Week 2 Lec Material

E L
T
BRIDGE ENGINEERING
P
N
Prof. Piyali Sengupta
Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad
Module 02: Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Decks

Lecture 06: Design of Slab Culverts
Ø General Features
Ø Flexural Strength
E L
P T
N
Ø Shear Strength
Ø Control of Cracking
Ø Control of Deflection
Ø Effective Width Method
Ø Design Example
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Effective Width Method N
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Basic Features
• A deck slab bridge is the simplest type of construction, adopted

mostly for small span bridges. They are also stated as slab
culverts.
• Slab culverts are slab decks supported on the piers/ abutments.
•
E L
The deck slab is designed to be a one-way slab to support the
P T
dead loads and live loads inclusive of impact factors.
• N
The span of reinforced concrete slab bridges should not exceed
8 m in order to make the superstructure economical.
Bridge Engineering
Basic Features
• The thickness of the slab used for RC bridge deck is

considerably higher.
• For larger spans, prestressed concrete slab decks are preferred

as the slab thickness can be reduced with prestressed concrete
being the structural material.
E L
•
P T
Construction of slab culverts is simpler due to easier
N
fabrication of formwork, reinforcement detailing and placement
of concrete.
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Flexural Strength
The ultimate flexural strength of reinforced concrete sections

can be determined by assuming suitable stress block in the
concrete compression zone.
The basic principles of estimating the ultimate strength of
E L
structural elements subjected to flexure are well established.
P T
N
Most of the codes have specified idealized stress block
parameters for concrete in the compression zone.
Bridge Engineering
Flexural Strength: Basic Assumptions
a) Plane sections normal to the axis remain plane after bending.
b) The maximum strain in concrete at the outermost

compression fiber is taken as 0.0035 in flexure regardless of
the grade of concrete.
E L
c) The relation between the compressive stress distribution and
P T
strain in concrete is assumed to be a rectangular parabola
N
which is in close agreement with the experimental results.
d) The tensile strength of concrete is ignored.
e) The stresses in the reinforcement are derived from

representative stress-strain curve for the type of steel used.
Bridge Engineering
f) The maximum strain in tension reinforcement in the section at

failure shall be not less than that computed by the relation.
𝒇𝒚 𝟎.𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚
ε𝒔𝒖 = + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟐 = + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟐
𝟏.𝟏𝟓𝑬𝒔 𝑬𝒔
Where 𝒇𝒚 = Characteristic strength of steel

E L
𝑬𝒔 = Modulus of elasticity of steel
P T
N
𝒇𝒄𝒌 = Characteristic strength of concrete
𝟎.𝟔𝟕𝒇𝒄𝒌 𝟎.𝟔𝟕𝒇𝒄𝒌
Design strength of concrete = = = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟓𝒇𝒄𝒌
𝜸𝒎 𝟏.𝟓
𝜸𝒎 = Partial safety factor
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Characteristic and Design Strength Curves for Concrete

in Compression
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Characteristic and Design Stress-Strain Curves

for Fe 415 Steel
Bridge Engineering
Flexural Strength: Stress Blocks
0.002
E L
P T
N
Stress Block Parameters
Bridge Engineering
Depth of parabolic portion of the stress block from the strain

diagram, using the principle of similar triangles = 0.002 × 𝒙𝒖/ 0.0035
= 4𝒙𝒖/7 = 0.57 𝒙𝒖
Depth of rectangular portion of the stress block = 𝒙𝒖− 4𝒙𝒖/7 = 3𝒙𝒖/7

= 0.43 𝒙𝒖
E L
P T
Compression force in the parabolic stress block = (2/3 × 0.45𝒇𝒄𝒌 ×
0.57𝒙𝒖× b) = 0.17𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b
N
Compression force in the rectangular stress block = (0.45𝒇𝒄𝒌 ×
0.43𝒙𝒖× b) = 0.19𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b
Where 𝒙𝒖 = Depth of Neutral Axis

𝒇𝒄𝒌 = Characteristic Compressive Strength
Bridge Engineering
𝒃 = Width of section
Total Compression Force = Sum of the compression forces from

parabolic and rectangular stress blocks = 0.17𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b +
0.19𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b = 0.36𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b
E L
T
Position of centre of compression from neutral axis = [0.17𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖
0.36𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × b = 0.58 𝒙𝒖 N P
× (3/5 × 0.57) × 𝒙𝒖 × b + 0.19𝒇𝒄𝒌 × 𝒙𝒖 × (0.43/2 + 0.57) × 𝒙𝒖 × b]/
Position of centre of compression from extreme compression

fibre = 𝒙𝒖 − 0.58 𝒙𝒖 = 0.42 𝒙𝒖
Bridge Engineering
Balanced, Under Reinforced and Over Reinforced Sections
• When the compressive strain in concrete reaches a value of

0.0035, reinforced concrete sections in flexure reach the failure.
• When the sections are reinforced in such a way that the tension
steel reaches the yield strain εy = [(0.87fy)/Es+0.002] and
E L
simultaneously the concrete strain is εc = 0.0035, then the
section is termed as Balanced section.
P T
• N
In Under reinforced sections, the tension steel reaches yield
strain at loads lower than the load at which concrete reaches the
failure strain. There will be excessive deflections and cracking
with a clear indication of impending failure, when the steel yields
earlier than concrete.
Bridge Engineering
Balanced, Under Reinforced and Over Reinforced Sections
• It is preferable to design sections as under reinforced since

failure will take place after yielding of steel with visible warnings
like excess deflections and cracking before the ultimate failure.
• In the case of over reinforced sections, concrete reaches the

maximum strain earlier than that of steel.
E L
•
P T
Over reinforced sections fail by compression failure of concrete
N
without much warning, with very few cracks and negligible
deflections.
• In practice, over reinforced concrete sections are not preferred

since they require higher reinforcement and experience sudden
catastrophic failure without any warning.
Bridge Engineering
Depth of Neutral Axis
• For under reinforced sections, the moment resistance can be

computed by using the stress diagram assumed at the limit state
of collapse.
• For a section of width b, effective depth d, Area of tension
E L
reinforcement Ast and neutral axis depth xu, for equilibrium of
forces at the limit state of collapse,
P T
Total tension T = Total compression C N
𝑨𝒔𝒕 . 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌 . 𝒃. 𝒙𝒖
𝒙𝒖 𝟎.𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕
Or, =
𝒅 𝟎.𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌 𝒃 𝒅
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Depth of Neutral Axis
• Maximum values of 𝒙𝒖/𝒅 to avoid compression failure i.e. brittle

failure is determined from the condition that the steel strain 𝝐𝒔𝒖
at failure should not be less than the value given by ∈𝒔𝒖 =
𝟎.𝟖𝟕 𝒇𝒚
+ 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟐
L
𝑬𝒔
• From proportionality of strains, we have the relation,

T E
𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙
𝒅
=
∈𝒄𝒖
∈𝒄𝒖 $∈𝒔𝒖
=
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓$∈𝒔𝒖
=
N
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓 P =
𝟎.𝟖𝟕 𝒇𝒚
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓$ 𝑬 $𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟐
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓
𝟎.𝟖𝟕 𝒇𝒚
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟓$ 𝑬
𝒔 𝒔
Here, is the limiting values of 𝒙𝒖/𝒅 to avoid compression
𝒅
failure i.e. brittle failure.
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Depth of Neutral Axis
𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙 𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓
= 𝟎.𝟖𝟕 𝒇𝒚
𝒅 𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟓$ 𝑬
𝒔
• Assuming Es = 2 × 105 N/mm2, the maximum limiting values

of 𝒙𝒖/𝒅 for different grades of steel can be determined.
E L
𝒇𝒚 (in MPa) Yield Strain ∈𝒔𝒖
P T𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙
N
𝒅
250 0.0031 0.53
415 0.0038 0.48
500 0.0042 0.46
Bridge Engineering
Moment of Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Sections
• For under reinforced sections, the moment resistance can be

computed by using the stress diagram assumed at the limit state
of collapse. Taking moments about the centre of compression,
𝑴𝒖 = 𝑻 𝒅 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐𝒙𝒖
• Substituting 𝒙𝒖 =
𝟎.𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕
and 𝑻 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕
E L
T
𝟎.𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌 𝒃
𝑴𝒖 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕 . [𝒅 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐× P

𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕
N
𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃
]
𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕
• Simplifying and rearranging, 𝑴𝒖 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕 𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕 . 𝒅 ×[𝟏 − ]
𝒇𝒄𝒌 𝒃𝒅
𝟏𝟎𝟎𝑨𝒔𝒕 𝑴𝒖 𝒑 𝒇𝒚 𝒑
• Percentage of steel 𝒑 = ,
𝒃 𝒅 𝒃𝒅𝟐
= 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 . 𝟏𝟎𝟎 ×[𝟏 − 𝒇𝒄𝒌
× 𝟏𝟎𝟎 ]
Bridge Engineering
• The moment of resistance of a concrete section can also be

determined in terms of concrete strength by taking the moment
of compression force about the tension force in steel
𝑴𝒖 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃 𝒙𝒖 𝒅 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐𝒙𝒖
• Simplifying and rearranging, we find

E L
𝑴𝒖 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃𝒅𝟐
𝒙𝒖
P T 𝒙𝒖
N
𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐
𝒅 𝒅
• Limiting values of Moment of resistance can be obtained by
𝒙𝒖 𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙
replacing with
𝒅 𝒅
𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙 𝒙𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙
𝑴𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝒇𝒄𝒌 𝒃𝒅𝟐 𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐
𝒅 𝒅
Bridge Engineering
• Limiting Moment of Resistance for Limiting for Different
𝒅
Grades of Steel are shown below.
𝒇𝒚 (in MPa) 𝑴𝒖,𝒎𝒂𝒙
L
𝒅
250 0.53
T E
𝟎. 𝟏𝟒𝟗𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃𝒅𝟐
415 0.48
NP 𝟎. 𝟏𝟑𝟖𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃𝒅𝟐
500 0.46 𝟎. 𝟏𝟑𝟑𝒇𝒄𝒌𝒃𝒅𝟐
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Shear Failures in Bridge Deck Slabs
• Shear failures are likely to occur near the supports of bridge

decks where maximum shear forces develop due to the vehicular
loads.
• The most common types of Shear failures are identified under

the following groups.
E L
a. Diagonal Tension
P T
b. Flexure Shear N
c. Shear Compression
d. Shear Bond
e. Shear Friction
Bridge Engineering
Shear Failures in Bridge Deck Slabs
• The ultimate shear strength of a reinforced concrete beam or

slab section depends upon several factors like percentage
reinforcement ratio, grade of concrete and depth of slab.
• Experimental studies have shown that slabs fail at loads
E L
corresponding to a nominal shear stress that is higher than that
P T
applicable for beams of usual proportions.
• N
In the case of reinforced concrete slab decks, shear resistance
being high, failure due to shear is a rare phenomenon and shear
reinforcements are not generally provided in slabs.
• If nominal shear stress exceeds the permissible values, depth of

the slab is increased to avoid use of shear reinforcements.
Bridge Engineering
Shear Strength in Bridge Deck Slabs
• According to the IRC bridge design code, the design shear

resistance 𝑽𝑹𝒅.𝒄 of the member without shear reinforcement is
given by the expression:
𝑽𝑹𝒅.𝒄 = [0.12K(𝟖𝟎 𝝆𝟏 𝒇𝒄𝒌)𝟎.𝟑𝟑 ]𝒃𝒘.d
E L
T
𝑨
𝝆𝟏 = 𝒔𝟏 ≤ 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐
𝒃𝒘 .𝒅
N P
Where 𝑨𝒔𝟏 = area of longitudinal reinforcement in the member
𝒃𝒘 = width of member in slabs and width of rib in beams
d = effective depth of the member
K = shear strength enhancing factor
Bridge Engineering
Shear Strength in Bridge Deck Slabs
• The shear strength enhancing factor K depends on the depth of

the solid slab.
• The IS: 456-2000 specifies values of K ranging from 1 to 1.30 for

slabs of depths ranging from 300 to 150 mm respectively.
• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies an

E
empirical L equation for
determining K as follows.
P T
K=1+
𝟐𝟎𝟎 N
≤ 𝟐. 𝟎𝟎
𝒅
Where d is the effective depth in mm.
Bridge Engineering
Minimum and Maximum Reinforcements in Bridge Deck Slabs
• In case of deck slabs, the effective cross-sectional area of the

longitudinal tensile reinforcement should be not less than that
required to control cracking and not less than 𝑨𝒔,𝒎𝒊𝒏 given by:
𝒇𝒄𝒕𝒎
L
𝑨𝒔,𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 0.26 𝒃𝒕 𝐝 but not less than 0.0013𝒃𝒕 d
𝒇𝒚𝒌
Where 𝒃𝒕 = mean width of the tension zone in slabs

T E
N P
𝒇𝒄𝒕𝒎 = mean value of axial tensile strength of concrete
𝐝 = effective depth
• The maximum reinforcement should not be greater than 0.025

𝑨𝒄 at the sections other than laps.
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Permissible Crack Widths
• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies values for the maximum permissible

width of cracks in reinforced and prestressed concrete bridge
decks depending on the exposure conditions.
Conditions Reinforced Concrete Prestressed Members with

of Exposure Members and
E L
Bonded Tendons
Prestressed Concrete
Members with Un-
P T
Bonded Tendons
Quasi-permanent Load
N
Frequent Load Combination
Combination (mm) (mm)
Moderate 0.3 0.2
Severe 0.3 0.2
Very Severe 0.2 0.2 and Decompression
and Extreme
Bridge Engineering
Permissible Crack Widths
(1) The condition of exposure considered applies to the most

severe exposure the surface will be subjected to in service.
(2) For moderate exposure class, crack width has an influence on

durability and this limit is set to guarantee acceptable appearance.
E L
(3) For these conditions of exposure, in addition, decompression
P T
should be checked under the quasi-permanent combination of
N
loads that include DL + SIDL + Prestress including secondary
effect + settlement + temperature effects.
(4) 0.2 applies to the parts of the member that do not have to be
checked for decompression.
Bridge Engineering
Control of Cracking
• The IRC: 112-2011 recommends a simpler procedure for control

of cracking without direct calculations.
• In this method, the code recommends the use of two tables in

which the maximum permissible stress in steel immediately after
E L
cracking is restricted to specified values for different bar
P T
diameters and bar spacings corresponding to the width of
•
cracks.
N
The maximum bar diameters and spacings for control of crack
widths of 0.3 mm and 0.2 mm for different stress levels in steel
are presented in tabular forms.
Bridge Engineering
Control of Cracking
Table 12.2 of IRC: 112-2011
Steel Service Maximum Bar Size (mm)

Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
L
160 32 25
200 25
T 16E
240 16
N P 12
280 12 ─
320 10 ─
Bridge Engineering
Control of Cracking
Table 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011
Steel Service Maximum Bar Spacing (mm)

Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
L
160 300 200
200 250
T E
150
240 200
N P 100
280 150 50
320 100 ─
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Control of Deflections in Bridge Decks
• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies the limiting values of deflection

taking into account the nature of the super structure, bridge deck
furniture and functional needs of the bridge.
• In the absence other criteria, the following deflection limits under

live load may be considered:
E L
Vehicular
P T Span/800
alone
N
Vehicular and Pedestrian or Pedestrian
Span/1000
Vehicular on Cantilever Span Cantilever Span/300

Vehicular and pedestrian and pedestrian
Cantilever Span/375
only on Cantilever Arms
Bridge Engineering
Control of Deflections in Bridge Decks
• According to the IS: 456-2000 and IS: 1343-2012 code of practice

for reinforced and prestressed concrete, the final deflection due
to all loads including the effects of temperature, creep and
shrinkage is limited to a value of span/250.
•
E L
The deflection limit of span/800 according to the IRC: 112-2011
P T
seems to be very conservative resulting in larger sizes of deck
N
elements with more reinforcements affecting the overall cost of
the deck structure.
• That is why the final deflection limit due to all loads including the
effects of temperature, creep and shrinkage is taken as span/250.
Bridge Engineering
Calculation of Deflections in Bridge Decks
Computation of deflections are considered in two parts.
• Instantaneous or short term deflections due to application of

loads
L
• Long term deflections resulting from differential shrinkage and
creep due to sustained loading
T E
N P
In case of cracked members, appropriate value of cracked moment
of inertia should be used in the computations. If actual value of
cracked moment of inertia cannot be determined, the code permits
the use of 70 percent of the gross moment of inertia for
computations.
Bridge Engineering
Deflection due to Shrinkage in Bridge Decks
𝟏
Deflection due to Shrinkage acs = k L2
rcs
Where k is a constant dependent on the support conditions.
k = 0.5 for cantilever ends, 0.125 for simply supported ends,
0.086 for continuous at one end, 0.063 for fully continuous ends.
𝟏
= Shrinkage curvature = [εcsαe(S/I)]
E L
T
rcs
αe = Modular Ratio =
𝑬𝒔
𝑬𝒄
N P
𝑬𝒔 = Young’s Modulus of Steel
𝑬𝒄 = Young’s Modulus of Concrete
S = First Moment of Area of Reinforcement about Centroid of
Section
I = Second Moment of Area of the section
Bridge Engineering
εcs = Total shrinkage strain = (εcd + εca)

εcd = Drying shrinkage strain
Drying shrinkage strain develops slowly since it is a function of the
migration of the water through the pores in the hardened concrete.
E L
Development of drying shrinkage strain with time εcd(t) = βds(t, ts) ×
kh εcd, unrestrained
P T
N
Where βds(t, ts) = [(t ‒ ts)/{(t ‒ ts) + 0.04√h03}]
h0 = Notional size of cross-section = 2Ac/u
Ac = Cross-sectional area of concrete
u = Perimeter of the cross-section exposed to drying shrinkage
t = Age of concrete in days at the time considered
Bridge Engineering
ts = Age of concrete in days at the beginning of drying shrinkage,

normally at the end of curing i.e. 28 days
kh = a factor dependent on notional size h0
εcd, unrestrained = unrestrained drying shrinkage
E L
T
Table 6.7 of IRC: 112-2011 Table 6.8 of IRC: 112-2011
h0 (mm)
100
kh
1.0
fck
(MPa) N P
εcd, unrestrained (× 106)
Relative Humidity (%)
200 0.85 20 50 80
300 0.75 25 620 535 300
≥ 500 0.70 50 480 420 240

75 380 330 190
95 300 260 150
Bridge Engineering
εca = Autogenous shrinkage strain

Autogenous shrinkage strain develops during hardening of
concrete in the early days after casting and it depends on concrete
strength.
Table 6.6 of IRC: 112-2011
E L
Grade of Concrete M30 M35 M45
T
M50
P
M60 M65
Autogenous Shrinkage
Strain εca (× 106)
35 45
N
65 75 95 105
Bridge Engineering
Deflection due to Creep in Bridge Decks
Deflection due to Creep effects of sustained loading over a long

period is calculated by using the Effective Modulus of Elasticity for
Concrete using the equation below.
Ec,eff = Ecm/(1 + ø)
where
E L
P T
N
Ecm = Secant Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete
Ø = Creep Coefficient for different ages of sustained loading and

atmospheric conditions
Bridge Engineering
Deflection due to Creep in Bridge Decks
Table 6.9 of IRC: 112-2011
Creep Coefficient ø
Age at Notional Size 2Ac/u (mm)
Loading 50 150 600 50 150 600
t0 (days)
Dry atmospheric conditions (RH Humid atmospheric conditions (RH
L
50%) 80%)
1 5.50 4.60 3.70 3.60
T E
3.20 2.90
7
28
5.50
3.90
4.60
3.10
3.70
2.60
N
2.60
1.90 P 2.30
1.70
2.00
1.50
90 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.40 1.20
365 1.80 1.50 1.20 1.10 1.00 1.00
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Wheel Loads on Concrete Slabs
• Wheel load is generally considered as a concentrated load on

slab. This load will get dispersed along span wise and widthwise
directions.
• Navier proposed a mathematical model for analysis of moments
L
and shear forces in steel plates subjected to concentrated
E
T
loads. However, this method is not applicable to concrete slabs.
P
•
N
Semi-empirical methods are applied for analysis of slabs
subjected to concentrated loads.
Bridge Engineering
Wheel Loads on Concrete Slabs
• Three methods available for analysis of slabs under

concentrated loads are as follows.
I. Effective Width Method

II. Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method
III. Westergaards Method
E L
•
P T
Effective Width Method is applicable to one way slabs supported
on two opposite edges.
N
• Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method is applicable for two way slabs
supported on all four edges.
• Westergaards Method being complex are rarely used for slab

deck designs.
Bridge Engineering
Effective Width Method
• Effective Width Method is applicable to one way slabs

supported on two opposite edges.
• However, for very long slabs, they are supported on all four
edges.
•
E L
This method is based on the assumption that along with the
P T
strip of the slab, immediately below the load, a certain width of
N
the slab also participate in load sharing.
• The width of the slab over which the load transfer prevails is
termed as the effective width of dispersion of slab.
• The extent of effective width depends on location of wheel load

with reference to support and dimensions of the slab.
Bridge Engineering
Effective Width Method: Single Concentrated Load
in Direction of Span
E L
P T
N
Load Dispersion on Slab
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Load Dispersion on Slab
Bridge Engineering
For a single concentrated load, the effective width may be

calculated by the equation as follows.
𝒙
𝒃𝒆 = 𝑲𝒙 𝟏 − + 𝒃𝒘
𝑳
E L
T
Where 𝒃𝒆 = Effective width of slab on which the load acts
𝑳 = Effective span
N P
𝒙 = Distance of centre of gravity of load from nearer support
𝒃𝒘 = breadth of concentration area of load, i.e. the dimension of the
tyre or track contact area over the road surface of the slab in a
direction at right angles to the span plus twice the thickness of the
wearing coat or surface finish above the structural slab.
Bridge Engineering
𝑩
𝑲 = A constant depending on the ratio 𝑳
where 𝑩 is width of the slab
Values of constant 𝑲 (Annexure B3: IRC 112: 2011)
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
• The effective width shall not exceed the actual width of the slab.
• In case of a load near the unsupported edge of a slab, the

effective width shall not exceed the above value nor half the
L
above value plus the distance of the load from the unsupported
E
edge.
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Effective Width Method: Two or More
Concentrated Loads in Direction of Span
• When two or more concentrated loads are positioned in a line in
the direction of span, the bending moment per unit width of slab
will be calculated separately for each load according to its
appropriate effective width of slab as specified under the single
concentrated load.
E L
P T
N
• When two or more concentrated loads are positioned not in line
in the direction of span and the effective width of slab for one
load overlaps the effective width of slab for an adjacent load, the
resultant effective width for two loads equals to the sum of the
effective widths for each load minus width of overlap, provided
that the slab design is checked for two loads acting separately.
Bridge Engineering
Effective Width Method: Solid Cantilever Slab
The effective width of dispersion in the direction parallel to the

supported edge for a single concentrated load is computed from
the equation.
𝒃𝒆 = 𝟏. 𝟐𝒙 + 𝒃𝒘
L
Where 𝒃𝒆 = Effective width of slab on which the load acts
E
P T
𝒙 = Distance of centre of gravity of load from the face of the
cantilever support
N
𝒃𝒘 = breadth of concentration area of load, i.e. the dimension of the
tyre or track contact area over the road surface of the slab in a
direction parallel to the supporting edge of the cantilever plus twice
the thickness of the wearing coat or surface finish above the
structural slab.
Bridge Engineering
• The effective width should be limited to one-third the length of

the cantilever slab measured parallel to the support.
• When the concentrated load is placed near one of the two

extreme ends of the length of the cantilever slab in the direction
E L
parallel to the support, the effective width should not exceed the
T
prescribed value, nor should it exceed half the above value plus
P
N
the distance of the concentrated load from the nearer extreme
end, measured in the direction parallel to the fixed edge.
Bridge Engineering
• When two or more loads act on the cantilever slab and the
effective width of slab for one load overlaps the effective width of
the adjacent load, the resultant effective width for two loads
should be taken as the sum of the respective effective widths for
each load minus the width of the overlap.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Effective Width Method: Dispersion along Span
The effective length of slab in the direction of the span is computed

as the sum of the tyre contact area over the wearing surface of the
slab in the direction of the slab and twice the overall depth of the
slab inclusive of the thickness of the wearing surface.
𝒗 = 𝒙 + 𝟐× 𝑫 + 𝑯
E L
P T
Where 𝒗 = Effective length of dispersion along the slab
N
𝒙 = Wheel load contact area along the span
𝑫 = Depth of the wearing coat
𝑯 = Depth of the slab
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
Ø Shear Strength
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Numerical Example: Problem Statement
Design a Simply Supported RC Slab Culvert for a National Highway
crossing for IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Loading.
Carriageway Width: Two lane (7.5 m wide);

Footpath: 1 m on either side;
Clear Span: 6 m;
E L
Wearing Coat: 80 mm;
P T
Width of Bearing: 400 mm; N
Materials: M25 Grade Concrete and Fe 415 Grade HYSD Bars
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Loading
Bridge Engineering
Numerical Example: Solution
1. Given Data:
Clear Span = 6 m; Width of Bearing = 400 mm
M25 Grade Concrete and Fe 415 Grade HYSD Bars
E L
T
2. Material Properties:
Concrete: fck = 25 N/mm2, Ec = 25 GPa
NP
Steel: fyk = 415 N/mm2, Es = 200 GPa
3. Depth of Slab and Effective Span:

Based on limit state of serviceability considerations of limiting
deflections, ratio of Span/ Depth (L/d) = 12-15
Bridge Engineering
For L/d = 15, d = (span/15) = (6000/15) = 400 mm
For L/d = 12, d = (span/12) = (6000/12) = 500 mm
For highway solid slab bridge deck, thickness of slab is assumed

as 80mm/ metre of span.
Depth of slab = 80 × 6 = 480 mm
E L
P T
Overall depth of slab can be adopted as 500 mm.
N
Assuming moderate exposure conditions, clear cover = 40 mm
Using 20 mm diameter HYSD bars with clear cover of 40 mm,
Effective Depth = 500 ‒ (40 + 10) = 450 mm
Width of bearing = 400 mm
Bridge Engineering
Effective Span is least of
(a) Clear Span + Effective Depth = (6 + 0.45) = 6.45 m
(b) Centre to Centre Distance of Bearings = (6 + 0.4) = 6.4 m
Hence, Effective Span = 6.4 m
E L
mm mm
P T mm
N
mm
Cross-Section of Deck Slab
Bridge Engineering
4. Dead Load Bending Moments:
Self-Weight of RC Slab = (24 × 0.5) = 12 kN/m2
Self-Weight of Wearing Coat = (22 × 0.08) = 1.76 kN/m2
Total Dead Load = (12 + 1.76) = 13.76 kN/m2
E L
Bending Moment due to Dead Load = 13.76 × 6.42/8 = 70.45 kN-m
P T
5. Live Load Bending Moments:
N
For IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicles, Impact Factor is 25% of the
span for up to 5 m span decreasing linearly to 10% for span of 9 m.
Therefore, for 6.4 m span, Impact Factor = [25 ‒ (15/4) × (6.4 ‒ 5)] =
19.75%
Bridge Engineering
Tracked Vehicle is placed symmetrically on the span.
Effective Length of Load = 3.6 + 2 × (0.08 + 0.5) = 4.76 m
mm
E L
T
mm
mm
N P
Position of Load for Maximum Bending Moment
Effective Width of Slab perpendicular to Span be = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw

bw = Wheel Contact Dimension in a direction perpendicular to Span
of Slab plus 2 times of the thickness of the wearing coat = 0.85 + 2 ×
0.08 = 1.01 m
Bridge Engineering
x = 3.2 m, L = 6.4 m, B = 9.5 m and B/L = 1.48

For B/L = 1.48, K = 2.84
be = 2.84 × 3.2 × (1 ‒ 3.2/6.4) + 1.01 = 5.56 m
The tracked vehicle is placed close to the kerb with the required
minimum clearance of 1200 mm.
E L
mm mm mm mm
P
mmT
N
mm
mm mm mm
mm
Net Effective Width of Dispersion for IRC Class AA Loading
Bridge Engineering
Net Effective Width of Dispersion = (2.625 + 2.05 + 5.56/2) = 7.455 m

Total Load of two tracks including impact factor = 2 × 350 × 1.1975 =
838.25 kN
Average Intensity of Load = 838.25/ (4.76 × 7.455) = 23.622 kN/m2
E L
Maximum Bending Moment due to Live Load is given by Mmax =
P T
(23.622 × 4.76 × 6.4/4) ‒ (23.622 × 4.762/ 8) = 113 kN-m
N
Total Bending Moment M = (MDead + MLive) = (70.45 + 113) = 183.45
kN-m
Total Design Ultimate Bending Moment Mu = (1.35 × MDead + 1.5 ×
MLive) = (1.35 × 70.45 + 1.5 × 113) = 264.61 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
6. Shear Forces due to Dead Load and Live Load

Shear Force from Dead Load = 13.76 × 6.4/2 = 44.03 kN
For Maximum Shear Force at Support, IRC Class AA Tracked
Vehicle is arranged as follows.
mm
E L
mm
P T
mm
N
Position for IRC Class AA Loading for Maximum Shear
Effective Width of Dispersion be = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw
bw = 0.85 + 2 × 0.08 = 1.01 m
Bridge Engineering
x = 2.38 m, L = 6.4 m, B = 9.5 m and B/L = 1.48

For B/L = 1.48, K = 2.84
be = 2.84 × 2.38 × (1 ‒ 2.38/6.4) + 1.01 = 5.256 m
mm mm mm mm mm
E L
P T mm
mm mm N (5256/2) mm
7303 mm

Bridge Engineering

Maximum Shear Force = 24.114 × 4.76 × (6.4 ‒ 2.38)/ 6.4 = 72.10 kN
Total Shear Force V = (VDead + VLive) = (44.03 + 72.10) = 116.13 kN
Total Design Ultimate Shear Force Vu = (1.35 × VDead + 1.5 × VLive) =
(1.35 × 44.03 + 1.5 × 72.10) = 167.59 kN
E L
7. Design of Slab:
P T
N
Using M25 grade concrete and Fe 415 HYSD bars, Limiting moment
of resistance for singly reinforced sections can be expressed as:
Mu,lim = 0.138 × fckbd2
Bridge Engineering
Effective Depth of Slab required, dreqd = √(Mu/0.138 fckb) = √(264.61 ×

106)/(0.138 × 25 × 1000) = 276.94 mm ≈ 277 mm
Since Effective Depth of Slab provided d = 450 mm > 277 mm, the
section is under-reinforced.
L
The area of reinforcement required to resist the ultimate bending
E
T
moment can be computed using the following relation.
P
Mu = 0.87fy Ast [d ‒ (fy Ast / fckb)]
N
where area of tension steel is given by Ast
264.61 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [450 ‒ 415 × Ast / (25 × 1000)]
5.99 × Ast2 ‒ 162472.5 × Ast + 264.61 × 106 = 0
Ast = 1740.3 mm2
Bridge Engineering
Using 20 mm diameter bars as main reinforcement, the spacing is

given by: S = (1000 ast/ Ast) = (1000 × 314/ 1740.3) = 180.43 mm
20 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided as main reinforcement
at a spacing of 150 mm.
L
Area of steel provided = (1000 × 314/ 150) = 2093.33 mm2
E
P T
The distribution reinforcement should be designed to resist the
transverse moment.
N
Transverse Moment = (0.2 × Multimate Dead + 0.3 × Multimate Live) = (0.2 ×
1.35 × MDead + 0.3 × 1.5 × MLive) = (0.2 × 1.35 × 70.45 + 0.3 × 1.5 × 113)
= 69.87 kN-m
Bridge Engineering

69.87 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [450 ‒ 415 × Ast / (25 × 1000)]
5.99 × Ast2 ‒ 162472.5 × Ast + 69.87 × 106 = 0
Ast = 437.08 mm2
E L
P T
Using 12 mm diameter bars as distribution reinforcement, the
N
spacing S = (1000 ast/ Ast) = (1000 × 113/ 437.08) = 258.53 mm
12 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided as distribution
reinforcement at a spacing of 200 mm.
Bridge Engineering
8. Check for Ultimate Flexural Strength:

Ultimate Bending Moment of Deck Slab Mu = 0.87fyAst [d ‒
(fyAst/fckb)] = 0.87 × 415 × 2093.33 × [450 ‒ 415 × 2093.33/(25 × 1000)]
= 313845165 N-mm = 313.84 kN-m > 264.61 kN-m (Hence, safe)
9. Check for Ultimate Shear Strength:

E L
P T
Ultimate Shear Strength of Deck Slab VRd,c = [0.12K (80 ρ1fck)0.33] bd
N
Here, K = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/450) = 1.67
ρ1 = Ast/bd = 2093.33/(1000 × 450) = 0.0046
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bd = [0.12 × 1.67 × (80 × 0.0046 × 25)0.33] ×
1000 × 450 = 187569 N = 187.57 kN > 167.59 kN (Hence, safe)
Bridge Engineering
10. Limit State of Cracking:

IRC 112: 2011 prescribes a permissible crack width of 0.3 mm in
reinforced concrete members under moderate exposure condition.
Tables 12.2 and 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011 outlines the maximum bar size
and maximum spacing for permissible crack width and service
E L
stress in steel.
Table 12.2 of IRC: 112-2011
P T
Table 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011
Service
Stress (MPa)
Maximum Bar Size (mm)
Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
N
Service
Stress (MPa)
Maximum Bar Spacing (mm)
Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
160 32 25 160 300 200
200 25 16 200 250 150
240 16 12 240 200 100
280 12 ─ 280 150 50
320 10 ─ 320 100 ─
Bridge Engineering
Service Load Bending Moment M = 183.45 kN-m

The stress in steel at working load σs = M/ [(d ‒ x/3)Ast]
Here x is Neutral Axis Depth.
bx2/2 = (Es/Ec) × Ast × (d ‒ x)
500x2 = (200/25) × 2093.33 × (450 ‒ x)
E L
500x2 + 16746.64x ‒ 7535988 = 0
P T
x = 107.16 mm N
σs = M/ [(d ‒ x/3)Ast] = 183450000/[(450 ‒ 107.16/3) × 2093.33] =
211.54 MPa
Bridge Engineering
For stress in steel 211.54 MPa and permissible crack width of 0.3
mm, maximum bar diameter and maximum bar spacing given by
IRC:112-2011 are 22 mm and 235 mm.
The slab is reinforced with 20 mm diameter bars at 150 mm spacing.
L
Hence, the bar size and the spacing are within the safe limits for
E
control of cracking.
P T
11. Limit State of Deflection:
N
𝟏
a) Deflection due to Shrinkage acs = k L2
rcs
k = 0.125 for simply supported ends,
Bridge Engineering
𝟏
rcs
𝑬𝒔
𝑬𝒄
L
αe =
𝑬𝒔
= 200/25 = 8
T E
P
𝑬𝒄
N
Section = 2093.33 × (250 – 40 – 20/2) = 418666 mm3
I = Second Moment of Area of the section = (1000 × 5003/12) = 10.42
× 109 mm4
S/I = 40.18 × 10‒6 /mm
Bridge Engineering
εcs = Total shrinkage strain = (εcd + εca) where

Development of drying shrinkage strain with time εcd(t) = βds(t, ts) kh
εcd, unrestrained
E L
P
Where βds(t, ts) = [(t ‒ ts)/{(t ‒ ts) + 0.04√h03}]T
h0 = Notional size of cross-section = 2Ac/u N
Ac = Cross-sectional area of concrete = 1000 × 500 = 500000 mm2
u = Perimeter of the cross-section exposed to drying shrinkage =
2000 mm
h0 = 2Ac/u = 2 × 500000/ 2000 = 500 mm
Bridge Engineering
t = Age of concrete in days at the time considered = 365 days

βds(t, ts) = [(t ‒ ts)/{(t ‒ ts) + 0.04√h03}] = [(365 ‒ 28)/{(365 ‒ 28) +
0.04√5003}] = 0.43
E L
T
εcd, unrestrained = 535 × 10‒6 for fck = 25 MPa and Relative Humidity 50%
P
N
Table 6.8 of IRC: 112-2011
kh = 0.70 for h0 = 500 mm
fck
Table 6.7 of IRC: 112-2011 Relative Humidity (%)
(MPa)
h0 (mm) kh 20 50 80
100 1.0 25 620 535 300
200 0.85 50 480 420 240
300 0.75 75 380 330 190
≥ 500 0.70 95 300 260 150
Bridge Engineering
εcd(t) = βds(t, ts) kh εcd, unrestrained = 0.43 × 0.70 × 535 × 10‒6 = 161.03 ×
10‒6
εca = 25 × 10‒6 for M25 Concrete
Table 6.6 of IRC: 112-2011
Grade of Concrete M30 M35 M45
E L
M50 M60 M65
Autogenous Shrinkage Strain εca (× 106) 35 45
P T65 75 95 105
N
Total shrinkage strain εcs = εcd + εca = 161.03 × 10‒6 + 25 × 10‒6 =
186.03 × 10‒6
𝟏
Shrinkage curvature = [εcsαe(S/I)] = 186.03 × 10‒6 × 8 × 40.18 × 10‒6
rcs
= 59797.48 × 10‒12
Bridge Engineering
𝟏
Deflection due to shrinkage acs = k L2 = 0.125 × 59797.48 × 10‒12 ×
rcs
64002 = 0.306 mm
b) Long term Deflection due to Sustained (Dead) Loads ad =
L
5wdL4/384Ec,eff Ieff
Total Dead Load wd = 13.76 kN/m = 13.76 N/mm
T E
Effective Span L = 6.4 m = 6400 mm
N P
Effective Moment of Inertia Ieff = 0.7 I = 7.28 × 109 mm4
Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete Ec = 25 kN/mm2 = 25000 N/mm2
Effective Modulus of Elasticity for Concrete Ec,eff = Ec/(1 + ø)
Where ø is Creep Coefficient
Bridge Engineering
Table 6.9 of IRC: 112-2011
Age at
Loading Notional Size 2Ac/u (mm)
t0 50 150 600 50 150 600
(days)
Dry atmospheric conditions (RH 50%) Humid atmospheric conditions (RH 80%)
1 5.50 4.60 3.70 3.60 3.20 2.90
7 5.50 4.60 3.70 2.60
E L
2.30 2.00
28 3.90 3.10 2.60 1.90
P T 1.70 1.50
N
90 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.40 1.20
365 1.80 1.50 1.20 1.10 1.00 1.00
For relative humidity 50%, Notional Size 2Ac/u = 500 mm and Age at
loading = 28 days, Creep Coefficient ø = 2.71 by linear interpolation.
Ec,eff = Ec/(1 + ø) = (25000/3.71) = 6738.54 N/mm2
Bridge Engineering
Maximum long term deflection due to dead load ad =

5wdL4/384Ec,effIeff = (5 × 13.76 × 64004) / (384 × 6738.54 × 7.28 × 109) =
6.127 mm
c) Deflection due to Live Loads al = 5wlL4/384EcIeff

Total Live Load wl = 23.622 kN/m2
E L
P T
N
Effective Moment of Inertia Ieff = 7.28 × 109 mm4
Maximum deflection due to live load al = 5wlL4/384EcIeff = (5 × 23.622
× 64004) / (384 × 25000 × 7.28 × 109) = 2.835 mm < Span/800 =
(6400/800) = 8 mm
Bridge Engineering
Total deflection = acs + ad + al = 0.306 + 6.127 + 2.835 = 9.268 mm <

Span/250 = (6400/250) = 25.6 mm
Hence the serviceability limit state of deflection is found within the
limits specified by IRC: 112 – 2011.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Numerical Example: Reinforcement Detailing
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
v N. Krishna Raju, Design of Bridges, Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
L
v D.J. Victor, Essentials of Bridge Engineering, Oxford & IBH Publishing
E
T
Co. Pvt. Ltd.
N P
v S. Ponnuswamy, Bridge Engineering, McGraw Hill Education.
v T.R. Jagadeesh and M.A. Jayaram, Design of Bridge Structures, PHI
Learning Pvt. Ltd.
v W.F. Chen, and L. Duan, Bridge Engineering Handbook, CRC Press, Taylor
& Francis Group.
v G. Parke and N. Hewson, ICE manual of Bridge Engineering, Thomas
Telford Publishing.
E L
T
BRIDGE ENGINEERING
P
N

Lecture 07: Design of T-Beam and Slab Bridge
Ø General Features
Ø Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method

E L
P T
N
Ø Load Distribution
Ø Courbon’s Method
Ø Guyon-Massonnet Method
Ø Hendry-Jaegar Method
Ø Design Example
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Hendry-Jaegar Method N
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
General Features
• A typical T-beam and slab bridge deck comprises the

longitudinal girders with an integral deck slab between the T-
beams and cross girders to provide lateral rigidity to the bridge
deck.
•
E L
Longitudinal girders are generally spaced at 2-3 m intervals
T
while cross girders are placed at 4-5 m intervals.
P
• N
Reinforced concrete T-beam and slab bridges are ideally suited
for spans in the range of 10-25 m.
• For larger spans, prestressed concrete T-beam and slab bridges

are preferred from the perspective of economy.
Bridge Engineering
General Features
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
General Features: Classifications
• Girder and Slab Type: Beams and slabs are cast monolithically
without any cross girders. Deck slab is designed as a one way
slab spanning between the girders. Decks do not possess
torsional rigidity. This configuration is no longer in use.
•
E L
Girder, Slab and Diaphragm Type: Beams and slabs are cast
P T
monolithically and diaphragms connecting the girders are
N
provided at supports and at few intermediate locations without
extending up to the deck slab. This configuration is marginally
better in load resistance due to its improved torsional rigidity in
comparison with the first one.
Bridge Engineering
• Girder, Slab and Cross Beam Type: Girders, slab and cross
beams are cast monolithically to form an integrated bridge
deck possessing superior flexural and torsional rigidity. This
configuration is the most commonly used system in highway
L
bridge decks.
T E
N P
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method
• There are three main structural components in a tee beam

bridge/ slab girder bridge.
a) Deck Slab
b) Longitudinal Girders
E L
c) Cross Girders
P T
•
N
The deck slab supported on all the sides by longitudinal and
cross girders is designed by the moment coefficients proposed
by Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method.
Bridge Engineering
For two-way slabs supported in all four sides subjected to a

symmetrically placed concentrated load, moments in two
directions can be computed using design curves developed by M.
Pigeaud.
E L
P T
N
Load Dispersion
Bridge Engineering
L = Long span length; B = Short span length

u, v = Dimensions of load spread after allowing for dispersion
through deck slab
k = Ratio of short to long span = (B/L)
M1 = Moment in the short span direction
E L
M2 = Moment in the long span direction
P T
N
m1 and m2 = Coefficients for moments along the short and long
spans
μ = Poisson’s ratio for concrete generally assumed as 0.15
W = Load from the wheel under consideration
Bridge Engineering
The bending moments are computed as

M1 = (m1 + μ m2) × W
M2 = (m2 + μ m1) × W
E L
The load dispersion may be assumed at 45° through the wearing
coat and the structural slab.
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Moment Coefficients m1 and m2 for k = 0.4
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Coefficients m1 and m2 (× 100)
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Load Distribution in Slab Girder Bridge
• Design of longitudinal girders involve evaluation of the live load

distribution among the number of beams in deck. Distribution of
live loads among the longitudinal girders can be estimated by
any of the following three rational methods:
a) Courbon’s Method
E L
P T
b)
c)
Guyon-Massonnet Method
Hendry-Jaegar Method
N
Bridge Engineering
Load Distribution in Slab Girder Bridge
• By using any of the three methods i.e. Courbon’s method,

Guyon-Massonnet method and Hendry-Jaegar method, the
maximum reaction factors are determined for the intermediate
and end longitudinal girders.
•
E L
The cross beams continuous over supports are designed to
P T
resist the maximum dead load and live load moments resulting
N
from the critical positioning of live loads.
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method
• When live loads are positioned near the kerb, centre of gravity
of live loads acts eccentrically with centre of gravity of the
girder system.
• Due to this eccentricity, loads shared by each girder is
E L
increased or decreased depending on the position of girders.
P T
This is calculated by Courbon’s Theory by a reaction factor
given by
N
𝑹𝒙 = ∑ 𝑾⁄𝒏 × 𝟏 + ∑ 𝑰⁄∑ 𝒅𝟐𝒙 ×𝑰 ×𝒅𝒙 ×𝒆
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method
Where
𝑹𝒙 = Reaction factor for the girder under consideration
𝑰 = Moment of Inertia of each longitudinal girder
E L
𝒅𝒙 = Distance of the girder under consideration from the central
axis of the bridge
P T
∑ 𝑾 = Total concentrated load N
𝒏 = Number of longitudinal girders
𝒆 = Eccentricity of live load with respect to axis of the bridge
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method
𝑹𝒙 = ∑ 𝑾⁄𝒏 × 𝟏 + ∑ 𝑰⁄∑ 𝒅𝟐𝒙 ×𝑰 ×𝒅𝒙 ×𝒆
E L
Clearance
b
P Tb
N
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method: Assumptions
Due to simplicity, Courbon’s method is popular among the three

methods.
However, the method is only applicable when following

conditions are satisfied.
E L
a) Ratio of span to width of deck is greater than 2 but less than
4.
P T
N
b) Longitudinal girders are interconnected by at least 5
symmetrically spaced cross girders.
c) Depth of cross girder is at least 0.75 times depth of

longitudinal girder.
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method: Numerical Example
Calculate the reaction forces shared by the girders at A, B and C

of the T-Beam Bridge using Courbon’s Method.
E L
P T
N
Transverse Position of IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Loading
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method: 𝑹𝒙 = ∑ 𝑾⁄𝒏 × 𝟏 + ∑ 𝑰⁄∑ 𝒅𝟐𝒙 ×𝑰 ×𝒅𝒙×𝒆
Where

E L
P T
axis of the bridge N
∑ 𝑾 = Total concentrated load
Bridge Engineering
For Outer Girders A and C
∑W = 2W1, n = 3 and ∑I = 3I
dx = 2.5 m ∑dx2.I = 2I × 2.52 m2
L
Distance between inner edge of the two wheels = 1.2 m
E
P T
Distance between central axis of the two wheels = (1.2 + 2 × 0.85/
2) m = 2.05 m
N
Distance between central axis of the left wheel and left edge of
deck = (1.2 + 0.85/ 2) m = 1.625 m
Distance between central axis of the left wheel and central axis
of Girder A = (1.625 − 1.25) m = 0.375 m
Bridge Engineering
Distance between central axis of the right wheel and central axis
of bridge = (2.5 − 0.375 − 2.05) m = 0.075 m
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Reaction factors RA or RC = (2W1/3) × [1 + (3I × 2.5 × 1.1)/(2I × 2.52)]
= 1.107 W1
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
For Inner Girder B

E L
P T
∑W = 2W1, n = 3 and ∑I = 3I
dx = 0 m ∑dx 2.I = 2I × 02 m2 =0
N
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
Reaction factor RB = (2W1/3) × (1 + 0) = 2W1/3 = 0.667 W1
Bridge Engineering
For IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle, Total Wheel Load W = 700 kN
Each Wheel Load W1 = 0.5W = 350 kN
RA or RC = 1.107 W1 = 387.45 kN
RB = 0.667 W1 = 233.45 kN
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
• This method is based on application of orthotropic plate theory

to the bridge deck system.
• This method has an advantage of using a single set of

distribution coefficients for extreme cases of no torsion and full
torsion of slabs.
E L
•
P T
The mean bending moment per girder can be expressed as
𝑴𝒎𝒆𝒂𝒏 = 𝑴⁄𝒏 N
Where 𝑴 = Total mean longitudinal bending moment
𝒏 = Number of girders
Bridge Engineering
The design bending moment is computed as
Design B.M. = (1.10 × K × 𝑴𝒎𝒆𝒂𝒏 × Impact Factor)
Where K = Distribution Coefficient whose magnitude is
L
dependent on flexural and torsional parameters.
T E
The factor 1.10 is used to compensate for the error involved in
N P
using only the first term of the Fourier series in finding the
distribution coefficients as suggested by Rowe based on his
experiments.
Bridge Engineering
Distribution Coefficient K is dependent on the flexural and

torsional parameters, expressed as:
Flexural Parameter 𝜽 = 𝒃⁄𝟐𝒂 𝒊⁄𝒋 𝟎.𝟐𝟓
Torsional Parameter 𝜶 = 𝑮 𝒊𝟎 + 𝒋𝟎 ⁄ 𝟐𝑬 𝒊𝒋
E L
Where 𝟐𝒂 = Span of the bridge
P T
N
𝟐𝒃 = Effective width of the bridge
𝒊 = Second moment of area per unit transverse width
𝒋 = Second moment of area per unit longitudinal width
𝑮 7 𝒊𝟎 = Torsional stiffness per unit width
𝑮 7 𝒋𝟎 = Torsional stiffness per unit length
Bridge Engineering
Distribution Coefficient K is calculated from the interpolation

formula 𝑲 = 𝑲𝟎 + 𝑲𝟏 − 𝑲𝟎 𝜶
Where 𝑲𝟎 and 𝑲𝟏 refers to Distribution Coefficients corresponding

to 𝜶 = 𝟎 and 𝜶 = 𝟏 respectively. The values of 𝑲𝟎 and 𝑲𝟏 for
ranges of 𝜽 between 0.2 to 0.8 are presented in tabular form for
E L
ready use by Sarkar et al.
P T
N
Ref pt -b -3b/4 -b/2 -b/4 0 b/4 b/2 3b/4 b
Load at
𝑲𝟎
0 0.94 0.99 0.97 1.02 1.06 1.02 0.97 0.99 0.94
b/4 0.25 0.42 0.63 0.84 1.02 1.19 1.35 1.56 1.73
b/2 -0.53 -0.15 0.25 0.63 0.97 1.35 1.72 2.10 2.49
𝛉 = 0.20 3b/4 -1.20 -0.66 -0.15 0.42 0.99 1.56 2.10 2.70 3.27
b -1.90 -1.20 -0.53 0.25 0.94 1.73 2.49 3.27 4.00
𝑲𝟏
0 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.96
b/4 0.91 0.93 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03
b/2 0.86 0.90 0.93 0.97 1.00 1.03 1.07 1.10 1.13
3b/4 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.93 0.99 1.03 1.10 1.16 1.23
b 0.75 0.80 0.86 0.91 0.96 1.03 1.13 1.23 1.35
Bridge Engineering
Ref pt -b -3b/4 -b/2 -b/4 0 b/4 b/2 3b/4 b
Load at
𝑲𝟎
0 0.86 0.95 0.97 1.05 1.10 1.05 0.97 0.95 0.86
b/4 0.20 0.40 0.63 0.87 1.05 1.22 1.36 1.53 1.68
b/2 -0.54 -0.16 0.24 0.63 0.97 1.36 1.73 2.10 2.46
𝛉 = 0.30 3b/4 -1.15 -0.63 -0.16 0.40 0.95 1.53 2.10 2.73 3.31
b -1.79 -1.15 -0.54 0.20 0.86 1.68 2.46 3.31 4.10
𝑲𝟏
0 0.94 0.97 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.02 1.00 0.97 0.94
L
b/4 0.85 0.89 0.94 0.97 1.02 1.06 1.06 1.05 1.06
E
b/2 0.77 0.82 0.89 0.94 1.00 1.06 1.13 1.17 1.21
T
3b/4 0.70 0.75 0.82 0.89 0.97 1.05 1.17 1.29 1.38
P
b 0.63 0.70 0.77 0.85 0.94 1.06 1.21 1.38 1.59
N
Ref pt -b -3b/4 -b/2 -b/4 0 b/4 b/2 3b/4 b
Load at
𝑲𝟎
0 0.71 0.90 0.99 1.11 1.2 1.11 0.99 0.90 0.71
b/4 0.12 0.36 0.64 0.91 1.11 1.29 1.40 1.47 1.56
b/2 -0.55 -0.17 0.23 0.63 0.99 1.37 1.76 2.10 2.40
𝛉 = 0.40 3b/4 -1.07 -0.58 -0.17 0.36 0.90 1.47 2.10 2.77 3.38
b -1.65 -1.07 -0.55 0.12 0.71 1.56 2.40 3.38 4.30
𝑲𝟏
0 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.08 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90
b/4 0.77 0.83 0.90 0.96 1.05 1.10 1.10 1.09 1.07
b/2 0.66 0.73 0.81 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.26 1.30
3b/4 0.58 0.65 0.73 0.83 0.95 1.09 1.26 1.41 1.55
b 0.50 0.58 0.66 0.77 0.90 1.07 1.30 1.55 1.88
Bridge Engineering
Ref pt -b -3b/4 -b/2 -b/4 0 b/4 b/2 3b/4 b
Load at
𝑲𝟎
0 0.55 0.79 1.00 1.21 1.32 1.21 1.00 0.79 0.55
b/4 0.00 0.30 0.63 0.96 1.21 1.40 1.44 1.40 1.40
b/2 -0.54 -0.17 0.22 0.63 1.00 1.40 1.80 2.08 2.30
𝛉 = 0.50 3b/4 -1.96 -0.54 -0.17 0.30 0.79 1.40 2.08 2.84 3.50
b -1.43 -0.96 -0.54 0.0 0.55 1.40 2.30 3.50 4.80
𝑲𝟏
0 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.07 1.13 1.07 1.00 0.92 0.85
L
b/4 0.68 0.76 0.86 0.96 1.07 1.16 1.15 1.12 1.09
E
b/2 0.55 0.63 0.73 0.86 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.35 1.39
T
3b/4 0.45 0.53 0.63 0.76 0.92 1.12 1.35 1.58 1.76
b 0.38 0.45 0.55 0.68 0.85 1.09 1.39 1.76 2.15
Ref pt
Load at
0
-b
0.31
-3b/4
0.66
-b/2
1.02
-b/4
𝑲𝟎
1.35 N
0
1.50
P
b/4
1.35
b/2
1.02
3b/4
0.66
b
0.31
b/4 -0.17 0.21 0.62 1.02 1.35 1.53 1.47 1.31 1.03
b/2 -0.52 -0.18 0.20 0.62 1.02 1.47 1.87 2.06 2.19
𝛉 = 0.60 3b/4 -0.80 -0.47 -0.18 0.21 0.66 1.31 2.06 2.92 3.08
b -1.05 -0.80 -0.52 -0.20 0.31 1.10 2.19 3.08 5.45
𝑲𝟏
0 0.80 0.89 1.00 1.12 1.19 1.12 1.00 0.89 0.80
b/4 0.58 0.67 0.80 0.95 1.12 1.23 1.20 1.15 1.08
b/2 0.44 0.52 0.63 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.45 1.46
3b/4 0.34 0.41 0.52 0.67 0.89 1.15 1.45 1.75 1.96
b 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.58 0.80 1.08 1.46 1.96 2.50
Bridge Engineering
Ref pt -b -3b/4 -b/2 -b/4 0 b/4 b/2 3b/4 b
Load at
𝑲𝟎
0 -0.04 0.53 1.03 1.52 1.68 1.51 1.03 0.53 -0.04
b/4 -0.37 0.11 0.00 1.06 1.51 1.70 1.55 1.21 0.67
b/2 -0.50 -0.19 0.18 0.60 1.03 1.55 1.96 2.05 2.03
𝛉 = 0.70 3b/4 -0.57 -0.40 -0.19 0.11 0.53 1.21 2.05 3.00 4.01
b -0.48 -0.57 -0.50 -0.37 -0.04 0.73 2.03 4.01 6.03
𝑲𝟏
0 0.71 0.83 0.98 1.17 1.28 1.17 0.98 0.83 0.71
L
b/4 0.50 0.59 0.74 0.94 1.17 1.33 1.27 1.15 1.04
E
b/2 0.33 0.43 0.55 0.74 0.98 1.27 1.51 1.55 1.52
T
3b/4 0.24 0.32 0.43 0.59 0.83 1.15 1.55 1.93 2.16
b 0.18 0.24 0.33 0.49 0.71 1.04 1.52 2.16 2.85
Ref pt
Load at
0
-b
-0.35
-3b/4
0.39
-b/2
1.02
-b/4
𝑲𝟎
N
0
1.66 1.88
P
b/4
1.66
b/2
1.02
3b/4
0.39
b
-0.35
b/4 -0.49 0.02 0.55 1.10 1.66 1.88 1.64 1.10 0.33
b/2 -0.48 -0.18 0.15 0.55 1.02 1.64 2.06 2.03 1.82
𝛉 = 0.80 3b/4 -0.34 -0.30 -0.18 0.02 0.39 1.10 2.03 3.10 4.02
b -0.16 -0.34 -0.48 -0.48 -0.35 0.39 1.82 4.02 7.02
𝑲𝟏
0 0.63 0.78 0.98 1.22 1.38 1.22 0.98 0.78 0.63
b/4 0.40 0.51 0.68 0.93 1.22 1.43 1.34 1.14 1.00
b/2 0.25 0.34 0.47 0.68 0.98 1.34 1.63 1.64 1.55
3b/4 0.16 0.23 0.34 0.51 0.78 1.14 1.64 2.10 2.33
b 0.12 0.16 0.25 0.40 0.63 0.98 1.55 2.33 3.20
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
• In this method, cross beams are replaced by a uniform

continuous transverse medium of equivalent stiffness.
• The load distribution in an interconnected bridge deck system

depends on 3 dimensionless parameters.
𝑨 = 𝟏𝟐⁄𝝅𝟒 × 𝑳⁄𝒉 𝟑 × 𝒏 7 𝑬𝑰𝒓 ⁄𝑬𝑰

E L
P T
𝑭= 𝝅𝟐 ⁄𝟐𝒏
N
× 𝒉⁄𝑳 × 𝑮𝑱⁄𝑬𝑰𝒓
𝑪 = 𝑬𝑰𝟏 ⁄𝑬𝑰𝟐
Bridge Engineering
Where L = Span of the bridge deck
h = Spacing of longitudinal girders
n = Number of cross girders
L
EI = Flexural rigidity of one longitudinal girder
E
P T
GJ = Torsional rigidity of one longitudinal girder
N
EI1 and EI2 = Flexural rigidities of outer and inner
longitudinal girders respectively where these parameters
are different
EIr = Flexural rigidity of one cross girder
Bridge Engineering
• The first parameter A represents a function of the ratio of span to

the spacing of longitudinal girders and the ratio of transverse to
longitudinal flexural rigidity.
• The second parameter F is a measure of the ratio of spacing to
E L
the span of longitudinal girders and the ratio of torsional rigidity
P T
of longitudinal girder to flexural rigidity of cross girders. This
N
parameter is difficult to be evaluated due to uncertainties in
computations of torsional rigidity values.
• The third parameter C is the ratio of flexural rigidity of

longitudinal and cross girders.
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion
Ø General Features
E L
P T
Ø Design Example
Bridge Engineering
Design the T-Beam and Slab Deck of RC T-Beam Bridge for IRC
Class AA Tracked Vehicle Loading using the following data.
Clear Width of Road way = 7.5 m
Bridge span = 16 m
Average Thickness of Wearing Coat = 80 mm
E L
S/W of Wearing Coat = 22 kN/m3
P T
M 25 Concrete; Fe 415 Steel Reinforcement , μConcrete = 0.15
S/W of Reinforced Concrete = 24 kN/m3 N

Spacing of Longitudinal Girders = 2.5 m
Spacing of Cross Girders = 4 m, Width of Girders = 300 mm
Dimensions of Kerb = 300 mm × 600 mm
Impact Factor = 1.25 for Deck Slab and 1.1 for Girders
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Wheel Load = 350 kN

Width (W) and Breadth (B) of Wheel Contact = 3600 mm × 850 mm
E L
P T
N
IRC Class AA
Tracked Vehicle
Loading
Bridge Engineering
1. Deck Slab Panel Dimensions:
Long Span Length L = 4 m, Short Span Length B = 2.5 m
Slab Thickness H = 0.2 m.
2. Dead Load Calculation:

Self-Weight of Slab = 0.2 × 24 = 4.8 kN/m2
E L
P T
Self-Weight of Wearing Coat = 0.08 × 22 = 1.76 kN/m2
Total Dead Load per area = 6.56 kN/m2 N
Total Dead Load on Slab Panel = (6.56 × 4 × 2.5) = 65.6 kN
Using Pigeaud’s Coefficient Method,
u/B = 1 and v/L = 1 as Dead Load is uniformly distributed on deck.
Bridge Engineering
For k = B/L = 2.5/4 = 0.625, m1 = 0.049 and m2 = 0.015
Moment in Short Span M1 due to Dead Load = W × (m1 + μm2)
= 65.6 × (0.049 + 0.15 × 0.015) = 3.362 kN-m
Moment in Long Span M2 due to Dead Load = W × (m2 + μm1)
= 65.6 × (0.015 + 0.15 × 0.049) = 1.466 kN-m
E L
P T
For continuous deck slab, Design Bending moment along Short
N
Span due to Dead Load = 0.8 × M1 = 2.69 kN-m
For continuous deck slab, Design Bending moment along Long
Span due to Dead Load = 0.8 × M2 = 1.173 kN-m
Shear Force due to Dead Load = 6.56 × (2.5 ‒ 0.3)/2 = 7.216 kN
Bridge Engineering
3. Live Load Calculation:
Wheel Load Dispersion along Short Span
u = 0.85 + 2 × 0.08 = 1.01 m
Wheel Load Dispersion along Long Span
v = 3.6 + 2 × 0.08 = 3.76 m
E L
k = B/L = 2.5/4 = 0.625
P T
N
u/B = 1.01/2.5 = 0.404; v/L = 3.76/4 = 0.94
Therefore, m1 = 0.085 and m2 = 0.024
Maximum Live Load due to IRC Class AA
Tracked Vehicle Loading = 350 kN
Bridge Engineering
Moment in Short Span M1 due to Live Load = W × (m1 + μm2)
= 350 × (0.085 + 0.15 × 0.024) = 31.01 kN-m
Moment in Long Span M2 due to Live Load = W × (m2 + μm1)
= 350 × (0.024 + 0.15 × 0.085) = 12.862 kN-m
E L
For continuous deck slab, Design Bending moment due to Live
P T
Load along Short Span (including Impact Factor) = 0.8 × M1 × 1.25 =
31.01 kN-m
N
For continuous deck slab, Design Bending moment due to Live
Load along Long Span (including Impact Factor) = 0.8 × M2 × 1.25 =
12.862 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
Using Effective Width Method, Dispersion of Live Load in Direction
of Short Span = x + 2 × (D + H) = 0.85 + 2 × (0.08 + 0.2) = 1.41 m
For Maximum Shear in Deck Slab, the wheel load is placed such
that the centre of wheel is at 1.41/2 = 0.705 m distance from the
edge of the panel.
E L
Effective Span L = 2.5 ‒ 0.3 = 2.2 m
P T
Effective Breadth B = 4 ‒ 0.3 = 3.7 m N
For Span Ratio of Slab = 3.7/2.2 = 1.682, K = 2.55 for Continuous
Deck Slab.
Effective Width of Slab = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw
Bridge Engineering
of Slab plus 2 times of the thickness of the wearing coat
= 3.6 + 2 × 0.08 = 3.76 m
x = 0.705 m
Effective Width of Slab = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw
E L
P T
= 2.55 × 0.705 × (1 ‒ 0.705/ 2.2) + 3.76 = 4.982 m
N
Live Load/ metre width due to 350 kN Wheel Load = 350/ 4.982 =
70.253 kN
Maximum Shear Force due to Live Load (Including Impact Factor) =

70.253 × (1 ‒ 0.705/ 2.2) × 1.25 = 59.675 kN
Bridge Engineering
4. Design Moment and Shear Force:
Service Load Bending Moment in Slab from Dead Load and Live
Load in Short Span MB = 2.69 + 31.01 = 33.7 kN-m
Service Load Bending Moment in Slab from Dead Load and Live
E L
Load in Long Span ML = 1.173 + 12.862 = 14.035 kN-m
P T
Service Load Design Shear Force in Slab from Dead Load and Live
Load V = 7.216 + 59.675 = 66.891 kN N
Ultimate Design Bending Moment in Slab from Dead Load and Live
Load in Short Span Mult,B = 1.35 × 2.69 + 1.5 × 31.01 = 50.146 kN-m
Ultimate Design Bending Moment in Slab from Dead Load and Live
Load in Long Span Mult,L = 1.35 × 1.173 + 1.5 × 12.862 = 20.876 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
Ultimate Design Shear Force in Slab from Dead Load and Live Load
Vult = 1.35 × 7.216 + 1.5 × 59.675 = 99.254 kN
5. Design of Slab:
Overall depth of slab = 200 mm.
E L
Assuming 40 mm clear cover and 16 mm diameter bars, effective
depth of slab = (200 ‒ 40 ‒ 8) = 152 mm
P T
N
of resistance along short span for singly reinforced sections can be
expressed as: Mu,lim = 0.138 × fckbd2
Effective Depth of Slab required, dreqd = √(M/0.138 fckb) = √(50.146 ×
106)/(0.138 × 25 × 1000) = 120.561 mm ≈ 121 mm
Bridge Engineering
section is under-reinforced.
The area of reinforcement required to resist the ultimate bending
moment can be computed using the following relation.
E L
P T
N
50.146 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [152 ‒ 415 × Ast / (25 × 1000)]
5.99 × Ast2 ‒ 54879.6 × Ast + 50.146 × 106 = 0
Ast = 1029.408 mm2
Bridge Engineering
Therefore, 16 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided along short
span at a spacing of 150 mm.
L
Area of steel provided = (1000 × 201/ 150) = 1340 mm2
E
P T
Similarly, using M25 grade concrete and Fe 415 HYSD bars, Limiting
N
moment of resistance along longer span for singly reinforced
sections is 20.876 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
20.876 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [152 ‒ 415 × Ast / (25 × 1000)]
5.99 × Ast2 ‒ 54879.6 × Ast + 20.876 × 106 = 0
Ast = 397.656 mm2
E L
given by: S = (1000 ast/ Ast) = (1000 × 78.54/ 397.656) = 197.507 mm
P T
Therefore, 10 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided along longer
span at a spacing of 150 mm.
N
Area of steel provided = (1000 × 78.54/ 150) = 523.6 mm2
Bridge Engineering
Ultimate Bending Moment of Deck Slab Mu = 0.87fy Ast [d ‒ (fy Ast /
fckb)] = 0.87 × 415 × 1340 × [152 ‒ 415 × 1340/(25 × 1000)]
= 62776861.09 N-mm = 62.777 kN-m > 50.146 kN-m (Hence, safe)

E L
P T
N
Here, K = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/152) = 2.147 > 2 (Hence, taken as 2)
ρ1 = Ast/bd = 1340/(1000 × 152) = 0.009
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bd = [0.12 × 2 × (80 × 0.009 × 25)0.33] × 1000
× 152 = 94687.959 N = 94.688 kN < 99.254 kN (unsafe)
Bridge Engineering
Using 16 mm diameter HYSD at a spacing of 120 mm, area of steel
provided = (1000 × 201/ 120) = 1675 mm2
ρ1 = Ast/bd = 1675/(1000 × 152) = 0.011
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bd = [0.12 × 2 × (80 × 0.011 × 25)0.33] × 1000
× 152 = 101170.597 N = 101.171 kN > 99.254 kN (safe)
E L
P T
N
Tables 12.2 and 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011 outlines the maximum bar size
and maximum spacing for permissible crack width and service
stress in steel.
Bridge Engineering
Service Maximum Bar Size (mm) Service Maximum Bar Spacing (mm)
Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
160 32 25 160 300 200
200 25 16 200 250 150
L
240 16 12 240 200 100
280 12 ─ 280
T E150 50
P
320 10 ─ 320 100 ─
Service Load Bending Moment M = 33.7 kN-m N

Bridge Engineering
bx2/2 = (Es/Ec) × Ast × (d ‒ x)
500x2 = (200/25) × 1675 × (152 ‒ x)
500x2 + 13400x ‒ 2036800 = 0
x = 51.816 mm
E L
σs = M/[(d ‒ x/3)Ast] = 33700000/[(152 ‒ 51.816/3) × 1675] = 149.333
MPa
P T
N
IRC:112-2011 are 32 mm and 300 mm.
Bridge Engineering

𝟏
a) Deflection due to Shrinkage acs = k r L2
cs
L
k = 0.063 for continuous ends,
𝟏
T E
P
rcs
αe = Modular Ratio = 𝑬𝒔
𝑬
𝒄 N
𝑬𝒔
αe = = 200/25 = 8
𝑬𝒄
Bridge Engineering

Section = 1675 × (100 – 40 – 16/2) = 87100 mm3
I = Second Moment of Area of the section = (1000 × 2003/12) = 6.67 ×
108 mm4
S/I = 130.585 × 10‒6 /mm
E L
P T
N
εcd, unrestrained
Bridge Engineering

2000 mm
h0 = 2Ac/u = 2 × 200000/ 2000 = 200 mm
E L
P T
N
βds(t, ts) = [(t ‒ ts)/{(t ‒ ts) + 0.04√h03}] = [(365 ‒ 28)/{(365 ‒ 28) +
0.04√2003}] = 0.749
Bridge Engineering
Table 6.8 of IRC: 112-2011
kh = 0.85 for h0 = 200 mm
fck
Table 6.7 of IRC: 112-2011 Relative Humidity (%)
(MPa)
h0 (mm) kh 20 50 80
100 1.0 25 620
E L 535 300
T
200 0.85 50 480 420 240
300
≥ 500
0.75
0.70
75
95
N P380
300
330
260
190
150
εcd(t) = βds(t, ts) kh εcd, unrestrained = 0.749 × 0.85 × 535 × 10‒6 = 340.608 ×
10‒6
Bridge Engineering

Table 6.6 of IRC: 112-2011
Grade of Concrete M30 M35 M45 M50 M60 M65

Autogenous Shrinkage Strain εca (× 106) 35 45 65 75 95 105
E
Total shrinkage strain εcs = εcd + εca = 340.608 × 10‒6 + 25 × 10‒6 = L
365.608 × 10‒6
P T
Shrinkage curvature
rcs
𝟏 N
= [εcsαe(S/I)] = 365.608 × 10‒6 × 8 × 130.585 ×
10‒6 = 381943.365 × 10‒12
𝟏
Deflection due to shrinkage acs = k L2 = 0.063 × 381943.365 × 10‒12
rcs
× 25002 = 0.15 mm
Bridge Engineering

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Table 6.9 of IRC: 112-2011
Age at
t0 50 150 600 50 150 600
(days)
Dry atmospheric conditions (RH 50%) Humid atmospheric conditions (RH 80%)
L
1 5.50 4.60 3.70 3.60 3.20 2.90
E
7 5.50 4.60 3.70 2.60 2.30 2.00
28 3.90 3.10 2.60 1.90
P T 1.70 1.50
N
90 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.40 1.20
365 1.80 1.50 1.20 1.10 1.00 1.00
For relative humidity 50%, Notional Size 2Ac/u = 200 mm and Age at
loading = 28 days, Creep Coefficient ø = 3.04 by linear interpolation.
Ec,eff = Ec/(1 + ø) = (25000/3.04) = 8223.684 N/mm2
Bridge Engineering

5wdL4/384Ec,effIeff = (5 × 6.56 × 25004) / (384 × 8223.684 × 4.67 × 108) =
0.867 mm
E L
Total Live Load wl = (350 × 1.25)/(4.982 × 4.16) = 21.11 kN/m2
P T
N
Maximum deflection due to live load al = 5wlL4/384EcIeff = (5 × 21.11 ×
25004) / (384 × 25000 × 4.67 × 108) = 0.92 mm ≤ Span/800 = (2500/800)
= 3.125 mm
Bridge Engineering
Total deflection = acs + ad + al = 0.15 + 0.867 + 0.92 = 1.937 mm ≤

Span/250 = (2500/250) = 10 mm
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
10. Design of Longitudinal Girder:

Using Courbon’s Method, IRC Class AA loads are arranged for
maximum eccentricity as shown below.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Courbon’s Method: 𝑹𝒙 = ∑ 𝑾⁄𝒏 × 𝟏 + ∑ 𝑰⁄∑ 𝒅𝟐𝒙 ×𝑰 ×𝒅𝒙×𝒆
Where

E L
P T
axis of the bridge
N
∑ 𝑾 = Total concentrated load
Bridge Engineering
For Outer Girders A and C
∑W = 2W1, n = 3 and ∑I = 3I
dx = 2.5 m ∑dx2.I = 2I × 2.52 m2
L
Distance between inner edge of the two wheels = 1.2 m
E
P T
Distance between central axis of the two wheels = (1.2 + 2 × 0.85/ 2)
m = 2.05 m
N
Distance between central axis of the left wheel and left edge of deck
= (1.2 + 0.85/ 2) m = 1.625 m
Distance between central axis of the left wheel and central axis of
Girder A = (1.625 − 1.25) m = 0.375 m
Bridge Engineering
Distance between central axis of the right wheel and central axis of
bridge = (2.5 − 0.375 − 2.05) m = 0.075 m
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Reaction factors RA or RC = (2W1/3) × [1 + (3I × 2.5 × 1.1)/(2I × 2.52)]

= 1.107 W1
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
L
For Inner Girder B
∑W = 2W1, n = 3 and ∑I = 3I
T E
dx = 0 m ∑dx2.I = 2I × 02 m2 = 0 N P
e = (2.05/2 + 0.075) m = (1.025 + 0.075) m = 1.1 m
Reaction factor RB = (2W1/3) × (1 + 0) = 2W1/3 = 0.667 W1
Bridge Engineering
For IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle, Total Wheel Load W = 700 kN
Each Wheel Load W1 = 0.5W = 350 kN
RA or RC = 1.107 W1 = 1.107 × 0.5W = 0.5535 W = 387.45 kN
L
RB = 0.667 W1 = 0.667 × 0.5W = 0.3335 W = 233.45 kN
E
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Dead Load of Slab to Girder:

Distance of Longitudinal Girders A and
C from Deck Slab Edge = (1.25 ‒ 0.3/2)
= 1.1 m
Weight of Parapet Railing = 0.7 kN/m
E L
Weight of Wearing Coat = (0.08 × 1.1 ×
P T
22) = 1.936 kN/m
N
Weight of Deck Slab = (0.2 × 1.1 × 24) = 5.28 kN/m
Weight of Kerb = (0.5 × 0.6 × 24) = 7.20 kN/m
Total Dead Load from Corner Segment of Deck Slab = 15.116 kN/m
Bridge Engineering
Span of Intermediate Segment of Deck Slab = (7.5 ‒ 1.1 × 2) = 5.3 m

Weight of Wearing Coat = (0.08 × 5.3 × 22) = 9.328 kN/m
Weight of Deck Slab = (0.2 × 5.3 × 24) = 25.44 kN/m
Total Dead Load from Intermediate Segment of Deck Slab = 34.768
kN/m
E L
P T
Total Dead Load from Deck Slab = (2 × 15.116 + 34.768) = 65 kN/m
N
It is assumed that the Dead Load is equally shared by all Girders.
Therefore, Dead Load per Longitudinal Girder = (65/3) = 21.667 kN/m
Bridge Engineering
Dead Load in Main Girder:

Depth of girder = 1600 mm, Depth of rib = 1400 mm, Width = 300 mm
Weight of main girder = (0.3 × 1.4 × 24) = 10.08 kN/m
Assuming that the cross girder also have same cross-sectional
E L
dimensions of main girder, weight of cross girder = 10.08 kN/m
P T
Total Dead Load on girder = (21.667 + 10.08) = 31.747 kN/m
N
Reaction on Main Girder = 10.08 × (2.5/2 + 2.5/2) = 25.2 kN
Maximum Dead Load Bending Moment at centre of span = (31.747 ×
162/8) + (25.2 × 2 × 16)/4 = 1217.504 kN-m
Maximum Dead Load Shear at support = (31.747 × 16/2) + (25.2 × 3/2)
= 291.776 kN
Bridge Engineering
31.747
Dead Load on Main Girder
E L
T
Live Load in Girder
Span of Girder = 16 m
N P
Impact Factor on girder = 1.10
IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Load is placed centrally on span.
Maximum Bending Moment for Live Load = 350 × (8 ‒ 1.8) + (700/
3.6) × 3.62/8 = 2485 kN-m.
Bridge Engineering
700 kN/ 3.6 m
16 m
8m 8m
1.8 m 1.8 m
Live Loading Diagram

+350 kN
E L
T
+ +
P
‒
N
‒
‒ 350 kN
Shear Force Diagram
+ 2485 kN-m
+ 2170 kN-m + 2170 kN-m
+
+ +
Bending Moment Diagram
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Bending Moment for Live Load in Outer Girder including

impact factor and reaction = 1.1 × 0.5535 × 2485 = 1512.992 kN-m.
Maximum Bending Moment for Live Load in Inner Girder including
impact factor and reaction = 1.1 × 0.3335 × 2485 = 911.622 kN-m.
E L
P T
N
Position of IRC Class AA Loads for Maximum Shear
Bridge Engineering
Reaction of W2 on girder B = (350 × 0.45)/2.5 = 63 kN.
Reaction of W2 on girder A = (350 × 2.05)/2.5 = 287 kN.
Total load on Girder B = (350 + 63) = 413 kN.
L
Maximum Reaction in Girder B = (413 × 14.2)/16 = 366.537 kN
E
P T
Maximum Reaction in Girder A = (287 × 14.2)/16 = 254.712 kN
N
Maximum Live Load Shear with Impact Factor in Inner Girder =
(366.537 × 1.1) = 403.191 kN
Maximum Live Load Shear with Impact Factor in Outer Girder =

(254.712 × 1.1) = 280.183 kN
Bridge Engineering
Design Shear Force and Bending Moment
Maximum Service Load Bending Moment in Inner Girder = (1217.504

+ 911.622) = 2129.126 kN-m.
Maximum Service Load Bending Moment in Outer Girder =
(1217.504 + 1512.992) = 2730.496 kN-m.
E L
P T
Maximum Service Load Shear Force in Inner Girder = (291.776 +
403.191) = 694.967 kN. N
Maximum Service Load Shear Force in Outer Girder = (291.776 +
280.183) = 571.959 kN.
Bridge Engineering
Design Shear Force and Bending Moment
Maximum Design Ultimate Bending Moment in Inner Girder = (1.35 ×

1217.504 + 1.5 × 911.622) = 3011.063 kN-m.
Maximum Design Ultimate Bending Moment in Outer Girder = (1.35
× 1217.504 + 1.5 × 1512.992) = 3913.118 kN-m.
E L
P T
Maximum Design Ultimate Shear Force in Inner Girder = (1.35 ×
N
291.776 + 1.5 × 403.191) = 998.684 kN.
Maximum Design Ultimate Shear Force in Outer Girder = (1.35 ×

291.776 + 1.5 × 280.183) = 814.172 kN.
Bridge Engineering
Design of Longitudinal Girder for Flexure:
Maximum Design Ultimate Load Bending Moment Mu = 3913.118 kN-

m.
Using 25 mm diameter bars in four rows with an effective cover of
E L
150 mm on tension side, effective depth = (1600 ‒ 150) = 1450 mm.
Parameters of the T-beam:
P T
N
bf = 2500 mm, fck = 25 MPa, fy = 415 MPa, d = 1450 mm, Df = 200 mm,
Mu = 3913.118 kN-m
xu = depth of Neutral Axis.
Bridge Engineering
If the neutral axis lies within the flange depth (xu < Df), value of xu
can be determined by using the following equation.
Mu = 0.36 × fck × bf × xu × (d ‒ 0.42xu)
Or, 3913118000 = 0.36 × 25 × 2500 × xu × (1450 ‒ 0.42xu)
E L
Or, 9450 xu2 ‒ 32625000 xu + 3913118000 = 0
P T
Or, xu = 124.427 mm < 200 mm
N
Hence, the neutral axis lies within the flange.
Bridge Engineering
Area of tensile steel can be computed from the following equation:

Mu = 0.87 × fy × Ast × d × [1 ‒ (Ast × fy)/(b × d × fck)]
Or, 3913118000 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × 1450 × [1 ‒ (Ast × 415)/(2500 ×
1450 × 25)]
Or, 3913118000 = 523522.5 × Ast ‒ 2.397 Ast2
E L
Or, 2.397 Ast2 ‒ 523522.5 × Ast + 3913118000 = 0
P T
Or, Ast = 7749.565 mm2 N
16 bars of 25 mm diameter bars can be provided as main
reinforcement in 4 rows at a total reinforcement of 7853.982 mm2.
Bridge Engineering
Design of Longitudinal Girder for Shear:
Maximum Design Ultimate Load Shear Force = 998.684 kN.
As per IRC 112: 2011, the ultimate shear strength of concrete

section VRd,c = [0.12K (80 ρ1fck)0.33] bwd
E L
T
Here, K = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/1450) = 1.371 < 2
P
N
ρ1 = Ast/bwd = 7853.982 /(300 × 1450) = 0.018
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bwd

= [0.12 × 1.371 × (80 × 0.018 × 25)0.33] × 300 × 1450
= 233500.483 N = 233.5 kN < 998.684 kN (unsafe)
Bridge Engineering
Hence, shear reinforcement are required to be designed to resist

the balance shear force VRd,s = (998.684 ‒ 233.5) = 765.184 kN
Using 10 mm diameter 4-legged stirrups, the spacing of stirrups is

evaluated as Sv = 0.87 × fy × Asv × z/ VRd,s
Here, lever arm z = 0.9 d for RC sections

E L
z = 0.9 d = 0.9 × 1450 = 1305 mm
P T
N
Sv = 0.87 × 415 × 4 × 78.54 × 1305/ 765184 = 193.447 mm
10 mm diameter 4-legged stirrups can be provided as shear

reinforcement at the spacing of 150 mm.
Bridge Engineering
11. Design of Cross Girder:
Self-weight of cross girder = 10.08

kN/m
Self-weight of slab and wearing

coat = 6.56 kN/m2
E L
P T
N
Since distribution of dead load is
triangular on cross girders, Dead
load from slab = (2 × 1/2 × 2.5 ×
1.25 × 6.56) = 20.5 kN
Triangular dead load
distribution on cross girders
Bridge Engineering
18.28
Therefore, uniformly distributed load on cross girder = 20.5 kN/ 2.5

m = 8.2 kN/m
E L
P T
Total dead load on cross girder = (10.08 + 8.2) = 18.28 kN/m
N
Assuming the cross girders share the loading uniformly, reaction in
each cross girder = (18.28 × 5/3) = 30.467 kN
Maximum Dead Load Shear Force = 30.467 kN
Maximum Dead Load Bending Moment = 25.394 kN-m.
Bridge Engineering
For maximum bending moment in

cross girder, live load is placed as
shown in figure.
Load on cross girder = 350 × (4 ‒ 0.9)/

4 = 271.25 kN
E L
Reaction on each longitudinal girder =
P T
2 × 271.25/ 3 = 180.833 kN N
Maximum bending moment in cross
girder due to live load = 180.833 × (2.5
‒ 2.05/2) = 180.833 × 1.475 = 266.729
kN-m.
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Bending Moment in Cross Girder due to Live Load

including Impact Factor = 1.1 × 266.729 = 293.402 kN-m.
Maximum Shear Force in Cross Girder due to Live Load = 271.25

kN
E L
Maximum Shear Force in Cross Girder due to Live Load including
P T
Impact Factor = 1.1 × 271.25 = 298.375 kN
N
Maximum Service Load Bending Moment in Cross Girder = (25.394
+ 293.402) = 318.796 kN-m.
Maximum Service Load Shear Force in Cross Girder = (30.467 +

298.375) = 328.842 kN.
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Design Ultimate Bending Moment in Cross Girder = (1.35

× 25.394 + 1.5 × 293.402) = 474.385 kN-m.
Maximum Design Ultimate Shear Force in Cross Girder = (1.35 ×
30.467 + 1.5 × 298.375) = 488.693 kN.
Design of Cross Girder for Flexure:

E L
P T
N
Maximum Design Ultimate Bending Moment Mu = 474.385 kN-m.
Using 25 mm diameter bars with an effective cover of 150 mm on
tension side, effective depth = (1600 ‒ 150) = 1450 mm.
Parameters of the T beam:
bf = 2500 mm, fck = 25 MPa, fy = 415 MPa, d = 1450 mm, Df = 200
mm, Mu = 474.385 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
xu = depth of Neutral Axis.
If the neutral axis lies within the flange depth (xu < Df), value of xu
can be determined by using the following equation.
Mu = 0.36 × fck × bf × xu × (d ‒ 0.42xu)
E L
T
Or, 474385000 = 0.36 × 25 × 2500 × xu × (1450 ‒ 0.42xu)
P
Or, 9450 xu2 ‒ 32625000 xu + 474385000 = 0
N
Or, xu = 14.6 mm < 200 mm
Hence, the neutral axis lies within the flange.
Bridge Engineering
Area of tensile steel can be computed from the following equation:
Mu = 0.87 × fy × Ast × d × [1 ‒ (Ast × fy)/(b × d × fck)]
Or, 474385000 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × 1450 × [1 ‒ (Ast × 415)/(2500 ×

1450 × 25)]
E L
Or, 474385000 = 523522.5 × Ast ‒ 2.397 Ast2
P T
N
Or, 2.397 Ast2 ‒ 523522.5 × Ast + 474385000 = 0
Or, Ast = 909.932 mm2
2 nos of 25 mm diameter bars can be provided as main

reinforcement in at a total reinforcement of 981.748 mm2.
Bridge Engineering
Design of Cross Girder for Shear:
Maximum Design Ultimate Load Shear Force = 488.693 kN.
As per IRC 112: 2011, the ultimate shear strength of concrete

section VRd,c = [0.12K (80 ρ1fck)0.33] bwd
E L
T
Here, K = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/1450) = 1.371 < 2
P
N
ρ1 = Ast/bwd = 981.748/(300 × 1450) = 0.0023
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bwd = [0.12 × 1.371 × (80 × 0.0023 ×

25)0.33] × 300 × 1450 = 118418.087 N = 118.418 kN < 488.693 kN
(unsafe)
Bridge Engineering
Hence, shear reinforcement are required to be designed to resist

the balance shear force VRd,s = (488.693 ‒ 118.418) = 370.275 kN
Using 10 mm diameter 2-legged stirrups, the spacing of stirrups is

evaluated as Sv = 0.87 × fy × Asv × z/ VRd,s
Here, lever arm z = 0.9 d for RC sections

E L
z = 0.9 d = 0.9 × 1450 = 1305 mm
P T
N
Sv = 0.87 × 415 × 2 × 78.54 × 1305/ 370275 = 199.882 mm
10 mm diameter 2-legged stirrups can be provided at the spacing

of 150 mm.
Bridge Engineering
120
E L
120
P T
150
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
L
E
T
Co. Pvt. Ltd.
N P
Learning Pvt. Ltd.
& Francis Group.
Telford Publishing.
E L
T
BRIDGE ENGINEERING
P
N

Lecture 08: Voided Slab Bridges, Skew Slab Culverts and Curved Bridge Decks
Ø Voided Slab Bridges
Ø Skew Bridge Decks

E L
P T
N
Ø Curved Bridge Decks
Ø Design of RC Skew Slab Culvert

Topic of Discussion

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Voided Slab Bridges
• A voided slab bridge is a slab bridge which contains voids in

the bridge deck.
• Voided slab bridge has a typical span of 8-15 m for single span
as well as continuous bridges.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Voided Slab Bridges
• The primary objective of adding voids is to decrease the overall

weight by as much as 35% when compared to solid slab bridges
of the same capacity.
• In voided slab bridges, void ratio i.e. area of voids to the area of
L
solid slabs should not exceed 40% of the superstructure.
E
•
P T
Voided slab bridges are required to be analyzed for longitudinal
N
as well as transverse structural actions.
• If void ratio is more than 40% of the superstructure, it can be

analyzed using either the Orthotropic Plate Method, Grillage
Analysis or Three-dimensional Continuum Method.
Bridge Engineering
Voided Slab Bridges
• Structural detailing should be decided keeping in mind the

presence of voids.
• Detailing of reinforcement should be such that the voided

portion is prevented from cracking from inside.
•
E L
Position of voids should be such that the void center lies in the
P
Neutral Axis where the stresses are zero.T
• N
Position of void centre can be eccentric with the neutral axis
only if the reinforcement present above and below the void can
bear the loads acting on the structure.
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Skew Bridges: Overview
• When the alignment of a bridge is such that it crosses an

obstacle (e.g. stream) at any angle other than 90 degrees, the
bridge is termed as Skew bridge.
• The term ‘angle of skew’ or ‘skew angle’ is generally applied to
L
the difference between the alignment of an intermediate or end
E
T
support and a line perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the
P
bridge.
N
Bridge Engineering
• High demand of traffic requirements in the recent times has

make skew bridges in demand.
• The behavior of skew bridges differs widely from that of normal

bridges and therefore, the analysis and design of skew bridges
need special attention.
E L
•
P T
A load applied on the deck slab is transmitted to supports in
N
proportion to the rigidity of various possible paths.
• When thickness of the slab is same everywhere, rigidity will be

maximum along shortest span i.e. along the span normal to the
faces of the piers or abutments.
Bridge Engineering
• Therefore, a major proportion of the load tends to reach the

supports in a direction normal to the faces of the abutments and
piers.
• Due to this, the planes of maximum stresses are not parallel to
L
the centre line of the road way and the slab exhibits warped or
E
T
twisted deformational characteristics due to the passage of
P
•
wheel loads on the deck.
N
With increase in skew angle, the stress distribution in the skew
slab differs significantly in comparison with the straight slab.
Bridge Engineering
• The centre line of the bridge is along BC while the plane of

maximum stresses of the slab will be along AB or CD being the
shortest distance between the supports. Therefore, the plane of
maximum stresses in a skew slab deck are not parallel to the
L
centre line of bridge and the deflection of such slab produces a
E
T
warped surface.
N P
Bridge Engineering
Skew Bridges: Observations
• Several researchers adopted numerical modeling techniques for

analyzing the performance of skew bridges to understand their
complex behavior.
• The reactions at the obtuse angled end of the skew slab support
L
are 0-50% larger than the other end for skew angles 20°-50°.
E
•
P T
For skew bridges of short spans ranging between 4-6 m, when
N
the skew angle increases from 15° to 45°, the increase in shear
force is around 20%.
• For skew bridges of long spans ranging between 8-12 m, when

the skew angle increases from 15° to 45°, the shear force is more
or less constant.
Bridge Engineering
Skew Bridges: Observations
• For skew bridges of short spans ranging between 4-6 m, when

the skew angle increases from 15° to 45°, the bending moment
slightly decreases.
• For skew bridges of long spans ranging between 8-12 m, when
L
the skew angle increases from 15° to 45°, the bending moment
E
increases by 10%.
P T
• N
The increase of torsional moment was similar to that of bending
moments. For skew angles exceeding 30 degrees, the torsional
moments are higher for short span bridges requiring larger
magnitude of reinforcements.
Bridge Engineering
Skew Bridges: Design
• An approximate method of design is evolved for smaller skew

angled (<15°) simply supported bridges.
• In this method, the bending moments are evaluated for a right

angled bridge of span length measured from centre to centre
L
distance of the supports and parallel to the centre line of the
E
road way.
P T
• N
Distribution reinforcement of 0.2% of the effective cross-section
of the slab is placed parallel to the supports.
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Reinforcement Layout in Slabs with Small Skew Angles
Bridge Engineering
• For higher skew angled (>15°) deck slabs, a more rigorous

analysis and design are required.
• Based on experimental investigations, researchers developed

influence surfaces for bending and torsional moments at the
L
critical points of skew slabs under concentrated load placed
E
T
anywhere on the slabs for various span/width ratios and skew
P
•
angles in the range of 15-60°.
N
The Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing) has prepared
standard designs (in tabular form) for skew bridge decks of clear
spans 5, 6 and 8 m and skew angles of 15°, 30°, 45° and 60° for
IRC loadings suitable for two lane traffic without footpaths on
national highways.
Bridge Engineering
• The bearing width is assumed as 370 mm. M20 Concrete and

Fe415 HYSD bars are considered for designing.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Reinforcement Layout in Slabs with Higher Skew Angles
Bridge Engineering
• The main and distribution reinforcement details to be provided at

the top and bottom of the slabs in a direction perpendicular and
parallel to the supports are shown in the figure (previous slide).
• The main bars in this reinforcement layout are ineffective in
L
resisting the bending moment at the centre of the free edge due
E
T
to lack of anchorage. Therefore, extra steel reinforcement is
P
N
provided near the free edge parallel to the edges at a width
sufficient to provide anchorage for the main bars.
• Reinforcements at the top of the slab are needed at the obtuse

angled corner and at the center of free edges. Short bars parallel
to the long diagonal are provided at the obtuse angled corner.
Bridge Engineering
• Transverse bars are provided parallel to the supports. Nominal

reinforcements of 10 mm diameter spaced at 300 mm centre to
centre distance are provided parallel to the free edge over the full
width of bridge deck.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Overview
• Curved Bridges are normally provided for viaducts and

interchanges where divergent traffic lanes converged into multi-
lane bridge or over-bridge or vice versa. On a curved bridge, the
skew angle is different at each support.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Overview
• In Curved Bridges, the support reactions are not in the same

plane as that of dead and live loads. Consequently, the dead and
live moments are accompanied by torque for equilibrium of the
structural system.
• In case of bridge structures

E L
of moderate curvature,
P T
simple beam theory
involving simple bending
N
theory and torsion of thin
walled structures is
sufficient in general.
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Methods of Analysis
• Simple Beam Theory
• Folded Plate Analysis
• Finite Strip Method
• Finite Element Method

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Simple Beam Theory
• Simple Beam Theory
This theory is based on simple bending and torsion of thin walled

structural members. The incremental torque at any section is
computed as a function of longitudinal beam for straight beam and
E L
applied torque along the span and the radius of curvature of the
bridge deck.
P T
N
Warping and distortion are ignored in this method. Local bending
moments in the deck slab are determined from the influence
surfaces and the transverse moments around the girders by
moment distribution for the element.
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Analysis of Curved Girders
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Warping and Distortion
Warping and distortion are ignored in Simple Beam Theory.
E L
P T
N
Warping Distortion
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Moment Distribution of Elements
Local bending moments in the deck slab are determined from the
influence surfaces and the transverse moments around the girders
by moment distribution for the element.
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Folded Plate Analysis
• Folded Plate Analysis
In this method, the structure is represented as an assembly of

plates joined rigidly along the longitudinal edges. Individual plate
stiffness matrices for the displacements at various points of the
E L
edges are derived from classical plate theory and the overall
P T
stiffness matrix for edge loading of the structure assembled.
N
All points of the longitudinal edges have four degrees of freedom.
Based on the load position, the fixed end moments and forces are
determined and applied to the structure.
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Folded Plate Analysis
The solutions are obtained using Fourier series and the final
results are obtained by superposition of the results of each
harmonic loading. This method is ideally suited for curved simply
supported structures of constant cross-sections.
E L
Continuous structures are analyzed by considering the structure
P T
as simply supported in the first stage and then eliminating the
N
displacements at the interior supports as a second stage in the
analysis.
Due to development of advanced methods like finite strip method

and finite element method, this method is rarely used.
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Finite Strip Method
• Finite Strip Method
This method is a simplified version of the folded plate method in

which the folded surfaces are subdivided into number of plates
simulating finite strips. The degrees of freedom chosen are same
E L
as that for the folded plate method and the solution is based on the
superposition of loading harmonics.
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Curved Bridges: Finite Element Method
• Finite Element Method
In this method, the entire structure is divided into small elements

and the stiffness of the structure is assembled from the bending
stiffness of each element. This method is applicable to all type of
E L
structures with its accuracy dependent on the nature and number
of elements.
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Topic of Discussion

E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Design of RC Skew Slab Culvert: Problem Statement
Design a Simply Supported RC Slab Culvert for a National Highway
crossing for IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Loading.
Carriageway Width: Two lane (7.5 m wide);

Clear Span: 6 m;
Skew Angle 30°;
E L
Wearing Coat: 80 mm;
P T
Width of Bearing: 370 mm; N
Materials: M20 Grade Concrete and Fe 415 Grade HYSD Bars
Bridge Engineering
Design of RC Skew Slab Culvert: Problem Statement
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Design of RC Skew Slab Culvert: Solution
1. Given Data:
Clear Skew Span = 6 m
Width of Bearing = 370 mm
L
M20 Grade Concrete and Fe 415 Grade HYSD Bars
2. Material Properties:
T E
Concrete: fck = 20 N/mm2, Ec = 23 GPa
NP
Steel: fyk = 415 N/mm2, Es = 200 GPa
3. Depth of Slab and Effective Span:

Based on limit state of serviceability considerations of limiting
deflections, ratio of Span/ Depth (L/d) = 12-15
Bridge Engineering
For L/d = 15, d = (span/15) = (6000/15) = 400 mm
For L/d = 12, d = (span/12) = (6000/12) = 500 mm
For higher skew angled (>15°) deck slabs, the table prepared by
The Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing) can be used.
E L
depth of slab can be adopted as 540 mm.
P T
Based on the Table, for clear span 6 m, skew angle 30°, overall
N
Using 20 mm diameter HYSD bars with clear cover of 40 mm,
Effective Depth of slab d = 540 ‒ (40 + 10) = 490 mm
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Effective Depth of slab d = 490 mm
Effective Span is least of
• Clear Span + Effective Depth = (6 + 0.49) = 6.49 m
•
E L
Centre to Centre Distance of Bearings = (6 + 0.37) = 6.37 m
Hence, Effective Span = 6.37 m
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
4. Dead Load Bending Moments:
Self-Weight of RC Slab = (24 × 0.54) = 12.96 kN/m2
Self-Weight of Wearing Coat = (22 × 0.08) = 1.76 kN/m2
Total Dead Load = (12.96 + 1.76) = 14.72 kN/m2
E L
Bending Moment due to Dead Load = 14.72 × 6.372/8 = 74.661 kN-m
P T
5. Live Load Bending Moments:
N
For IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicles, Impact Factor is 25% of the
span for up to 5 m span decreasing linearly to 10% for span of 9 m.
Therefore, for 6.37 m span, Impact Factor = [25 ‒ (15/4) × (6.37 ‒ 5)]
= 19.86%
Bridge Engineering
Tracked Vehicle is placed symmetrically on the span.
4840 mm
3185 mm
E L
6370 mm
P T
N
Position of Load for Maximum Bending Moment
Effective Width of Slab perpendicular to Span be = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw

of Slab plus 2 times of the thickness of the wearing coat = 0.85 + 2
× 0.08 = 1.01 m
Bridge Engineering
x = 3.185 m, L = 6.37 m, B = 7.5 m and B/L = 1.18
For B/L = 1.18, K = 2.63
be = 2.63 × 3.185 × (1 ‒ 3.185/6.37) + 1.01 = 5.198 m
The tracked vehicle is placed close to the kerb with the required
minimum clearance of 1200 mm.
E L
mm mm mm mm
P T
N 540
mmmm
1625 mm mm (5198/2) mm
6274 mm
mm
Bridge Engineering
Total Wheel Load of two tracks including impact factor = 2 × 350 ×

1.1986 = 839.02 kN
E L
T
Maximum Bending Moment due to Live Load is given by Mmax =
P
(27.63 × 4.84 × 6.37/4) ‒ (27.63 × 4.842/ 8) = 132.057 kN-m
N
Total Service Load Bending Moment M = (MDead + MLive) = (74.661 +
132.057) = 206.718 kN-m
Total Design Ultimate Bending Moment Mu = (1.35 × MDead + 1.5 ×

MLive) = (1.35 × 74.661 + 1.5 × 132.057) = 298.878 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
6. Shear Forces due to Dead Load and Live Load
Shear Force from Dead Load = 14.72 × 6.37/2 = 46.883 kN
For Maximum Shear Force at Support, IRC Class AA Tracked
Vehicle is arranged as follows.
4840 mm
mm
E L
mm
P T
N
x = 2420 mm
6370 mm
mm
Position for IRC Class AA Loading for Maximum Shear
Effective Width of Dispersion be = Kx (1 ‒ x/L) + bw

bw = 0.85 + 2 × 0.08 = 1.01 m
Bridge Engineering
x = 2.42 m, L = 6.37 m, B = 9.5 m and B/L = 1.18
For B/L = 1.18, K = 2.63
be = 2.63 × 2.42 × (1 ‒ 2.42/6.37) + 1.01 = 4.956 m
mm mm mm mm
E L
P T 540
mm
N
mm
1625 mm mm (4956/2) mm
6153 mm
mm
Net Effective Width of Dispersion = 2.625 + 2.05 + (4.956/2) = 6.153 m
Bridge Engineering
Maximum Shear Force = 28.713 × 4.84 × (6.37 ‒ 2.42)/ 6.37 = 86.175
kN
Total Service Load Shear Force V = (VDead + VLive) = (46.883 + 86.175)
= 133.058 kN
E L
T
Total Design Ultimate Shear Force = (1.35 × VDead + 1.5 × VLive) =
P
N
(1.35 × 46.883 + 1.5 × 86.175) = 192.554 kN
7. Design of Slab:
of resistance for singly reinforced sections can be expressed as:
Mu,lim = 0.138 × fckbd2
Bridge Engineering
Effective Depth of Slab required, dreqd = √(M/0.138 fckb) = √(298.878 ×
106)/(0.138 × 20 × 1000) = 329.073 mm ≈ 330 mm
section is under-reinforced. The area of reinforcement required to
L
resist the ultimate bending moment can be computed using the
E
T
following relation.
N P
298.878 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [490 ‒ 415 × Ast / (20 × 1000)]
7.49 × Ast2 ‒ 176914.5 × Ast + 298.878 × 106 = 0
Ast = 1831.39 mm2
Bridge Engineering
20 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided as main reinforcement

at a spacing of 115 mm. (Conforming to the Table).
E L
Area of steel provided = (1000 × 314/ 115) = 2730.435 mm2
P T
The distribution reinforcement should be designed to resist the
transverse moment. N
Transverse Moment = (0.2 × Multimate Dead + 0.3 × Multimate Live) = (0.2 ×
1.35 × MDead + 0.3 × 1.5 × MLive) = (0.2 × 1.35 × 74.661 + 0.3 × 1.5 ×
132.057) = 79.584 kN-m
Bridge Engineering
The area of reinforcement required to resist the transverse moment
can be computed using the following relation.
E L
79.584 × 106 = 0.87 × 415 × Ast × [490 ‒ 415 × Ast / (20 × 1000)]
P
7.49 × Ast2 ‒ 176914.5 × Ast + 79.584 × 106 = 0 T
Ast = 458.754 mm2 N
Using 10 mm diameter bars as distribution reinforcement, the
spacing S = (1000 ast/ Ast) = (1000 × 78.54/ 458.754) = 171.203 mm
Bridge Engineering
reinforcement at a spacing of 100 mm as part of the bottom
reinforcement. (Conforming to the Table)
The free edges of skew slabs are strengthened by 20 mm diameter

bars at a spacing of 110 mm. (As per the Table)
E L
P T
N
reinforcement at a spacing of 260 mm as part of the top
reinforcement. (As per the Table)
Further, 16 mm diameter HYSD bars can be provided as corner

reinforcement at a spacing of 300 mm as part of the top
reinforcement. (As per the Table)
Bridge Engineering
Ultimate Flexural Strength of Deck Slab Mu = 0.87fyAst [d ‒
(fyAst/fckb)]
= 0.87 × 415 × 2730.435 × [490 ‒ 415 × 2730.435/ (20 × 1000)]
E L
= 427200205 N-mm = 427.2 kN-m > 298.878 kN-m (Hence, safe)

P T
N
Here, K = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/490) = 1.639
ρ1 = Ast/bd = 2730.435/ (1000 × 490) = 0.0056
Bridge Engineering
VRd,c = [0.12K(80 ρ1fck)0.33] bd
= [0.12 × 1.639 × (80 × 0.0056 × 20)0.33] × 1000 × 490
= 198709 N = 198.709 kN > 192.554 kN (Hence, safe)
L
T E
N P
Tables 12.2 and 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011 outlines the maximum bar
size and maximum spacing for permissible crack width and service
stress in steel.
Bridge Engineering
Service Maximum Bar Size (mm) Service Maximum Bar Spacing (mm)
Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm Stress (MPa) Wk = 0.3 mm Wk = 0.2 mm
160 32 25 160 300 200
200 25 16 200 250 150
L
240 16 12 240 200 100
280 12 ─ 280
T E150 50
P
320 10 ─ 320 100 ─
Service Load Bending Moment M = 206.718 kN-m N

Bridge Engineering
bx2/2 = (Es/Ec) × Ast × (d ‒ x)
500x2 = (200/23) × 2730.435 × (490 ‒ x)
500x2 + 23742.913x ‒ 11634027.39 = 0
x = 130.632 mm
E L
σs = M/ [(d ‒ x/3)Ast] = 206718000/ [(490 ‒ 130.632/3) × 2730.435]
= 169.578 MPa
P T
N
IRC:112-2011 are 30 mm and 288 mm.
Bridge Engineering
𝟏
a) Deflection due to Shrinkage acs = k r L2
cs
L
k = 0.125 for simply supported ends
𝟏
T E
P
rcs
𝑬𝒔
𝑬𝒄
N
𝑬𝒔
αe = = 200/23 = 8.696
𝑬𝒄
Bridge Engineering
Section = 2730.435 × (270 – 40 – 20/2) = 602895.7 mm3
I = Second Moment of Area of the section = (1000 × 5403/12) =
13.122 × 109 mm4
S/I = 45.952 × 10‒6 /mm
E L
P T
N
εcd, unrestrained
Bridge Engineering
2000 mm
h0 = 2Ac/u = 2 × 540000/ 2000 = 540 mm
E L
P T
N
βds(t, ts) = [(t ‒ ts)/{(t ‒ ts) + 0.04√h03}]
= [(365 ‒ 28)/{(365 ‒ 28) + 0.04√5403}] = 0.402
Bridge Engineering
Table 6.8 of IRC: 112-2011
kh = 0.70 for h0 = 540 mm εcd, unrestrained (× 106)
Table 6.7 of IRC: 112-2011 fck
Relative Humidity (%)
(MPa)
h0 (mm) kh
20 50 80
100 1.0
L
25 620 535 300
200 0.85
E
50 480 420 240
T
300 0.75
75 380 330 190
≥ 500 0.70
95
N P 300
εcd(t) = βds(t, ts) khεcd, unrestrained = 0.402 × 0.70 × 558 × 10‒6 = 157.021 ×
260 150
10‒6
Table 6.6 of IRC: 112-2011
Grade of Concrete M30 M35 M45 M50 M60 M65
Autogenous Shrinkage Strain εca (× 106) 35 45 65 75 95 105
Bridge Engineering
Total shrinkage strain εcs = εcd + εca = 157.021 × 10‒6 + 15 × 10‒6 =
172.021 × 10‒6
𝟏
Shrinkage curvature r = [εcsαe(S/I)] = 172.021 × 10‒6 × 8.696 × 45.952
cs
× 10‒6 = 68739.349 × 10‒12
Deflection due to shrinkage acs = k
𝟏
rcs
E L
L2 = 0.125 × 68739.349 × 10‒12
× 63702 = 0.349 mm
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
Table 6.9 of IRC: 112-2011
E L
T
P
Age at
t0
(days)
50 150 600
Dry atmospheric conditions (RH 50%)
N50 150 600
Humid atmospheric conditions (RH 80%)
1 5.50 4.60 3.70 3.60 3.20 2.90
7 5.50 4.60 3.70 2.60 2.30 2.00
28 3.90 3.10 2.60 1.90 1.70 1.50
90 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.40 1.20
365 1.80 1.50 1.20 1.10 1.00 1.00
Bridge Engineering
For relative humidity 50%, Notional Size 2Ac/u = 540 mm and Age
at loading = 28 days, Creep Coefficient ø = 2.667 by linear
interpolation.
Ec,eff = Ec/(1 + ø) = (23000/3.667) = 6272.157 N/mm2
E L
T
5wdL4/384Ec,effIeff = (5 × 14.72 × 63704) / (384 × 6272.157 × 9.185 ×
P
109) = 5.478 mm
N
Total Live Load wl = 27.63 kN/m2
Bridge Engineering
Maximum deflection due to live load al = 5wlL4/384EcIeff
= (5 × 27.63 × 63704) / (384 × 23000 × 9.185 × 109) = 2.804 mm <
Span/800 = (6370/800) = 7.962 mm
E L
P T
Total deflection = acs + ad + al = 0.349 + 5.478 + 2.804 = 8.631 mm <
Span/250 = (6370/250) = 25.48 mm
N
Bridge Engineering
Design of RC Skew Slab Culvert: Reinforcement Detailing
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
E L
P T
N
Bridge Engineering
L
E
T
Co. Pvt. Ltd.
N P
Learning Pvt. Ltd.
& Francis Group.
Telford Publishing.

Week 2 Lec Material

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Week 2 Lec Material

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

E L

Module 02: Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Decks

Ø Effective Width Method

• A deck slab bridge is the simplest type of construction, adopted

• Slab culverts are slab decks supported on the piers/ abutments.

• The thickness of the slab used for RC bridge deck is

• For larger spans, prestressed concrete slab decks are preferred

The ultimate flexural strength of reinforced concrete sections

The basic principles of estimating the ultimate strength of

b) The maximum strain in concrete at the outermost

d) The tensile strength of concrete is ignored.

e) The stresses in the reinforcement are derived from

f) The maximum strain in tension reinforcement in the section at

Where 𝒇𝒚 = Characteristic strength of steel

𝜸𝒎 = Partial safety factor

Characteristic and Design Strength Curves for Concrete

Characteristic and Design Stress-Strain Curves

Depth of parabolic portion of the stress block from the strain

Depth of rectangular portion of the stress block = 𝒙𝒖− 4𝒙𝒖/7 = 3𝒙𝒖/7

Where 𝒙𝒖 = Depth of Neutral Axis

Total Compression Force = Sum of the compression forces from

Position of centre of compression from extreme compression

• When the compressive strain in concrete reaches a value of

• It is preferable to design sections as under reinforced since

• In the case of over reinforced sections, concrete reaches the

• In practice, over reinforced concrete sections are not preferred

• For under reinforced sections, the moment resistance can be

• For a section of width b, effective depth d, Area of tension

• Maximum values of 𝒙𝒖/𝒅 to avoid compression failure i.e. brittle

• From proportionality of strains, we have the relation,

• Assuming Es = 2 × 105 N/mm2, the maximum limiting values

• For under reinforced sections, the moment resistance can be

𝑴𝒖 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕𝒇𝒚 𝑨𝒔𝒕 . [𝒅 − 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐× P

• The moment of resistance of a concrete section can also be

• Simplifying and rearranging, we find

• Shear failures are likely to occur near the supports of bridge

• The most common types of Shear failures are identified under

• The ultimate shear strength of a reinforced concrete beam or

• Experimental studies have shown that slabs fail at loads

• If nominal shear stress exceeds the permissible values, depth of

• According to the IRC bridge design code, the design shear

𝑽𝑹𝒅.𝒄 = [0.12K(𝟖𝟎 𝝆𝟏 𝒇𝒄𝒌)𝟎.𝟑𝟑 ]𝒃𝒘.d

𝒃𝒘 = width of member in slabs and width of rib in beams

d = effective depth of the member

K = shear strength enhancing factor

• The shear strength enhancing factor K depends on the depth of

• The IS: 456-2000 specifies values of K ranging from 1 to 1.30 for

• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies an

Where d is the effective depth in mm.

• In case of deck slabs, the effective cross-sectional area of the

Where 𝒃𝒕 = mean width of the tension zone in slabs

• The maximum reinforcement should not be greater than 0.025

• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies values for the maximum permissible

Conditions Reinforced Concrete Prestressed Members with

(1) The condition of exposure considered applies to the most

(2) For moderate exposure class, crack width has an influence on

• The IRC: 112-2011 recommends a simpler procedure for control

• In this method, the code recommends the use of two tables in

Table 12.2 of IRC: 112-2011

Steel Service Maximum Bar Size (mm)

Table 12.3 of IRC: 112-2011

Steel Service Maximum Bar Spacing (mm)

• The IRC: 112-2011 specifies the limiting values of deflection

• In the absence other criteria, the following deflection limits under