effects when the applied torsion is greater than 0.25 times the
torsion cracking moment Tcr, including the strength reduction factor. From AASHTO LRFD
specifications Eq. 5.8.2.1-4, the torsional cracking moment is defined as
7- 2 (April 2020)
2
Acp f pc
Tcr = 0.125 f 'c 1+ (kip-in.)
pc 0.125 f ' c
Where
f 'c = compressive strength of concrete for use in design (ksi)
Acp = total area enclosed by outside perimeter of concrete cross section (in.2)
pc = total length of outside perimeter of concrete cross section (in.)

f pc = compressive stress in concrete after prestress losses have occurred at the centroid
of the cross section resisting transient loads (ksi)
The introduction of compressive stress due to prestress fpc increases the torsional cracking
moment.
7.1.2 Overturning
During plant handling and transport, the segments must be supported in such a way that the
segments are prevented from rotating due to the torsional moment about the longitudinal axis
of the segment. Restraint of the segment may be accomplished by a restraint system or by
offsetting lifting and support points. Rotation of the girder must also be prevented once the
segments are lifted onto the temporary falsework or permanent piers.
Overturning is not typically an issue and is generally controlled with proper handing and
bunking rather than external bracing, which would only be necessary in unusual situations.
7.1.3 Lifting
U-beam segments are generally lifted using strand lift loops or high-strength bars with
sufficient embedment to develop the required strength. Lifting points can be located near the
ends of the segment or away from the ends to reduce the positive moment during lifting. . For
example, a significant reduction in torsional demand is realized by positioning the temporary
supports inboard by 10% of the segment length (Fig. 7.1). Shifting the lifting points inboard
will require stress checks for negative moment at the cantilever supports. Twenty percent of
the segment length produces approximately equal positive and negative moments; however,
the section moduli at the top and bottom of the U- beams are not equal, so a support point that
equalizes stresses and not moments may be advisable. The optimum location of lifting points
varies and is best determined based on experience and calculation.
Inboard lifting points should be evaluated for erection considerations as they require larger
crane radii to swing girders into position. Lifting points at the ends of the girder are sometimes
necessary to facilitate erection.
7- 3 (April 2020)
Figure 7.1
Torsional analysis and demand.
For a given U-beam cross section, the introduction of prestressing force in the casting yard
(see section 7.1.1) in combination with careful placement of supports during lifting and
transport may eliminate the need for regular horizontal struts or diagonal bracing to control
torsional distortion during lifting and transport.
As noted in section 7.1.2, care must be taken to prevent the U-beam segment from rotating
when lifting in the plant or during girder placement. This is accomplished by offsetting the
center of action of the spreader bar and U-beam segment. Figure 7.2 shows a typical spreader
bar and lifting hook arrangement.
Care must be used to consider the dynamic effect discussed in section 2.2.3 when lifting,
handling, and transporting segments.
Figure 7.2
Spreader bar and lifting hooks.
Figure 7.3 shows analyses that were performed to determine the behavior of the U-beam
segments during lifting, transporting, and placing on temporary falsework with the lid slab
7- 4 (April 2020)
casting operation. For lifting and transporting, the midspan moment is significantly less than
for the case when the beam is placed on falsework. Table 7.1 shows a comparison of midspan
stresses made for four 100 ft long beams, that is, straight and with radii of 500, 750, and 1000
ft. This comparison shows that for longitudinal stresses, the behavior of the four beams is
similar. In general, the curvature of the beams can be ignored for this stress check.
Figure 7.3
Lifting, transport, and falsework evaluations.
7- 5 (April 2020)
Table 7.1. Midspan stresses for beams for lifting and transport
Top stress, psi Bottom stress, psi
Beam radius
Left Right Left Right
Straight (R = infinity) -166 -166 139 136
1000 ft -172 -161 126 144
750 ft -174 -158 126 151
500 ft -177 -154 120 151
Classical Beam -173 140
Theory
Additional evaluations were made for beams supported at their ends and with lid slab loads
applied. Figure 7.4 shows transverse stress conditions that exist in the bottom slab and webs
for an 84 in. deep × 100 ft long × 500 ft radius U-beam. Applying the beam dead weight and lid
slab load of 0.66 kip/ft, the longitudinal moment demand at mid-span is estimated to be 3700
kipft, and the torque demand is estimated to be 240 kipft at the beam ends. Finite element
results summarized in Table 7.2 show longitudinal stresses at midspan at the corners of the
top and bottom flanges differing by approximately 200 psi from straight-beam (Mc/I) theory
and 200 to 350 psi from an equivalent finite element analysis on a straight beam. Transverse
stresses in the top of the bottom slab are estimated by the finite element analysis to be 145 psi
maximum. These relative comparisons between finite element results and classical beam
theory (using Mc/I) are performed for self-weight and do not include the effect of prestressing
or impact for transport. Note that tension is positive in Tables 7.1 and 7.2.
Table 7.2. Midspan stresses for beams on falsework

Top stress, psi Bottom stress, psi
Beam radius
Lt-1 Lt-2 Rt-1 Rt-2 Left Right
Straight (R = infinity) -1151 -1174 -1174 -1152 936 933
500 ft -1237 -835 -1526 -1079 720 1145
Classical Beam
--1161 940
Theory
7- 6 (April 2020)
Figure 7.4
Deformations and stress on U-beam segment.
Understanding that systems constructed with smaller radii and longer spans could increase
the effects of out-of-plane behaviors, it is recommend the cut-off for more rigorous analysis be
established at L/R = 0.2 as recommended by NCHRP Report 620 [7-1].13 This is implemented
in the AASHTO LRFD specifications, Article 4.6.1.2.4c. Hence, the first step of analysis
refinement after the cut-off is a grillage model, which is presented for the prototype beam in
chapter 6. This ratio is applicable for the bridges on falsework or in their permanent
configuration.
7.2 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE

The design of a precast concrete U-beam bridge is very similar to conventional cast-in-place
concrete box girder design. In general, sectional design is based on the requirements of the
AASHTO LRFD specifications, as discussed in the following sections.
7- 7 (April 2020)
The design checks discussed in general in the following sections and presented in more detail
in appendix D are based on the results of the three-dimensional modeling discussed in section
6.9.
7.2.1 Longitudinal Reinforcing Check

The design of longitudinal reinforcing balances the factored external moment against the
internal moment generated between the tension reinforcing and compression block generated
in the concrete section. Depending on the stage of construction and the location of the design
check, the compression block may be on the composite cross section or on the precast concrete
U-beam alone. A sample ultimate longitudinal reinforcing, or ultimate flexure, check is
included in appendix D following the principles of the AASHTO LRFD specifications.
Continuous tendons placed in the webs of the precast concrete U-beams in varying profiles
along the length of the bridge provide the primary load-resisting reinforcement. Top tendons
may be placed in the flanges of the U-beams in negative moment regions to supplement the
available load-resisting reinforcement. Similarly, bottom tendons installed in each segment
before transport add to the available positive moment capacity, but are not effective at the
splice closure placements. For this reason, it is desirable to place splices at locations within
spans with lower flexural demands, such as quarter points.
The design of the prototype bridge assumes grouted and bonded post-tensioning tendons.
Depending on the preference of the design team and governing agency, replaceable tendons
may be incorporated. Grouted external tendons are unbonded. Stress in unbonded
prestressing steel is based on the effective stress in the tendon after losses and the global
displacement compatibility between bonded sections of tendons (such as anchorage points or
deviators). Alternatively, the stress in unbonded tendons may be estimated using approximate
equations in the AASHTO LRFD specifications.
The depth from the extreme compression fiber of the beam to the centroid of the prestressed
reinforcing is adjusted to account for eccentricity in the ducts according to the AASHTO LRFD
specifications, Article 5.9.1.6.
7.2.2 Transverse Web Reinforcing

Transverse web reinforcing is determined using the relevant formulae and methods in the
AASHTO LRFD specifications, Articles 5.8.3 and 5.8.3.4.2, using the principles of modified
compression field theory.
Due to curvature and eccentric loading, transverse web reinforcing is required to resist the
combined action of longitudinal shear and torsion according to the requirements of the
AASHTO LRFD specifications, Article 5.8.3.6.
Depending on the judgement of the engineer and governing agency, the webs are also analyzed
for the combination of longitudinal shear and transverse web bending. Historical practice is
used as a basis to compute the amount of reinforcing required for each face of the webs
independently under the actions of both longitudinal shear forces and transverse moments.
The analysis of the web for transverse bending and shear/torsion is carried out using
Podolny’s equations, where the amount of reinforcing placed on the face of the webs is chosen
as the greatest of:
7- 8 (April 2020)
• As = 1.0(Av) + 0.5(Af)
• As = 0.5(Av) + 1.0(Af)
• As = 0.7(Av + Af)
Where
Av = area of reinforcement required for longitudinal shear and torsion
Af = area of reinforcement required for transverse flexure
The width of the web effective for shear was according to the AASHTO LRFD specifications,
Article 5.8.2.9, and reduced for post-tensioning ducts based on the requirements of the
AASHTO LRFD specifications, Article 5.8.6.1.
7.2.3 Reinforcing Parameters

The reinforcement ratio is an indicator of the economy and ductility of a concrete beam. For
prestressed beams, it is defined as follows:
 = Aps/bd
where
Aps = area of prestressed steel on the tension face of the beam
b = width of the compression face of the beam
d = distance from the extreme fiber in compression to the centroid of the steel on the
tension side of the member
The reinforcement ratio varies along the length of the bridge due to the profile of the
continuity tendons, the addition of local bottom or top tendons, and changes in the bridge
cross section. The reinforcement ratio differs for positive and negative moment regions.
Reinforcement ratios for key locations of the prototype bridge were calculated to provide a
reference to the designer (Table 7.3). An example calculation for reinforcement ratio is
included with the ultimate flexure check in appendix D.
7- 9 (April 2020)
Table 7.3. Reinforcement ratios for prototype bridge
Location Reinforcement ratio
Positive moment region 0.0014
Negative moment region 0.0061
7.3 SECTIONAL DESIGN FOR SERVICE LIMIT STATE

Design of pre- and post-tensioned structures requires checks for service level limit states as
well as ultimate level limit states. In general, service design is based on the requirements of the
AASHTO LRFD specifications, as discussed in the following sections.
For ultimate state checks, the service level checks discussed in general in the following
sections and presented in more detail in appendix D are based on the results of the three-
dimensional modeling discussed in section 6.9.
7.3.1 Longitudinal Stress Check

The calculation of longitudinal stress is relatively straightforward and is the summation of
axial and flexural stress at the extreme fiber of the cross section. The cross section changes
throughout the construction stages, for example, after casting the lid slab or concrete deck, and
stress is calculated at the extreme fiber of each cross section. Because the deck is cast after
stressing the continuity post-tensioning, the deck is not precompressed and may crack under
some loading conditions. For this reason, and at the discretion of the design professional and
governing agency, stress on the composite section may be calculated assuming both cracked
and uncracked section properties (Fig. 6.4) and for both short- and long-term creep and
shrinkage results. For all projects, these criteria and the evaluation of cracked versus
uncracked should be established at the beginning of the project.
Many analysis programs internally calculate and report extreme fiber stresses for the cross
section. Analysis programs are also capable of enveloping and reporting extreme fiber stresses
due to construction stages. Stress values calculated internally by the analysis program or
externally using force results and section properties are compared with stress limits
established in the design codes. An example calculation for longitudinal stress is included in
appendix D. For the prototype bridge, the U- beam and lid slab are in compression under
permanent loads and within allowable stress limits under service loads using both short- and
long-term creep and shrinkage results with cracked section properties at the piers.
7.3.2 Principal Stress Check

As discussed in section 6.10, principal stresses in the webs of U-beams may be calculated for
special design cases per Article 5.12.5 of the eighth edition AASHTO LRFD specifications using
classical beam theory and Mohr’s circle. Code provisions and governing authorities establish
7- 10 (April 2020)
limits on principal stress to limit cracking in the web under service conditions, including
construction stages.
Principal web stresses are generally checked for each construction stage and for the structure
in the final stage for both short- and long-term creep and shrinkage results at the centroid of
the cross section. An example principal web stress calculation is included in appendix D.
7- 11 (April 2020)
7- 12 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
DESIGN DETAILS
This chapter includes design details for U-beam bridges, including the following:
• typical section and post-tensioning
• lid slab and deck details
• precast concrete tongue section
• interior haunch section
• blisters
• diaphragms
• bearings
Qualitative design discussion related to various elements is provided throughout this chapter.
In-depth discussion is provided for unique elements, such as the diaphragm, over more
common elements, such as the deck slab.
The prototype project that is the focus of this document is not intended to represent the most
efficient and cost-effective design alternative, nor is the discussion in this chapter intended to
provide a comprehensive view of all possible details and design decisions that must be
included in a given project. Instead, it serves an example of one prototype project with focus
on some of the more important structural design requirements. Other items that should be
considered by the design professional may include, but are not limited to:
• reinforcing to resist curvature effects in webs (see bar 3B21 in Fig. 8.11)
• stressing jack access at expansion joints and intermediate tendon anchorages
• superstructure to substructure connections without bearings
- pinned connections
- integral connections
• bottom slab anchorages and blisters
• expansion joint details
• splice details
- splice length
- splice reinforcement
- shear interface between precast concrete U-beam and cast-in-place splice
- post-tensioning duct connections
• staged deck slab placement to minimize dead load stress in cast-in-place deck over the
piers
8-1 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
• special erection requirements
- strongback supports
- ground splicing
8.1 TYPICAL SECTION AND POST-TENSIONING

The typical section for the prototype bridge has a bridge width of 45 ft 1 in. with two assumed
travel lanes. Figure 8.1 shows the typical section. The cross section consists of two PCI 84 in.
deep U-beams with an 8¾ in. thick concrete deck between the U- beams and 10 in. thick deck
over the U-beams and at the overhangs.
Figure 8.1
Typical section of prototype bridge.
Figure 8.2 shows the post-tensioning layout for the prototype bridge. The post-tensioning is
composed of three types of tendons. Each segment has two nine-strand tendons in the bottom
flange designed to support its self-weight. The U-beam section has four draped continuity 15-
strand tendons in each web that pass through internal ducts from the beginning to the end of
each unit, linking all the U-beam segments in the unit when the final stressing is complete. The
geometry of tendons is arranged in a parabolic pattern, although harped arrangements are
equally feasible. In general, Colorado designs have used a parabolic pattern instead of the
harped pattern. Also, a top flange 12-strand tendon in each web is provided over the middle
pier. These tendons were sized to limit the Service III tension and Service I compression
stresses within allowable limits during all stages of construction and final service life of the
bridge. Figure 8.3 shows post-tensioning coupling at a field splice using couplers (red) and
heat shrink sleeves (black).
Post-tensioning ducts are spliced within cast-in-place closure placements between U-beam
segments. Because the lengths of cast-in-place splices are relatively short (less than 2 ft), duct
protrusions from the ends of the beam segments are very rigid and not easily moved.
Therefore, mitigation of duct extension translation during beam concrete placement is
paramount for field splicing success; otherwise, the integrity of this splice will be
8-2 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
compromised. Means and methods of setting and holding duct profiles, particularly at the duct
extensions, should be discussed before beam fabrication. Although not directly comparable,
the use of a bulkhead/mandrel system similar to that used for precast concrete duct couplers
can be considered, in addition to ingenious detailing at the duct-concrete beam interface. It is
important to hold the free end of the duct protruding from the end of the beam at the proper
location so that it aligns with its mating duct in the adjacent U-beam segment.
Figure 8.2
Post-tensioning of prototype bridge.
8-3 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.3
Post-tensioning coupling details at field splice.
8.2 LID SLAB AND DECK DETAILS

Figures 8.4 to 8.6 show the slab reinforcement details. Because the U-beams without the slab
have a low torsional resistance, it is necessary to have a lid slab that increases the torsional
resistance of the section before deck placement. Lid slabs are necessary in bridges where
curvature is significant to increase the torsional resistance before stressing longitudinal post-
tensioning, removing falsework, and casting the deck slab. Lid slabs are not used on straight
sections and could be eliminated on sections with large radius and a low degree of curvature
based on the judgment of the design professional.
Figure 8.4
Typical slab reinforcement.
8-4 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.5
Typical lid slab reinforcement before main deck placement.
Figure 8.6
Typical slab reinforcement detail over top flange.
If used, the lid slabs are cast in place or installed as precast concrete elements after the beams
are erected to limit the transport weight (Fig. 8.5). The design of the lid slab is recommended
to account for horizontal shear forces at the interface between the lid slab and U-beam,
horizontal shear forces at the interface between the lid slab and deck slab, torsional force flows
via diaphragm and strut-and-tie action, longitudinal distribution reinforcing, and transverse
moment capacity due to the weight of the deck placement and subsequent superimposed dead
and live loads after the deck is cast.
8.3 PRECAST CONCRETE TONGUE

The development and function of the precast concrete tongue is discussed in section 2.4.4. The
tongue design uses both precast and cast-in-place concrete for the diaphragms. At the ends of
the units where the continuity tendons are anchored, a tongue extension section allows the
contractor to cast the remainder of the U-beam segment with the end diaphragms. Figures 8.7
8-5 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
to 8.9 show the precast concrete U-beam segment end with a tongue extension. The tongue
extension provides sufficient concrete to support the U-beam on the permanent bearings
(section 8.8), before the diaphragm casting. Tongue reinforcing is designed to accommodate U-
beam and diaphragm weight when placed on bearings, and also general zone reinforcing for
the longitudinal post-tensioning.
Figure 8.7
Tongue extension elevation reinforcement.
8-6 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.8
Tongue extension section reinforcement.
Figure 8.9
Tongue extension isometric view of reinforcement.
8-7 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
8.4 INTERIOR HAUNCH CONNECTION
As mentioned in section 8.3, a significant factor in U-beam bridge design is the precast
concrete beam weight. To limit the weight of the pier segments with the bottom flange haunch,
a secondary placement can be specified (Fig. 8.10). The need for thickening of the bottom
flange at piers can also be reduced by using ultra-high-performance concrete for the bottom
flange at and near the interior piers. Another issue, which is both a design and construction
consideration related to means and methods, is the selecting of cast-in-place or precast
concrete for bottom slab thickening at the pier. It may be difficult to achieve high design
strengths in critical sections such as a bottom slab haunch if cast in the field, and precasting
may be more desirable. If the bottom flange haunch is cast in place, it is necessary to couple the
transverse reinforcement at the face of the joint (Fig. 8.11) or extend precast concrete
reinforcement though the side face roughened construction joint (Fig. 2.4). These figures
indicate that the joint, and therefore coupler or lap splice provided, are optional to provide
flexibility so the bottom slab can be cast in the yard as one placement or in the field as two
placements.
Figure 8.10
Haunch detail at piers.
8-8 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.11
Haunch reinforcement detail (assuming construction joint).
8-9 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS
8.5 BLISTERS
As mentioned in section 8.1, it may be necessary to have a top flange tendon in each web over
the interior piers to bring tension and compression stresses within allowable limits during all
stages of construction and final service life of the bridge. For the prototype design, a 12-strand
tendon is anchored 18 ft 0 in. on each side of the centerline of pier 3. Figures 8.12 to 8.15 show
the tendon blister details for the top tendon. Because the top flange is not large, the geometry
of the tendon exiting from the top flange and reinforcement details are critical. It is
appropriate to use the AASHTO LRFD specifications,2 Article 5.10.9, for the blister analysis and
design. Another useful reference is a publication by Rogowky and Marti titled, Detailing for
Post-Tensioning.15 Similar to the diaphragms described later, strut-and-tie models can be used
for analysis and design of these blisters.
Regarding the top flange blister shown in Fig. 8.12 through 8.15, the blister extending outside
the typical cross section may be cast as a secondary placement (Fig. 8.16). Also note reference
to a connecting block adjacent to and between blisters in these figures. The connecting blocks
are important to provide out-of-plane support to the webs.
Figure 8.12
Plan view of top blister.
(Connecting block reinforcing not shown.)
8 - 10 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.13
Partial elevation of top blister.
(Connecting block reinforcing not shown.)
Figure 8.14
Section of top blister.
8 - 11 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.15
Isometric view of top blister.
Figure 8.16
Block-out for top flange post-tensioning blister.
Appendix E gives schematic details for bottom flange blisters.
8 - 12 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
8.6 DIAPHRAGM
Diaphragms are cast at all the permanent piers to tie the two U-beams together and transmit
loads to the bearings. The diaphragm carries vertical shear and torsion from the webs of the U-
beam around the access opening to the bearings on the pier cap located at the centerline of
each U-beam. Figure 8.17 shows the elevation view of the diaphragm at pier 3. The diaphragms
at the end of the unit are similar. This section demonstrates strut-and-tie layouts that may be
used to design a diaphragm for the prototype curved U-beam bridge with each U-beam
supported on single bearings (See Figure 8.21).
Integral construction, or use of two bearings supporting each U-beam under the webs
eliminates indirect supports. Hence, the diaphragm analysis can be simplified and reinforcing
requirements reduced. Furthermore, the later details may potentially eliminate the need for a
diaphragm between U-beams and facilitate skewed construction.
The interior diaphragm is 8 ft tall and approximately 32 ft wide and is 4 ft thick (Fig. 8.17). The
horizontal span between bearings is approximately 23 ft, which depends on the superstructure
cross slope. The assumed bearing plate at each bearing is 3 ft wide. The diaphragm includes
two 3 ft diameter inspection access opening at the center of the U-beams to conform to
Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements.
Figure 8.17
Elevation view of interior diaphragm at pier 2.
Internal diaphragms are generally complex elements that must resist the introduction and
transfer of various loads and reactions. Figure 8.18, adapted from Beaupre et al. (2011),16
shows an example of diaphragm cracking for a U-beam bridge that may occur if the bearing are
set substantially inboard from the webs and force transfer is not accounted for by
reinforcing—for example, to maintain traffic clearance by pier placement.
8 - 13 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.18
Concrete box with centered bearing, similar to diaphragm for prototype.
Figures 8.19 and 8.20 show the application of diaphragm shear and torsion loadings used for
the prototype bridge. In Fig. 8.20, beam action of the diaphragm is illustrated by the moment
diagram (shaded orange) due to applied torques and the deflected shape shown with a dashed
line. Anticipated tension and compression zones of the diaphragm are labeled. The web shear
and torsion forces are assumed to be placed at the center of the transverse horizontal ties at
the upper and portions of the web. Additionally, there is substantial continuity post-tensioning
at the top of the section at the pier; hence, the need to provide some hanger reinforcing in the
webs at this location is clear. Nonetheless, there are conflicting opinions and research
regarding the placement of the resultant web shear and torsion forces, especially in the
selection of the vertical level for the applied load. This is a complicated issue that partially
depends on the longitudinal moment and shear-load-carrying behavior of the spans adjacent
to the diaphragm. By providing some tie-up reinforcement in the web, the web cracking shown
in Fig. 8.18 can be controlled. Nevertheless, the amount of tie-up reinforcing is substantial, and
it is proposed to count all vertical reinforcing within d/2 of the diaphragm faces, plus the width
of the diaphragm, when evaluating the demand versus the capacity of the tie-up bars. Struts
from the upper portion of the tie-up reinforcing will be able to travel through the webs to
nodes located at the middepth of the webs.
Figure 8.19
Diaphragm loads for shear.
8 - 14 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.20
Diaphragm beam action due to applied torsional loads.
Strut-and-tie models may be used for the shear and torsion components to analyze their
effects.16,17 Figure 8.21(a) shows the fan-shaped strut distribution of global longitudinal
moment and shear forces. Figure 8.21(b) qualitatively shows the shear loads applied at the
upper and lower portion of each web and the applied force couple resulting from pure torsion
applied to one web. Ties at the upper and lower levels of the webs redirect the applied forces
to the bearings. External to and between the U- beams, the diaphragm carries resultant
torsional moment and shear between the two boxes via beam action.
a) Elevation view: Fan-shaped struts at intermediate diaphragm.
8 - 15 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
b) Cross sectional view: Diaphragm transverse force flow.
Figure 8.21
Qualitative strut-and-tie models for diaphragm.
For the diaphragms at the ends of each unit where the continuity post-tensioning tendons are
anchored, it is necessary to analyze and design reinforcement to resist the tensile stresses
developed by the distribution of the anchorage forces into the diaphragm and U-beams. Figure
8.22 shows a simplified two-dimensional strut-and-tie model for the transfer of anchor loads
from the diaphragm into the web and flanges of the U-beam. The top and bottom flange force is
the equivalent force based on the section stress. The strut-and-tie model shows the controlling
tie force is 0.25 to 0.30 of the factored applied post-tensioning force P. Based on this tie force,
the area of steel required can be determined.
8 - 16 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.22
Strut-and-tie model for tendon anchorage force distribution into the diaphragm at ends of
unit.
8 - 17 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
8.7 Bearings
The connection of the superstructure to substructure is an important design consideration.
Bearings are engaged when the beams are placed or when falsework loads are released. The
superstructure can be supported on bearings or made integral with the substructure assuming
the piers are flexible enough to allow the necessary movements. The elimination of the
bearings could result in lower initial cost and future maintenance savings. If bearings are used,
pot or disk-type bearings may be an option. Figures 8.23 and 8.24 show the bearing
configuration assumed for the prototype bridge. These figures show the bearing details for a
fixed bearing. Bearings can be grouted at the permanent piers, which allows some translational
and rotational tolerances to be built out during construction due to the room around pintles.
Figure 8.23
Transverse view of bearing.
With consideration of tolerances in the bearing design, it may be possible to erect directly on
the bearings to eliminate shoring. Welded connections with steel taper plates have been used
in some applications. The advantage of a welded connection is that tongue sections can be
placed directly on the bearings without the use of falsework. If this detail is used, field welding
must be properly detailed and executed for long-term performance and tolerances accounted
for. If nonuniform bearing pressures are created, the elastomers can be overstressed and fail.
Elastomeric bearings are feasible provided they are designed with sufficient load and
rotational capacities. Rotational checks must be made with code-recommended rotational
setting tolerances. Furthermore, attention shall be given to all erection stages and any blocking
or restraint required to prevent bearings from moving or disengaging during construction.
8 - 18 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
Figure 8.24
Longitudinal view of grouted fixed bearing.
8 - 19 (April 2020)
DESIGN DETAILS
8 - 20 (April 2020)
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. PCI Bridge Committee. 2012. Curved Precast Concrete Bridges State-of-the-Art Report. CB-
01-12. Chicago, IL: PCI.
2. AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). 2017.
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 8th ed., customary U.S. units. Washington, DC:
AASHTO.
3. Nickas, W. N., and J. S. Dick. 2015. “Sharing New Technology Through PCI Bridge
Technoquests.” Aspire 9 (3): S-1–S-15 (supplement).
www.aspirebridge.com/magazine/2015Summer/ASPIRESupplementSummer2015.pdf
4. Stelmakc, T. 2016. “Design Considerations for Horizontally Curved Precast Concrete U-
Girders.” Aspire 10 (1): 30–32. www.aspirebridge.com/magazine/2016Winter/CBT-
DesignConsiderationforHorizontallyCurvedPrecastConcreteUGirders.pdf
5. WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation) Bridge and Structures Office.
2011. Bridge Design Manual (LRFD). M 23-50.05. Olympia, WA: WSDOT.
8. PTI (Post-Tensioning Institute). 2012. Guide Specification for Grouted Post-Tensioning.
M50.3-12. Farmington Hills, MI: PTI.
9. Brice, R. 2018. “Designing Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders for Lateral
Stability: An Owner’s Perspective.” Aspire 12 (1): 10–12.
10. AASHTO. 2017. Guide Specification for Wind Loads During Construction. AASHTO GSWLB 1.
Washington, DC: AASHTO.
11. PCI Bridge Design Manual Steering Committee. 2014. Bridge Design Manual. MNL-133. 3rd
ed. Chicago, IL: PCI.
12. CEB/FIP (Euro-International Concrete Committee/International Federation for
Prestressing). 1990 International System of Unified Standard Codes of Practice for
Structures. Volume 2: CEB-FIP Model Code for Concrete Structures. Paris, France: CEB.
13. NCHRP (National Cooperative Highway Research Program). 2008. Development of Design
Specifications and Commentary for Horizontally Curved Concrete Box-Girder Bridges. NCHRP
Report 620. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
www.trb.org/Main/Public/Blurbs/160353.aspx
14. Bressan, M., and P. D. Kinderman. 2014. “Satus Creek Bridge.” Aspire 8 (2): 24–26.
15. Rogowsky, D. M., and P. Marti. 1991. Detailing for Post-Tensioning. VSL Report Series 3.
Bern, Switzerland: VSL International.
https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/baug/ibk/concrete-and-bridge-design-
dam/lehre/masterstudium/Stahlbeton/Unterlagen/Detailing_for_post-tensioning.pdf
16. Beaupre, R. J., R. B. Anderson, and V. Bridges. 2010. Diaphragm for a Segmental Concrete
Bridge. ACI Special Publication SP-273. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
17. Schlaich, J., K. Schafer, and M. Jennewein. 1987. “Toward a Consistent Design of Structural
Concrete.” PCI Journal 32 (3): 74-150.
REFERENCES - 1 (April 2020)

REFERENCES
REFERENCES - 2 (April 2020)

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES______________APPENDIX A
ABBREVIATED STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA
APPENDIX A - ABBREVIATED STRUCTURAL

DESIGN CRITERIA
A.1 INTRODUCTION TO ABBREVIATED STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA
This appendix contains sample structural design criteria for curved, spliced, precast,
prestressed concrete U beams. The criteria are intended to convey the design engineer’s intent
to the project team. These abbreviated sample criteria highlight selected design assumptions,
and are not intended to be a full and complete guide.
This sample criteria are provided for reference only. The engineer shall evaluate the
appropriateness of the criteria for the intended project before their use.
APPENDIX A - 1 (April 2020)


A1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A1.1 Functional Requirements
TBD-BD (to be determined by designer): These features, related to the layout and
configuration of the bridge structure, shall be determined by the engineering design
team in accordance with the requirements specified and/or directed by the governing
agency.
A1.1.1 Bridge Classification
A1.1.2 Horizontal Alignment
A1.1.3 Vertical Alignment
A1.1.4 Typical Section
A1.1.5 Design Speed
A1.1.6 Bridge Railings
A1.1.7 Clearances – Vertical and Horizontal
A1.2 Codes, Standards, and Specifications

ACI Committee 209. 1982. Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage and Temperature Effects in
Concrete Structures. ACI 209R-82.
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 2017. 8th ed., customary U.S. units.
AASHTO Guide Specifications: Thermal Effects in Concrete Bridge Superstructures. 1989.
AASHTO. Guide Specification for Design and Construction of Segmental Concrete
Bridges. 1999. 2nd ed.
AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015. Bridge Welding Code. 7th ed., with Interim Revisions.
AASHTO. Construction Handbook for Bridge Temporary Works. 2017. 2nd ed.
AASHTO. Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works. 2017. 2nd ed.
AASHTO. Manual for Bridge Evaluation. 2018. 3rd ed., with Interim Revisions.
ASTM A416/A416M-18. Standard Specification for Low-Relaxation, Seven-Wire Steel
Strand for Prestressed Concrete.
ASTM A615/A615M-18e1. Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Carbon-Steel
Bars for Concrete Reinforcement.
ASTM A722/A722M-18. Standard Specification for High-Strength Steel Bars for
Prestressed Concrete.
CEB/FIP. 1990. International System of Unified Standard Codes of Practice for
Structures. Volume 2: CEB-FIP Model Code for Concrete Structures.

A2. DESIGN PARAMETERS
A2.1 Reinforced Concrete Members
A2.1.1 Selected concrete mixture proportions, reinforcing type, and covers to satisfy
local practice and the anticipated exposure to environmental conditions
A2.2 Prestressed Concrete Members
a. Tolerable ranges of the assumed beam age at time of erection or closure shall be
shown in the plans.
b. The AASHTO LRFD specifications, Article 5.12.5, gives supplemental

recommendations for: thermal gradient, principal stress, and the combination of
vertical shear and transverse bending in the webs that may be used at the
discretion of the design professional.
A3. DESIGN LOADINGS
A3.1 Dead Loads
Table A3.1. Dead load – Force effects
Material Density/effect
Reinforced concrete* 150 lb/ft3
Plain concrete without reinforcement 145 lb/ft3
Post-tensioned concrete 155 lb/ft3
Structural steel 490 lb/ft3
Sacrificial deck thickness† TBD-BD
Stay-in-place (SIP) or temporary
TBD-BD
forms‡
Note: TBD-BD = to be determined by designer.
* Compute the concrete density accounting for concrete strength according to
AASHTO LRFD Table 3.4.1-1.
† Many governing agencies require a nominal thickness of the deck to be
included as a sacrificial overlay. If a sacrificial overlay is used, it shall be
included in the dead load of the slab but shall be omitted from its section
properties.
‡ If metal SIP forms are used, their weight shall be distributed over the
projected area of the metal forms for the unit weight of metal forms and
concrete required to fill the form flutes. The governing agency shall be
consulted regarding the use of metal SIP forms, SIP pretensioned concrete
deck panels, or temporary forms.

A3.2 Superimposed Dead Loads
Table A3.2. Superimposed dead load – Force effects
Superimposed dead loads Weight
Future wearing surface TBD-BD

Traffic railing and median barriers TBD-BD
Utilities TBD-BD
Note: TBD-BD = to be determined by designer.
A3.3 Live Loads
A3.3.1 HL-93 Live Loads
Apply AASHTO LRFD specifications live-load HL93 design truck or tandem plus 0.64 kip/ft
uniform lane load.
Table A3.3. Load combinations for live-load cases

Design
loads*
Load combination no.: 1 2
AASHTO LRFD
HL93 design truck or tandem
All regions, specifications
plus 0.64 kip/ft uniform lane X
all spans Articles 3.6.1.2
load in all load lanes
Longitudinal
and 6.4.3
Negative 90% of two HL93 design

AASHTO LRFD
moment trucks in same lane spaced at
specifications X
regions, all 50 ft minimum plus 90% of
Article 3.6.1.3.1
spans 0.64 kip/ft uniform lane load
* Apply vehicular dynamic load allowance IM of 33% to design truck and tandem only.
A3.3.2 Permit and Legal Loads
Permit load and legal loads shall be as defined by the governing agency.
A3.4 Wind Loads
A3.4.1 Wind loads for bridges computed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD
specifications Article 3.8, and/or as defined by the governing agency.
A3.5 Thermal Loads
A3.5.1 Mean Temperature
TBD-BD

A3.5.2 Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
Concrete: 6.0 × 10-6 per degree Fahrenheit
A3.5.3 Uniform Seasonal Temperature Rise and Fall
For structural design (concrete); see also AASHTO LRFD specifications Article 3.12:
Temperature rise TBD-BD

Temperature fall TBD-BD
Range TBD-BD
A3.5.4 Temperature Gradient
Thermal forces (longitudinal): Nonlinear temperature gradient is based on AASHTO LRFD

specifications Article 3.12.3, using the appropriate plain concrete surface for solar
radiation zone.
Thermal forces (transverse): Not considered.
Note: The AASHTO LRFD specifications Article C3.12.3 gives guidance related to the
exclusion of thermal gradient effects based on local performance experience.
A3.5.5 Deck Movements
For deck movements for design of bearings and expansion joints, per AASHTO LRFD
specifications Table 3.4.1-1, use 0.00 or 1.00 times the combined movements of creep,
shrinkage, and elastic shortening (bracketing the time-dependent behavior), plus 1.20
times the calculated movement due to temperature change.
Bearings accommodate motions that occur after girder erection; expansion joints
accommodate motions that occur after joint installation. Bearings and expansion joints
shall be designed to accommodate the full range of movement.
Bearings and expansion joints shall be adjusted based upon the temperature during the
time of installation.
A3.6 Creep and Shrinkage
A3.6.1 Strains are calculated in accordance with CEB/FIP Model Code for Concrete
Structures, 1978 or 1990, provisions developed by the American Concrete
Institute Committee 209; or AASHTO LRFD Section 5.4.2.3.
A3.6.2 Relative humidity: TBD-BD (see also the AASHTO LRFD specifications, Fig.
5.4.2.3.3-1)
A3.6.3 Permanent effects of creep and shrinkage shall be added to all AASHTO LRFD
specifications loading combinations with a load factor per Table 3.4.1-3.

A3.7 Construction Loads
A3.7.1 TBD-BD: Minimum construction live load CLL of 10 lb/ft2 when permanent deck
slab is in place, per AASHTO LRFD Article 5.14.2.3.2. Additionally, 50 lb/ft 2
loading across the width of the lid slabs and flanges during erection and 25
lb/ft2 across the full deck for falsework reactions has been used on previous
projects.
Apply construction equipment load CEQ for assumed weight of screed machine.
Apply CLL and CEQ as applicable per the load phases outlined in section A3.7.4.
A3.7.2 Wind loads on permanent and temporary components during construction shall
be considered. The design wind speed for evaluation of strength and stability
evaluations of temporary falsework may be reduced based on statistical
evaluations of the expected wind return period over the duration of the
construction. Wind loads during construction may be established by the owner.
A3.7.3 Wind load pressure coefficient:
a. Lid slab not in place: TBD-BD

b. Lid slab in place: TBD-BD
A3.7.4 Load phases during construction:
a. Lifting and hauling with beam self-weight (DC) and superimposed

dead load (DW) 20% up and 20% down of beam self-weight.
Beams supports located at lifting loops or at carrier support points denoted

on the plans or approved shop drawings.
b. Setting with beam self-weight (DC) 20% down (DC) of beam self-
weight for amplification of loads due to an abrupt placement.
Beam supports at ends.
c. Lid slab construction with beam self-weight (DC), lid slab self-weight
(DC), stay-in-place (SIP) forms between the girder webs and concrete filling
the SIP form flutes (DW) if applicable, and with construction load (CLL) over
the area of the lid slab and beam flanges.
Lid slab is noncomposite, and the beam is supported at ends before

stressing continuity post-tensioning. Lid slab is composite, and the beam is
supported as indicated by analysis after stressing continuity post-
tensioning. Temporary supports shall be removed before casting the deck
slab.

d. Deck slab construction with beam self-weight (DC), deck slab self-
weight (DC), SIP forms and concrete filling the SIP form flutes (DW) over
the entire area of the bridge if applicable, 10 lb/ft2 construction load (CLL)
over the area of the bridge, and with construction equipment load (CEQ).
The 10 lb/ft2 construction load (CLL) and the construction equipment load
(CEQ) shall be configured in the worst location.
Deck slab is noncomposite, and the beam is supported at permanent

locations.
A3.7.5 Load combinations during construction
Table A3.4. Load factors  for post-tensioned U beams during construction

Load
combination CR +
DC DW EL CEQ CLL TU TG WS
Limit state SH
(A,B,C, D)
Service I 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00* 1.00 0.50† 1.00 1.00††
Service III 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50† 1.00
Strength I 1.30 1.30 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.20 1.30
Strength III 1.30 1.30 1.00 1.50* 1.20 1.30 1.25††

Note: Differential load (DIFF), applicable to balanced cantilever construction, need not be
considered. DC = dead load of structural components and nonstructural attachments; DW =
dead load of wearing surfaces and utilities; EL = locked-in forces/stresses, including the
primary and secondary effects of prestressing or post-tensioning; CEQ = construction
equipment; CLL = construction live load; TU = force effect due to uniform temperature; TG =
force effect due to temperature gradient; CR = force effects due to creep; SH = force effects
due to shrinkage; WS = wind load on structure.
* For Service I and Strength III limit states, CEQ shall consider weight of screed rails and their
supports along the length of the beams; however, the screed machine shall be assumed to be
tied down at the pier location.
† For Service I and Service III limit states, TG shall not be evaluated for lid slab before deck
casting.
†† Wind speeds determined by governing agency.
A3.8 Differential Support Settlement
Differential support settlement requires the evaluation and potential monitoring of

settlement and movement of permanent and temporary foundations during erection
through post-tensioning. The contract documents shall specify limits of settlement for
temporary foundations in terms of magnitude and time.
A3.9 Load Combinations – Permanent Structure
A3.9.1 Load combinations shall be in accordance with AASHTO LRFD specifications

Tables 3.4.1-1 and 3.4.1-2.

Table A3.5. Load factors  for post-tensioned U beams for
permanent structure
AASHTO LRFD
specifications dead AASHTO LRFD specificationstransient
and permanent loads
Load
loads
combination
EL
limit state DC
w/
CR DW LL WS WL FR TU TG
PS
SH
sec.
Service I 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50
Service III 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 1.00 0.50
Strength I 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.75 1.00 0.50
Strength III 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.40 1.00 0.50
Strength V 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.35 0.40 1.00 1.00 0.50
DC = dead load of structural components and nonstructural attachments; CR = force effects

due to creep; SH = force effects due to shrinkage; DW = dead load of wearing surfaces and
utilities; EL = permanent effects of erection forces (for example, from erection equipment,
changes in the statical system), including the secondary effects of post-tensioning; PS =
secondary forces from post-tensioning for strength limit states; total prestressing forces for
service limit states; LL = vehicular live load; WS = wind load on structure; FR = friction load;
TU = force effect due to uniform temperature; TG = force effect due to temperature gradient;
CR = force effects due to creep.
A4. MATERIALS
A4.1 Concrete
A4.1.1 All concrete properties shall be in accordance with the specified 28-day
compressive strength f’c and initial strength f’ci suggested in Table A4.1.
Table A4.1. Concrete properties
Location f’c, psi f’ci, psi
Traffic railing barrier 3400
Bridge deck and lid slabs 4500
Precast, prestressed concrete U beams 8500 6000

Prestressed concrete U beams (cast-in-place
closure placements, haunched portions of bottom 6500 4500
slabs, applicable blisters, and diaphragms)
Note: f’c = 28-day compressive strength; f’ci = initial strength. The concrete strengths indicated
are suggested representative values and will vary based on the decision of the engineering
design team and the governing agency.

A4.2 Reinforcing Steel
A4.2.1 It is suggested that reinforcing steel conform to ASTM A615, Grade 60, unless
otherwise required.
A4.2.2 All reinforcing steel shall be black or epoxy as defined by the project contract
documents (plans and specifications) and the local governing agency.
A4.2.3 Mechanical couplers shall develop not less than 125% of the yield strength of
the bar.
A4.2.4 Headed reinforcing provided shall be in accordance with the project contract
documents (plans and specifications).
A4.3 Prestressing Steel

A4.3.1 Suggested Prestressing Parameters for Strand
All strands are assumed to be 0.6 in. in diameter, conforming to the requirements of ASTM
A416 Grade 270 for low-relaxation strands.
Post-tensioning:
Material properties/parameters:
Tensile strength of prestressing strand fpu: 270 ksi
Yield strength of prestressing strand fpy : 243 ksi
Modulus of elasticity: 28,500 ksi
Anchor set: 3/8 in.
Friction coefficient μ (internal tendons in polyethylene ducts): 0.23

Wobble coefficient k (internal tendons): 0.0002/ft
Allowable stresses:
Maximum jacking stress at anchorage: 0.80fpu
Maximum anchorage stress at anchorage
immediately after anchorage: 0.70fpu
Max. anchorage stress at internal locations
A4.3.2 Suggested Prestressing Parameters for Bars
All bars shall conform to the requirements of ASTM A722 Grade 150.
Material properties/parameters:
Tensile strength of prestressing bars fpu : 150 ksi
Yield strength of prestressing bars fpy: 120 ksi
Modulus of elasticity: 29,700 ksi
Maximum jacking stress: 0.80fpu
Maximum anchorage stress: 0.70fpu
Anchor set: Zero
Friction coefficient μ: 0.30
Wobble coefficient k: 0.0002/ft
Allowable stresses:
Maximum jacking stress at anchorage: 0.80fpu

Maximum anchorage stress at anchorage
Max. anchorage stress at internal locations
A4.4 Grouting of Post-Tensioning Tendons and Bars
Grouting may be cementitious (bonded) or wax based (unbonded) as directed by the

governing agency.
A5. ALLOWABLE STRESSES
A5.1 Reinforced Concrete
Reinforced concrete shall be in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD specifications.
A5.2 Prestressed Concrete – Service Level
A5.2.1 Compression
Table A4.2. Compression stress limits

Design
Location
stress limit
Temporary stresses before losses (AASHTO LRFD specifications Article 5.9.4.1)
Due to effective prestress, permanent loads, and transient loads due to

shipping and handling. Estimate loads due to shipping and handling,
0.65f’ci (ksi or psi)
applied in addition of the weight of the beam, as 20%(up)/20%(down) of
the weight of the beam. See also section A3.7.4.
Stresses after losses (AASHTO LRFD specifications Table 5.9.4.2.2-1)
Due to effective prestress and permanent loads 0.45f’c (ksi or psi)
Due to effective prestress, permanent loads, and transient loads. 0.60f’c (ksi or psi)
A5.2.2 Longitudinal Tension (assuming bonded reinforcement and stress limits

to limit cracking)
Table A4.3. Tension Stress Limits

Design
Location
Stress Limit
Temporary stresses before losses (AASHTO LRFD specifications Table 5.9.4.1.2-1)

Due to effective prestress, permanent loads, and transient loads due to

shipping and handling. Estimate loads due to shipping and handling, 0.190∙√f’ci (ksi)
applied in addition of the weight of the beam, as 20%(up)/20%(down) of 6.0∙√f’ci (psi)
the weight of the beam. See also section A3.7.4.
Permanent condition after losses (AASHTO LRFD specifications Table 5.9.4.2.2-1)
Flexural tension: Areas outside of joints with minimum bonded auxiliary 0.190∙√f’c (ksi)
reinforcement 6∙√f’c (psi)
Flexural tension: Closure joints with minimum bonded auxiliary 0.095∙√f’c (ksi)
reinforcement 3∙√f’c (psi)
0.110∙√f’c (ksi)
Principal tension: Neutral axis of web
3.5∙√f’c (psi)
Construction load combinations (AASHTO LRFD specifications Table 5.14.2.3.3-1)
0.190∙√f’c (ksi)
Excluding “other loads”
6∙√f’c (psi)
Flexural tension: All areas
0.220∙√f’c (ksi)
Including “other loads”
7∙√f’c (psi)
0.110∙√f’c (ksi)
Excluding “other loads”
3.5∙√f’c (psi)
Principal tension: Neutral axis of
web
0.126∙√f’c (ksi)
Including “other loads”
4∙√f’c (psi)
Design operating legal and permit limits (as defined by the governing agency)
Flexural tension: All areas TBD-BD
Principal tension: Neutral axis of web TBD-BD
A6. U-BEAM DESIGN DETAILS
A6.1 Longitudinal Tendons and Ducts
a. Minimum four tendons per web, or as specified by governing agency.

b. Horizontal and vertical spacing, the maximum of:
i. 4 in.; or,
ii. Outer duct diameter plus 1.5 times maximum aggregate size; or,
iii. Outer duct diameter plus 2 in.
c. Assumed post-tensioning duct out-to-out rib diameters:*

i.Twelve 0.6 in. strands: 3.58 in.
ii.Fifteen 0.6 in. strands: 3.94 in.
iii.Nineteen 0.6 in. strands: 4.57 in.
* Dimensions are for plastic duct. Revise for galvanized duct if they are allowed by
governing agency.
A6.2 Provisional Strands
Provisional strands are not required. Provisional strands may be provided at the discretion
of the governing agency. Alternatively, the jacking stress may be reduced to allow for
adjustment of post-tensioning.
A6.3 Future Post-Tensioning Strands
Future post-tensioning strands are not required.
A6.4 Average Radius for Pairs of Girders
Use same radius for pairs of girders along the length of the span.
A6.5 Maximum Girder Rotation at Kink Points
The maximum rotation shall be defined by maintaining the maximum and minimum haunch
specified in section A6.7.
A6.6 Girder Access Points
See section A7.6.
A6.7 Girder Haunch
• 6 in. maximum preferred for cast-in-place haunches; larger haunches are possible with
appropriate detailing
• 1 in. minimum for cast-in-place lid slabs; 1½ in. minimum for precast concrete lid
slabs
A6.8 SIP Forms
The governing agency shall be consulted regarding the use of metal SIP forms, SIP
pretensioned concrete deck panels, or temporary forms.
A7. MISCELLANEOUS
A7.1 Placement of Reinforcing Steel
A7.1.1 Concrete cover shown on the plans does not include placement or fabrication
tolerances unless noted as “minimum cover”.
A7.1.2 Dimensions shown on the plans from face of the concrete to reinforcing bars are the
clear distances, unless noted otherwise. Spacing of bars is center to center.

A7.1.3 Suggested minimum cover for reinforcing steel, or as specified by the governing
agency:
Superstructure:
Prestress U beams (interior and exterior) 2 in.
Prestress girders: girder top flange 1 in.
CIP, except top deck surface 2 in.
Top deck surface (including ½ in. sacrificial) 2½ in.
All other surfaces 2 in.
A7.2 Bearings
A7.2.1 Integral superstructure to substructure connections are recommended and

preferred. Multirotational disk or pot bearings may also be used to satisfy particular
project requirements and constraints.
A7.2.2 If bearing are used, it is suggested to include provisions for jacking of the
superstructure for replacement of all bearings. Bearing replacement may be
considered with a reduced live load.
A7.3 Expansion Joints
Expansion joints shall be in accordance with the project plans and specifications.
A7.4 Deck Drainage
Spread confined to shoulders and water conveyed to off-bridge drainage systems.

Optimally, drains shall be located at pier locations and drainage pipes shall be kept to the
exterior of the box girders. Consideration shall be given to force transfer for load paths
interrupted by pans for drainage systems.
A7.5 Lighting, Power, and Intelligent Traffic Systems
A7.5.1 Roadway Lighting: [TBD-BD]
A7.5.2 Aesthetic Lighting: [TBD-BD]
A7.5.3 Interior Power and Lighting: [TBD-BD]
It is suggested to provide interior lighting and electrical outlets at all ingress/egress access
openings and at midspan of each span. Only a single interior light and electrical outlet are
required if these locations coincide. Alternatively, the use of battery powered portable
lighting may be anticipated. The inclusion of interior lighting and power is generally
prescribed by the governing agency.
A7.5.4 Intelligent Traffic Systems (ITS): [TBD-BD]
A7.6 Maintenance and Inspection Access
Suggested U-beam inspection access is described below and shall comply with

Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards and consider confined space
entry:
A7.6.1 Provide access opening into the box through the bottom slab. Provide doors at all
bottom slab access openings.
A7.6.2 Provide access holes in diaphragms at both expansion and interior piers. Provide
doors at diaphragm access openings at expansion joints at all piers and abutments.
A7.6.3 Equip all doors at abutments and bottom flange entrances with a keyed lock and
hasp. Require that all locks on an individual bridge be keyed alike.
A7.6.4 Provide handles on either side of access holes for inspectors.
A7.6.5 Provide wooden ramps at diaphragms and bottom slab blisters to facilitate
inspection and equipment movement. Provide ramps that are continuous through
the access opening. Composite internal bottom flange build-ups used for haunched
girders may serve as ramps. For all other wood, meet the treatment requirements
of the project plans and specifications.

THIS PAGE HAS INTENTIONALLY BEEN LEFT BLANK

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES_____________APPENDIX B
DESIGN DETAILS
APPENDIX B – DESIGN DETAILS
The illustrations and reinforcing details shown in this publication are samples from
constructed projects. Local practices and requirements need to be followed.
APPENDIX B - 1 (April 2020)

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN DETAILS

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES______________APPENDIX C
SAMPLE SPECIFICATIONS
APPENDIX C – SAMPLE SPECIFICATIONS

The following sample technical specification was developed and adapted from projects
constructed in Florida. Reference is given to sections of the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT), “Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction,” which are
summarized below and are not intended to supersede the requirements of local jurisdictions.
DIVISION II CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS
105 Contractor Quality Control General Requirement
STRUCTURES
346 Portland Cement Concrete
400 Concrete Structures
415 Reinforcing for Concrete
450 Precast Prestressed Concrete Construction
458 Bridge Deck Joints
462 Post-Tensioning
MATERIALS FOR PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
(STRUCTURAL, PAVEMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS)
925 Curing Material for Concrete
DIVISION III MATERIALS

The most recent Florida specifications can be found at:
www.fdot.gov/programmanagement/Implemented/SpecBooks/
The following definitions are used in this sample technical specification:
FDOT – Owner Agency or Authorized Representatives
FDOT Inspector – Owner Agency’s (or Authorized Representatives) Inspection Team on site
or at casting yard.
EOR – Engineer of Record responsible for U-Beam Plans and Technical Special Provision
As recommended industry practice, the following sample technical specification includes
separate payment for Specialty Engineering of the Precast Prestressed Concrete Spliced U-
Beams structure.
Modification of this sample technical specification is necessary for other projects, governing
agencies, and delivery methods.
APPENDIX C - 1 (April 2020)


TECHNICAL SPECIAL PROVISION
For
PRECAST PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SPLICED U-BEAM BRIDGES


SECTION 450A
PRECAST PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SPLICED U-BEAM BRIDGES
450A-1 Description.
Fabricate, store, transport and erect precast prestressed spliced structural U-Beam concrete
superstructure segments to the established lines and grades, in accordance with the design,
dimensions and details shown on the Plans and in accordance with this Technical Special
Provision. Spliced U-Beams shall meet the requirements of Sections 400 and 450 of the FDOT
Specifications except as appended by this Technical Special Provision.
Embedded reinforcing steel, other embedded items and all appurtenant items are included.
Additionally, concrete, reinforcing and post-tensioning in cast-in-place portions of spliced U-
Beams shall be in accordance with Sections 400, 415 and 462 of the FDOT Specifications,
respectively.
The work in this Section 450A is applicable to longitudinally post-tensioned spliced beams upon
which a concrete slab is cast-in-place.
450A-2 Qualification Requirements for Supervisory Personnel.

Meet the requirements of Section 105 of the FDOT Specifications.
Individuals filling the position of Project Engineer, Project Superintendent, and Foreman,
shall have experience meeting the requirements of Section 105-8.8.6 of the FDOT Specifications.
450A-3 Quality Control Program.

Meet the requirements of Section 450-2 of the FDOT Specifications. The plant shall be
certified by the Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI). No substitutions will be accepted.
450A-4 Definitions.
The following definitions apply to precast prestressed spliced U-Beam bridge
construction:
450A-4.1 U-Beam Segment: A modular section of the superstructure consisting of the
U-Beam cross-section shape and length as detailed in the Plans. U-Beam pier segments may have
a variable thickness bottom slab which can be cast be cast monolithically, or as a secondary pour,
as detailed in the Plans.
450A-4.2 Casting Bed: A special formwork arrangement, meeting the requirements of
Section 450-6 and 5.2.2 of the FDOT Specifications, usually consisting of movable bulkheads of
the cross-section shape with side and core forms capable of horizontal movement, designed and
assembled into an assembly for making single or multiple superstructure spliced U-Beam
segments.
450A-4.3 Lid Slab: A field cast partial depth portion of the deck slab cast between the
top flanges of a single U-Beam to provide improved torsional characteristics to the spliced U-

Beam structural system prior to application of longitudinal continuity post-tensioning and
casting of the deck slab per the sequence indicated on the Plans.
450A-4.4 Closure Joints: The individual U-Beam segments are made in a casting bed.
Continuous units are made when the individual segments are erected in the superstructure with
a reinforced cast-in-place closure joint between each segment except at expansion joints.
(During erection, all the segments of a span or multiple spans are supported by falsework,
strongbacks, or other techniques until the closure joints have gained strength and the
longitudinal post-tensioning installed and sequenced to make them self-supporting as indicated
on the Plans.)
450A-4.5 Ground Splice: Two segments properly blocked and made into a single
segment on the ground by casting a closure joint between the segments and subsequently post-
tensioning. The combined segments are then incorporated as one segment into the permanent
structure.
450A-4.7 Segment-By-Segment (Erection): Placing a specified number of segments on
a temporary support system and permanent piers, with intermediate closure joints, aligned and
post-tensioned longitudinally forming a completed unit of the superstructure from expansion
joint to expansion joint.
450A-4.8 Camber: The amount by which the concrete profile at the time of erection
must differ from the theoretical geometric profile grade to compensate for preceding beam
build-ups, all structural dead load including that induced by the removal of falsework or
temporary shoring, post-tensioning, all long term and time dependent deformations (creep and
shrinkage) including all intermediate erection stages and effects. (The opposite of deflections.)
450A-4.9 Erection Elevation: The elevation at which a segment is set in the structure at
the time it is erected. (This is profile grade corrected by the amount of deflection calculated to
occur from that stage onwards.)
450A-5 Shop Drawings, Calculations and Manuals.

450A-5.1 General: Use methods and procedures providing adequate safety to the
general public from construction/erection activities and/or falsework placed over or adjacent
to traveled roadways, navigational or recreational waterways or any existing commercial,
industrial or other facility.
450A-5.2 Information Required: Submit detailed shop drawings, calculations, manuals
and other information, including, but not limited to, the following:
450A-5.2.1 U-Beam Segment Shop Drawings:
(1) A schedule of materials for segment fabrication including concrete, reinforcing
steel, post-tensioning including ducts and hardware, prestressing steel (if applicable), grout, and
other similar items.
(2) Each segment number and the direction of erection.
(3 ) Segment dimensions including widths, lengths, thicknesses, tapers, fillets,
radii, working points, post-tensioning, clearances, rebar dimensions and spacing, embedded
items, holes, anchorage positions, and other similar items.

(4) Post-tensioning requirements as outlined in Section 462 of the FDOT
Specifications. Check post-tensioning for consistency with pre-approved post-tensioning
hardware and provide part numbers for FDOT pre-approved systems on the shop drawings.
Substitution of parts or materials is not allowed. Profiles of post-tensioning shall be developed
for each U-Beam segment, and at diaphragms and closure joints.
(5) The length of the spliced U-Beam segment, volume of concrete, weight of
reinforcement and weight of post-tensioning in each precast segment and the total weight for
reinforcement and post-tensioning for both the precast and cast-in-place portions of the U-Beam
segments summarized and tabulated on the shop drawings.
(6) Details and calculations, as necessary, for any localized strengthening for
concentrated supports and loads or reactions from any special erection equipment placed in
locations not already allowed for in the Plans. Calculations and details for lifting and storage of
U-Beam segments. Any effect to the Permanent Works caused or induced by the construction
efforts and Temporary Works shall be evaluated.
(7) Details and supporting calculations for any modifications to segment
geometry, cross-section dimensions, or segment length including any required changes to
reinforcing and post-tensioning.
(8) Details of permanent and temporary embedded items including inserts,
blockouts, temporary openings, holes, and other similar items; and any localized required
strengthening and the materials and methods to fill and finish the holes.
(9) Detailed shop drawings shall be fully integrated depicting all information
listed in (1) through (8) above.
450A-5.2.2 Casting Bed: Precaster shall provide information regarding:
(1) Procedures for spliced U-Beam segment fabrication including set-up and
operation of the casting bed, movable rain and sun shades, geometry control stations, the
storage and handling of rebar cages, placing and finishing concrete, curing of concrete, form
stripping, and other similar items.
(2) Equipment for segment fabrication, including details of the forms for the
manufacture of the segments, lifting and transportation of the segment in the yard, and other
similar items.
(3) Segment storage including method of supporting the segments, placing
erection marks and segment identification, and other similar items. Stacking of U-Beam
segments will not be permitted.
(4) Segment transportation from the casting bed to the site.
450A-5.2.3 Erection Plan: Meet the requirements in 450A-9 of this Technical Special
Provision.
450A-6 Materials.
450A-6.1 General: Use materials which conform to this Section 450A and the
requirements prescribed in the FDOT Division III Specifications, Materials, for the particular
kind and type of material specified.

450A-6.2 Concrete: Use concrete as specified in Section 346 except as specifically
modified by this Technical Special Provision. Use No. 67 coarse aggregate in the concrete for
segments with strengths as shown in the Plans. Screenings are not allowed as a substitute for
silica sand for use in concrete for Precast Superstructure Segments.
450A-6.3 Reinforcing Steel: Use ASTM A615, Grade 60 reinforcing steel which meets
the requirements of Section 415 of the FDOT Specifications. Field welding of reinforcing steel is
not allowed.
As an alternative, the Contractor may submit to the EOR for approval alternate
reinforcing details utilizing Welded Wire Fabric (WWF). If approved, WWF shall meet the
requirements of ASTM A1064 deformed wire. No substitutions shall be made without prior
approval of the EOR.
450A-6.4 Post-Tensioning Systems: Use post-tensioning hardware components
meeting the requirements of Section 462 of the FDOT Specifications. Components are not
interchangeable and must comply with the details of the approved shop drawings.
450A-7 U-Beam Segment Casting Requirements.

450A-7.1 General: Ensure that all materials, details, and procedures are as specified in
this Technical Special Provision, as noted in the Plans, or as shown on the approved shop
drawings.
Do not begin casting segments until the EOR approves the relevant shop drawings,
calculations, casting manuals, concrete forms and concreting operations and the post-tensioning
system components and layout if different from that on the Contract Plans. (Approval of post-
tensioning stressing elongations and forces for field erection operations is not required at this
stage but is required prior to erection.)
Give each segment an erection mark indicating its location, orientation and order in the
erection sequence. Show erection marks on the erection plans or in the erection manual.
450A-7.2 Forms: The Contractor is responsible for the design and engineering of the
forms as well as their construction. Exterior exposed surfaces of each element of the structure
shall be formed with the same material to produce similar concrete surface textures, color, and
appearance. Build the details shown on the Contract Plans or as amended by approved shop
drawings into the forms.
Repair or replace worn, damaged, or otherwise unacceptable forms and obtain the
Inspector's approval before casting any segment.
Where sections of forms are joined, ensure that offsets in flat surfaces do not exceed 1/16
inches and that offsets with corners and bends do not exceed 1/8 inches.
Ensure that all joints in the forms and contact points with bulkheads and existing
segments have good fitting seals to prevent loss of fine material and cement grout.
Ensure forms are properly aligned to maintain cross-section and horizontal alignment
shown on approved shop drawings. Check and inspect forms on a regular weekly basis to ensure
proper alignment and geometric accuracy. Do not use forms which fail to meet the specified

casting tolerances until such corrections are made to produce segments within the specified
tolerances.
450A-7.3 Precast Geometry: Before commencing the casting operation, submit the
proposed method of curve layout for all girder casting operations to the EOR for review. This
submittal must include but is not necessarily limited to:
(1) All measuring equipment and procedures for layout of curved formwork
(2) Location of working points to be established on the forms for manufacturing
the girders.
450A-7.4 Embedded Items:

450A-7.4. 1 General: Embedded items must be in accordance with specifications
for prestressed, and post-tensioned construction as outlined in Sections 450 and 462 of the
FDOT Specifications, respectively, and the requirements in this Technical Special Provision.
450A-7.4.2 Embedded Post-Tensioning Ducts: Ensure that embedded ducts for
post-tensioning tendons and bars are positioned accurately to their required alignment.
Properly fabricate and identify all ducts so that proper positioning is assured and can be verified
after casting.
Utilize positive methods to ensure that ducts will not be displaced or damaged during
concrete placement and consolidation. Adequately secure all embedded post-tensioning ducts
to the reinforcement cage at intervals not exceeding 30 inches for steel pipes and 24 inches for
plastic ducts. (Small ducts and very flexible ducts may require closer supports.) Any auxiliary
ties and support bars needed for these purposes will be considered incidental and at no extra
cost to the project. Prevent the concrete cover requirements from being violated by any auxiliary
ties and support bars.
After installation in the forms, ensure that the ends of the ducts are sealed at all times to
prevent entry of water, debris and fine material. Following each pour of concrete, demonstrate
that all empty ducts are free of water and are unobstructed and undamaged. Immediately prior
to installation of the prestressing steel into the ducts, again demonstrate to the satisfaction of
FDOT that all ducts are unobstructed and free of water and debris.
450A-7.4.3 Anchor Plates and Castings: Prior to placing concrete in the forms
either in the precast bed or the field, fix all tendon anchor plates and anchor castings in their
respective position in the forms, connected to their duct and sealed to prevent mortar intrusion.
Ensure that anchor plates and castings are rigidly fixed in the forms to maintain their correct
alignment and position during concrete placement and consolidation.
450A-7.4.4 Reinforcing Steel: Fabricate and place reinforcing steel in
accordance with the Contract Plans or as superseded by the approved shop drawings, in
accordance with Section 450-9.1 of the FDOT Specifications, and as required in this Technical
Special Provision.
Do not cut out or remove reinforcing steel to permit proper alignment of post-tensioning
ducts except as indicated on the Plans. Replace any bar that cannot be fabricated to clear the

ducts by additional bars with adequate lap lengths and submit the details to the EOR for
approval.
450A-7.5 Concrete Placement, Consolidation and Finishing:

450A-7.5 .1 General: Do not deposit concrete into the forms until the entire set-
up of the forms, reinforcement, ducts, anchorages and embedded items have been thoroughly
inspected and checked. Do not place concrete until FDOT is satisfied that all the above items
have been properly inspected and checked, and the rate of producing and placing the concrete
will be sufficient to complete the casting and finishing operations within the scheduled time,
that experienced concrete finishers are available where required for finish work and that all
necessary finishing tools and equipment are on hand at the site of the work and are in
satisfactory condition for use.
During conveying and placement, protect concrete against undue drying, rise in
temperature, and inclement weather.
450A-7.5.2 Concrete Placement Equipment: Use concrete placement
equipment of a size and design which permits placing concrete within the specified time. Clean
all equipment at the end of each operation or workday. Just prior to reuse, check the equipment
again and clean off hardened concrete and foreign materials.
Place concrete by belt conveyors and by pumping in accordance with 400-7.6 and 400-
7.7 of the FDOT Specifications, respectively. Provide concrete with adequate slump to fill the
volume of the forms with proper consolidation.
450A-7.5.3 Concrete Placement Sequence: Place concrete at the precast site in
accordance with 450-10.3.2.5 of the FDOT Specifications.
450A-7 .5.4 Concrete Placement and Consolidation: Discharge individual
loads of concrete into the forms, and place and consolidate in the required locations. After
discharge into the forms, do not bodily move concrete from place to place within the forms by
mechanical vibrators or other similar equipment.
Place and consolidate concrete with care so that post-tensioning ducts, anchorages and
any other embedded items are maintained in their proper positions and are not damaged.
Consolidate all concrete using approved vibrators together with any other equipment
necessary to perform the work as specified. Use internal vibrators having a minimum frequency
of 8,000 vibrations per minute and sufficient amplitude to consolidate the concrete effectively.
Provide at least two stand-by vibrators in working condition for emergency use in case of
malfunction.
Use of external vibrators for consolidating concrete when the concrete is inaccessible for
adequate consolidation by internal means. When external vibration is used, construct the forms
sufficiently rigid to resist displacement or damage.
Vibrate concrete in a manner which avoids displacement or damage to reinforcement,
post-tensioning ducts, anchorages and other embedded items.
No construction joints are allowed within a segment, except as detailed in the Plans.

450A-7.5.5 Finishing: Give top surfaces of precast U-Beam components, lid slabs, or
closure joints a rough surface finish of 1/4 inch amplitude.
450A-7.6 Curing:
450A-7.6. 1 General: Where casting cells are intended to operate on a short
(daily) cycle and it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the EOR that the required initial
concrete strengths for the removal of the forms, application of pre-stress, moving and handling
of the segments and that the final concrete strength can be achieved in a timely and consistent
manner, then steam curing will not be required. However, take precautions to promote proper
curing by methods approved by the EOR and in accordance with Sections 400 and 450-10.6 of
the FDOT Specifications. Such precautions must meet or exceed the following:
(a) To prevent moisture loss, cover all exposed surfaces (those not in contact with
a form) as soon as possible after casting with a moisture tight covering (wet curing blankets or
other approved equal systems).
(b) After stripping of the side and core forms, continue curing of the precast
concrete by the application of a Type 2 (white pigmented) membrane curing compound as
specified in Section 925-2 of the FDOT Specifications to all exposed surfaces (including segment
exterior once exposed by removal from the form).
(c) Maintain the moisture tight covering for at least 72 hours. As an alternative,
steam curing may be used.
450A-7.6.2 Steam Curing: Meet the requirements of Sections 400 and 450-10.6
of the FDOT Specifications modified by the following requirements when steam curing is used.
(1) Provide a device or devices for simultaneously recording the temperature of
three widely separated locations per casting bed. Locate the three temperature sensors near the
top, middle and bottom of the enclosure or as otherwise approved by the EOR. Identify the charts
with the hours, dates and segment number and deliver to the FDOT inspector immediately after
steam curing is completed unless otherwise approved.
450A-7.7 Removal of Forms: Prior to removing the forms, protect the plastic concrete
from adverse weather effects.
Keep supporting forms in place until the concrete has reached the required strength for
form removal as specified in the Plans, in this Section, or as shown on the approved shop
drawings.
Provide test cylinders, made and cured in the same manner as the segment, to confirm
the form release strength prior to removing form. With the approval of FDOT, a strength curve
chart may be established to determine the time necessary for achieving the required form
release strength, in accordance with the specifications for form removal.
Avoid damaging the segment when removing the forms. Notify the FDOT inspector of any
damage which occurs and address in an approved manner.
450A-7.8 Test Samples: Provide additional test samples and testing for compressive
strength on precast segments and field closure joints to control the construction activities and
to ensure adequate strength of these components at various stages of their manufacture and

assembly. Make test cylinders, in accordance with Section 346 of the FDOT Specifications, cured
in the same manner as the structural components to ensure adequate compressive strength has
been achieved in accordance with the plan requirements for the following conditions:
(a) Prior to release of prestressing for components which are to be pretensioned.
(Note: No prestressing strands have been identified on the Plans for the curved post-tensioned
U- Beams on this project.)
(b) Prior to form release and/or moving the components to storage.
(c) Prior to placing a component into position in the structure and/or stressing of
longitudinal post-tensioning tendons if the component is less than 28 days old.
Determine the number of cylinders in accordance with the proposed method for casting,
transporting and erecting the various components.
Provide the results of the compression testing of one or more test cylinders for
controlling the time of execution of the various construction operations. Obtain FDOT's approval
for meeting the specification requirements on casting, curing and testing of concrete test
cylinders.
No direct payment will be made for the concrete testing. All costs for such testing will be
included in the bid items for the various precast structural components.
450A-7.9 Beam Age: U-Beam component age for incorporating continuity post-
tensioning shall be as shown on the Plans.
450A-7.10 Tolerances:
450A-7.10.1 General: Product dimension tolerances for spliced U-Beams shall
meet the requirements outlined in Appendix B of PCI Manual MNL-116 (Manual for Quality
Control for Plants and Production of Structural Precast Concrete Products) and those of Section
450-2.1 of the FDOT Specifications.
450A-7.10.2 Repairs: Identify and repair minor breakage, spalling, or
honeycomb (not over 1 inch deep), and any other defects or deficiencies in accordance with
Sections 450- 12, 450-13 and 450-14 of the FDOT Specifications. Repair of minor defects on joint
surfaces is not required. Major breakage, spalling, or honeycomb in excess of 1 inch deep is
subject to the EOR's structural review and approval. If found to be satisfactory, repair these
areas using a method or procedure submitted by the Contractor and approved by the EOR. Do
not perform surface finishing or repairs of minor cracking precast segments until after final
erection of the segment, except as noted in this Technical Special Provision. Remove and dispose
segments found to be unsatisfactory and not repairable after structural review and cast a new
segment at no expense to the FDOT.
450A-8 Precast U-Beam Segment Handling, Storage and Shipment.

Handle, store and ship segments in accordance with Section 450-16 of the FDOT
Specifications and details shown in the Plans. Handle segments using only the devices shown on
the shop drawings for this purpose. Store all precast segments level in the upright position. Do
not stack U-Beam segments one upon another.

Prior to shipment the FDOT inspector will thoroughly inspect each segment for damage.
Thoroughly clean the faces of all joints of laitance, bond breaking compound and any other
foreign material prior to shipment. Upon arrival at the bridge site an FDOT inspector will inspect
each segment again. If in the FDOT inspector's opinion, any damage has occurred during
shipment that will impair the function of the segment (structurally, aesthetically, etc.), the U-
Beam segment will be referred to the EOR for further review. Replace any rejected U-Beam
segment with an approved segment at no cost to FDOT. Provide firm support at bearing locations
noted above.
450A-9 Erection.
450A-9.1 General: The work under this item consists of furnishing the design and
erection plan for the erection of the U-Beams, including the design of any necessary falsework,
shoring, bracing and cofferdams required during, or between, construction stages as detailed on
the plans, shop drawings, and Specifications.
450A-9.1.1 References: The following references apply to this work and shall be
used by the Contractor's Specialty Engineer when performing construction engineering and
designing Temporary Works:
(1) AASHTO - LRFD Bridge Design Specifications - Customary U.S. Units,
2012 with 2013 Interims.
(2) AASHTO I AWS Dl.5/Dl. 5-2010 with 2011 and 2012 Interims - Bridge Welding
Code.
(3) AASHTO - Construction Handbook for Bridge Temporary Works, 1st Edition
(1995) with 2008 Interims.
(5) AASHTO - Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works, 1st
Edition (1995) with 2008 Interims.
(6) FDOT - Structures Design Manual effective date January 1, 2014.
450A-9.1.2 Qualifications: The Contractor's Specialty Engineer charged with
preparing the erection drawings, calculations and manuals shall have a minimum of 5-years'
experience in the design and erection of spliced precast concrete structures and shall be a
Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Florida. The Contractor shall furnish the resume
of its Specialty Engineer, which shall include a detailed description of projects worked on, the
Specialty Engineer's role in these projects and owner references, which can verify the
experience.
In addition to the above, the Specialty Engineer shall be qualified in accordance
with Rule 1 4-75 Florida Administrative Code, Work Group 4.2.3: Major Bridge Design -
Segmental.
450A-9.1.3 Construction Equipment: The Contractor shall furnish and
maintain, at its own cost and risk, all tools, apparatus and appliances, equipment, and power for
same, scaffolding, runways, ladders, temporary supports and bracing, and all other similar work
or materials necessary to ensure speed, convenience, and safety in the execution of the work. All
such items shall comply with OSHA regulations and other applicable codes and standards.

450A-9.2 Construction Methods: The schematic construction sequence shown on the
plans is not mandatory. The Contractor shall prepare a complete erection sequence based either
on the construction sequence shown or a different erection sequence of its own choice. The
contractor shall submit the proposed to the engineering for review. If the Engineer determines
that the contractor's proposed erection sequence will significantly affect the performance of the
permanent structure, the Contractor shall submit design calculations and detailed drawings to
the EOR for review and approval. Any additional materials required by the contractors erection
scheme shall all be at no cost to FDOT and coordinated with the Contractor's accepted Traffic
Control Plan.
The furnishing of such plans, methods and calculations pertaining to the Contractor's
erection sequence and their approval by the EOR shall not serve to relieve the Contractor of its
responsibility for the safety of the work and the successful completion of the Project. The
Contractor's erection methods must meet all requirements established in regulatory permits for
the Project and must also conform to the requirements of the project criteria defined in the
Plans-General Notes. The contactor's erection plan shall be signed and sealed by a Registered
Professional Engineer in the State of Florida.
450A-9.3 Erection Plan: Before commencing erection operations, submit proposals for
all U-Beam segment erection operations to the EOR for review. This submittal must be in the
form of an "Erection Plan" and include but not necessarily be limited to:
(1) A detailed step-by-step sequence for the erection of each U-Beam segment
including all intermediate procedures relating to erection equipment, temporary and
permanent post-tensioning and making of closures between U-Beam segments, spans and/or
cantilevers and other required sequencing.
(2) Positioning, use and sequencing of falsework, jacking and/or releasing of
falsework, temporary towers, supports, tie-downs, counterweights, closure devices and the like.
(3) Positioning, use and sequencing of erection equipment, falsework, temporary
bracing and the like, both on and off the structure, including the movement introduction and/or
removal of any supports onto or connections with the structure. Include drawings and
calculations for the structural effects of erection equipment on the structure.
(4) Scheduling of all temporary and permanent post-tensioning operations.
(5) Stressing forces and elongations for post-tensioning.
(6) Sequencing of grouting operations.
(7) Geometry control procedures for erection of the curved precast girders
including but not limited to:
(a) Erection elevations for setting girders at temporary and permanent
supports in order to achieve the deck elevations shown in the Plans, including calculations
and/or test results to indicate estimated movement due to settlement, elastic shortening of
falsework under load, etc.
(b) Procedures for monitoring elevations of erected girders throughout the
construction process. Elevations shall be reported to the EOR for review.

(c) U-beam build-ups at each web to be set in the field which include the
theoretical geometric horizontal alignment, profile grade and superelevation appropriately
combined with the camber.
(d) Proposed methods to make adjustments to erected girder elevations if
required due to excessive movement/settlement after girders have been erected.
(8) Any other relevant operations as required and applicable to the structure type
and construction method.
(9) Geotechnical information: The Contractor is responsible to obtain
recommendations for: a) soil bearing or pile capacities; and, b) soil pressures induced on
temporary shoring. These recommendations shall be signed and sealed by a Professional
Engineer registered in the State of Florida and submitted to the EOR for review.
450A-9.4 Other Miscellaneous Erection Requirements:
450A-9.4.1 Closure Joints, Diaphragms, and Built-Up Bottom Slab Haunches:
Ensure that concrete reaches the minimum required strength as shown in the Plans or in the
Specifications prior to stressing the continuity post-tensioning. Ensure that the closure joint
forms provide tolerances as specified under 450A-7.10 Tolerances.
450A-9.4.2 Temporary Works-Shoring, Bracing, Falsework and Formwork:
The Contractor is responsible for identifying the need for and the design of any and all
Temporary Works. Temporary bracing and shoring shall be designed to accommodate all loads
to which the structure may be subjected during construction, including erection equipment and
operation of the same. Such bracing shall be left in place as long as necessary for safety.
The Contractor shall submit plans and details for Temporary Works including shoring,
falsework, bracing, blocking, and cofferdams, to the EOR for review to verify that they produce
no adverse effect to the Permanent Works.
450A-9.4.3 Cranes Supported by the Permanent Structure: If the Contractor's
Erection Plan requires the use of cranes supported by any permanent structure, the Contractor
shall prepare and submit for review by the EOR a detailed plan, including supporting
calculations, to verify that the erection method does not adversely affect any existing or new
construction. Drawings shall include all details for attaching the cranes to the permanent
structure including erection and removal details.
450A-9.5 Pressure Grouting of Bearings: Where designated on the Plans, pressure
grout after the precast element and bearing have been set at the proper final elevation.
Submit materials and method to be used for pressure grouting the interface between the
bearing and precast U-Beam to the EOR for approval.
450A-10
This section has been deleted.
450A- 11 Bridge Deck Construction and Surface.

Construct bridge deck and provide a Class 4 Floor Finish in accordance with Section 400 of the
FDOT Specifications for Long Bridges subsequent to superstructure segment erection and prior

to opening to traffic. Install expansion joints in accordance with Section 400 and other applicable
Sections of the FDOT Specifications.
450A-12 Method of Measurement.

For Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams, the final lengths will be the plan quantity based on the
casting lengths, as detailed on the plans along the centerline of each beam, subject to the
provisions of subarticle 9-3.2 of the FDOT Specifications.
450A -13 Basis of Payment.

450A-13.1 General: Payment will be in accordance with the following:
450A-13.2 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams: Payment will be made at the
Contract unit price per linear foot for Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams, complete in place
and accepted.
Such prices and payments will be full compensation for manufacture, storage, transport,
assembly and erection of the segments complete and in place, including filling all concrete
blockouts and similar miscellaneous details. These prices and payments will also include
providing temporary and permanent segment access details, material testing, special erection
equipment, temporary post-tensioning or prestressing, tools, labor and incidental items
necessary for completing the work in accordance with the Plans, Specifications and approved
shop drawings. All work and material for installing, maintaining, modifying or adjusting and
removing shoring, falsework, bracing and cofferdams shall be incidental to the unit price (per
foot) of the Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beam.
The cost for concrete and reinforcing for haunched portions of the U-Beam
bottom slab (precast or cast-in-place) shall be considered incidental to the unit price (per foot)
of the Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beam.
450A-13.3 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams-Concrete: Payment for cast-in-
place concrete for closure joints, diaphragm and details will be paid for under this item which
also includes the cost of all formwork, closure devices and other temporary construction
needed to make these closures and joints and cast-in-place segments or portions thereof as
designated in the Plans.
Include the cost of providing a Class 4 floor finish on the bridge deck and
approach slab surfaces in the cost of bridge deck and approach slab concrete.
The Bridge floor grooving will be measured and paid for separately.
No additional payment will be made for extra concrete necessitated by approved
modifications to the segments or structure needed to accommodate the Contractor’s
construction methods.
450A-13.4 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams-Reinforcement: Payment for
reinforcement embedded or originating in precast segments shall be considered incidental to
the unit price (per foot) of the Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beam.

Payment for reinforcement in cast-in-place closure joints and other cast-in-place
diaphragms and details will be at the Contract bid price per pound for reinforcing steel
(prestressed spliced U-Beam closure pours and diaphragms) and will be in accordance with
Section 400.
No additional payment will be made for extra reinforcement necessitated by
accepted modifications to the segments or structure for the purposes of the Contractor’s
construction methods.
450A-13.5 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams-Post-Tensioning: Payment for
permanent post-tensioning will be in accordance with Section 462.
No additional payment will be made for extra permanent or temporary post-
tensioning or prestressing necessitated by accepted modifications to the segments or structure
for the purposes of the Contractor’s construction methods, nor will payment be made for
temporary tendons which are approved to be left in the structure, either stressed or
unstressed, for the convenience of the Contractor’s operations.
450A-13.7 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams-Non-Compliance: Any penalties or
deductions for non-compliance with regard to concrete, reinforcement or post-tensioning will
be applied to the work affected in accordance with the requirements of the respective
specifications.
450A-13.8 Specialty Engineering Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams: Specialty

Engineering required for the erection of the Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams structure
shall be paid for separately.
450A-13.9 Payment Items:

Payment will be made under:
Item No. 400- 8-22 Class V Concrete (Closure Joint)–per cubic yard.
Item No. 415- 1- 4 Reinforcing Steel (Superstructure)–per pound.
Item No. 450A- 1 Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beam, 84”–per foot.
Item No. 450A- 2 Specialty Engineering for Precast Prestressed Spliced U-Beams
End of Section 450A

The following sample technical specification was developed to allow the development of
alternative designs in Colorado.
REVISION OF SECTION 631

ALTERNATIVE BRIDGE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
The Standard Specifications are hereby revised for this project to include Section 631,
Alternative Bridge design & Construction, as follows:
DESCRIPTION
631.01 (a) The intent of this Special Provision is to provide to all bidders the option to submit a
bid for the design and construction of an alternative bridge structure (“alternative bridge”), in
lieu of submitting a bid for only the construction of the two-cell steel box girder structure
shown on the Plans and referred to herein as the “default bridge”.
Bidders are not required to submit a bid for an alternative bridge; rather, that is an option, at
their sole discretion. However, bidders are hereby notified that Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) will consider all submitted bids for the default bridge and for the
alternate bridge together, and that CDOT will award to the low responsible and responsive
bidder regardless of the particular type of bridge structure (default or alternative) bid by that
bidder.
(b) The only alternative bridge structure type that is acceptable to CDOT under this Special
Provision, and for which CDOT will consider a bid is Precast Post-tensioned horizontally
curved U-Girders.
No other alternative bridge types will be considered by CDOT. Any bids submitted for
alternative bridge types other than the type described above will be automatically rejected and
will not be considered.
(c) The intent of this Special Provision is to provide a specification that is applicable to an
alternative bridge. Any alternative bridge submitted by a bidder must be at least equivalent to
the default bridge. To be considered “equivalent”, the alternative bridge:
(1) Must provide all of the architectural features, live load capacity, safety features,
horizontal and vertical alignment, lateral clearance and minimum vertical
clearances, as described herein and as shown on the Plans; and

(2) Must include all work and materials to design and construct foundations, piers,
abutments, and superstructure with all appurtenances, as described herein and
as shown on the Plans.
(d) Any bid for an alternative bridge structure must strictly comply with all terms and
conditions of this Special Provision, in order to be considered “responsive” and eligible for
award.
DESIGN
631.02(a) General.
CDOT has not provided designs for the alternative bridge type described above. Therefore, if a
bidder elects to submit a bid for the alternative bridge structure, the bid must include both the
design and construction of the alternative bridge, and that bidder must provide a design for
the alternative bridge (“alternative design”).
Further, the alternative design must be completed by a Professional Engineer registered in the
State of Colorado. That Professional Engineer designer of the alternative bridge shall have
been in responsible charge of the design of the type of structure being proposed within the
past five years, and a list of successfully completed projects (which include the proposed type
of structure) shall be provided as reference.
If a bidder who elects to submit a bid for the alternative bridge is the apparent low responsible
bidder, that bidder shall submit the alternative design to the Award Officer for acceptance
within 12 calendar days of bid opening. As part of the alternative design, the bidder shall
provide to CDOT preliminary design calculations, a preliminary design and construction
schedule, and preliminary drawings for the alternative bridge structure for preliminary
approval. The preliminary drawings shall include a general layout, structure elevation, typical
section, and girder erection scheme. Two hard copies of reproducible drawings shall also be
included.
Bidders on alternative bridge should be aware that only the low bidder who gets the award
will be compensated by CDOT for the design, as part of that bid; any bidders who will have
performed design work before award, but do not get the award for any reason, will have
performed that work at their sole cost and that design work will not be reimbursed by CDOT.

If CDOT does not approve that preliminary design within 30 calendar days of bid opening (12
calendar days for bidder submittal, plus 18 calendar days for CDOT review), that bid will be
rejected.
Any delay in the bidder’s submittal or CDOT’s review and approval of a proposed alternative
design, or a revision thereto, shall not extend the contract time.
The Contractor shall ensure that the alternative design meets all applicable design criteria for
strength and serviceability, as described herein and as shown on the Plans. The Contractor
shall use the Plans, and the References and Guidelines in subsection 631.02(e), for the design
criteria.
Alternative designs predicated on any errors or omissions in the Contract will be rejected. If
any such error, omission or discrepancy is discovered, the Contractor shall notify the Engineer
immediately. Failure to notify the Engineer will constitute a waiver of all claims for
misunderstandings, ambiguities, or other situations resulting from error, omission, or
discrepancy.
Experimental or demonstration-type design concepts, products, structures, or elements that

have not been pre-approved by CDOT, in writing, for general use will not be permitted in the
alternative design. Post-tensioned structural steel will not be permitted. Claims for design
errors will not be allowed for any portion of alternative design.
The alternative design shall include an independent design check by an independent engineer
registered in the State of Colorado.
(b) Final Plans and Specifications.
An alternative bridge design structure shall be identified by the same structure number as the
default bridge.
On the alternative bridge design drawings, the title block shall show the Contractor’s signature
in ink, the date signed, a business name, business address, and the note: “These drawings
(Bxxx-Byyy) which supersede drawings (Bwww-Bzzz) were approved (insert date).”
The Contractor shall submit complete original plans and electronic files for an alternative
design entirely in Auto-Cad 2000 format, and the Contractor shall make any changes in the
same medium.

The Contractor shall submit the final plans, the itemized quantity and cost break down, and the
bridge field package, to the Engineer in accordance with the preliminary design and
construction schedule. The final package for submittal shall include complete design
calculations, design check calculations, and the bridge rating. Final bridge geometry, including
project coordinates and dead load deflections, shall be included in the bridge field package.
For each portion of the alternative bridge, the Contractor shall submit two record sets of plans
with design notes and computations to the Engineer one week prior to starting construction of
that portion of the alternative bridge. The design notes and computations shall document the
conclusions reached during the development of the construction plans. The plans and design
computations will be reviewed by CDOT for completeness and to assure conformance with the
design requirements only. However, all details of the alternative design plans, as well as the
completeness and accuracy of those plans, are the Contractor’s sole responsibility. Designs and
computations that are not in compliance with Design Requirements, in section 631.02(d)
below, shall be corrected by the Contractor and resubmitted. The record sets shall bear the
endorsement seal and signature of the Professional Engineer in responsible charge of the
design and preparation of the plans.
(c) Design Computations.
The first sheet of the computations for the alternative bridge design shall contain the
endorsement seal and signature of a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Colorado.
Discrepancies between the design and the design check shall be resolved by the Contractor and
all corrections shall be reflected in the design computations.
The complete set of design computations for the alternative bridge design shall include both
substructure and superstructure and all appurtenances required. The structure shall be rated
in accordance with the CDOT Bridge Rating Manual and subsection 3.2 of the CDOT Bridge
Design Manual. The structure shall be designed for an HL-93 live load and the design shall
conform to all AASHTO requirements as amended by the CDOT Bridge Design Manual.
In the event of a conflict or difference in interpretation of the design criteria, standards, or

specifications that cannot be resolved, the decision of the Engineer shall be final.
The foundations design shall be consistent with the recommendations provided by the CDOT
Geotechnical Section. In lieu of those recommendations, the Contractor may provide a
foundation analysis by an independent geotechnical consultant. Costs for independent
foundation analysis shall be borne by the Contractor.

(d) Design Requirements.
The Standard Specifications shall apply to the construction of the alternative bridge.
The Contractor, in accordance with the Plans and the CDOT Bridge Design Manual, shall
provide inspection and maintenance access to the alternative bridge.
The Contractor shall provide all roadway lighting attachments for the alternative bridge at the
locations shown on the Plans.
All deck drains for the alternative bridge shall be placed by the Contractor at the locations, and
of the same or greater hydraulic capacity, than shown on the Plans.
All earthquake restraints or pintels for the alternative bridge shall be provided by the
Contractor in accordance with the CDOT Bridge Design Manual and AASHTO specifications.
The horizontal and vertical alignment for the alternative bridge shall be as shown on the Plans.
All substructure locations for the alternative bridge shall be as shown on the Plans. All
horizontal clearances to the traveled roadways for the alternative bridge shall be as shown on
the Plans. All vertical clearances for the alternative bridge shall not be less than the minimum
shown on the Plans.
All bearings, expansion devices, bridge rail and fence screening of the alternative bridge shall
be in accordance with the Contract, and CDOT Staff Bridge Design Manual and Staff Bridge
Design Worksheets.
The Contractor may use lightweight concrete for any portion of the alternative bridge only
with written approval of the Owner or Governing Agency.
The texture finish and color scheme of the alternative bridge shall be as shown on the Plans.
The pier column shape of the alternative bridge shall be as shown on the Plans. All piers shall
be the same shape.
The alternative bridge shall be constant depth, or shall provide the appearance of constant
depth. The girders of the alternative bridge shall be trapezoidal box shaped, and they shall be
continuous. The minimum deck overhang from the edge of the deck to the face of the girder at
the bottom of the deck shall be 3’-0”. The exterior webs of the boxes shall be sloped at one

horizontal to four vertical (1:4). The Contractor shall not use intermediate hinge joints in the
superstructure.
(e) Reference and Guidelines.
The following shall be applicable to the design and construction of an alternative bridge.
- Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction

- American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official (AASHTO) LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications (1998 with 1999 and 2001 Interims)
- Colorado Department of Transportation M& S Standards (2000)
- Colorado Department of Transportation Bridge Design Manual (1992)
- Colorado Department of Transportation Bridge Rating Manual (1995)
- CDOT Staff bridge Design Worksheets
- CDOT Bridge Manual Vol. II Detailing and Checking Chapter 3
- ANSI/AASHTO/AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5-95
- AASHTO Guide Specification for Design and Construction of Segmental Concrete
Bridges
- AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges
- Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Field Materials Manual
- CDOT Survey Manual
- CDOT Cost Estimates Item Book
- CDOT Cost Estimates Cost Data ( Current Addition)
- CDOT Procedural Directive 508.1 Professional Engineers Stamp
- Final Foundation Report; Structure #E-17-QJ
Future continuity reinforcement required by the AASHTO Guide specification for Precast Post-
tensioned Segmental Bridges shall be external and shall be provided for with tendon
blockouts, deviation blocks and anchor blocks.
MATERIALS
631.04 General: All materials used in the construction of an alternative bridge structure must
meet the requirements of the applicable sections of the Standard Specifications.

Materials that do not meet these requirements are subject to rejection or price
adjustment.
CONSTRUCTION
631.07
(a) General. Construction of the alternative bridge shall strictly conform to the
applicable sections of the Standard Specifications.
(b) Survey. Construction survey for the alternative bridge shall be in accordance with
Section 625, as revised for this project.
(c) Traffic Control. Traffic control for the alternative bridge shall conform to the Traffic
Control Plan included in the Contract.
(d) Construction Oversight and Inspection. Cost of quality assurance inspections will be
the responsibility of CDOT. The Contractor shall be responsible for quality control
inspections for the alternative bridge. The Contractor’s Engineer of Record shall
check and approve all construction details, and records of post-tensioning and
geometric control, for the alternative bridge.
The designer of a shored structure shall review and approve shoring and falsework details for
construction of the proposed alternative bridge.
(e) Engineer’s Certification. The Contractor’s registered Engineer shall provide a letter
certifying that the alternative bridge structure was constructed in accordance with the
Contract, and that it meets all requirements of the design.
The presence of the Engineer of Record on the project shall in no way act to relieve the
Contractor of the full responsibility for: conformance of the work to the requirements of the
contract documents; the structural adequacy of the erection scheme he chooses; or the safety
of workmen or the general public.
(f) As-constructed Plans. The Contractor shall provide copies of the as-constructed plans,
shop drawings, and working drawings for the alternative bridge for informational purposes
and for future maintenance. Complete as-constructed plans and electronic files for an

alternative bridge shall be submitted by the Contractor entirely in AutoCAD 2000 format, and
all changes shall be made by the Contractor in the same medium.
Falsework shall be removed prior to placement of the Type 7 Barrier.
The bottom slab and webs shall be placed monolithically. A construction joint between the
bottom slab and web will not be allowed.
631.10 The alternative bridge design and construction will not be measured, but will be paid
for on a lump sum basis, which basis will include all work and materials required to design and
construct an alternative bridge.
The work will include, without limitation, the design, the independent design check, bridge
rating, preparation of plans, details, and drawings required to fabricate and construct the
alternative bridge, and the construction of the superstructure, foundations, abutments, railings
and appurtenances. All discrepancies in quantities for the alternative bridge design will be the
Contractor’s sole responsibility and will not be adjusted.
The completed structure shall include the following items, which will not be measured
separately, but will be included in the bid price for Item 631, Alternative Bridge Design
Construction:
Structure Excavation, Structure Backfill (Class 1), Structure Backfill (Class 2), Mechanical
Reinforcement of Soil, Shoring, Drilled Caissons, Concrete Slope and Ditch Paving, Structural
Steel, Bearing Devices, Bridge Drains, Concrete Sealer, Bridge Expansion Devices, Concrete Class D
(Bridge), Structural Concrete Coating, Bridge Deck Finish (sawed Grooves), Reinforcing Steel,
Reinforcing Steel (Epoxy Coated), Bridge Rail Type 7, Fence Chain Link (Special) (36 Inch), 1 Inch
Electrical Conduit, 2 Inch Electrical Conduit, Prestressing Steel Wire or Strand, Prestressed
Concrete Slab (Depth Less Than 6 Inches), Precast Concrete U Girder (Post-Tensioned),
Mobilization and all other work and materials to complete the structure.
By submitting a bid for Alternative Bridge Design and Construction, the Contractor agrees to
accept the amount of that bid, as a lump sum basis, for the complete and satisfactory
performance of the work.
BASIS OF PAYMENT

631.11 The accepted quantities for construction of the alternative bridge will be paid for at the
contract lump sum bid as follows:
Payment will be made under:
Pay Item Pay Unit
Alternative Bridge Design & Construction Lump Sum
Lump sum Basis:

The lump sum bid price shall be full compensation for the cost of all the work, materials, tools,
equipment, and incidentals required to complete the design and construction of the alternative
bridge, including any modification required at bridge approaches. The work shall include
design, independent design check, bridge rating, and plan preparation for the alternative
bridge. Supplemental survey and foundation investigation required for alternative bridge shall
also be included in the work. The Contractor’s construction oversight and quality control
inspections shall be included in the work.
The Engineer will determine partial payment for the construction of the alternative bridge and
include the partial payment on the monthly pay estimate.
Partial Payment and Price Reduction: The Contractor shall furnish an itemized quantity and
cost break down of the Lump Sum bid to the Engineer prior to commencement of construction.
The Contractor’s itemized quantity and cost break down shall reference the CDOT item
numbers as provided in the CDOT Cost Estimates Item Book.
The Engineer will review the Contractor’s itemized quantity and cost break down to determine
its trueness and reasonableness by using CDOT cost estimate data. The Contractor’s approved
itemized quantity and cost break shall be used as a basis for calculating monthly partial
payments and price adjustments for materials that do not meet specifications.
No adjustment will be made for differences in preliminary estimated quantities and final
quantities.

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES_____________APPENDIX D
EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX D - INTRODUCTION TO EXAMPLE

CALCULATIONS
Selected calculations are included to illustrate design concepts for curved, spliced, precast,
prestressed concrete U-beams. These calculations build on the analysis and discussion
presented for the prototype bridge in section 6 of this report.
These calculations are provided for reference only. The engineer shall evaluate the
appropriateness of the calculations for the intended project before their use.
An example table of contents for a complete set of calculations is provided in this appendix.
Calculations for a particular project will vary depending on the design opportunities and
constraints, and the requirements of the project governing agency. Thus, a representative
collection of abbreviated calculations related to curved U-beam design is provided, including
the following:
• Flexure at service limit state
• Flexure at strength limit state
• Web design at service limit state – Principal tensile stress
• Web design at strength limit state
• Beam camber
APPENDIX D - 1 (April 2020)

D.1 EXAMPLE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR CALCULATIONS

1 General
1.1 General
1.2 Tender Design Layout
1.3 Design Criteria
1.4 Survey Information
1.5 Geotechnical Information
1.6 Bridge Drainage
1.7 Utilities
1.8 Traffic Data
1.9 Special Provisions
2 Geometry
2.1 Geometry Computations
2.1.1 Clearance Criteria
2.1.2 Geometry Data
2.1.3 Roadway to Bridge Horizontal Clearances (Bridge Layout)
2.1.4 Roadway to Bridge Vertical Clearances
2.2 Geometrics
2.2.1 Roadway Geometry
2.2.2 Bridge Geometry
2.2.2.1 Bridge Geometry
2.2.2.2 Girder Geometry
2.2.2.3 Beam Dimensions
2.2.2.4 Finished Grade Elevations
2.2.2.5 Beam Seat Elevations
2.2.3 End Bent Layout and Elevations
2.2.4 Top of Footing and Pile Cut Off Elevations
2.2.5 Pier Geometry and Elevations
2.2.6 Pile Group Work Point Coordinates
3 Superstructure
3.1 General
3.1.1 Material Properties
3.1.2 Section Properties
3.2 Construction Design
3.2.1 Construction Loads
3.2.2 Lifting and Transport
3.3 Loading
3.3.1 Dead Loads
3.3.2 Superimposed Dead Loads
3.3.3 Live Loads
3.3.4 Creep and Shrinkage
3.3.5 Temperature Loads
3.3.6 Post-Tensioning
3.3.6.1 General
3.3.6.2 Tendon Geometry
3.3.6.3 Jacking Analysis
3.3.6.4 Tendon Input Data

3.4 Slab Design
3.4.1 Slab Design
3.4.2 Slab Pouring Sequence
3.5 Main Girder Design - Transverse
3.5.1 Model Input
3.5.2 Model Output
3.5.3 Slab & Girder Design
3.6 Main Girder Global Analysis - Longitudinal (Time Dependent Model Input)
3.6.1 Model Layout
3.6.1.1 Superstructure Element Numbering
3.6.1.2 Substructure Element Numbering
3.6.1.3 Boundary Conditions & Temporary Supports
3.6.1.4 Girder Geometry
3.6.2 Geometry Input
3.6.3 Element Properties
3.6.3.1 Material Properties
3.6.3.2 Creep & Shrinkage Properties
3.6.4 Section Properties
3.6.4.1 U-Beams
3.6.4.2 Piers
3.6.4.3 Deck Slab
3.6.4.4 Diaphragms
3.6.5 Loadings
3.6.5.1 Dead Loads
3.6.5.2 Post-Tensioning
3.6.5.3 Construction Loads
3.6.5.4 Live Loads
3.6.5.5 Temperature Loads
3.6.5.6 Load Combinations
3.6.6 Construction Schedule & Casting Dates
3.6.7 Verification Model
3.6.7.1 Model Input
3.6.7.2 Model Output
3.6.7.3 Model Comparison to Design Model

3.7 Main Girder Design - Longitudinal
3.7.1 General
3.7.1.1 Section Properties
3.7.1.2 Post-Tensioning
3.7.1.3 Mild Reinforcement Data
3.7.2 Load Combinations
3.7.3 Flexure at Service Limit State <- Included
3.7.3.1 Left Girder
3.7.3.2 Right Girder
3.7.4 Flexure at Strength Limit State <- Included
3.7.4.1 Left Girder
3.7.5 Web Design at Service Limit State - Principal Tensile Stress <- Included
3.7.5.1 Left Girder
3.7.6 Web Design at Strength Limit State <- Included
3.7.6.1 Left Girder
3.7.7 Erection Stresses Envelopes
3.7.7.1 Left Girder
3.7.8 Temporary Towers Service Loads
3.8 Diaphragm Design
3.8.1 General
3.8.2 Loadings
3.8.3 Interior Pier Diaphragm
3.8.4 Expansion Diaphragm
3.8.5 Anchorage
3.8.6 Shear Friction Check
3.8.7 Spalling Reinforcement Check
3.8.8 Reinforcement Details - Interior
3.8.9 Reinforcement Details - Expansion
3.9 Closure Joint Segment Design
3.10 Blister Design
3.10.1 Intermediate Anchorage Details
3.10.1.1 Top Blister
3.10.1.2 Bottom Blister
3.10.2 U-Beam End Anchorage Details
3.11 Access Opening Design
3.12 Tendon Radial Confinement
3.13 Camber
3.13.1 Camber Design <- Included

4 Substructure - End Bents
4.1 Layout and Geometry
4.2 End Bent Loads
4.3 End Bent Pile Design and Strap Forces
4.3.1 Pile Axial Loads and Strap Forces
4.3.2 Pile Lateral Analysis
4.4 End Bent Cap Design
4.4.1 Cap Design
4.4.2 Detailing Summary
5 Substructure - Piers
5.1 Pier Geometry
5.1.1 Pier Design Geometry
5.1.2 Minimum Beam Seat
5.2 Pier Loads
5.2.1 Load Combinations
5.2.2 Superstructure Loads from Design Model
5.2.3 Centrifugal Loads
5.2.4 Braking Loads
5.2.5 Wind Loads
5.3 Pier Cap Design
5.3.1 Strut and Tie Model Design
5.3.2 Beam Model Design
5.4 Pier Column Design
5.4.1 Column Design
5.4.2 Serviceability Check
5.4.3 Shear and Torsion Design
5.5 Pile Design
5.5.1 Pile Axial Load Design
5.5.2 Pile Lateral Analysis
5.6 Pile Cap Design
5.6.1 Pile Cap Design

D.2 FLEXURE AT SERVICE LIMIT STATE














D.3 FLEXURE AT STRENGTH LIMIT STATE

















D.4 WEB PRINCIPAL AT SERVICE LIMIT STATE PRINCIPAL TENSILE STRESS



D.5 WEB DESIGN AT STRENGTH LIMIT STATE



















D.6 CAMBER






DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES_____________APPENDIX E
PCI STANDARDS
APPENDIX E - PCI STANDARDS
APPENDIX E - 1 (April 2020)

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

PCI STANDARDS

DESIGN OF CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM BRIDGES_____________APPENDIX F
PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
APPENDIX F - PCI-PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE

RESPONSES
The information presented on these questionnaires was collected from available plan sets and
may not represent the actual as-built condition of the structure. For bridges with multiple
units, only the unit containing the controlling span was recorded.
APPENDIX F - 1 (April 2020)














A PCI Report
8770 W. Bryn Mawr Ave. | Suite 1150 | Chicago, IL 60631-3517 | 312-786-0300 | www.pci.org

Design of Curved Spliced Precast Concrete UBeam Bridges

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Design of Curved Spliced Precast Concrete UBeam Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A PCI Report

200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

for the Design of

Concrete U-Beam Bridges

Fir st Edit ion

200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

for the Design of

Concrete U-Beam Bridges

200 West Adams Street I Suite 2100 I Chicago, IL 60606-5230

Fir st Edit ion

Library of Congress Control Number: 2020937997

Publisher’s Cataloging-In-Publication Data

Correlation between the Guide Document for the

Training Course T350

Training Course T353

After completing this course, the student will understand:

Training Course T356

Training Course T358

After completing this course, the student will be able to:

U1.1 Structure of the Document

U1.1.2 Numbered Paragraphs

U1.1.3 Page Header

U1.1.4 Page Footer

U1.1.5 Figures and Tables

U1.2 Revisions and Registration

U1.2.1 Registering Your Copy

U1.2.2 Errors and Omissions

U1.3 Exchange of Suggestions

U1 3.2 Our Suggestion

TOC- 1 (April 2020)

4.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................................................................... 4-1

TOC- 2 (April 2020)

7.1.1 Internal Bracing .............................................................................................................................. 7-2

TOC- 3 (April 2020)

THIS PAGE INTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TOC- 4 (April 2020)

TOF- 1 (April 2020)

Figure 6.8 Torsion in right girder. .................................................................................................................. 6-15

TOF- 2 (April 2020)

CURVED, SPLICED PRECAST CONCRETE U-BEAM

1-1 (April 2020)

1.3 LIMITS OF APLICABILITY

1.4 DEFINITIONS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMS

1-2 (April 2020)

1-3 (April 2020)

1-4 (April 2020)

1-5 (April 2020)

1.7 REFERENCE CODE

1-6 (April 2020)

IMPLEMENTATION OF CURVED, SPLICED U-BEAM

2.1.1 Review of Projects

RampK,I- CO 158-200-200- 0.79 7 ft 7 ft 9.0 in. 25.8 24 ft 2 in.

Austin Bluffs CO 132-210-140-110 0.67 7 ft 7 ft 10.0 in. 26.8 25 ft 4 in.

Ramp A, SH- CO 154-205-235-187, 0.8, 8 ft 8 ft 10.0 in. 26.6 19 ft 0 in.

West Bijou St. CO 106-135-148-86 0.71 5 ft 5 ft 9.0 in. 25.7 20 ft 4 in.

SH-120 / CO 81-112-145-71 0.49 4 ft 4 ft 8.5 in. 30.8 24 ft 2 in.

I-95 FL 145-200-231-191, 0.83, 0.73, 7 ft 7 ft 9.0 in. 29.8 23 ft 9 in.

SH-85 over CO 147-188-147 0.78 6 ft 6 ft 9.0 in. 27.9 19 ft 4 in.

Bronco CO 86-148-135 0.58, 0.91 6 ft 6 ft 8.0 in. 22.2 25 ft 0 in.

Ramp 1, I- CO 145-191-147, 0.77, 6 ft 6 ft 9.0 in. 28.6 22 ft 0 in.

C-470 over CO 133-110-132- 0.93 6 ft 6 ft 8.0 in. 24.8 17 ft 6 in.

Arbor Road CO 141-135 3 ft 9 in. 3 ft 9 in. 6.0 in. 33.2 9 ft 4 in.