Recommended Practice For Lateral Stability of Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders CB-02-16

Repor t
e logos
Recommended Practice
for Lateral Stability of
nly logos
Precast, Prestressed
Concrete Bridge Girders
CB -02-16-E
Fi rs t Editi on
This page intentionally left blank
Recommended Practice for
Lateral Stability of Precast,
Prestressed Concrete Bridge
Girders
Publication CB-02-16-E
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute

8770 W. Bryn Mawr Ave., Suite 1150
Chicago, IL 60631-3517
Phone: 312-786-0300 Fax 312-621-1114 www.pci.org
i (Feb 16)
PCI Publication CB-02-16-E
First Edition 2016
Copyright © 2016
By Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the written
permission of the Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, except by a reviewer who wishes to quote
brief passages in a review written for inclusion in a magazine or newsletter.
ISBN 978-0-9968021-3-0
This document has been prepared and reviewed through an extensive

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) Committee process to present state-
of-the-art information on the lateral stability of precast, prestressed concrete
bridge girders. Substantial effort has been made to ensure that all collected data
and information included in this report are accurate. PCI, the committee members,
the authors, and the quoted agencies cannot accept responsibility for any errors or
oversights in this report, the use of this material, or in the preparation of any
design and engineering plans. This document is intended for reference by
professional personnel who are competent to evaluate the significance and
limitations of its contents and who are able to accept responsibility for the
application of the material it contains. Actual conditions on any project must be
given special consideration and more specific evaluation and engineering
judgment may be required that are beyond the intended scope of this work. The
contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the agencies
mentioned, and do not constitute a standard or policy for design or construction.
Printed in the United States of America
ii (Feb 16)
FOREWORD
Precast, prestressed concrete has been used extensively in the nation’s highway bridges beginning in 1949. The
rigorous construction of the interstate highway system in the 1950s, and the subsequent development of higher
performance materials and methods, resulted in the recognition that precast, prestressed concrete is the most
durable, cost-effective bridge construction solution for the span ranges in which it is applicable.
Girders are manufactured in sophisticated plants on permanent casting beds in strong, accurate steel forms. The
plants use high-strength, high-performance concrete that assures rapid fabrication cycles and excellent long-term
performance. Pretensioning is used to prestress the girders.
PCI is acknowledged to be the body of knowledge of the precast and precast, prestressed concrete industry. Since
1954, PCI has researched, refined, and published the technology of this industry. PCI developed comprehensive
guidelines and standards for drafting, design, production, quality control, and installation of precast concrete. It
administers the industry’s first and most comprehensive family of certification programs for personnel,
production, and erection of precast concrete―all of which are predicated on a continuous process of quality
improvement.
Due to the trend toward using longer girders, in 2007, the PCI Bridge Committee recognized the need to develop
and disseminate information about the lateral stability of prestressed concrete girders during all stages of
construction, and to provide recommendations to practitioners throughout the industry including designers,
manufacturers, and the owner agencies. In that year, they established the Girder Stability Subcommittee and
accepted membership of a select group of industry stakeholders. This report is the result of its work.
This recommended practice adds to the body of knowledge. It provides for the evaluation and analysis of
laterally-sensitive bridge girders. PCI will continue to develop this technology to provide guidance to bridge
design and construction practitioners.
Suggestions, questions, and comments concerning this document are welcome. Please contact Managing Director
Transportation Systems at PCI; telephone 312-786-0300, or send your email to PCIBridgeManual@pci.org.
iii (Feb 16)

DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW
Throughout the development of this document, strict adherence to the PCI policies has been followed, including a
series of comprehensive reviews. The outline and each draft were reviewed by the PCI Girder Stability
Subcommittee and its consulting members who replied with written comments. These comments were generally
discussed at the semi-annual meetings of the subcommittee and electronically at intermediate intervals. The
subcommittee balloted the final draft and all written comments were accommodated. The PCI Committee on
Bridges reviewed and balloted the final draft. The document was submitted to the PCI Technical Activities Council
(TAC) for assurance that it meets the Institute’s standards for technical content and quality guidelines for
presentation. Primary and secondary comments resulting from these ballots were resolved by the subcommittee
and subsequently approved by the reviewing committees.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During the development of this document, governmental agencies and universities including the Florida
Department of Transportation, The Texas Department of Transportation, the (Virginia Tech), have undertaken
research to resolve many of the outstanding issues related to girder stability. Their hard work and determination
to resolve these issues and improve safety during construction is recognized and greatly appreciated. Much of
their research has been incorporated into this document.
Many others in addition to the subcommittee engaged in discussions at the meetings and read one or more of the
progression of drafts. PCI wishes to thank all of these professionals for their time and expertise. Many of those
who participated in the writing and review of this document are acknowledged below.
The following is a list of the active Voting Members of the PCI Girder Stability Subcommittee at the time this
document was printed.
Glenn F. Myers, Chair Roy L. Eriksson Z. John Ma
Atkins Eriksson Technologies, Inc. University of Tennessee Knoxville
J. P. Binard Antonio M. Garcia Michael L. McCool, Jr.
Bayshore Concrete Products Garcia Bridge Engineers Beam, Longest & Neff, LLC.
David Chapman Keith Kaufman Gregg A. Reese
Concrete Technology Corporation Knife River Prestress Summit Engineering Group
David Deitz Todd A. Lang Steven Schwarz
Palmer Engineering HDR Inc HR Green, Inc.
iv (Feb 16)
The following are Consulting Members of the PCI Girder Stability Subcommittee. Consulting Members are not held
to the same strict attendance standards for Voting Members as set forth in the PCI Group Operating Manual. Many
of these members attended numerous meetings and participated in committee work including verbal and written
reviews of the documents.
William N. Nickas, Non-voting Zhengzheng Fu Dale King
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Louisiana DOTD Bekaert
Institute
Brian Barngrover Chad Saunders
Dr. Mantu Baishya Eriksson Technologies, Inc. Bayshore Concrete Products
Independent Civil Engineer
Andrew D. Mish Matt Farrar
Paul Dentel Summit Engineering Group Idaho Transportation
Jersey Precast Corporation Department
Tim Holien
D. Scott Eschleman Spancrete, Inc. Finn Hubbard
Stanley Consultants, Inc. Fish and Associates, Inc.
Richard Potts
Lalith Galagedera Standard Concrete Ozzie Bayrak
Yaggy Colby Associates University of Texas–Austin
Reid W. Castrodale
Estella Matemu Castrodale Engineering Shri Bhide
Dayton Superior Concrete Consultants, PC Bentley Systems
Accessories, Inc
Milenko Simic Maher K. Tadros
Claude S. Napier Prestressed Systems, Inc. e.Construct.USA, LLC
Federal Highway
Shoukry Elnahal Loren Risch
Administration (retired)
Delaware River and Bay Kansas DOT
Kent Fuller Authority
Dura-Stress Inc.
Christopher Waldron
University of Alabama
Birmingham
v (Feb 16)
This document was developed with the oversight of the PCI Committee on Bridges. The Committee
monitored the work and reviewed and balloted the final draft. The following is a list of the active
Voting Members of this committee at the time this document was printed.
Kevin R. Eisenbeis, Chair Matt Farrar Michael L. McCool

Burns & McDonnell Idaho Transportation Beam, Longest & Neff, LLC
Department
Finn Hubbard, Vice-Chair Dennis Mertz
Fish & Associates Inc. Antonio M. Garcia University of Delaware
Garcia Bridge Engineers, PA
Maher K. Tadros, TAC Liaison Richard Miller
e.Construct USA, LLC Hossein Ghara University of Cincinnati
SDR Engineering Consultants,
Tess Ahlborn Andrew Mish
Inc.
Michigan Technological Summit Engineering Group
University R. Jon Grafton
Glenn Myers
Oldcastle Precast
Sameh S. Badie Atkins North America, Inc.
George Washington University James S. Guarre
Andrzej S. Nowak
Berger ABAM
Oguzhan Bayrak Auburn University
University of Texas at Austin Ziad Hanna
Michael Oliva
Alfred Benesch & Company
Shrinivas Bhide University of Wisconsin
Bentley Systems, Inc Joseph L. Hartmann
Robert J. Peterman
Federal Highway
JP Binard Kansas State University
Administration
Bayshore Concrete Products
Scott Phelan
Corporation Susan E. Hida
AECOM
California DOT
Reid Castrodale
Chuck Prussack
Castrodale Engineering Fouad Jaber
Oldcastle Precast Inc.
Consultants, PC Nebraska Department of Roads
Mary Lou Ralls Newman
Vijay Chandra Troy Jenkins
Ralls Newman, LLC
VC Consulting, LLC Northeast Prestressed Products,
LLC Gregg A. Reese
David Chapman
Summit Engineering Group
Concrete Technology Bruce Johnson
Corporation Oregon DOT Peter Stamnas
New Hampshire DOT
William R. Cox Keith Kaufman
American Segmental Bridge Knife River Prestress Carin L. Roberts-Wollmann
Institute Virginia Polytechnic Institute
Bijan Khaleghi
and State University
Nancy Daubenberger Washington State DOT
Minnesota DOT Bruce W. Russell
Andy Ko
Oklahoma State University
David Deitz Dewberry
Palmer Engineering Francesco M. Russo
Susan N. Lane
Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
John Dick Federal Highway
J Dick Precast Concrete Administration Steven L. Schwarz
Consultant, LLC HR Green Inc.
Z. John Ma
Larry Erickson The University of Tennessee Stephen J. Seguirant
SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Knoxville Concrete Technology
Corporation
Roy L. Eriksson Tom Macioce
Eriksson Technologies, Inc. Pennsylvania DOT Rita Seraderian
PCI Northeast
Hussam (Sam) Fallaha Eric E. Matsumoto
SDR Engineering Consultants, California State University
Inc.
vi (Feb 16)
Mohsen A. Shahawy C. Douglas Sutton Stephen Zendegui
SDR Engineering Consultants, Purdue University Jacobs Inc.
Inc.
Maher K. Tadros William N. Nickas, Staff Liaison
Eric Steinberg eConstruct USA, LLC (Non-voting)
Ohio University Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Edward Wasserman
Institute
Chuanbing Sun Modjeski and Masters, Inc.
eConstruct USA, LLC
The following are Consulting Members of the PCI Committee on Bridges. Consulting Members are
not held to the same strict attendance standards for Voting Members as set forth in the PCI Group
Operating Manual. Many of these members attended numerous meetings and participated in
committee work including verbal and written reviews of the documents.
Alex Aswad Lyman D. Freemon David A. Tomley
Consultant Consultant Thompson Engineering
Gregory Aaron Banks David Garber Christopher Vanek
Florida International University Parsons Brinckerhoff
James M. Barker
HNTB Corporation Danielle Kleinhans Helmuth Wilden
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Wilden Enterprises
Dean Bierwagen
Institute
Iowa DOT Yuhe Yang
Claude S. Napier Parametrix
D. Scott Eshleman
Virginia DOT
Stanley Consultants Inc. Wael Zatar
Basile G. Rabbat Marshall University
Consultant
vii (Feb 16)

viii (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION FOR USERS
U1.0 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

This document is available as an electronic “eBook” and in a hardcopy version only after a personal eBook
version is registered. The electronic version is a secured PDF format that is particularly useful because it can
be searched and contains links to references and other material. It is fully printable but cannot be moved to
another user. PCI uses Adobe Digital Edition software that is the same tried and proven software used by the
public library system for secured document delivery.
U1.1 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT
U1.1.1 Using Links

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

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

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

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

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

Revisions to this document are expected. To receive revisions, or notices of revisions, it is necessary to
register your copy of the Report.
ix (Feb 16)
U1.2.1 Registering Your Copy

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

Your help will be appreciated in locating errors and identifying omissions. Please contact PCI with your
suggestions at PCIBridgeManual@pci.org.
UI 1.2.3 Dissemination of Corrections

Corrections to this document if required will be assembled and a notice emailed to those registered. The
replacement pages will readily identify the change and the page will be identified as revised in the footer.
Two methods are used to disseminate changes. Simple corrections, revisions, and improvements will be
posted as “Errata” on the PCI Publications website, http://www.pci.org/cms/index.cfm/publications/errata. Or,
select “Errata” on the Publications home page, then look for the title of this document.
Complex revisions that involve more than a few pages may require the user to redownload the entire
document. There will be no cost for this download. Instructions will be emailed as noted above.
In the future, when a new edition is required, an email will notify registered users. There will likely be an
additional charge for a new edition. Please keep your contact information current so you can be notified.
U1.3 EXCHANGE OF SUGGESTIONS
U1.3.1 Send Your Suggestions

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

We strongly urge the designer, in the early stages of a project, to contact one or more PCI-Certified precast
concrete manufacturers. The manufacturer can advise about local experience and capability. The producer can
often help with suggested solutions and cost estimates. They can provide specific design information about
special local, state or regional precast sections. A current list of PCI-Certified producers is readily available
on the PCI website at www.pci.org.
x (Feb 16)
Table of Contents
FOREWORD ...................................................................................................................................... iii
DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW ...................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. iv
INFORMATION FOR USERS ............................................................................................................ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................... xiv
NOTATION ..................................................................................................................................... xv
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 CURRENT PRACTICE.................................................................................................................. 3
3.0 GIRDER STABILITY OVERVIEW .............................................................................................. 5
3.1 THEORY OF GIRDER STABILITY............................................................................................. 5
3.2 HANGING GIRDERS .................................................................................................................... 5
3.2.1 Girder Equilibrium ................................................................................................................... 6
3.2.2 Factor of Safety ........................................................................................................................ 8
3.2.3 Girder Equilibrium Considering Wind ..................................................................................... 9
3.2.3.1 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Increased Rotation ....................................... 9
3.2.3.2 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Decreased Rotation ................................... 10
3.3 SEATED GIRDERS ..................................................................................................................... 11
3.3.1 Girder Equilibrium during Transport ..................................................................................... 11
3.3.2 Girder Equilibrium Considering Lateral Forces ..................................................................... 13
3.3.3 Girder Equilibrium on Elastomeric Bearings ......................................................................... 15
3.4 SPECIAL CASE 1—GIRDER LIFTED FROM ONE END ........................................................ 16
3.5 SPECIAL CASE 2—GIRDER LIFTED WITH INCLINED CABLES ....................................... 17
3.6 PROCEDURES TO INCREASE FACTORS OF SAFETY ........................................................ 19
3.7 GIRDER STABILITY SOFTWARE ........................................................................................... 19
4.0 CRITERIA FOR GIRDER STABILITY ...................................................................................... 21
4.1 APPLIED DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION LOADS .............................................................. 21
4.1.1 Permanent Loads .................................................................................................................... 21
4.1.1.1 Dead Load of Structural Components ............................................................................. 21
4.1.1.2 Prestress, Creep, and Shrinkage ...................................................................................... 22
4.1.2 Transient Loads ...................................................................................................................... 22
4.1.2.1 Dynamic Loads................................................................................................................ 22
4.1.2.2 Centrifugal Force ............................................................................................................. 22
4.1.2.3 Construction Live Load ................................................................................................... 22
xi (Feb 16)
4.1.3 Environmental Loads .............................................................................................................. 22

4.1.3.1 Wind Loads ..................................................................................................................... 23
4.1.3.2 Thermal Force Effects ..................................................................................................... 23
4.1.3.3 Seismic Loads.................................................................................................................. 24
4.2 MATERIAL PROPERTY ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................ 24
4.2.1 Concrete Compressive Strength ............................................................................................. 24
4.2.2 Modulus of Elasticity.............................................................................................................. 24
4.2.3 Assumed Tolerances ............................................................................................................... 24
4.3 ALLOWABLE STRESSES AND FACTORS OF SAFETY ....................................................... 25
4.3.1 Allowable Stresses in Girders................................................................................................. 25
4.3.2 Factors of Safety ..................................................................................................................... 25
5.0 LATERAL STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS—FROM BED TO BRIDGE ............................ 27
5.1 GIRDER MANUFACTURE ........................................................................................................ 27
5.1.1 Concrete Properties................................................................................................................. 28
5.1.2 Girder Weight ......................................................................................................................... 28
5.1.3 Girder Sweep .......................................................................................................................... 28
5.1.4 Lifting Methods ...................................................................................................................... 28
5.1.5 Temporary Prestressing .......................................................................................................... 32
5.2 TRANSPORTATION TO BRIDGE SITE ................................................................................... 32
5.2.1 Modes of Transport ................................................................................................................ 33
5.2.2 Weight Limitations ................................................................................................................. 33
5.2.3 Length Limitations ................................................................................................................. 33
5.2.4 Height Limitations .................................................................................................................. 34
5.2.5 Lateral Stability during Transportation .................................................................................. 34
5.2.6 Summary Considerations for Transportation ......................................................................... 35
5.2.6.1 Transportation by Truck: ................................................................................................. 35
5.2.6.2 Transportation by Barge .................................................................................................. 35
5.3 ERECTION AT THE BRIDGE SITE .......................................................................................... 35
5.3.1 Lifting Methods ...................................................................................................................... 36
5.3.2 Crane Rigging Effects on Lifting Devices and Stability ........................................................ 36
5.3.3 Repositioning Methods ........................................................................................................... 37
5.3.4 Wind Loading ......................................................................................................................... 38
5.3.5 Seating Stability Considerations ............................................................................................. 38
5.3.6 Construction Bracing .............................................................................................................. 38
xii (Feb 16)

5.4 STABILITY DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE DECK ....................................................... 39

5.4.1 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications Provisions ................................................................. 40
5.4.2 Construction Loads ................................................................................................................. 40
5.4.3 Load Application .................................................................................................................... 40
5.4.4 Construction Load Factors...................................................................................................... 42
5.4.5 Limit States ............................................................................................................................. 43
6.0 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS .................................................................................................... 45
6.1 HANGING GIRDER .................................................................................................................... 53
6.1.1 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with No Wind............................................................. 54
6.1.2 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with Impact ................................................................ 64
6.1.3 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with Wind .................................................................. 70
6.1.4 Girder Hanging from Inclined Cables with Wind .................................................................. 76
6.1.5 Hanging Girder Comparisons ................................................................................................. 84
6.2 GIRDER DURING TRANSPORT ............................................................................................... 85
6.2.1 Girder during Transport Stopped on Superelevated Curve .................................................... 86
6.2.2 Girder during Transport at Intersection .................................................................................. 91
6.2.3 Girder during Transport Comparisons.................................................................................... 96
6.3 SEATED GIRDER ....................................................................................................................... 97
7.0 CITED REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 111
APPENDIX A—STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS .............................................................. 113
APPENDIX B—ALTERNATIVE WIND LOAD CALCULATION PROVISIONS ..................... 121
EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS ..................................................................................................... 123
xiii (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.2-1 Eccentricity of Center of Mass due to Allowable Tolerances.......................................... 6
Figure 3.2-2 Perspective View of a Hanging Girder ............................................................................ 6
Figure 3.2.1-1 Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder ................................ 7
Figure 3.2.3-1 Geometric Conditions and Free Body Diagrams of Rotated Girder Subjected to Wind
from Both Directions .................................................................................................... 9
Figure 3.3.1-1 Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Transport Vehicle
..................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 3.3.1-2 Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Transport Vehicle Rollover .......... 13
Figure 3.3.2-1 Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Transport Vehicle
..................................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 3.3.3-1 Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Bearings .......... 16
Figure 3.4-1 Geometric Condition of Girder Lifted from One End……………………………........16
Figure 3.5-1 Lateral Eccentricity of Horizontal Force……………………………………………….18
Figure 5.1.4-1 Lifting Hardware Engaging Dual Lift Loops .............................................................. 29
Figure 5.1.4-2 Girder Lifted from Below its Bottom Flange .............................................................. 29
Figure 5.1.4-3 Extended Rigid Lifting System ................................................................................... 30
Figure 5.1.4-4 Girder Rotation Due to Eccentric Form Bracket Loading .......................................... 31
Figure 5.1.4-5 Deflected Girder Diagram……………………………………………………………31
Figure 5.2-1 Girder Transport Turning at Intersection ....................................................................... 33
Figure 5.3.2-1 Lifting with Two Cranes ............................................................................................. 36
Figure 5.3.2-2 Slings Used to Lift Girder with Single Crane ............................................................. 37
Figure 5.3.2-3 Horizontal Forces Developed During Single Crane Lift............................................. 37
Figure 5.3.6-1 Girder Tie Bracing ...................................................................................................... 39
Figure 5.4.3-1 Loads during Deck Construction ................................................................................ 41
Figure 5.4.3-2 Bracing Loads in Deck Form Overhang Brackets ...................................................... 42
xiv (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS NOTATION
NOTATION
CF = centrifugal force
Ec = modulus of elasticity of the girder
𝑒ℎ = lateral eccentricity of the horizontal component of the tension force from the roll axis to the
section under consideration
𝑒𝑖 = initial lateral eccentricity of the center of mass of the girder with respect to the roll axis or
center
𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = eccentricity of the girder weight for girder subjected to WS
Fh = horizontal component of lifting force due to sloped slings
FS = factor of safety
FS’ = factor of safety for the cracked girder section at rollover
𝑓𝑐 = compressive strength of concrete during a specific stability event
′
𝑓𝑐 = specified compressive strength of concrete
𝑓𝑐𝑖′ = specified compressive strength of concrete at time of initial prestressing
ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = vertical distance from roll center to mid-depth of girder
ℎ𝑟 = height of roll center above the roadway
ℎ𝐶𝐸 = vertical distance from roll center to center of mass of girder
Iy = moment of inertia of the girder about the y-axis
K1 = modulus of elasticity correction factor for local aggregate
𝐾θ = rotational constant of the spring support
𝐾θ1 = rotational constant of the single spring support
L = span length between roll centers
Ma = acting moment
Mr = resisting moment
𝑀𝑦.𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘 = lateral moment applied to the girder that causes tensile cracking in the most critical flange
𝑀𝑧 = gravity moment of the girder
𝑃𝑐𝑟 = critical buckling load
𝑃ℎ = horizontal component of the tension force in an inclined cable
W = weight of the girder
wc = unit weight of plain concrete
WS = wind force on girder or structure
𝑦𝑐𝑚 = height of the lift point roll center above the center of mass of the girder along centerline of
girder
𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡 = height of the lift point roll center above the top of girder
𝑦𝑟 = distance from the roll axis/center to the center of mass of the girder
𝑧 = lateral deflection of the girder under self-weight
zo = lateral eccentricity of the center of mass of the deflected shape of the girder subjected to W
applied as a lateral load
𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = lateral deflection of the girder subjected to WS
𝑧𝐶𝐸 = lateral deflection of the girder subjected to CE
𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 = distance from the center of bunking surface to the centerline of the dual tires on the truck
α = superelevation of the roadway supporting the vehicle
α = slope of a single spring support
ϕ = angle between sloped lift sling and horizontal
θ = rotation angle of the girder from vertical
θ𝑒𝑞 = rotation angle at equilibrium
θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 = rotation angle of the girder from vertical that causes girder cracking
θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 = critical rotation angle at rollover
Note: This notation applies to Sections 1 through 5. A separate notation for Section 6 and App. B is in Section 6.
xv (Feb 16)
LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS NOTATION
xvi (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS _________________ SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Precast, prestressed concrete girders became an important bridge superstructure component in the 1950s.
Concrete strengths have progressively increased over the subsequent decades resulting in significantly longer
spans. With longer spans came the challenge to produce long slender girder sections that are laterally stable
during production, transportation, erection, and during construction of the bridge deck. A history of lateral
stability failures indicated the need for a reliable analysis to check the stability of these girders for all phases
of their transition from the casting bed to incorporation into the bridge superstructure. This document
provides guidelines for the analysis of stability of prestressed concrete girders from “bed to bridge” along
with the fundamental principles behind the analysis methods.
The issues relating to the lateral stability of precast, prestressed concrete girders are addressed in
subsequent sections of this document:
Current Practice: A survey was developed and sent to all state bridge engineers and other industry
professionals to determine the processes in place to ensure stability of prestressed concrete girders from
bed-to-bridge. Some of the questions presented to these agencies, addressed who had professional
responsibilities for ensuring stability along with their experiences with girder failures and rejection of
girders due to excessive lateral deflections.
Girder Stability Basics: The basic theory for lateral stability of prestressed girders is presented in this
report. The theory builds on the widely accepted analysis methods developed and presented by Robert F.
Mast (1989, 1993), adding additional criteria that should be evaluated.
Criteria: This section discusses the various criteria to be considered for design.
Lateral Stability Considerations from Bed to Bridge: This section presents a discussion of the various
conditions to be considered for the following stages in the life of a prestressed girder:
 Transfer of prestress force
 Lifting the girder from the casting bed
 Transportation to the yard storage area
 Support conditions in the yard storage area
 Transportation to the project site
 Erection at the project site
 Bracing requirements during the construction or reconstruction of the deck
Example Calculations: A series of calculations are provided to illustrate the lateral stability analysis
methods. All of the conditions stated above are investigated in the examples. A number of variations are
also illustrated such as the effects of wind or no wind, various wind speeds, and two roadway cross
slopes.
1 (Feb 16)
INTRODUCTION
2 (Feb 16)
CURRENT PRACTICE
2.0 CURRENT PRACTICE

In preparing this recommended practice to assess lateral stability, it was important to understand the
industry experience with lateral stability failures and the rejection of girders due to excessive lateral
deflection. Equally important is understanding the role played by all of the project professionals involved.
State bridge engineers and other industry professionals were surveyed as to their experience with these
issues. The findings of this survey are included in Appendix A and are summarized below.
The respondents experienced with lateral stability failures or rejections indicated the locations where these
incidents occurred, included the fabricator's yard, in transit to the project site, during girder erection, and at a
time following girder erection. There was no clear indication that any one of these locations was more likely a
problem area than others. Based on the responses, it became clear that lateral stability of the girder must be
evaluated throughout the entire process from casting bed-to-bridge.
The most significant issues identified as resulting in either rejection or failure of prestressed concrete girders,
were excessive lateral deflection and inadequate bracing. Forty-five percent of the respondents indicated
these issues as the reason for the rejections or failures. Other cited contributors included lifting methods,
bearing geometry, out-of-level bearings, dynamic impact, roadway grade issues, and wind pressure. This
experience is indicative of a need for care to be taken throughout the activities required to produce and
install prestressed concrete girders.
There was no consensus from the survey about whose responsibility it is to ensure that lateral stability is
evaluated during design and construction. These responsibilities appear to be dependent on past experience,
contractual requirements, and legal precedents, which vary from state to state. It is therefore incumbent upon
the design professional preparing the bridge design plans and specifications to ensure that these
responsibilities are clearly identified in the contract documents. In this document, the specific professional
responsible to ensure adequate girder stability at each stage will be referred to as the Stability Engineer. The
term Stability Engineer is used to emphasize that the stability of the girder in all phases of construction needs
to be designed or reviewed by a responsible professional. The Stability Engineer may be associated with any
one of the entities that designs or handles the girders.
Bridge design engineers, fabricators, transporters, erectors, and contractors must be fully cognizant of the
factors that affect lateral stability. Each must ensure that lateral stability is properly addressed throughout
the life of the girder until it is fully incorporated into the bridge. This document provides guidance and
recommendations for a greater understanding of these factors, and their incorporation into prestressed
concrete girder bridge projects.
3 (Feb 16)
CURRENT PRACTICE
4 (Feb 16)
GIRDER STABILITY OVERVIEW
3.0 GIRDER STABILITY OVERVIEW

In general, precast, prestressed concrete bridge girders are structurally efficient members and can be made
very long and slender. When a girder becomes too slender, lateral stability during handling, transport, and
erection is a safety concern. Typically, there is no concern about lateral stability after the girder is secured in
its final position and integrated into the bridge structure. However, before the girder is part of the bridge, it is
handled using lifting loops or other hardware located in the top of the girder near its ends or it is supported
from beneath during storage, transport, and in its final location in the bridge. In all these stages, the potential
for instability must be assessed to determine the need for some form of girder lateral restraint.
As constituent materials become stronger and the girders’ span-to-depth ratios increase, the potential
increases for an unstable condition to occur. It is important therefore, that all stakeholders (designers,
manufacturers, and contractors) have a complete understanding of girder stability. This must include the
fundamental causes of girder instability and what means and methods are necessary to ensure that the girder
remains stable. This recommended practice is intended to address those needs.
3.1 THEORY OF GIRDER STABILITY

There are two basic support conditions for a girder. A girder is typically lifted with the aid of devices attached
to its web or embedded in its top near each end. The girder is hoisted into the air using these devices in order
to move it to another location. A girder suspended from the top is commonly referred to as a hanging girder.
A girder can also be supported from beneath during lifting, storage, transport, and when set into position in
the bridge. A girder supported from below is commonly referred to as a seated girder. The assessment of
stability is different for a hanging or a seated girder.
3.2 HANGING GIRDERS

The methods included here are an expansion of the work developed and presented by Robert F. Mast (1989,
1993). This section begins with the theory of basic equilibrium equations developed by Mast and expands the
equations to include wind and other lateral load effects. It should be noted that the equations for factor of
safety of a hanging girder given in Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams—Part 1 (Mast, 1989)
were updated in Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams—Part 2 (Mast, 1993) to reflect the
relationship between resisting moment and acting moment.
Hanging girder stability is based on the resolution of internal and external loads that are eccentric to an
imaginary line connecting the support points, referred to as the roll axis. Fabrication tolerances, including
permissible deviation in member geometry and prestressing eccentricity, cause the girder to have built-in
transverse deformations, defined as sweep, which causes the center of mass of the girder to fall to one side or
the other of the roll axis, as shown in Figure 3.2-1. Moment restraint at the lifting devices is typically
negligible, so when a girder is lifted, the eccentricity causes the girder to rotate about the roll axis. As the
girder rotates, it continues to deflect laterally under its own weight, resulting in an increasing eccentricity,
which drives more rotation. This rotation continues until the girder either regains its equilibrium, as shown
in Figure 3.2-2, or it fails. The rotation, lateral eccentricity, and girder strength are the variables that are
investigated to develop a factor of safety against cracking or failure.
5 (Feb 16)
Figure 3.2-1
Eccentricity of Center of Mass due to Allowable Tolerances
Figure 3.2-2
Perspective View of a Hanging Girder
3.2.1 Girder Equilibrium

When a girder is lifted, the girder will roll until it reaches a state of equilibrium where the center of mass of
the curved arc of the girder is directly below the roll axis. The roll center is defined as the center of rotation at
each support. The roll axis is defined as the line connecting the roll centers. The depiction of this geometric
condition and its free body diagram are shown in Figure 3.2.1-1.
The variables defined in this figure include:
𝑒𝑖 = initial lateral eccentricity of center of mass of girder with respect to roll axis caused by girder
sweep and eccentricity of lifting devices from centerline of girder
𝑦𝑐𝑚 = height of top of girder above center of mass of girder
𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡 = height of roll center above top of girder
𝑦𝑟 = distance from roll axis to center of mass of girder
𝑧 = lateral deflection of centroid of girder cross section
θ = rotation angle of girder from vertical
W = weight of girder
6 (Feb 16)
Figure 3.2.1-1
Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder
The lateral eccentricity of the deflected shape of the girder, z, is caused by the deflection from force 𝑊sin(θ).
As the girder rotates to seek equilibrium, the lateral deflection of the girder under self-weight will vary as a
function of the girder rotation. Defining the variable, 𝑧𝑜 , as the lateral deflection of the center of mass of the
girder computed with the full girder weight, W, applied as a lateral load, a relationship between the rotation
and the lateral deflection is established. The lateral deflection, z, can be redefined as:
𝑧 = 𝑧𝑜 sin(θ)
To satisfy the condition of equilibrium, moments are taken about the roll center at the lifting point. For a
given rotation, the resisting moment is:
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊sin(θ)𝑦𝑟
For a given rotation, the acting moment is:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧 + 𝑒𝑖 ) = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧𝑜 sin(θ) + 𝑒𝑖 )
Using small deflection theory, cos(θ) = 1 and sin(θ) = θ , these equations become:
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊𝑦𝑟 θ,
and
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊(𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑒𝑖 ).
The equilibrium condition is defined where the resisting and acting moments are equal.
𝑊𝑦𝑟 θ = 𝑊(𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑒𝑖 )
Solving for the rotation at equilibrium, where the acting and resisting moments are equal,
𝑒𝑖
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝑦𝑟 − 𝑧0
This angle is utilized to calculate the lateral moment in the girder due to self-weight. The lateral moment is
combined with the load effects from girder dead weight and prestressing to determine the stresses in the
7 (Feb 16)
girder. These stresses are compared to allowable compressive stresses and may require an increased 28-day
design compressive strength.
It is important to emphasize that for 𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡 to be considered as part of the distance from the roll axis to the
center of mass of the girder, 𝑦𝑟 , the lifting extension must be sufficiently stiff to act as an extension of the
beam, and not deform at the top of the girder. This is a specific requirement to satisfy the equilibrium
condition defined in the equations. When strand lifting loops are used, they may not exhibit sufficient
stiffness to maintain extended girder geometry.
3.2.2 Factor of Safety

A key concept in ensuring girder stability is the notion of factor of safety, which is a measure to provide a
resisting moment that is sufficiently larger than the acting moment. The factor of safety is defined as:
𝑀𝑟 𝑦𝑟 θ
𝐹𝑆 = =
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑒𝑖
The factor of safety is established for two different scenarios:
1. Factor of safety to provide an uncracked section
2. Factor of safety against failure using cracked sections
For the uncracked section, the rotation at which the section cracks, θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 , is defined as:
𝑀𝑦.𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘
θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
𝑀𝑧
where:
𝑀𝑦.𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘 = lateral moment applied to the girder that causes tensile cracking in the most critical flange
𝑀𝑧 = gravity moment of the girder
The factor of safety against cracking is as follows and is recommended to be at least 1.0:
𝑀𝑟 𝑦𝑟 θ𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.0
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑒𝑖
For the cracked section, the lateral stiffness of the girder is reduced, so it will deflect more under the same
load. Mast (1993) defined the effective stiffness as:
𝐸𝑐 𝐼𝑔
𝐸𝑐 𝐼𝑒𝑓𝑓 =
(1 + 2.5θ)
The effective stiffness is applied to the lateral deflection of the girder only, as the initial lateral eccentricity is
not affected by the softening of the girder. Incorporating this effective stiffness, the factor of safety becomes:
𝐹𝑆 = =
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ (1 + 2.5 θ) + 𝑒𝑖
The angle of rotation in the above formula for cracked section is varied to find the maximum factor of safety
by plotting the factor of safety as a function of rotation, θ. Mast (1993) identified a maximum rotation angle of
0.4 radians as a practical limit to the small deflection theory used to simplify the analysis. The differentiation
of this relationship can be used to establish the maximum tilt angle for the cracked section, θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 . The
resulting formula becomes:
𝑒𝑖
θ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √
2.5𝑧𝑜
The factor of safety against failure must be at least 1.5:

𝑀𝑟 𝑦𝑟 θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹𝑆′ = = ≥ 1.5
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (1 + 2.5 θ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝑒𝑖
′
Section checks should be performed to assure that the girder has adequate lateral moment capacity to resist
1.5𝑀𝑎 .
8 (Feb 16)
3.2.3 Girder Equilibrium Considering Wind
The introduction of wind into the equilibrium equations requires consideration of both added rotation of the
girder and added deflection of the girder. Since the girder is supported from the top, this rotation and
deflection results in opposing contributions to the lateral stability factor of safety. Figure 3.2.3-1 illustrates
these contributions for wind in either direction. The additional variables defined in this figure include:
WS = wind force on girder
𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = eccentricity of the girder weight for girder subjected to WS
For a case where the girder bottom rotates to the right due to the applied eccentricities described in Section
3.2.2, the girder rotation will increase due to the wind load as shown in the left diagram in Figure 3.2.3-1,
increasing the lateral self-weight deflection, 𝑧𝑜 . However, the lateral deflection of the girder due to the wind
load acts in the opposite direction, reducing the lateral deflection. The opposite occurs with wind from the
opposite direction, the rotation lessens while the deflection increases. Therefore, it is necessary to check wind
from both directions to establish the critical factors of safety.
Figure 3.2.3-1
Geometric Conditions and Free Body Diagrams of Rotated Girder Subjected to Wind from Both Directions
3.2.3.1 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Increased Rotation

Where wind acts to increase girder rotation, the equilibrium equations described in Section 3.2.2 are
modified to include the wind effects. The lateral movement of the girder due to wind is defined as:
𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 =
𝑊
The resisting and acting moments become:
and
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧 + 𝑒𝑖 − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ) + 𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
Using 𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = 𝑊 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 and 𝑧 = 𝑧𝑜 sin(θ), the applied moment becomes:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧𝑜 sin(θ) + 𝑒𝑖 − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ) + 𝑊 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
Using small deflection theory, cos(θ) = 1 and sin(θ) = θ, these equations become:
9 (Feb 16)
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊𝑦𝑟 θ
and
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊(𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑒𝑖 − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ).
𝑒𝑖 − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝑦𝑟 − 𝑧0
This angle is utilized to calculate the lateral moment in the girder due to self-weight and other loads such as
wind force, to determine the concrete compressive strength requirements.
The factor of safety against cracking is as follows and must be at least 1.0:
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.0
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑖
Using effective stiffness for a cracked section, the factor of safety against failure is as follows and is
recommended to be at least 1.5:
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.5
𝑀𝑎 (𝑧𝑜 θ − 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 )(1 + 2.5 θ) + 𝑒𝑖
1.5𝑀𝑎 .
3.2.3.2 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Decreased Rotation

Where wind acts to decrease girder rotation, the equilibrium equations described in Section 3.2.2 are
modified to include the wind effects. The resisting and acting moments become:
and
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧 + 𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ) − 𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
Using 𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = 𝑊 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 and 𝑧 = 𝑧𝑜 sin(θ), the applied moment becomes:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧𝑜 sin(θ) + 𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ) − 𝑊 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
Using small deflection theory, cos(θ) = 1 and sin(θ) = θ, these equations become:
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊𝑦𝑟 θ
and
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊(𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 ).
𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝑦𝑟 − 𝑧0
Again, this angle is utilized to calculate the lateral moment in the girder due to self-weight and other loads
such as wind force, to determine the concrete compressive strength requirements.
The factor of safety against cracking is recommended to be at least 1.0:
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.0
𝑀𝑎 𝑧𝑜 θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 + 𝑒𝑖
10 (Feb 16)
Using effective stiffness for a cracked section, the factor of safety against failure is as follows and is
recommended to be at least 1.5:
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.5
𝑀𝑎 (𝑧𝑜 θ + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 )(1 + 2.5 θ) + 𝑒𝑖
Again, the angle of rotation in the above formula for cracked section is varied to find the maximum factor of
safety by plotting the factor of safety as a function of rotation, θ. Section checks should be performed to
assure that the girder has adequate lateral moment capacity to resist 1.5𝑀𝑎 .
3.3 SEATED GIRDERS

The methods presented for equilibrium stability for a girder resting on its bottom flange are also an
expansion of the work done by Robert Mast. This section starts with the theory behind the basic equilibrium
equations developed by Mast (1993) and expands them to include applied lateral loads consisting of wind
and centrifugal force effects.
A girder in storage, or on a transporting rig, or when erected into final position on bearings in the bridge, is
supported by bearing reactions on its bottom at each end. When placed in storage, a girder is typically
supported on hardwood blocks or other relatively inflexible supports on firm, level ground. In this situation,
stability is not usually of concern. However, during transport and when the girder is placed in its final
position, the points of bearing may be quite flexible, which can cause the girder to rotate and adversely affect
its stability and the stability of the transporting rig.
Seated girder stability is based on the resolution of internal and external forces that are eccentric to the
girder supports through the rotational resistance of the transporting rig or bearing pad upon which the girder
is seated. The overall stability of the girder is also influenced by the cross slope of the surface on which the
truck or bearing is resting and imperfections in girder geometry. Principal forces acting to cause overturning
include girder self-weight, and wind and centrifugal force during transport.
3.3.1 Girder Equilibrium during Transport

During transport, the rotational stiffness of the trailer and the cross slope of the roadway greatly influence
the stability of the girder. In addition, dynamic and other loads relevant to transportation may need to be
considered as shown in Section 4.1.2. The relationship between the girder and its support system is
illustrated in Figure 3.3.1-1. The roll center is defined at the center of the spring support of the trailer. The
accompanying free body diagram indicates the direct relationship between the acting girder weight and the
restoring force caused by the torsional resistance of the trailer. The spring constant of the trailer, 𝐾θ , must be
sufficient to resist the overturning tendency of the girder when it is tilted.
Two different checks are performed to verify the stability of a supported girder: 1) the potential for cracking
resulting from lateral deformation and, 2) the potential for the girder rolling over due to failure. This takes
the forms of computing the safety factor against cracking and the safety factor against girder rollover.
For the girder cracking check, equilibrium is satisfied by taking moments about the roll center and using the
simplifications for small deflection theory. For a given rotation, the resisting moment is based on the
rotational change in the suspension system of the transporting rig:
11 (Feb 16)
𝑀𝑟 = 𝐾θ (θ − α)
where:
𝐾θ = rotational constant of the spring support
α = superelevation of the roadway supporting the vehicle
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧 + 𝑒𝑖 ) + 𝑊sin(θ)𝑦𝑟
Where 𝑦𝑟 = distance from the roll center to the center of mass of the girder
Figure 3.3.1-1
Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Transport Vehicle
Using the simplifications for small deflection theory and substituting 𝑧𝑜 θ for 𝑧, this equation becomes:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ + 𝑒𝑖 )
While the Mast (1993) equations compare resisting and acting moment arms in the development of the factor
of safety, herein, the resisting and acting moments are compared for the development of the factor of safety.
This will make the addition of lateral force effects easier to follow in the next section.
Factor of safety against cracking is determined and compared to the recommended factor of safety of at least
1.0:
𝑀𝑟 𝐾θ (θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 − α)
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.0
𝑀𝑎 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑒𝑖 )
Solving for the rotation at equilibrium,
𝐾θ α + 𝑊𝑒𝑖
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝐾θ − 𝑊(𝑦𝑟 + 𝑧0 )
wind and centrifugal forces, to determine the concrete compressive strength requirements.
Overturning of the truck is also a critical criterion to be analyzed for transportation. The geometric condition
and free body diagram of a girder supported on a transporting rig is shown in Figure 3.3.1-2. For a given
12 (Feb 16)
girder rotation angle, the acting moment is equal to the resisting moment from the girder cracking analysis
above.
𝑀𝑎 = 𝐾θ (θ − α)
The resisting moment from the figure is:
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊(𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 cos(α) − ℎ𝑟 sin(α))
where 𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 = distance from the center of bunking surface to the centerline of the dual tires on the truck
Solving for the critical rotation at rollover and using small deflection theory:
𝑊(𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 − ℎ𝑟 α)
θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 = +α
𝐾θ
Figure 3.3.1-2
Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Transport Vehicle Rollover
The factor of safety for the cracked girder section at rollover becomes:
𝐾θ (θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 − α)
𝐹𝑆 ′ = ≥ 1.5
𝑊((𝑧0 (1 + 2.5 θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝑦𝑟 )θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑒𝑖 )
1.5𝑀𝑎 .
3.3.2 Girder Equilibrium Considering Lateral Forces

The introduction of wind and centrifugal force into the equilibrium equations simply adds the overturning
forces due to these lateral loads into the acting moment equation along with the added lateral deflections
from these forces. These forces and the resulting free body diagram are shown in Figure 3.3.2-1. Typically,
centrifugal force is ignored in the analysis of transporting rigs on curves, simulating a stopped vehicle on a
superelevated surface or a transporting rig in a superelevation transition outside of the curve. However,
where the transporting rig is turning on a surface with superelevation sloping away from the turning
direction, the centrifugal force can add to the overturning moment.
13 (Feb 16)
This overturning moment, 𝑀𝑜𝑡 , is defined as the moment created by the lateral forces about the roll center.
𝑀𝑜𝑡 = 𝑊𝑆 ℎ𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝐶𝐸 ℎ𝐶𝐸
where:
WS = wind force on girder
CE = centrifugal force
ℎ𝐶𝐸 = vertical distance from roll center to center of mass of girder
Figure 3.3.2-1
Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Transport Vehicle
Including this moment and the lateral deflections results in the following acting moment equation:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ + 𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑧𝐶𝐸 ) + 𝑀𝑜𝑡
where:
𝑧𝐶𝐸 = lateral deflection of the girder subjected to CE
Factor of safety against cracking is determined and compared to the recommended factor of safety of 1.0:
𝑀𝑟 𝐾θ (θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 − α)
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.0
𝑀𝑎 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑧𝐶𝐸 ) + 𝑀𝑜𝑡
𝐾θ α + 𝑊(𝑒𝑖 + 𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑧𝐶𝐸 ) + 𝑀𝑜𝑡
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝐾θ − 𝑊(𝑦𝑟 + 𝑧0 )
wind and centrifugal forces, to determine the concrete compressive strength requirements.
14 (Feb 16)
For the overturning check,
𝑀𝑎 = 𝐾θ (𝜃 − α) + (𝑊𝑆 − 𝐶𝐸) ℎ𝑟
The resisting moment is the same as the previous analysis.
𝑀𝑟 = 𝑊(𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 cos(α) − ℎ𝑟 sin(α))
Solving for the critical rotation at rollover and using small deflection theory:
𝑊(𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥 − ℎ𝑟 α) − (𝑊𝑆 − 𝐶𝐸) ℎ𝑟
θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 = +α
𝐾θ
The factor of safety for the cracked girder section at rollover becomes:
𝐾θ (θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 − α)
𝐹𝑆 ′ = ≥ 1.5
𝑊((𝑧0 (1 + 2.5θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝑦𝑟 )θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (𝑧𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 − 𝑧𝐶𝐸 )(1 + 2.5θ′𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝑒𝑖 ) + 𝑀𝑜𝑡
1.5𝑀𝑎 .
3.3.3 Girder Equilibrium on Elastomeric Bearings

Stability must be checked for the condition of seating of the first girder at the bridge site. This stability check
uses the same equilibrium theory for girders in transit, replacing the rotational stiffness of the transporting
rig with the rotational stiffness of the bearings. This stability check is also necessary if the girder is placed on
compressible bearings temporarily at the jobsite before being set in the structure. The relationship between
the girder and its bearings is illustrated in Figure 3.3.3-1. The accompanying free body diagram indicates the
direct relationship between the acting girder weight and the restoring force caused by the torsional
resistance of the bearing. The spring constant of the bearings, 𝐾θ , must be sufficient to resist the overturning
tendency of the tilted girder.
The rotational stiffness of the bearing, 𝐾θ , is highly dependent on the conditions of the mating surfaces . As
the girder rotates, liftoff can occur, as shown in the right diagram in Figure 3.3.3-1. When this liftoff occurs,
the rotational stiffness of the bearing is reduced dramatically. The equations presented herein depend on a
linear relationship between the moment resistance of the bearing and the rotation. To maintain the
applicability of these equations, the reaction eccentricity must not exceed the kern point of the bearing. A
factor of safety of 1.2 for this bearing check is recommended based on overturning resistance requirements in
Section 2.2.3 of the AASHTO Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works (2008).
Once the girders are adequately braced in the structure, the stability of the bearings is no longer an issue.
15 (Feb 16)
Figure 3.3.3-1
Geometric Condition and Free Body Diagram of Rotated Girder on Bearings
3.4 SPECIAL CASE 1—GIRDER LIFTED FROM ONE END

There are special cases such as when a girder is seated at one end and lifted from the other end. The
equations presented herein for hanging girders and seated girders do not address the equilibrium stability
for this special case. Figure 3.4-1 illustrates the support geometry of the condition. The roll axis is defined as
the line that intersects the roll center at the lifting point, as defined in Figure 3.2.1-1, and the roll center at
support spring as defined in Figures 3.3.1-1 or 3.3.3-1 for girders seated on a trailer or on a bearing,
respectively. This condition can be very unstable since the center of mass is very close to the roll axis. In these
cases, the resistance against rotation must come from the spring support at the seated end.
Figure 3.4-1
Geometric Condition of Girder Lifted from One End
Similar to seated girder stability, the resisting moment is developed from the rotational stiffness of spring
support of a trailer or bearing on which the girder is seated. The spring constant of the support, 𝐾θ1 ,
represents the stiffness for the single support that is restraining the rotation. This spring constant is different
from the spring constant, 𝐾θ , defined for the seated condition where two supports are resisting the rotation of
the girder.
16 (Feb 16)
The potential for cracking that results from lateral deformation and the potential for the girder rolling over
due to failure should be checked. This means computing the safety factor against cracking and the safety
factor against girder rollover.
For the girder cracking check, equilibrium is established by taking moments about the roll axis and using the
simplifications for small deflection theory. For a given rotation, θ, the resisting moment is based on the
rotational change in the girder seat:
𝑀𝑟 = 𝐾θ1 (θ − α)
where:
𝐾θ1 = rotational constant of the single spring support
α = slope of the single spring support
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊cos(θ)(𝑧 + 𝑒𝑖 ) + 𝑊sin(θ)𝑦𝑟
where 𝑦𝑟 is the distance from the roll center to the center of mass of the girder. 𝑦𝑟 is positive for the case
where the center of mass is above the roll axis.
Using the simplifications for small deflection theory and substituting 𝑧𝑜 θ for 𝑧, this equation becomes:
𝑀𝑎 = 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ + 𝑒𝑖 )
Factor of safety against cracking is computed as follows and compared to the recommended factor of safety of
at least 1.0:
𝑀𝑟 𝐾θ1 (θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 − α)
𝐹𝑆 = = ≥ 1.5
𝑀𝑎 𝑊((𝑧𝑜 + 𝑦𝑟 )θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑒𝑖 )
𝐾θ1 α + 𝑊𝑒𝑖
θ𝑒𝑞 =
𝐾θ1 − 𝑊(𝑦𝑟 + 𝑧0 )
This angle is utilized to calculate the lateral moment in the girder due to self-weight. This lateral moment is
combined with the load effects from girder dead weight and prestressing to determine the stresses in the
girder. These stresses are compared to establish the required concrete compressive strength.
For the girder with one end seated on a truck, the overturning of the truck should be analyzed with the
methods presented in Section 3.3.1, modifying the spring constant for the single support condition.
This methodology assumes that the effects of wind load are balanced on either side of the roll axis. If the
exposed area of girder above and below the roll axis is significantly different, wind loads should be
considered.
3.5 SPECIAL CASE 2—GIRDER LIFTED WITH INCLINED CABLES

Girders are sometimes lifted with inclined slings from a single crane hook as described later in Section 5.3.2.
The horizontal component of the tensile force in these cables, shown in Figure 5.3.2-3, when applied directly
to the girder roll center, introduces an eccentric compressive force in the girder section along the roll axis.
This force results in compression in the top of the girder and a constant moment between lifting points due to
the eccentricity of the roll center to the center of mass of the girder. Increased lateral moment occurs from
the eccentricity due to the lateral deflection of the girder as shown in Figure 3.5-1. These forces should be
considered when determining the stability of the girder.
17 (Feb 16)
Figure 3.5-1
Lateral Eccentricity of Horizontal Force
where:
𝑒ℎ = lateral eccentricity of the horizontal component of the tension force from the roll axis to the section
under consideration
𝑃ℎ = horizontal component of the tension force in the inclined cable
The calculation of the lateral moment caused by the eccentricity should be adjusted for P-Delta effects by
magnifying the eccentricity by the quantity:
1/(1 − 𝑃ℎ /𝑃𝑐𝑟 )
π2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼𝑦
where 𝑃𝑐𝑟 = critical buckling load =
𝐿2
where:
Ec = modulus of elasticity of the girder
𝐼𝑦 = weak axis moment of inertia of the girder
L = span length between roll centers
The lateral eccentricity, 𝑒ℎ ,is composed of all of the deformations defined by the initial eccentricity, the
deflections caused by external lateral forces, and the self-weight lateral deflection of the girder due to
rotation. All of these eccentricities are magnified for P-Delta effects.
Calculation of the rotation at equilibrium, θ𝑒𝑞 , is governed by the equations in Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.3, The
calculation for rotation causing cracking, however, is redefined to address the P-Delta effect as follows:
𝑀𝑦.𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘
θ𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
𝑀𝑧 + 𝑃ℎ 𝑧0
where 𝑀𝑦.𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘 = lateral moment applied to the girder that causes tensile cracking in the most critical flange
after consideration of all lateral eccentricities that are not affected by girder rotation
18 (Feb 16)
3.6 PROCEDURES TO INCREASE FACTORS OF SAFETY
The factors of safety for the various stability conditions are based on the following relationship:
𝑀𝑟
𝐹𝑆 =
𝑀𝑎
where Mr, the resisting moment, exceeds Ma, the acting moment, by recommended limits.
In the event these limits are exceeded, certain procedures are available to increase the factors of
safety. These procedures can either increase the resisting moment, or reduce the acting moment.
Some of the methods to increase the resisting moment include:
 Increase the resisting moment arm for lifting by extending 𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡 above the top of the
girder. This extension must be of sufficient stiffness to act as an extension of the beam.
 Increase the rotational constant of the spring support of transport vehicles.
 Increase the width of the bearings under a seated girder, which increases the rotational
constant of the spring support provided by the bearing
 Increase the concrete strength
Some of the methods to reduce the acting moment include:
 Increase the distance from the end of the beam to girder lift points or transport bunking
points. This reduces eccentricity of the center of mass from the roll center.
 Provide bracing or other means to restrict rotation of the girder
Example calculations are provided in Section 6 that examine some of these means to increase
factors of safety.
3.7 GIRDER STABILITY SOFTWARE

Case Studies included in Section 6 of this document were generated with a PTC® Mathcad document
developed by the Girder Stability Subcommittee of the PCI Committee on Bridges.
Other software solutions are available that were used to verify certain aspects of the calculation methods
used in the PTC® Mathcad document, including:
VT Lifting Stability Analysis by Cojoaru and Moen (2013) provides the methodology used for the
spreadsheet. This spreadsheet can be used to calculate the equilibrium rotation of a girder subject to
an initial eccentricity. Additional discussion is found in Moen, 2014.
Florida Department of Transportation Beam Stability v2.2 (FDOT Stability, 2015), a Mathcad 15
program that evaluates the construction stability and temporary bracing requirements of simple
span pretensioned girders in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2014), the
FDOT Structures Manual (2015), and AASHTO Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary
Works (2008).
As with all software, it is the responsibility of the user to understand the methodology employed and the
accuracy of the calculations before implementation.
19 (Feb 16)
20 (Feb 16)
CRITERIA FOR GIRDER STABILITY
4.0 CRITERIA FOR GIRDER STABILITY

Application of girder stability analysis should conform to accepted industry practice. This practice establishes
criteria pertinent to the design of precast, prestressed concrete girders and bracing that may be required for
stability. The criteria for girder stability must:
 define assumed design and construction loads,
 identify assumed material properties,
 specify assumed tolerances for construction, and
 establish stress limitations and overall factors of safety.
Some bridge owners establish limited criteria to be used for stability analysis. The Stability Engineer should
supplement the bridge owner’s criteria with other industry accepted criteria for each stage of the life of the
girder from bed to bridge, and obtain pertinent information from prospective contractors to establish
construction load and material requirements.
4.1 APPLIED DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION LOADS

The Stability Engineer should evaluate the various permanent, transient, and environmental loading
conditions to establish criteria for stability consistent with the project requirements, and detail any
limitations affecting stability design in the plans and shop drawings.
4.1.1 Permanent Loads

Permanent loads are defined as loads that remain constant, or that may vary over a long time interval relative
to the lifetime of the structure. Permanent loads relevant to girder stability include dead load of structural
components, and force and deformation effects from prestress, creep, and shrinkage.
4.1.1.1 Dead Load of Structural Components

Dead load includes the weight of all components of the structure included within each stage of the life of the
prestressed girder, including self-weight and the weight of bracing, formwork and any other appurtenances.
Significantly overestimating or underestimating the self-weight of the girder can have a detrimental effect on
the calculated stability of the girder.
In the absence of more precise information, the weight of normal weight concrete is generally taken in design
as 150 pcf. It assumes 145 pcf for the weight of plain concrete plus 5 pcf for reinforcement, in accordance
with AASHTO LRFD Table 3.5.1-1 and Section C 3.5.1. Plain unit weights of lightweight and sand-lightweight
concrete vary from 90 pcf to 120 pcf. Actual self-weight can vary depending on use of higher concrete
strengths and the methods used for reinforcing the girder. The weight of reinforcement, strands, post-
tensioning tendons, and hardware can result in a significantly higher self-weight. The self-weight of heavily
reinforced girders with dense concrete has been measured up to 170 pcf.
It is the responsibility of the Stability Engineer to understand the properties of the materials to be used for
concrete based on local industry experience, or in some cases, the mix design properties proposed by a
specific fabricator or contractor.
During deck construction, the dead weight of the cast-in-place deck concrete, bracing, and formwork must be
considered. AASHTO Guide Design Specification for Bridge Temporary Works (2008), Section 2.2.2, specifies a
minimum of 160 pcf for normal weight concrete and 130 pcf for lightweight concrete, including the weight of
reinforcement and falsework.
21 (Feb 16)
4.1.1.2 Prestress, Creep, and Shrinkage
The application of prestress force to a girder results in compression of the section combined with internal
moments due to eccentricity of the force. This force results in a distribution of stresses in the girder that must
be accounted for when determining the cracking resistance and ultimate strength of the girder for the various
loading conditions to which the girder will be subjected. Loss of prestress must be considered at each stage of
the life of the girder.
The effective prestress force, creep, and shrinkage result in superimposed deformations that must be
considered in the analysis of girder stability. These deformations are defined as girder camber and lateral
deflection of the girder. Over time, these deformations will change, or grow. Camber can be highly variable
from calculated values. A study by Tadros et al., (2011) indicates that camber variability can be as much as
50%.
4.1.2 Transient Loads

Transient loads are defined as those that can vary over a short time interval relative to the lifetime of the
structure. Transient loads relevant to girder stability include impact, centrifugal force, and construction live
load.
4.1.2.1 Dynamic Loads

Section 8.10.2.2 of the PCI Bridge Design Manual (2014) provides guidance for impact loads during
transportation. It recommends that effects of impact and stability be addressed separately. Impact is normally
an issue during transportation of products at higher speeds and typically over lesser superelevations. On
roads with greater superelevations when the girder must be checked for stability due to tilting, the trucks are
typically moving slowly and impact is not a factor. However, there could be exceptions to these
generalizations that should be considered.
For lifting and placing operations, the Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works (2008) Section
2.2.3.2, provides specific guidance with respect to impact.
4.1.2.2 Centrifugal Force

Centrifugal force is a consideration for stability during transportation around curves. This force generates an
overturning moment about the girder’s support combined with a lateral outward deflection. The effects of
tilting due to superelevation must also be considered.
4.1.2.3 Construction Live Load

The Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works (2008), Section 2.2.3, states that construction live
load is the actual weight of any equipment plus a uniform load of 20 psf applied over the area supported, and
75 plf applied at the outside edge of deck overhangs. The Stability Engineer must obtain pertinent data
relating to operational weights of deck placing screed machines and other temporary work platforms that can
adversely affect the stability of an exterior girder supporting cantilever forms.
4.1.3 Environmental Loads

Environmental loads are defined as loads created from the environment in which the girder is located. The
loads to be considered by the Stability Engineer should include wind loads, thermal loads, and seismic loads
as may be applicable to the project.
22 (Feb 16)
4.1.3.1 Wind Loads
The PCI Bridge Design Manual (2014) discusses the importance of including wind loads in stability
considerations. In addition to causing additional lateral deflection, the wind load causes an overturning
moment that must be accounted for, whether the girder is seated or hanging.
Wind loads vary depending on geographic location and can be affected by varying environmental exposure
conditions. Bridge owners typically establish the mean wind recurrence or the basic wind velocity for the
wind event to which the completed bridge will be subjected during its design life. The basic wind velocity is
utilized to calculate the magnitude of wind pressure to various bridge components, with adjustments for
exposure conditions, including height above ground. Due to the relatively short time frame that an individual
girder is exposed, wind velocities are reduced based on the probability of a design wind event during
construction. Some bridge owners provide guidance for these reduced wind velocities or pressures during
construction; however, this guidance is typically limited to erected girders prior to casting the deck. These
criteria do not address wind velocities or pressures for other exposure conditions to which a girder will be
subjected prior to incorporation into the bridge. The Stability Engineer should become aware of the owner’s
criteria for wind and supplement it with additional investigation to establish wind criteria from the precast
yard to the project site.
The Stability Engineer should also be aware that wind velocities provided by owners, weather forecasters,
and referenced design specifications may be specified with different wind velocity criteria. Two criteria are
typically specified:
 Fastest-mile wind velocity is the average wind velocity of a volume of air travelling one mile. Fastest-
mile wind velocity is used for the Saffir Simpson Scale to establish hurricane categories. Fastest-mile
wind velocity is specified in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (prior to the Seventh
Edition) and the AASHTO Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works (2008).
 Three-second gust wind velocity is the average wind velocity of a volume of air during a 3-second
interval. The U. S. Weather Service now records wind velocity using 3-second gust wind velocity. This
velocity criterion was added to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2014) in the 2016
Interim Revisions and is in Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2013),
and Design Loads for Structures during Construction (ASCE, 2015).
The equations for developing wind pressures from these two wind velocity criteria are significantly different.
Provisions in these standards should not be mixed.
Typically, lifting operations are curtailed when wind velocity during the lift is expected to exceed 20 to 25
miles per hour (3-second gust). The Stability Engineer should verify restrictions on lifting with the girder
erector to establish lifting wind criteria.
During transportation, wind speeds can be highly variable, particularly in canyons and urbanized settings
where wind speeds can be amplified due to tunnel effects. The Specialty Engineer must carefully assess the
transportation routes for localized wind speed effects, whether transported on land by truck or on water by
barge.
4.1.3.2 Thermal Force Effects

Thermal force effects are typically not a consideration in girder stability checks since the girders are not
restrained against movement from temperature change. Thermal effects can cause girder vertical and lateral
deflections. These additional deflections must be considered by the Stability Engineer for lateral stability
analysis.
23 (Feb 16)
4.1.3.3 Seismic Loads
Seismic loads are a consideration for the stability of seated girders. Seismic criteria are very location specific
and the Stability Engineer must coordinate with local authorities to develop the criteria needed for stability
analysis.
4.2 MATERIAL PROPERTY ASSUMPTIONS
4.2.1 Concrete Compressive Strength

Currently, the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications allows for concrete strengths up to 15 ksi for flexure and
compression design of girders.
4.2.2 Modulus of Elasticity

The LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Equation 5.4.2.4-1, gives the modulus of elasticity as:
3
𝐸𝑐 = 120,000 𝐾1 𝑤𝑐2 √𝑓𝑐′
where
K1 = correction factor for local aggregate,
wc = unit weight of plain concrete (kcf)
𝑓𝑐′ = specified concrete compressive strength (ksi)
The LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Section 5.4.2.4, limits plain concrete weights to between 90 and 155
pcf for the calculation of modulus of elasticity using this formula.
4.2.3 Assumed Tolerances

PCI maintains two publications containing recommended allowable product tolerances. These are the
Tolerance Manual (PCI, 2000) and the Manual for Quality Control (PCI, 1999).The following product
tolerances may be assumed due to manufacturing imperfections affecting the lateral stability of girders:
Strand and prestressing force eccentricity: ± ¼ in.
Sweep and lateral deflection (fabrication tolerance): ⅛ in. per 10 ft of length
Camber variation from design camber: ± ⅛ in. per 10 ft of length,
½ in. maximum for lengths up to 80 ft
1 in. maximum for lengths greater than 80 ft
Transverse location of lifting devices: 1 in.
Longitudinal location of lifting device: ± 6 in.
Tipping and flushness of bearing assembly: ± ⅛ in.
Studies by Cojocaru (2012) documented sweep measurements during transportation. Twenty-three of the
123 girders measured exceeded the sweep tolerances shown above. The PCI Bridge Design Manual (2014)
recommends using the full tolerance plus 1 in. for sweep during transportation.
24 (Feb 16)
4.3 ALLOWABLE STRESSES AND FACTORS OF SAFETY
4.3.1 Allowable Stresses in Girders

Tension: Limit tensile stresses to the modulus of rupture of concrete, 0.24√𝑓𝑐 , where 𝑓𝑐 is the concrete
compressive strength during the stability event under consideration
Compression: Limit compressive stresses to 0.6𝑓𝑐 . Lifting is usually checked using 𝑓𝑐𝑖′ since the girders will be
first lifted out of the bed as soon as the prestress is transferred. Transportation, situations in place on the
bridge, and in rare circumstances lifting, are checked using 𝑓𝑐′ .
4.3.2 Factors of Safety

The lateral stability of girders has historically used a factor of safety on the service limit state loads and
resistance. There has been insufficient study to calibrate these historically proven factors of safety for
hanging and lifted girders for incorporation into the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.
The factors of safety given in the Bridge Design Manual (PCI, 2014), Section 8.10, are:
Factor of safety against cracking = 1.0
Factor of safety against failure = 1.5
25 (Feb 16)
26 (Feb 16)
LATERAL STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS—FROM BED TO BRIDGE
5.0 LATERAL STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS—FROM BED TO

BRIDGE
Lateral stability must be considered for all stages in the life of a prestressed girder, including lifting, storage,
transport, erection, support of construction loads during casting of the bridge deck, and in the future during
deck removal and replacement. This section provides guidance for many of the issues to be addressed in
design and construction.
5.1 GIRDER MANUFACTURE

During the design phase of the project, it is extremely important that the design engineer has considered the
procedures necessary to handle, transport, and erect the girder. The design engineer should communicate
with a local precast girder manufacturer that is capable of providing the girders for the project. The
manufacturer’s engineer should be able to answer questions related to handling, transporting, and erecting
the girders. In some instances, the bridge site and route restrictions could limit the maximum length of
girders. These are issues that must be addressed prior to the project being developed for bid.
Several project bidding scenarios are common depending on location and the agency involved. The following
assumes one such scenario. When the plans are available for estimating, the girder manufacturer evaluates
the contract plans and specifications (the contract documents) to prepare a price quote. The contract
documents include the details necessary to fabricate the girders to meet the design requirements of the
girder in the final structure. The contract documents could, in some locations, include girder handling,
storage, and transportation recommendations. The manufacturer must have confidence that the product as
designed, can be fabricated, handled, stored, transported, and erected. Often, the manufacturer will provide
or confirm the girder weights, the lifting and storage locations, and transportation conditions together with
the material price quotation. Girder stability calculations must be performed at critical stages: removing the
girder from the casting form, moving the girder within the plant, in storage, during transportation, and finally
erection. In some locations, the manufacturer transports the girders and in others, the contractor provides or
contracts transportation. Therefore, this information is important so the contractor can determine crane
requirements, bracing, and transporting equipment if necessary to accurately bid the project. The shop
drawings may include temporary prestressing to assist with handling, transportation, and erection stresses.
After award of contract, the manufacturer prepares the shop drawings for the girders. In addition to meeting
the details of the contract documents, the shop drawings must include any special hardware, inserts, forming
holes, or other attachments to ensure the girder can be handled safely from the casting bed to the bridge. The
shop drawings may include the following basic information about the girder:
 Cross section, basic geometry, and weight. In some instances where the girder is not symmetric,
the shop drawings should include the total weight and the centroid of mass relative to the girder
ends or lifting locations.
 Casting length. This length includes the adjustments necessary to the plan length of the girder for
shortening, grade conditions, and end rotation.
 Concrete strengths and materials. The concrete mix identification, compressive strength at
transfer of prestress and at 28-days.
 Prestressing. The specific strand patterns, strand size, jacking force, materials, debonding,
draping, harp locations, and detensioning sequence. Also, temporary prestressing details with
field detensioning instructions, if required.
 Camber. Camber predictions at transfer and at a specific curing duration are provided. If
temporary prestressing is incorporated, the expected rebound or increase in camber should be
estimated and provided.
 Mild reinforcement. All mild reinforcement is detailed with materials details given.
 Handling. The materials or devices used to lift and handle the girder are included.
 Storage. The shop drawings include the storage support locations, typically from 2 to 3 ft from
the ends of the girder.
27 (Feb 16)
 Transporting. The shop drawings should include the support locations during transportation.
Inserts or web and flange holes that receive the shipping restraint systems are included on the
shop drawings.
 Erection. Typically, the lifting device used to handle the product in the precast manufacturer’s
yard is the same used for erection. However, special lifting configurations may be incorporated
to assist the contractor with erection. The shop drawings should include this information.
The girder manufacturer usually has experience and tools to help with the successful production, handling,
storage, transportation, and erection of the girder.
5.1.1 Concrete Properties

The engineer will specify the concrete strength at transfer of prestress and at 28-days, in addition to other
properties required. The girder manufacturer will specify a mix designed to achieve the required concrete
properties evidenced by documented historical mix test data. Typically, the compressive strength at transfer
of prestress controls the mix design. The compressive strength at 28 days will typically increase 30 to 40%
from the strength required at transfer. The engineer must understand the limitations of the concrete mixes
used by precast manufacturers. The requirements for air-entrainment and admixtures such as fly ash or slag
cement can reduce the concrete compressive strengths at transfer.
5.1.2 Girder Weight

The girder weight is often simply determined by calculating the girder volume multiplied by a unit weight for
reinforced concrete such as 150 pcf. This can often lead to an underestimate of the actual girder weight,
which may lead to transportation, and crane erection issues. The precast manufacturer records the concrete
unit weight for each mix design. Long, heavily reinforced girders may reach unit weights of 170 pcf. It is
important to perform a girder weight calculation using the steel unit weights (490 pcf), concrete displaced by
the reinforcement, and concrete unit weight (145 pcf to 160 pcf). Form tolerances are important. As little as
⅛ in. form spread that is within allowable product tolerance will significantly increase the weight of the
girder.
5.1.3 Girder Sweep

When the concrete strength for transfer of prestress has been reached, the prestress force is transferred to
the girder. The first observations of the girder alignment related to sweep occurs when the girder is lifted
from the casting bed and transported to storage, where sweep and camber are measured and recorded.
Prestressed concrete girders can bow laterally when their storage position allows the sun to warm one side
causing temperature differential from one side to the other. The evidence of excessive lateral sweep and
girder rotation needs immediate attention. Using bracing and adjustment of the slope of the bearings can be
effective to counter sweep. It is important to correct the sweep while the age of the concrete is relatively
young. If sweep in storage is not corrected it can result in permanent set of sweep.
The manufacturer must address the cause of the sweep. The form, soffit, and header alignment should be
evaluated and corrected if necessary. In addition, the stressing geometry and procedures must be evaluated
for eccentricity and uniformity of forces. Harped or draped systems must be evaluated to ensure that lateral
positioning of strands is maintained during casting.
5.1.4 Lifting Methods

There are several methods that are commonly used to lift girders. Precast manufacturers often use bundled
prestressing strands to make lifting loops. Usually, two lifting loops are embedded at both girder ends to
reduce lifting loads that exceed the capacity of a single loop. Figure 5.1.4-1 shows the application of dual
lifting loops.
28 (Feb 16)
Lifting systems vary throughout the industry. The systems must consider the following attributes:
1. Minimize eccentricity between the lifting systems and the girder
2. Ensure load is equally shared between dual lifting systems
3. Ensure uniform load distribution to all strands in a bundled lifting loop
4. Ensure lifting extensions are rigid and unyielding to lateral loads if 𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡 is considered as part of the
distance from the roll axis to the center of mass of the girder, 𝑦𝑟
Extension of the lifting devices above the top flange may control the allowable transportation height.
Figure 5.1.4-1
Lifting Hardware Engaging Dual Lift Loops
(Photo: Knife River Corporation)
Other systems are successfully incorporated by precast manufacturers. An alternative lifting system that
improves stability is shown in Figure 5.1.4-2. If the stability of a hanging girder cannot be achieved, a
structural frame can be used to lift a girder from below its bottom flange, limiting girder rotation, and
improving stability.
Figure 5.1.4-2
Girder Lifted from Below its Bottom Flange
(Photo: Cone and Graham, Inc.)
29 (Feb 16)
Extending lifting systems above the top flange can help with girder stability during handling and erection.
Plates are bolted to the web and pass through slots cast in the top flange. This device is shown in Figure
5.1.4-3. The distance from the top flange to the center of the lifting system, ylift, defined in Section 3.2.1 and
shown in Figure 3.2.1-1, increases yr, thereby increasing the resisting moment. The extension of the lifting
system must be designed to resist the lateral force caused by the rotation of the girder and other external
forces with minimal displacement.
Figure 5.1.4-3
Extended Rigid Lifting System (Photo: The Lane Construction Corporation)
Formwork brackets may be attached to the girder during lifting, as shown in Figure 5.1.4-4. Eccentricity of
these appurtenances must be accounted for in the stability calculations. Typically, the weight of the girder is
adjusted to include the weight of these appurtenances, and the initial lateral eccentricity, 𝑒𝑖 , adjusted to
account for the eccentricity of the load. Note the rotation of the girder under the eccentric load.
30 (Feb 16)
Figure 5.1.4-4
Girder Rotation Due to Eccentric
Form Bracket Loading
(Photo: Pomeroy Corporation)
Figures 5.1.4-1 through 5.1.4-3 demonstrate an effective means to improve girder stability. Moving the lift
points inward from the ends of the girder reduces the acting moment by moving the roll axis closer to the
center of mass of the girder as shown in Figure 5.1.4-5.
Figure 5.1.4-5
Deflected Girder Diagram
31 (Feb 16)
5.1.5 Temporary Prestressing
Lifting points and transport support locations are often moved away from the girder ends to improve stability
and optimize the transportation equipment. The cantilevered ends of the girder can be as long as two times
the depth of the member. This reduces the dead load at midspan and increases the cantilever stresses at the
support or picking points. To help reduce the tensile stresses at the top flange and compressive stresses at the
bottom flange, temporary prestressing may be required in the top flange. The temporary strands can be
pretensioned or post-tensioned. Pretensioning the temporary strands will increase the demands on the
stressing bed and must be included in the analysis of the bed’s capacity. Post-tensioning may be performed at
the bed or in the yard if the temporary prestressing is needed for transportation only.
Pretensioning temporary strands is accomplished by tensioning multiple strands in the top flange before
concrete placement. Debonding is added to the full length of the strand with the exception of 10 to 15 ft from
each end of the girder. Blockouts or strand access holes are provided in both edges of the top flange a short
distance before the end of the debonding. These blockouts must be kept dry to prevent water intrusion into
the debonding sheath. Detensioning of these strands is performed after the girder is seated and braced for
stability, typically at the ends, and prior to installation of any intermediate diaphragms. The effects of the
detensioning must be considered in the design of the bracing.
Post-tensioned temporary strands are provided when pretensioning is not practical. In this situation, an
unbonded tendon is installed in the top flange with the exception of the dead end that includes 10-15 feet of
bonded length. The tendon may be coated with grease. However, the fabricator must ensure that
cementitious paste does not enter the sleeve during girder casting. At the live end, an embedded plate is
installed normal to the orientation of the strand. Some additional mild reinforcement may be required behind
the plate to restrain excessive bursting stresses. The alignment of the unbonded tendon needs to be true and
not have any horizontal curvature. Depending on requirements, the post-tensioning may be applied prior to
removing the product from the bed or just prior to transport. The end anchorage typically includes a
temporary chuck. As camber increases in the girder, the top flange may increase in length. This will increase
the stress in the post-tensioned strand. The tendon is understressed so the temporary anchorage does not fail
or suddenly detension on its own. The shop drawings should include elongation calculations of the unbonded
tendon to ensure a successful installation. Directions for detensioning the post-tensioned tendon are very
important. If the tendon is cut through a hole in the flange, the live end anchorage could become a projectile,
which, of course, is a safety issue. Another technique is to provide a slot in the live end bearing plate with
material to create a small void behind, and then use an acetylene torch to melt the strand just ahead of the
anchor. Care must be taken to ensure all personnel are clear of the girder ends during the detensioning
procedures.
5.2 TRANSPORTATION TO BRIDGE SITE

Next, the girder must be delivered from the precast yard to the jobsite. It is of paramount importance for both
precaster and designer to be aware of all the details of the route and the project site. The designer must be
assured that the girders can be reasonably delivered to the site as part of the design. Vertical and horizontal
clearances along the selected delivery route must be verified by inspection.
The ability to transport deep girder sections can be influenced by a large number of variables, including mode
of transport, weight, length, height, and lateral stability. Depending on conditions, some variables have more
influence than others. The feasibility of transporting deep girders is strongly site dependent. It is
recommended that routes to the site be investigated during the preliminary design phase, particularly where
transport requires sharp turns, as illustrated in Figure 5.2-1. To this end, on projects that require long, heavy
girders, the owner can be very helpful by including an advisory in the project special provisions that includes
expected transportation routes, estimated permit fees, escort vehicle requirements, owner law enforcement
patrol requirements, and time required for permit approval.
32 (Feb 16)
Figure 5.2-1
Girder Transport Turning at Intersection
(Photo: Bayshore Concrete Products)
5.2.1 Modes of Transport

The most prevalent means to transport precast girders are truck, barge, and rail. Among these three, the most
widely used is transport by truck. In almost all states, most girders used in highway construction are
transported by truck. The precast girders used in railroad construction are generally shorter in length and
mostly transported by rail. Barge transportation is very economical when the project is accessible by water.
Barges enable transportation of long girders with ease.
There are advantages and disadvantages to the various modes of transportation. Also, there are weight
limitations for each of these modes. The maximum load on trucks is restricted by the state transportation
agency. Rail cars range in capacity from approximately 120 to 200 kips. However, unless the rail system runs
directly from the precasting plant to the jobsite, members must be trucked for at least some of the route to
access the rail and weight may be restricted by the trucking limitations.
Products delivered by barge are generally not limited by size or weight, but by the handling equipment on
either end. In most cases, if a product can be made and handled in the plant, it can be transported by barge. Of
course, this applies only if both the plant and jobsite are fully accessible by barge, as some are.
5.2.2 Weight Limitations

In most states, girder weights are permitted in the range of 100 to 150 kips. This range generally does not
pose a problem for transportation. However, with the greater implementation of high performance concrete
and 0.6- and 0.7-in.-diameter strands, girder lengths and weights are increasing. In some states, precast
producers are transporting girders weighing in excess of 200 kips. In light of this, it becomes increasingly
important to determine from the trucking industry net weight limitations and the availability of equipment to
maintain the frequency of girder delivery to the construction site.
5.2.3 Length Limitations

The available transportation routes for delivery can limit the length of the girder. The longer the girder, the
greater the radius required for turning. Sometimes, moving the support points closer together (away from the
33 (Feb 16)
ends of the girder), or selecting alternate routes can help resolve these problems. Moving the support points
away from the ends requires maintaining the concrete stresses within allowable limits. In addition, trucking
companies often have company rules for transporting girders. The girder design should be reviewed for any
limiting conditions and adjustments made if necessary.
Length limitations are not usually the restricting factor for most project locations. It is now common to have
trailers available that are equipped with rear axles that are steerable. These operate similar to traditional
steering at the rear of a fire hook and ladder truck. The steerable axles are usually controlled by remote
controls from the tractor cab. They provide great maneuverability for long loads.
5.2.4 Height Limitations

During transportation, trucks may encounter underpass structures. The overhead clearances restrict the
depth of the girder. However, except for unique projects, standard girders seldom encounter height
restrictions. The height of the support for the girder on the vehicle is approximately 6 ft above the roadway
surface. Adding the depth of the girder, including camber and projecting lifting hardware and reinforcement,
the overall distance from the roadway surface to the top of concrete can approach 14 ft. Occasionally,
overhead clearance may not accommodate the vertical projection of reinforcement on deeper standard girder
sections. Alternate reinforcement configurations can be used to attain adequate clearance.
Overhead obstructions along the route should be investigated for adequate clearance during the design
phase. Obstructions without adequate clearance must be by-passed by selecting alternate routes.
5.2.5 Lateral Stability during Transportation

It is necessary for the Stability Engineer to be fully aware of the route to the project site and to understand
the resulting effects on the girder. A thorough survey of the route must provide an understanding of the
highway geometry, including design speeds and superelevations, any special conditions, such as anticipated
wind speeds and potential acceleration of wind due to tunneling effects in canyons.
The resistance to overturning of a girder on its transport vehicle is governed by the rotational stiffness of the
vehicle, 𝐾θ . While transport vehicles can be procured with certain rotational stiffness ratings, the rotational
stiffness should be verified periodically, as the stiffness could change over time due to wear. Methods to
determine the rotational stiffness of the vehicle are presented in the PCI Bridge Design Manual (PCI, 2014),
Section 8.10.3.
The control to avoid cracking the top flange is temporary strands in the flange as described in Section 5.1.5.
These strands are tensioned to the same load as the permanent strands and may be required to provide an
acceptable factor of safety. The requirement for these strands depends on the combination of girder dead
load, prestress, and tension in the top flange induced by the girder rotation. The rotation is dependent on the
roadway superelevation, the rotational stiffness of the transport vehicle, and other externally applied loads,
such as wind and centrifugal force.
34 (Feb 16)
5.2.6 Summary Considerations for Transportation
5.2.6.1 Transportation by Truck:

 Conduct preliminary meeting with precaster and designer (a contractor or trucking company
should be included depending on the experience and expertise of the precaster)
 Select the route from precast yard to jobsite
 Check vertical clearance along selected route
 Check horizontal clearance along selected route
 Identify weak structures (tonnage capacity) in the transportation route such as a weak bridge or
buried culvert
 Determine maximum allowable load permitted by owner
 Determine the maximum superelevation or other cross slopes on the transportation route
5.2.6.2 Transportation by Barge

 Conduct preliminary meeting with precaster and designer (a contractor or trucking company
should be included depending on the experience and expertise of the precaster)
 Identify accessible barge mooring facilities in vicinity of the jobsite
 If the site is away from a direct waterway, identify alternate transportation method from
waterway to the jobsite
 If alternate transportation method is needed, determine weight limitations
 Check navigation clearance both vertically and horizontally
 Determine gradient of waterway
 Determine environmental impact in the event that the barge capsizes, tilts, or sinks resulting in
the loss of the precast member into the waterway
 Engage a naval architect to assess the stability of the barge with the proposed loading and
unloading sequence, and rotation due to wave action
5.3 ERECTION AT THE BRIDGE SITE

Once the precast girder arrives at the bridge construction site, the means and methods required to install the
girders in their final position must be carefully considered to ensure safety. Each activity could include a
specific requirement for determination of lateral stability. Site conditions should be carefully evaluated to
ensure stable support for the delivery vehicles to the necessary staging areas for crane pick-up, travel, and
positioning. Stability of embankments and temporary roads and ramps should be investigated to ensure
stability under transport vehicle wheel loads and crane treads or wheels. Crane stability outriggers should be
provided with proper support pads or foundations to ensure stability. Rough surfaces, potholes, construction
debris, or sudden settlement under load can cause impact forces and dynamic lateral sway of the girder that
can be detrimental to stability.
At site staging areas, the girders may be transferred to other vehicles, such as rubber tired transport travel-
lifts. These vehicles should be assessed in a similar fashion as those used to transport the girder to the site in
accordance with the provisions noted in Section 5.2.6.
Transport of girders by barge should also be carefully evaluated by an engineer or naval specialist well
versed in vessel buoyancy. Loading and unloading of multiple girders can result in loads eccentric to the
center of buoyancy that can cause the barge to list, thereby rotating the girder sections and reducing the
girder stability factor of safety. A sequence of loading and unloading should be developed to minimize listing.
Roll and pitch stability of the vessel should also be evaluated in waters subject to wave action.
Lateral stability analysis must be evaluated for all site conditions to which the girders will be subjected, from
lifting in the staging areas to final placement within the bridge.
35 (Feb 16)
5.3.1 Lifting Methods
Once the girder has been transferred to its initial staging area, the girder is ready to be lifted from the
transport vehicle and moved to its final location. At this stage, lateral stability should be evaluated for
additional forces imposed on the girder as a result of crane rigging, impact from lifting and walking, lateral
accelerations from swing movement of the crane, and lateral deflections due to wind.
5.3.2 Crane Rigging Effects on Lifting Devices and Stability

The choice of crane, number of cranes, and the proposed rigging scheme will have an impact on the lateral
stability of the girder. Cranes should be chosen to provide adequate factors of safety, both for the weight to be
lifted and the reach required to place the girder in its final position. Two cranes, one at each end of the girder,
provide the maximum safety. The crane redundancy provides a greater ability to control sudden unexpected
movements and allows greater control of girder positioning, particularly under windy conditions. However,
single crane lifting operations can certainly be performed successfully, if properly planned and evaluated.
The angle at which the rigging reacts with the girder lifting loops or anchors can induce forces that will affect
lateral stability. Lifting with two cranes, as shown in Figure 5.3.2-1, enables nearly vertical forces. In some
cases misalignment of cranes can cause some minor angular deviations from vertical.
Additional information about lifting and handling is given in Chapter 3 of the PCI Bridge Design Manual (PCI,
2014).
Figure 5.3.2-1
Lifting with Two Cranes (Photo: Knife River Corporation)
When using a single crane, the crane hook is attached to the girder with two wire rope slings. These are then
further divided into four slings at the girder, as shown in Figure 5.3.2-2. The angle of these slings induces
significant longitudinal forces through the lifting loops or devices as shown in Figure 5.3.2-3. The impact on
girder stability from this horizontal force is analyzed in Section 3.6. Figure 5.3.2-3 also illustrates how the
use of a spreader beam will eliminate the horizontal forces.
36 (Feb 16)
Figure 5.3.2-2
Slings Used to Lift Girder with a Single Crane
(Photo: Bayshore Concrete Products)
Figure 5.3.2-3
Horizontal Forces Developed During Single Crane Lift.
5.3.3 Repositioning Methods

After the crane has lifted the girder, it must then be moved laterally to its final position on the supporting
substructure. In cases where the delivery vehicle can be maneuvered close to the final location of the girder,
this activity can be as simple as lifting the girder vertically, then rotating the crane, commonly referred to as
swinging, to position the girder above its final supports. The swing motion of the crane imparts a delayed
lateral acceleration of the girder that results in amplified girder roll. This additional roll should be factored
37 (Feb 16)
into the stability analysis in these situations. Field supervision of this swing operation, and reducing the
speed at which it occurs, can help in minimizing the effects on stability.
When cranes must “walk” to the final setting position, similar delayed lateral accelerations can occur. These
lateral accelerations are coupled with dynamic vertical impact caused by the motion of the crane over the
ground surface. The smoothness of the ground surface and the speed at which the crane travels can be
controlled to minimize these effects. Guidance on impact values can be found in the Section 2.2.3.2 of the
Design Guide Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works (AASHTO, 1995) and Design Loads on Structures
during Construction (ASCE, 2015).
Occasionally, girders have been set on dollies and rolled along auxiliary support beams to final position. In
this case the lateral acceleration does not occur. However, vertical dynamic impact should be considered in
the girder stability analysis.
5.3.4 Wind Loading

Erection contractors typically have rules regarding the maximum wind at which they will operate their
equipment. These rules have been developed through experience. Typically, erection is limited to when basic
wind velocities are below 20 to 25 miles per hour (fastest mile wind speed). Approaching weather systems
should also be considered.
When establishing the wind pressure applied to the girder, the exposure conditions of the site, the maximum
lifted height of the girder above ground, and an appropriate lateral and lift drag coefficient should be
considered in the girder stability evaluation.
5.3.5 Seating Stability Considerations

When the girder is seated on its supports, lateral stability must again be verified to determine if the girder can
be released from the crane without additional lateral stability bracing. Long girders supported at their ends
on compressible bearings can be unstable, particularly if the bearings are not aligned with the long dimension
normal to the axis of the girder (skewed bearings).
Construction tolerances of the girder seat and out-of-parallel tolerances of bearing surfaces must also be
considered. Investigation of girder stability should be performed with realistic tolerances, such as the 0.005
radians suggested in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications (2014) for pedestal surfaces. These tolerances
should be verified with construction procedures and tolerances specified in the governing design
specifications. Out-of-plane surface tolerances for the elastomeric pads and other bearing types should also
be included for determining maximum lateral deflections and tilt for stability considerations. Creep effects in
the bearing should also be considered. Where guided and multi-directional pot bearings are used, they should
be restrained from sliding movements until the concrete deck has been cast.
Stability analysis for girders supported on elastomeric bearings must consider the roll stiffness of the bearing.
The skew orientation and contact slope of the bearing are extremely important parameters to be thoroughly
examined during the stability analysis. In many cases, the girder without the dead load of the deck is
cambered upwards such that the contact surface does not provide uniform pressure on the bearing. As the
girder tilts, uplift can occur at one of the bearing corners that reduces the roll stiffness of the bearing, thereby
reducing the lateral stability factor of safety. Studies by Consolazio et al., 2012, have shown that this uplift
results in non-linearity of the moment-rotation curve. The stability equations rely on this linear relationship.
Consolazio reports average reductions in roll stiffness for pads subject to skew and slope are 81 to 85%.
Generally, girders supported on skewed bearings should be braced.
5.3.6 Construction Bracing

Stability does not necessarily require bracing, but should be checked for every girder. Where bracing is
required, the first girder brace should be connected to the supporting substructure, as shown in Figure 5.3.6-
1. At times, the Contractor may have to continue to support the load until this bracing is in place. Temporary
38 (Feb 16)
cross frames between adjacent girders can be placed after the second girder is erected, at which time the
initial anchors can be removed. Bracing connections should be designed to be sufficiently flexible to allow the
girder to be positioned with its webs vertical. Bracing should be designed to directly connect to the girders,
and not be friction fit. Friction fit bracing is subject to loosening under wind loads, which are cyclic and incite
vibrations. Locations of anchors and cross frames should consider access requirements for end diaphragm
formwork installation and removal.
The stability bracing should consider higher wind loads than considered during erection. Section 4.1.3.1
provides guidance on the wind loads to be considered. The bridge owner may also have requirements for
wind loads.
Studies by Consolazio et al. (2013), has shown that the wind loading forces on the bracing attached to the
exterior girder is 20% higher than the wind load force acting on the exterior girder alone. As the wind flows
around the structure, suction occurs in this first bay, pulling the first interior girder towards the exterior
girder, thus increasing the bracing forces.
Figure 5.3.6-1
Girder Tie Bracing
5.4 STABILITY DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE DECK

Historically, girders were designed in their final conditions and the contractor was responsible for the
stability of the girder during the construction period. This division of responsibility does not account for the
fact that girder stability is part of the girder design or at least influenced by the girder design. The AASHTO
LRFD Bridge Specifications (2014) requires verification that a girder is stable during construction of a bridge.
The contractor is responsible for verifying that the construction loads do not exceed the assumed loads in the
design as shown in the contract documents or construction plans.
39 (Feb 16)
5.4.1 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications Provisions
Several provisions contained in these specifications make reference to the constructability checks required by
the design engineer of record or a specialty engineer. The following are a sampling of some references to
construction loads and the constructability checks:
LRFD Section 2.5.3—Constructability
“Constructability issues should include, but not be limited to, consideration of deflection, strength of
steel and concrete, and stability during critical stages of construction.”
LRFD Section 3.4.2—Load Factors for Construction Loads
Subsection 3.4.2.1—Evaluation at the Strength Limit State
“All appropriate strength load combinations in Table 3.4.1-1, modified as specified herein, shall be
investigated.
When investigating Strength Load Combinations I, III, and V during construction, load factors for the
weight of the structure and appurtenances, DC and DW, shall not be taken to be less than 1.25.
Unless otherwise specified by the Owner, the load factor for construction loads and for any
associated dynamic effects shall not be less than 1.5 in Strength Load Combination I. The load factor
for wind in Strength Load Combination III shall not be less than 1.25.”
LRFD Section C3.4.2.1—Commentary on Evaluation at the Strength Limit State
“The load factors presented here should not relieve the contractor of responsibility for safety and
damage control during construction.
Construction loads are permanent loads and other loads that act on the structure only during
construction. Construction loads include the weight of equipment such as deck finishing machines or
loads applied to the structure through falsework or other temporary supports. Often the construction
loads are not accurately known at design time; however, the magnitude and location of these loads
considered in the design should be noted on the contract documents.”
LRFD Section 4.6.2.7.3—Construction
“The need for temporary wind bracing during construction shall be investigated for I- and box-
section bridges.”
LRFD Section 5.6—Design Considerations
Subsection 5.6.1 General
“Components and connections shall be designed to resist load combinations, as specified in Section 3,
at all stages during the life of the structure, including those during construction. Load factors shall be
as specified in Section 3.”
5.4.2 Construction Loads

During construction, the superstructure is the most vulnerable to horizontal loading. During this stage, the
reinforced concrete deck is not present to distribute the horizontal loads to all of the girders. All of the
horizontal distribution and bracing is a result of the diaphragms. This lack of horizontal support, coupled with
additional horizontal loading from construction equipment and formwork can cause extreme loadings that
are not checked during the typical in-service design calculations.
5.4.3 Load Application

The capacity of the non-composite girder must be checked using the loads described in Section 4.1 and the
load factors given in Section 5.4.4.
40 (Feb 16)
See Figure 5.4.3.-1 and Figure 5.4.3-2 for the application of the construction loads. The angled bracket is
assumed to extend at a 45 degree angle from the web to 6 in. beyond the edge of coping to maximize the
horizontal force.
Figure 5.4.3-1
Loads during Deck Construction
41 (Feb 16)
Figure 5.4.3-2
Bracing Loads in Deck Form Overhang Brackets
5.4.4 Construction Load Factors

In accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications, Section 3.4.2—Load Factors for Construction Loads,
the load factor for construction loads and any associated dynamic effects shall be not less than 1.5 when
considering the Strength I Limit State. The load factors for use during construction, including for use for the
design of bracing, are:
 Strength I—1.25(Component Loads) + 1.5( Construction Dead Loads) + 1.5(Construction Live
Loads)
 Strength III—1.25(Component Loads) + 1.5(Construction Dead Loads) + 1.25(Wind Loads)
 Strength IV—1.5(Component Loads) + 1.5(Construction Dead Loads)
 Strength V—1.25(Component Loads) + 1.5(Construction Dead Loads) + 1.35(Construction Live

Loads) + 1.25(Wind Loads)
 Service I—1.00(Component Loads) + 1.00(Construction Dead Loads) + 1.00(Construction Live

Loads) + 1.00(Wind Loads)
Note that the Wind Loads in the above equations are calculated using the actual wind velocities for the
stability event under consideration.
42 (Feb 16)
5.4.5 Limit States
After the composite deck is cast on the superstructure, the top of the girder is considered to be fully braced by
the deck. The deck works as a large diaphragm, uniformly distributing horizontal loads to all girders.
However, during construction there is no rigid diaphragm to distribute the horizontal loads. The deck forms
are ignored for this function and only the diaphragms are recognized as acceptable to distribute horizontal
loads. The precast girders are susceptible to lateral or lateral-torsional buckling under self-weight and
construction conditions prior to the girders being stabilized.
The girder stresses should be checked for tension and compression limits. Girder stability should be verified
for the deck construction sequence in addition to the rotation checks for the girders.
43 (Feb 16)
44 (Feb 16)
EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS
NOTATION
The following notation is used in Section 6 and the example calculations in Appendix B. The notation shown
below with the subscripts .lift2 and .seat1 are not used in the example calculations in Section 6 or Appendix B.
They are included here to establish a comprehensive list to facilitate a major future stability product based on
this publication.
Abeam = beam section area
Ar = dimensionless constant for computation of bearing rotational stiffness
a = length of cantilever
abunk = distance from end of beam to support point; seated on bearings
aharp = harp location from beam end
apick = lift distance from end of beam
aseat2 = equivalent bunk points; beam seated on bearings
aseat3 = equivalent bunk points; multiple beams seated on bearings
Bθ.z.trans = dimensionless constant for computation of bearing rotational stiffness
bbot.fl = beam bottom flange width
bchamfer = beam bottom flange chamfer
btop.fl = beam top flange width
CF = centrifugal force
CFtrans = centrifugal force while truck traversing curved roadway
Coverred = reduction in concrete cover
Cd = wind pressure (drag) coefficient
dbrg = distance from end of beam to center of bearing
Econc = modulus of elasticity of concrete function
Ec.lift1 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time of lifting beam from casting bed
Ec.lift2 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time of lifting beam in the field
Ec.lift2 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time of lifting beam in the field
Ec.seat1 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time beam seated on dunnage
Ec.seat2 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time beam seated on bearings
Ec.seat3 = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time multiple beams seated on bearings
Ec.trans = modulus of elasticity of concrete at time of transport to bridge site
ebrg.seat1 = bearing tolerance from CL of beam to CL of support; beam seated on dunnage
ebrg.seat2 = bearing tolerance from CL of beam to CL of support; beam seated on bearings
ebrg.seat3 = bearing tolerance from CL of beam to CL of support; multiple beams seated on bearings
ebrace = amount of play, imperfection, in each brace; multiple beams seated on bearings
ebunk.trans = bunking tolerance from CL of beam to CL of support
eccserv.limit = maximum eccentricity at service limit; multiple beams seated on bearings
eccserv.seat3 = maximum eccentricity with full bearing with all loads; multiple beams seated on bearings
econn = tolerance of lift connection from centerline of beam
econn.lift1 = modified lift connection tolerance at time of lifting from casting bed
econn.lift2 = modified lift connection tolerance at time of lifting in the field
eh.pick = lateral eccentricity of the horizontal component of the tension force from the roll axis to the
section under consideration
eh.lift1.wr,wl = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) at time of lifting from the casting bed due to wind
right, left
eh.lift2.wr,wl = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) at time of lifting in the field due to wind right, left
ei.lift1 = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) at time of lifting from casting bed
ei.lift2 = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) at time of lifting in the field
ei.seat1 = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) and tolerance at time beam seated on dunnage
45 (Feb 16)
ei.seat2 = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) and tolerance at time beam seated on bearings
ei.seat3 = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) and tolerance at time multiple beams seated on
bearings
ei.trans = eccentricity of lateral deflection (sweep) at time of transport to bridge site
ei.tol = lateral deflection (sweep) tolerance
ei.total = lateral deflection of beam
etotal.seat3 = total eccentricity with wind; multiple beams seated on bearings
emod.lift1 = lateral deflection modifier at time of lifting from the casting bed
emod.lift2 = lateral deflection modifier at time of lifting in the field
ewind = eccentricity of wind load
ewind.seat3 = beam deflection; multiple beams seated on bearings
Fbrace.seat3 = horizontal bracing force at service; multiple beams seated on bearings
Fmod = effective resistance of bracing; multiple beams seated on bearings
Fot.seat2 = lateral force concurrent with Mot.seat2
FScr.lift1 = minimum factor of safety against cracking at time of lifting from casting bed
FScr.lift2 = minimum factor of safety against cracking at time of lifting in the field
FScr.lift1.wr,wl= factor of safety against cracking at time of lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
FScr.lift2.wr,wl= factor of safety against cracking in the field; wind from right, left
FScr.seat1 = minimum factor of safety against cracking; beam seated on dunnage
FScr.seat2 = minimum factor of safety against cracking; beam seated on bearings
FScr.seat3 = minimum factor of safety against cracking; multiple beams seated on bearings
FScr.trans = factor of safety against cracking during transit
FSroll.seat1 = factor of safety against rollover failure; beam seated on dunnage
FSroll.seat2 = factor of safety against rollover failure; beam seated on bearings
FSroll.trans = factor of safety against rollover failure of beam and truck during transit
FSult.lift1 = minimum factor of safety against failure at time of lifting from casting bed
FSult.lift2 = minimum factor of safety against failure at time of lifting in the field
FSult.lift1.wr,wl = factor of safety against failure at lifting from casting bed
FSult.lift2.wr,wl = factor of safety against failure at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
FSult.seat2 = factor of safety against failure; beam seated on bearings
FSult.seat3 = factor of safety against failure; multiple beams seated on bearings
FSult.trans = factor of safety against failure during transit
fb.lift1.wr,wl = stress in bottom of beam at lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
fb.lift2.wr,wl = stress in bottom of beam at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
fb.ck.lift1.wr,wl = stress in bottom of beam at lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
fb.ck.lift2.wr,wl = stress in bottom of beam at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
fb.seat1 = stress in bottom of beam; beam seated on dunnage
fb.seat2 = stress in bottom of beam; beam seated on bearings
fb.seat3 = stress in bottom of beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
fb.trans = stress in bottom of beam during transit
fc , fc = specified concrete compressive strength at 28 days
fci = concrete compressive strength at release of prestress
fc.lift1 = concrete compressive strength at time of lifting beam from casting bed
fc.lift2 = concrete compressive strength at time of lifting beam in the field
fc.seat1 = concrete compressive strength at time beam seated on dunnage
fc.seat2 = concrete compressive strength at time beam seated on bearings
fc.seat3 = concrete compressive strength at time multiple beams seated on bearings
fc.trans = concrete compressive strength at time of transport to bridge site
46 (Feb 16)
feq.b.trans = stress in bottom of beam at equilibrium during transit
feq.b.seat1 = stress in bottom of beam at equilibrium; beam seated on dunnage
feq.b.seat2 = stress in bottom of beam at equilibrium; beam seated on bearings
feq.b.seat3 = stress in bottom of beam at equilibrium; multiple beams seated on bearings
feq.t.seat1 = stress in top of beam at equilibrium; beam seated on dunnage
feq.t.seat2 = stress in top of beam at equilibrium; beam seated on bearings
feq.t.seat3 = stress in top of beam at equilibrium; multiple beams seated on bearings
feq.t.trans = stress in top of beam at equilibrium during transit
fr(fc) = modulus of rupture of concrete function
fr.lift1 = modulus of rupture of concrete at time of lifting beam from casting bed
fr.lift2 = modulus of rupture of concrete at time of lifting beam in the field
fr.seat1 = modulus of rupture of concrete at time beam seated on dunnage
fr.seat2 = modulus of rupture of concrete at time beam seated on bearings
fr.seat3 = modulus of rupture of concrete at time multiple beams seated on bearings
fr.trans = modulus of rupture of concrete at time of transport to bridge site
ft.ck.lift1.wr,wl = stress in top of beam at lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
ft.ck.lift2.wr,wl = stress in top of beam at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
ft.lift1.wr,wl = stress in top of beam at lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
ft.lift2.wr,wl = stress in top of beam at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
ft.seat1 = stress in top of beam; beam seated on dunnage
ft.seat2 = stress in top of beam; beam seated on bearings
ft.seat3 = stress in top of beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
ft.trans = stress in top of beam during transit
G = wind gust effect factor
Gbp = elastomer shear modulus
g = acceleration of gravity at the earth’s surface
hbeam = beam section height
hbrg = total bearing height
hri = thickness of interior elastomer layers
hroll.trans = height of roll center above roadway
hroll.seat1 = height of roll center above bearing pedestal; beam seated on dunnage
hroll.seat2 = height of roll center above bearing pedestal; beam seated on bearings
hrubber = total thickness of bearing pad rubber
hwind.trans = height of beam midpoint above roll center during transit
Ibrg.z = bearing moment of inertia about bearing z axis
IMlift1 = lifting impact factor in the plant
IMlift2 = lifting impact factor in the field
IMtrans = impact factor during transit
Ix = moment of inertia about horizontal axis
Iy = moment of inertia about vertical axis
Jbeam = torsion constant
Kbp = elastomer bulk modulus
Km = correction factor for source of aggregate
Kmod.1 = adjustment factor for concrete modulus of elasticity
Kz = wind velocity pressure exposure coefficient
K θ.trans = stiffness of transport rig
K θ.seat1 = bearing rotational stiffness; beam seated on dunnage
47 (Feb 16)
Kθ.z = bearing rotational stiffness; beam seated on bearings
L, Lbeam = overall length of beam
Lb = unbraced length between braces
Lbrg = plan dimension of bearing pad perpendicular to axis of rotation
LCLL3 = length over which construction live load on walkway extension is applied
Lharp = distance from midspan to strand harp point
Mbrace.const = moment resistance of brace at service; multiple beams seated on bearings
MCF.trans = lateral beam moment due to centrifugal force during transit
Mg.lift1 = moment due to gravity load in the plant
Mg.lift2 = moment due to gravity load in the field
Mg.seat1 = moment due to gravity load; beam seated on dunnage
Mg.seat2 = moment due to gravity load; beam seated on bearings
Mg.seat3 = moment due to gravity load; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mg.trans = moment due to gravity load during transit
Mh.lift1.wr,wl = lateral moment to cause cracking at lifting from casting bed, wind from right, left
Mh.lift2.wr,wl = lateral moment to cause cracking at lifting in the field, wind from right, left
Mlat.lift1.wr,wl = lateral moment to cause cracking at lifting from casting bed, wind from right, left
Mlat.lift2.wr,wl = lateral moment to cause cracking at lifting in the field, wind from right, left
Mlat.seat1 = lateral moment to cause cracking; beam seated on dunnage
Mlat.seat2 = lateral moment to cause cracking; beam seated on bearings
Mlat.seat3 = lateral moment to cause cracking; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mlat.trans = lateral moment to cause cracking during transit
Mlift.seat3 = uplift moment due to wind; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mmod = effective moment coefficient due to bracing; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mot.seat1 = overturning moment resisted by bracing if needed (each end); beam seated on dunnage
Mot.seat2 = overturning moment resisted by bracing if needed (each end); beam seated on bearings
Mot.seat3 = overturning moment due to wind; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mot.trans = overturning moment due to wind and centrifugal force during transit
Mroll.trans = overturning moment from wind and centrifugal force during transit
Mroll.seat2 = overturning moment from weight of beam; beam seated on bearings
Mt.x = moment between supports in beam function with cantilever ends and uniform load
Mt.trans = total moment due to wind and centrifugal force during transit
Mult.y.lift1 = ultimate lateral moment capacity required in the plant
Mult.y.lift2 = ultimate lateral moment capacity required in the field
Mwind.lift1 = lateral moment due to wind in the plant
Mwind.lift2 = lateral moment due to wind in the field
Mwind.seat1 = lateral moment due to wind; beam seated on dunnage
Mwind.seat2 = lateral moment due to wind; beam seated on bearings
Mwind.seat3 = lateral moment due to wind; multiple beams seated on bearings
Mwind.trans = lateral moment due to wind during transit
nbeams = number of beams in cross section
nbraces = number of braces; multiple beams seated on bearings
nri = number of interior elastomer layers
offsetpick = eccentricity reduction factor in the plant
offsetseat1 = eccentricity reduction factor; beam seated on dunnage
offsetseat2 = eccentricity reduction factor; beam seated on bearings
offsetseat3 = eccentricity reduction factor; multiple beams seated on bearings
48 (Feb 16)
offsettrans = eccentricity reduction factor during transit
PCLL2 = construction live load from screed machine; multiple beams seated on bearings
PCLL3 = live load on walkway; multiple beams seated on bearings
Pcr = critical buckling load at time of lifting in the field
Peff.lift1 = effective prestress force at lifting beam from casting bed
Peff.lift2 = effective prestress force at time of lifting in the field
Peff.seat1 = effective prestress force at time beam seated on dunnage
Peff.seat2 = effective prestress force at time beam seated on permanent bearings
Peff.seat3 = effective prestress force at time multiple beams seated on permanent bearings
Peff.trans = effective prestress force at time of transport to bridge site
Ph.lift1 = horizontal component of tension force in the inclined cable at the casting bed
Ph.lift2 = horizontal component of tension force in the inclined cable in the field
Pinit = initial prestress
qwind = wind pressure
Radiustrans = minimum turn radius
Sbrg = bearing shape factor
Sx.t = top section modulus, horizontal axis
Sx.b = bottom section modulus, horizontal axis axis
Sy.t = top section modulus, vertical axis
Sy.b = bottom section modulus, vertical axis
sext = walkway formwork extension length beyond coping; multiple beams seated on bearings
soh = overhang from CL of exterior beam to coping; multiple beams seated on bearings
sscreed =distance from coping to screed rail; multiple beams seated on bearings
sbeam = beam spacing adjacent to exterior beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
TCLL1 0 = unit moment from live load on concrete deck between beams; multiple beams seated on
bearings
TCLL11 = unit moment from live load on concrete deck over beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
TCLL1 2 = unit moment from live load on deck cantilever; multiple beams seated on bearings
TCLL2 = unit moment from live load due to screed machine; multiple beams seated on bearings
TCLL3 = unit moment from live load on walkway; multiple beams seated on bearings
TDC1 0 = unit moment on edge beam due to weight of concrete deck between beams; multiple beams
seated on bearings
TDC11 = unit moment on edge beam due to weight of concrete deck over beam; multiple beams seated
on bearings
TDC1 2 = unit moment on edge beam due to cantilevered deck; multiple beams seated on bearings
TDC2 0 = unit moment on edge beam due to stay-in-place deck forms; multiple beams seated on
bearings
TDC21 = unit moment on edge beam of forms over beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
TDC2 2 = unit moment on edge beam due to weight of cantilever deck forms; multiple beams seated
on bearings
Tuni = total overturning on beam from uniform torques
tbup = build up thickness over beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
tdeck = concrete deck thickness; multiple beams seated on bearings
V = basic wind velocity in mph
Veltrans = design speed in turn
Vm = wind velocity modification factor
W = wind load
49 (Feb 16)
Wbeam = weight of beam
Wbeam.trans = effective beam weight during transit
Wbrg = plan dimension of bearing pad parallel to axis of rotation
w = applied unit load
wCLL1 = construction live load on deck; multiple beams seated on bearings
wCLL10 = live load on deck between beams applied at tip of beam flange; multiple beams seated on
bearings
wCLL11 = live load on concrete deck over beam applied at CL of beam; multiple beams seated on
bearings
wCLL12 = live load on deck cantilever applied at CG of deck beyond tip of beam flange; multiple beams
seated on bearings
wCLL3 = construction live load on walkway extension; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC.beam = unit weight of beam
wDC.beam.lift1 = effective weight of beam at lifting from casting bed
wDC.beam.lift2 = effective weight of beam at lifting in the field
wDC.beam.trans = effective weight of beam during transit
wDC10 = weight of concrete deck between beams; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC11 = weight of concrete deck over beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC1 2 = weight of concrete deck cantilever; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC2 0 = weight of stay-in-place deck forms; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC21 = weight of forms over beam; multiple beams seated on bearings
wDC2 2 = weight of cantilever deck forms; multiple beams seated on bearings
wlift.seat3 = vertical wind uplift pressure
wr, wl = wind from right, left
wwind.global = total wind pressure resisted by all beams
wwind.lift1 = lateral wind pressure at lifting beam from casting bed
wwind.lift2 = lateral wind pressure at lifting beam in the field
wwind.seat1 = lateral wind pressure while beam seated on dunnage
wwind.seat2 = lateral wind pressure while beam seated on bearings
wwind.seat3 = lateral wind pressure while multiple beams seated on bearings
wwind.trans = lateral wind pressure at time of transport to bridge site
wc = unit weight of plain concrete
x = distance from beam end to point under consideration
yb = distance from bottom of beam to CG of beam section
ycgs.mid = distance from bottom of beam to CG strands at midspan
ylift = rigid extension of lift device above top of beam
ymid.seat1 = height of beam midpoint above roll center; beam seated on dunnage
ymid.seat2 = height of beam midpoint above roll center; beam seated on bearings
ymid.seat3 = height of beam midpoint above roll center; multiple beams seated on bearings
yr.lift1 = height of the CG of the cambered arc below lift points in the plant
yr.lift2 = height of the CG of the cambered arc below lift points in the field
yr.seat1 = height of the CG of beam above roll center; beam seated on dunnage
yr.seat2 = height of the CG of beam above roll center; beam seated on bearings
yr.seat3 = height of the CG of beam above roll center; multiple beams seated on bearings
yr.trans = height of the CG of beam above roll center
yseat.brg = height from roll center to beam seat; beam seated on bridge
yseat.trans = height from roll center to beam seat; beam seated on transport vehicle
yt = distance from top of beam to CG of beam section
50 (Feb 16)
yupper.yolk = distance between upper and lower yolks
yw.lift1 = midheight of the cambered arc below pick points in the plant
yw.lift2 = midheight of the cambered arc below pick points in the field
zCF.trans = deflection of beam due to centrifugal force during transit
zmax.trans = horizontal distance from roll axis to CL of tire group
zmax.seat2 = horizontal distance from roll axis to kern point of bearing pad
zt.trans = total deflection with wind and centrifugal force during transit
zwind.lift1 = eccentricity due to lateral wind deflection in the plant
zwind.lift2 = eccentricity due to lateral wind deflection in the field
zwind.seat1 = eccentricity due to lateral wind deflection; beam seated on dunnage
zwind.seat2 = eccentricity due to lateral wind deflection; beam seated on permanent bearings
zwind.seat3 = eccentricity due to lateral wind deflection; multiple beams seated on permanent bearings
zwind.trans = deflection due to wind during transit
z0.lift1 = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis in the plant
z0.lift2 = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis in the field
z0.seat1 = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis; beam seated on dunnage
z0.seat2 = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis; beam seated on bearings
z0.seat3 = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis; multiple beams seated on bearings
z0.trans = lateral deflection due to beam weight on weak axis during transit
z0.p.seat1 = lateral deflection due to tilt angle θmax.p.seat1 , beam seated on dunnage
z0.p.seat2 = lateral deflection due to tilt angle θmax.p.seat2 , beam seated on bearings
z0.p.trans = lateral deflection due to tilt angle θmax.p.trans during transit
αcr = elastomer creep coefficient
αseat1 = maximum transverse seating tolerance from level; beam seated on dunnage
αseat2 = maximum transverse seating tolerance from level; beam seated on permanent bearings
αseat3 = maximum transverse seating tolerance from level; multiple beams seated on permanent
bearings
αtrans = maximum roadway superelevation
𝛽ahead = Beam end skew, ahead station
𝛽back = Beam end skew, back station
∆camb.lift1 = beam camber at at time of lifting from casting bed
∆camb.lift2 = beam camber at time of lifting in the field
∆camb.seat1 = beam camber at time beam seated on dunnage
∆camb.seat2 = beam camber at time beam seated on bearings
∆camb.seat3 = beam camber at time multiple beams seated on bearings
∆camb.trans = beam camber at time of transport to bridge site
∆cg = effective deflection function
δscreed = deflection of screed rail due to rotation
γconc = unit weight of plain concrete
γconc.AASHTO = AASHTO unit weight of normal weight concrete
γbeam = unit weight of reinforced beam concrete
γconc.deck = unit weight of concrete in deck; multiple beams seated on bearings
γconc.user = user-defined weight of concrete
γform.cant = unit weight of removable cantilever deck form and handrails; multiple beams seated on
bearings
γrebar = unit weight of prestressing strands and reinforcement
γsip = unit weight of stay-in-place forms and concrete fill in flutes; multiple beams seated on bearings
𝜆 = bearing compressibility index
51 (Feb 16)
ϕconst = rotation of beam due to torsion
𝜂ahead = bearing skew, ahead station
𝜂back = bearing skew, back station
θ = assumed maximum beam rotation for computation
θcr.lift1.wr,wl = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection at lifting in the plant; wind from right, left
θcr.lift2.wr,wl = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
θcr.seat1 = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection; beam seated on dunnage
θcr.seat2 = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection; beam seated on bearings
θcr.seat3 = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection; multiple beams seated on bearings
θcr.trans = tilt angle at cracking due to lateral deflection during transit
θeq.seat1 = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium; beam seated on dunnage
θeq.seat2 = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium; beam seated on bearings
θeq.seat3 = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium; multiple beams seated on bearings
θeq.trans = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium during transit
θeq.lift1.wr,wl = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium due to lateral wind pressure from right, left
in the plant
θeq.lift2.wr,wl = rotation of beam from vertical at equilibrium due to lateral wind pressure from right, left in
the field
θmax.p.seat1 = tilt angle at maximum resisting moment arm; beam seated on dunnage
θmax.p.seat2 = tilt angle at maximum resisting moment arm; beam seated on bearings
θmax.p.trans = tilt angle at maximum resisting moment arm during transit
θmax.ult.lift1.wr,wl = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety at lifting from casting bed; wind from right, left
θmax.ult.lift2.wr,wl = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety at lifting in the field; wind from right, left
θmax.ult.lift1.wr,wl.check = check tilt angle in the plant; wind from right, left
θmax.ult.lift2.wr,wl.check = check tilt angle in the field; wind from right, left
θmax.ult.seat1 = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety; beam seated on bearings
θmax.ult.seat2 = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety; beam seated on bearings
θmax.ult.seat3 = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety; multiple beams seated on bearings
θmax.ult.trans = tilt angle at maximum factor of safety
θserv.seat3 = tilt angle at service loads; multiple beams seated on bearings
θyolk = angle of lifting cables from horizontal
52 (Feb 16)
6.0 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS
The following calculations explore the stability of a 136-ft-long PCI BT-72 prestressed girder during lifting,
transport, and seating on elastomeric bridge bearings. In all, seven conditions are investigated. The example
closely follows the parameters published in the Bridge Design Manual (PCI, 2014) and developed in the
original work by Imper and Laszlo (1987) and Mast (1993).
The calculations for hanging girders demonstrate the different results for factor of safety with and without
the consideration of wind and for girders lifted with both vertical and inclined cables.
The calculations for girders during transport demonstrate the effects of wind and centrifugal force on
stability.
The calculations for seated girders on elastomeric bearings includes analysis of bracing requirements for
seating for a single girder on bearings for the active construction case and for multiple girders on bearings for
the inactive construction case
6.1 HANGING GIRDER

Four separate calculations are shown to demonstrate effects of wind, impact, and vertical and inclined
supporting cables. These calculations include:
6.1.1 Girder hanging from vertical cables with no wind
6.1.2 Girder hanging from vertical cables with impact and no wind
6.1.3 Girder hanging from vertical cables with wind
6.1.4 Girder hanging from inclined cables with wind
6.1.5 Summary of the findings of these analyses
Shorthand for Stability Checks

lift1 Stability at Lifting from Bed
seat1 Stability at Storage on Dunnage
trans Stability at Transport to Field
lift2 Stability at Lifting in Field
seat2 Stability at Seating of First Beam
seat3 Stability in Field Subject to Wind Load for Inactive Construction
seat4 Stability in Field during Deck Construction
Abbreviations – Units
kips= 1,000 lbs psf = lbf/ft2 klf = kips/ft
ksi = 1,000 psi pcf = lbf/ft3 ksf = kips/ft2
plf = lbf/ft pci = lbf/in3 kcf = kips/ft3
kci = kips/in3
Abbreviations for Design References

Abbreviation Design Reference
LRFD AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition
GSBTW AASHTO Guide Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works, 1st Edition with 2008 Interims
MAST 1 Mast, Robert F., "Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Beams - Part 1", PCI Journal, Jan-Feb 1989
MAST 2 Mast, Robert F., "Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Beams - Part 2", PCI Journal, Jan-Feb 1993
PCI TM PCI Tolerance Manual for Precast and Prestressed Concrete Construction, MNL-135-00
53 (Feb 16)
6.1.1 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with No Wind
The following information is provided for this calculation:
Girder Type: AASHTO-PCI BT-72 bridge beam
Girder depth: 72 in.
Top flange width: 42 in.
Bottom flange width: 26 in.
Unit weight of concrete: 0.155 kcf
Girder cross-sectional area: 767 in2
Girder CG from girder soffit: 36.6 in.
Strong axis moment of inertia: 545,894 in4
LRFD Sect. 5.4.2.6
Weak axis moment of inertia: 37,634 in4
Overall girder length: 136 ft
Girder lift points from beam end: 9 ft
Strand harp points: 0.4L
Time of lift: Immediately after strand release
Concrete compressive strength: 5.5 ksi
Prestress after initial prestress losses: 1,232 kips
Location of CG of strands from girder soffit: 5 in.
Girder camber: 2.92 in.
Lifting method: Vertical cables
Wind load: No wind
Impact: 0%
Initial girder lateral deflection: 0.85 in. (½ sweep tolerance based on plant experience)
Lifting connection eccentricity: 0.25 in. (¼ tolerance based on plant experience)
Roll Center above girder top flange: 0 in. (no rigid connection)
54 (Feb 16)
Functions are provided in the analysis to calculate concrete modulus of elasticity, modulus of rupture for normal
weight concrete, center of mass eccentricity due to deflection and moment on beam between supports with
cantilever ends subjected to uniform loads.
 wc  2.0 3
Concrete Modulus of Elasticity: Econc ( Kmwc fc )  ( 120000 ksi)  Km    fc LRFD Eqn. 5.4.2.4-1
 kcf  ksi
where:
Km = Correction Factor for Source of Aggregate
wc = Unit Weight of Plain Concrete
fc = Specified Concrete Compressive Strength
Modulus of Rupture (Normal Weight Concrete): fr ( fc )  0.24 fc  ksi LRFD Sect. 5.4.2.6
where fc = Concrete Compressive Strength
Moment on Beam between Supports with Cantilever Ends, Subjected to Uniform Load:
2
w L w x
Mt.x( w La x)   ( x  a) 
2 2
where:
a = Length of Cantilever (same both ends)
L = Overall Length of Beam
w = Applied Unit Load
x = Distance to Point under Consideration from Beam End
Center of Mass Eccentricity Due to Deflection: Mast 1 Eqn. 8
55 (Feb 16)
General Beam Geometry

Overall Beam Length: Lbeam  136.00  ft
Number of Beams in Cross-Section: nbeams  6
Beam End Skew - ahead station:  ahead  0  deg
Beam End Skew - back station:  back  0  deg
Note: Beam end skew is positive in the direction

shown in the sketch.
Bearing Pad Information
Note: Bearings may be placed at a different skew
than the end of beam skew. However, it is
recommended to place bearings normal to the
centerline of beam to maximize lateral stability.
Bearing Skew - ahead station: ahead  0  deg
Bearing Skew - back station: back  0  deg
Beam Plan View

Distance from End of Beam to Centerline of Bearing dbrg  10.0  in
Plan Dimension of Bearing Pad perpendicular to the axis of rotation

(generally parallel to the longitudinal axis of the bridge): Lbrg  12  in
Plan Dimension of Bearing Pad parallel to the axis of rotation (generally

Wbrg  20  in
parallel to the transverse axis of the bridge):
Number of Interior Elastomer Layers nri  6 Number of interior layers of elastomer are
defined as those layers which are bonded on each
face. Exterior layers are defined as those layers
Thickness of Interior Elastomer Layer: hri  0.5  in
which are bonded only on one face. When the
thickness of the exterior layer of elastomer is
Total Thickness of Rubber: hrubber  3.00  in equal to or greater than one-half the thickness of
an interior layer, the parameter, nri, may be
Total Bearing Height: hbrg  3.844 in increased by one-half for each such exterior layer.
(LRFD 14.7.5.3.3)
Note: Elastomer Shear Modulus reduced 15% from
Elastomer Shear Modulus: Gbp  127.5  psi
specified shear modulus per LRFD 14.7.5.2.
Elastomer Bulk Modulus: Kbp  450  ksi

LRFD Commentary C14.7.5.3.3
Elastomer Creep Coefficient: cr  0.35 LRFD Table 14.7.6.2-1
56 (Feb 16)
Beam Section Properties
Beam Section Height: hbeam  72.00  in
2
Beam Section Area: Abeam  767.0  in
Top Flange Width: btop.fl  42  in
Bottom Flange Width: bbot.fl  26  in Bottom Flange Chamfer: bchamfer  0.75  in
Distance from Beam Bottom to CG of Beam Section: yb  36.6  in
Distance from Beam Top to CG of Beam Section: yt  hbeam  yb  35.400 in

4
Horizontal Axis Moment of Inertia: Ix  545894 in
Ix 3
Horizontal Axis Section Modulus - Top: Sx.t   15421 in
yt
Ix 3
Horizontal Axis Section Modulus - Bottom: Sx.b   14915 in
yb
4
Vertical Axis Moment of Inertia: Iy  37634 in
2 Iy 3
Vertical Axis Section Modulus - Top: Sy.t   1792 in
b top.fl
2 Iy 3
Vertical Axis Section Modulus - Bottom: Sy.b   2895 in
b bot.fl
4
Torsion Constant: Jbeam  6972  in
Beam Section Prestressing
Prestress - Initial: Pinit  1232  kips
Distance from Beam Bottom to CG of Strands at Midspan: ycgs.mid  5.00  in
Distance from Midspan to Strand Draping Harp Point: Lharp  13.6  ft Note: Use Lharp= 0.00 ft for
straight strand beams
Harp Location: aharp  0.5 Lbeam  Lharp  54.400 ft from beam end
Kmod.1  1.0
Adjustment Factor for Concrete Modulus of Elasticity:
57 (Feb 16)
Material Properties
28-day Concrete Compressive Stress: fc  7.0  ksi
Release Concrete Compressive Stress: fci  5.5  ksi
Check_fc  "O.K." if fc  15 ksi
"Verify Unit Weight and Modulus of Elas ticityValues" otherwise
Check_fc  "O.K."
AASHTO Unit Weight of Normal Weight Concrete:

  fc  
 conc.AASHTO  if fc  5 ksi0.145 kcf  0.140  0.001   kcf  0.147 kcf LRFD Table 3.5.1-1
  ksi  
User Defined Weight of Concrete (optional):  conc.user  0.150  kcf
Unit Weight of Plain Concrete:

 
 conc  if  conc.user  0.000 kcf  conc.user  conc.AASHTO  0.150 kcf
Unit Weight of Strands and Reinforcing:  rebar  0.005  kcf
Unit Weight of Reinforced Concrete:  beam   conc   rebar  0.155 kcf
Unit Weight of Beam per foot: wDC.beam  Abeam  beam  0.826 klf
Weight of Beam: Wbeam  wDC.beam Lbeam  112.280 kips
Adjustment Factor for Concrete Modulus of Elasticity: Kmod.1  1.0
58 (Feb 16)
Check of Stability at Lifting from Bed

The girder will be handled from lifting devices located a distance, alift, from the girder ends.
The analysis for this condition assumes the following:
 The dimension, alift, is the same at both ends.
 Girder is lifted with one crane at each end resulting in vertical cables.
Concrete Properties at Lifting
Concrete Compressive Stress: fc.lift1  5.500  ksi
 
Modulus of Elasticity - at Lifting: Ec.lift1  Econc Kmod.1 conc fc.lift1  4765.970 ksi
Modulus of Rupture - at Lifting: fr.lift1  fr fc.lift1  0.563 ksi
Camber at Lifting
Camber:  camb.lift1  2.92  in
Lbeam 1
Lateral Deflection (Sweep) Tolerance: ei.tol    in  1.700 in
10 ft 8
Use Lateral Deflection: ei.total  0.85  in (half tolerance)
Prestress Force at Lifting

Effective Prestress Force: Peff.lift1  Pinit  1232.000 kip
Other Parameters at Lifting

Lateral Wind Pressure at Lifting: wwind.lift1  00  plf Note: Tension at end of beam due to
dead weight cantilever to be designed
Vertical Wind Uplift considered negligible and accounted for in beam stranding.
Lift Connection Locations from End of Beam: apick  9  ft Note: Rigid Extension must be
designed for the transverse forces
Lift Connection Rigid Extension above Top of Girder: ylift  0.0  in applied to the connection.
Lift Connection Tolerance from Centerline of Beam: econn  0.25  in
Lifting Impact: IMlift1  0  % positive for downward acceleration, negative for upward rebound acceleration
kips

Effective Wright of Beam at Lifting: wDC.beam.lift1  wDC.beam 1  IMlift1  0.826
ft

59 (Feb 16)
Girder Eccentricities
2
 Lbeam  2 apick  1
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetpick      0.419
Lbeam 3
 
Eccentricity of Lateral Deflection Sweep: ei.lift1 := ei.total·offsetpick = 0.357 in
Height of the center of gravity of the cambered arc below pick points:
yr.lift1  hbeam  yb  offsetpick  camb.lift1  ylift  34.175 in
Eccentricity Due to Wind Deflection (wr = wind right, wl = wind left):
 
zwind.lift1   cg wwind.lift1Lbeamapick Ec.lift1 Iy  0.000 in
Mid-Height of the cambered arc below pick points:

hbeam
yw.lift1   ylift  offsetpick  camb.lift1  34.775 in
2
Lateral Deflection Due to Beam Weight on Weak Axis:
 
z0.lift1   cg wDC.beam.lift1Lbeamapick Ec.lift1 Iy  10.513 in
Eccentricity of Wind Load:

wwind.lift1 yw.lift1
ewind   0.000 in
wDC.beam.lift1
60 (Feb 16)
Check Girder Stresses
 
Moment Due to Gravity Load: Mg.lift1  Mt.x wDC.beam.lift1Lbeamapick aharp  1327.153 ft  kips
Lateral Moment Due to Wind: Mwind.lift1  Mt.xwwind.lift1Lbeamapick aharp  0.000 ft  kips
Concrete Stress in Beam:

 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.lift1 Mwind.lift1
ft.lift1.wr  Peff.lift1      0.114 ksi
 Abeam Sx.t
 Sx.t Sy.t

ft.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      0.114 ksi
 Abeam Sx.t
 Sx.t Sy.t

fb.lift1.wr  Peff.lift1      3.149 ksi
A Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 beam 
fb.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      3.149 ksi
A beam Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 
Check Compressive and Tensile Stress:
ei.lift1  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind 

eq.lift1.wr   0.02563 rad
yr.lift1  z0.lift1
Mg.lift1 eq.lift1.wr
fb.ck.lift1.wr  fb.lift1.wr   3.290 ksi
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr   0.113 ksi
Sy.t
ei.lift1  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind 

eq.lift1.wl   0.02563 rad
Mg.lift1 eq.lift1.wl
fb.ck.lift1.wl  fb.lift1.wl   3.286 ksi
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl   0.107 ksi
Sy.t
   
Check_fb.lift1  if max fb.ck.lift1.wr fb.ck.lift1.wl  0.6 fc.lift1 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."
Check_ft.lift1  if minft.ck.lift1.wr ft.ck.lift1.wl   fr.lift1 "O.K." "N.G. "   "O.K."
61 (Feb 16)
Check Factor of Safety Against Cracking

Analysis assumes ei.lift1 is due to form misalignment and not eccentric prestressing.
Lateral Moment to Cause Cracking:
Wind Right:  
Mlat.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr  fr.lift1  Sy.t  101.143 ft  kips
Wind Left: Mlat.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl  fr.lift1 Sy.t  101.143 ft  kips
Tilt Angle at Cracking Due to Lateral Deflection:

Mlat.lift1.wr
Wind Right: cr.lift1.wr   0.076211 rad
Mg.lift1
Mlat.lift1.wl
Wind Left: cr.lift1.wl   0.076211 rad
Mg.lift1
Factor of Safety against Cracking:
Wind Right:
 
yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wr
FScr.lift1.wr   1.850
z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wr  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1
 
yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wl
FScr.lift1.wl   1.850
Wind Left: z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wl  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1
Minimum:  
FScr.lift1  min FScr.lift1.wr FScr.lift1.wl  1.850
 
Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.lift1  if FScr.lift1  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."
62 (Feb 16)
Check Factor of Safety Against Failure
Wind Right: Try   .4
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Factor of Safety Function: FSult.lift1.wr ( ) 
z0.lift1 ( )  zwind.lift1  ewind  ( 1  2.5 )  ei.lift1  econn
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad
Find Angle at Maximum Factor of Safety:  

max.ult.lift1.wr  Maximize FSult.lift1.wr   0.151917 rad
ei.lift1  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind

Angle Check: max.ult.lift1.wr.check   0.151917
2.5 z0.lift1
Factor of Safety: 
FSult.lift1.wr  FSult.lift1.wr max.ult.lift1.wr  1.847 
Wind Left: Try   .4
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Factor of Safety Function: FSult.lift1.wl( ) 
z0.lift1 ( )  zwind.lift1  ewind  ( 1  2.5 )  ei.lift1  econn
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad

max.ult.lift1.wl  Maximize FSult.lift1.wl   0.151917 rad
ei.lift1  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind

Angle Check: max.ult.lift1.wl.check   0.151917
2.5 z0.lift1
FSult.lift1.wl  FSult.lift1.wl max.ult.lift1.wl  1.847 
Critical Factor of Safety:  
FSult.lift1  min FSult.lift1.wr FSult.lift1.wl  1.847

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSult.lift1  if FSult.lift1  1.5 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
Lateral Ultimate Moment Capacity Required:
1.5
Mult.y.lift1 
FSult.lift1
Mg.lift1 maxmax.ult.lift1.wr max.ult.lift1.wl  163.696 ft  kips
63 (Feb 16)
6.1.2 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with Impact

Girder cross-sectional area: 767 in2
Girder cg from girder soffit: 36.6 in.
Strong axis moment of inertia: 545,894 in4
Weak axis moment of inertia: 37,634 in4
Prestress force after initial losses: 1,232 kips
Location of cg of strands from girder soffit: 5 in.
Wind Load: 0 plf of beam
Impact: 20%
Initial girder lateral deflection: 0.85 in. (½ of sweep tolerance based on plant experience)
64 (Feb 16)

The dimension alift is the same at both ends.
Girder is lifted with one crane at each end resulting in vertical cables.
 
 
Modulus of Rupture - at Lifting: fr.lift1  fr fc.lift1  0.563 ksi
Camber at Lifting
Lbeam 1
10 ft 8


Lateral Wind Pressure at Lifting: wwind.lift1  00  plf
Vertical Wind Uplift considered negligible

Note: Tension at end of beam due to dead
weight cantilever to be designed and
Lift Connection Locations from End of Beam: apick  9  ft
accounted for in beam stranding.
Lift Connection Rigid Extension above Top of Girder: ylift  0.0  in
Note: Rigid Extension must be designed
Lift Connection Tolerance from Centerline of Beam: econn  0.25  in for the transverse forces applied to the
connection.
kips
 
ft
65 (Feb 16)
2
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetpick      0.419 Mast 2 Figure B1
Lbeam 3
 
 

hbeam
2
 

ewind   0.000 in
wDC.beam.lift1
 

A beam Sx.t Sx.t Sy.t
 
ft.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      0.321 ksi
 Abeam Sx.t
 Sx.t Sy.t

 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b

A Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 beam 
66 (Feb 16)

eq.lift1.wr   0.02813 rad
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr   0.021 ksi
Sy.t

eq.lift1.wl   0.02813 rad
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl   0.021 ksi
Sy.t
   
67 (Feb 16)
Check Factor of Safety against Cracking

Wind Right:  

Mlat.lift1.wr
Mg.lift1
Mlat.lift1.wl
Mg.lift1
Wind Right:

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wr
Wind Left:

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wl
z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wl  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1
Minimum:  

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.lift1  if FScr.lift1  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
68 (Feb 16)
Check Factor of Safety against Failure
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad


2.5 z0.lift1
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad


2.5 z0.lift1
Critical Factor of Safety: 
FSult.lift1  min FSult.lift1.wr FSult.lift1.wl  1.600

1.5
Mult.y.lift1  M
FSult.lift1 g.lift1

 max max.ult.lift1.wr max.ult.lift1.wl   207.090 ft  kips
69 (Feb 16)
6.1.3 Girder Hanging from Vertical Cables with Wind

Girder cross-sectional area: 767 in.2
Strong axis moment of inertia: 545,894 in.4
Weak axis moment of inertia: 37,634 in.4
Prestress force after initial prestress losses: 1,232 kips
Location of cg of strands from girder soffit: 5 in.
Wind Load: 15 plf of beam (20 mph 3-second gust, refer to Appendix B)
Impact: 0%
70 (Feb 16)

Girder is lifted with one crane at each end resulting in vertical cables.

 

Camber at Lifting
Lbeam 1
10 ft 8

Vertical Wind Uplift considered negligible Note: Tension at end of beam due to dead
Lift Connection Locations from End of Beam: apick  9  ft accounted for in beam stranding.
Lift Connection Rigid Extension above Top of Girder: ylift  0.0  in Note: Rigid Extension must be designed for
the transverse forces applied to the
connection.
kips

Effective Wright of Beam at Lifting: wDC.beam.lift1  wDC.beam 1  IMlift1  0.826 ft
71 (Feb 16)
2
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetpick      0.419 Mast 2 Figure B1
Lbeam 3
 
 

hbeam
2
 

ewind   0.632 in
wDC.beam.lift1

 

 
ft.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      0.047 ksi
 Abeam Sx.t
 Sx.t Sy.t

 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b

A Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 beam 
72 (Feb 16)

eq.lift1.wr   0.04426 rad
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr   0.117 ksi
Sy.t

eq.lift1.wl   0.00700 rad
Sy.b
ft.ck.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl   0.109 ksi
Sy.t
   
73 (Feb 16)

Wind Right:  

Mlat.lift1.wr
Mg.lift1
Mlat.lift1.wl
Mg.lift1
Wind Right:

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wr 
Wind Left:

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wl
z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wl  econn  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1
Minimum:  

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.lift1  if FScr.lift1  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
74 (Feb 16)
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad


2.5 z0.lift1
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad


2.5 z0.lift1

1.5
FSult.lift1 g.lift1

 max max.ult.lift1.wr max.ult.lift1.wl   257.084 ft  kips
75 (Feb 16)
6.1.4 Girder Hanging from Inclined Cables with Wind

Prestress force after initial losses: 1,232 kips
Location of cg of strands from girder soffit: 5.00 in.
Girder Camber: 2.92 in.
Lifting method: Inclined cables
Upper yolk above roll axis: 59 ft
Wind Load: 15 plf of beam (20 mph 3-second gust, refer to Appendix B)
Impact: 0%
76 (Feb 16)
Check of Stability at Lifting in Field


Girder is lifted with one crane resulting in inclined cables.
 
Camber at Lifting
Lbeam 1
10 ft 8
Use Lateral Deflection: ei.lift2  0.85  in (1/2 of sweep tolerance based on plant experience)
77 (Feb 16)

Vertical Wind Uplift considered negligible

Note: Tension at end of beam due to dead
Lift Connection Locations from End of Beam: apick  9  ft
accounted for in beam stranding.
Note: Rigid Extension must be
Lift Connection Rigid Extension above Top of Girder: ylift  0.0  in designed for the transverse forces
applied to the connection.
Lifting Impact: IMlift2  0  % Positive for downward acceleration, negative for upward rebound acceleration
kips
 
ft
78 (Feb 16)
Inclined Cable Support

Height of Upper Yolk above Lower Yolk: yupper.yolk  59  ft Enter zero for vertical cables
   yupper.yolk  
Angle of Cables from Horizontal: yolk  if  yupper.yolk  0.0 ft  atan     45.000 deg
2
  0.5 Lbeam  apick  
Lbeam
Horizontal Component of Lift Force: Ph.lift1  wDC.beam.lift1  56.140 kips
2 tan yolk  
2
  Ec.lift1  Iy
Critical Compression Load: Pcr   882.887 kips
2
Lbeam  2 apick
1
Lateral Deflection Modifier: emod.lift1   1.068
Ph.lift1
1
Pcr
Modified Lift Connection Tolerance: econn.lift1  econn emod.lift1  0.267 in
2
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetpick     3  0.419
Lbeam
 
Eccentricity of Lateral Deflection Sweep: ei.lift1  ei.total offsetpick emod.lift1  0.381 in
 
zwind.lift1   cg wwind.lift1Lbeamapick Ec.lift1 Iy  emod.lift1  0.204 in

hbeam
2

 
z0.lift1   cg wDC.beam.lift1Lbeamapick Ec.lift1 Iy  emod.lift1  11.227 in

ewind   0.632 in
wDC.beam.lift1
79 (Feb 16)

 
 1 y b  ycgs.mid  Mg.lift1 Mwind.lift1  1 yr.lift1 

ft.lift1.wr  Peff.lift1      Ph.lift1     0.473 ksi
 Abeam Sx.t
 Sx.t Sy.t
 Abeam Sx.t

 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.lift1 Mwind.lift1  1 yr.lift1 
ft.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      Ph.lift1     0.151 ksi
A beam Sx.t Sx.t Sy.t A beam Sx.t
   
 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.lift1 Mwind.lift1  1 yr.lift1 
fb.lift1.wr  Peff.lift1       Ph.lift1  A
    2.993 ksi
 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b
 beam Sx.b

 1 y b  ycgs.mid  Mg.lift1 Mwind.lift1  1 yr.lift1 
fb.lift1.wl  Peff.lift1      Ph.lift1     3.193 ksi
 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b
 Abeam Sx.b

Eccentricity Factor (Section under Consideration to Roll Axis)
 2
 Lbeam  2 aharp  
2
 Lbeam  2 apick 
eh.pick        0.713
 Lbeam Lbeam
   
Check Compressive and Tensile Stress Wind Right:
ei.lift1  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind 
eq.lift1.wr   0.04687 rad
Eccentricity from Section Under Consideration to Roll Axis (Wind Right):

 
eh.lift1.wr  econn.lift1  ei.lift1  zwind.lift1  eh.pick  0.393 in
Mh.lift1.wr  Ph.lift1 eh.lift1.wr  1.839 ft  kip
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1 eq.lift1.wr Mh.lift1.wr

fb.ck.lift1.wr  fb.lift1.wr    3.269 ksi
Sy.b Sy.b
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1 eq.lift1.wr Mh.lift1.wr

ft.ck.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr    0.028 ksi
Sy.t Sy.t
80 (Feb 16)
Check Compressive and Tensile Stress Wind Right:

ei.lift1  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind 
eq.lift1.wl   0.00958 rad
Eccentricity and Moment from Section Under Consideration to Horizontal Component of Lift Force (Wind Left):
 
eh.lift1.wl  econn.lift1  ei.lift1  zwind.lift1  eh.pick  0.684 in
Mh.lift1.wl  Ph.lift1 eh.lift1.wl  3.199 ft  kip
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1 eq.lift1.wl Mh.lift1.wl

fb.ck.lift1.wl  fb.lift1.wl    3.261 ksi
Sy.b Sy.b
 
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1  eq.lift1.wl Mh.lift1.wl
ft.ck.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl    0.041 ksi
Sy.t Sy.t
   
81 (Feb 16)


Wind Right:  
Mlat.lift1.wr  ft.lift1.wr  fr.lift1  Sy.t  Mh.lift1.wr  152.929 ft  kips
Wind Left:  
Mlat.lift1.wl  ft.lift1.wl  fr.lift1  Sy.t  Mh.lift1.wl  103.343 ft  kips
Mlat.lift1.wr
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1
Mlat.lift1.wl
Mg.lift1  Ph.lift1 z0.lift1
Wind Right:

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wr 
z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wr  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1

yr.lift1 cr.lift1.wl 
Wind Left: FScr.lift1.wl   2.413
z0.lift1 cr.lift1.wl  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind  ei.lift1
Minimum:  

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.lift2  if FScr.lift2  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."
82 (Feb 16)

Wind Right: Try θ = 0.400 Rad
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
z0.lift1 ( )  zwind.lift1  ewind  ( 1  2.5 )  ei.lift1  econn.lift1
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000rad
ei.lift1  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind

2.5 z0.lift1
Given
yr.lift1 ( )
z0.lift1 ( )  zwind.lift1  ewind  ( 1  2.5 )  ei.lift1  econn.lift1
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad

Find Angle at Maximum Factor of Safety: max.ult.lift1.wl  Maximize FSult.lift1.wl   0.088514 rad 
ei.lift1  econn.lift1  zwind.lift1  ewind
2.5 z0.lift1
Factor of Safety: FS 
ult.lift1.wl  FSult.lift1.wl max.ult.lift1.wl  2.259 
Check Factor of Safety: 
Check_FSult.lift1  if FSult.lift1  1.5 "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. "
1.5
FSult.lift1 g.lift1
   
 Ph.lift1 z0.lift1  max max.ult.lift1.wr max.ult.lift1.wl  max Mh.lift1.wr Mh.lift1.wl 
Mult.y.lift1  279.234 ft  kip
83 (Feb 16)
6.1.5 Hanging Girder Comparisons

The following table summarizes the stability factors of safety for the cases checked in section 6.1.1 through 6.1.4.
Support Cable Initial Lateral Factor of Safety Factor of Safety
Condition Check
Condition Deflection against Cracking against Failure
No wind, no impact Vertical Cables 0.85” 1.85 1.85
No wind, with 20% impact Vertical Cables 0.85” 1.71 1.60
With wind, no impact Vertical Cables 0.85” 1.58 1.55
With wind, no impact Inclined Cables 0.85” 1.63 1.47
From this table it can be seen that these different parameters, e.g., wind, impact, and support cable condition,
have an appreciable effect on the factor of safety, and should be evaluated for the varying conditions encountered
during the life of the girder. Sensitivity of these factors of safety to minor changes in these parameters should also
be investigated. For the inclined cable lift, increasing the concrete compressive strength requirements at release
from 5.5 ksi to 6.0 ksi will increase the factor of safety against failure to greater than 1.50.
An additional check was performed with vertical cables for 10% impact rebound with no wind. This rebound
increased the compression in the bottom flange of the girder. While the factors of safety were above 1.9, the
compressive stress in the bottom flange exceeded acceptable limits, which would have required increasing the
concrete compressive strength requirements at release from 5.5 ksi to 6.0 ksi.
84 (Feb 16)
6.2 GIRDER DURING TRANSPORT

Two calculations are shown to demonstrate effects of wind, impact, and vertical and inclined supporting cables.
These calculations include:
 6.2.1 Girder during transport stopped on superelevated curve
 6.2.2 Girder during transport at intersection
 6.2.3 Summary of the finding of the two analyses
The analysis performed for girders under transport do not exhibit adequate factors of safety with the prestressing
provided in Section 6.1. Temporary post-tensioning is added in the top flange to control cracking.
85 (Feb 16)
6.2.1 Girder during Transport Stopped on Superelevated Curve

This transport calculation demonstrates the effects of a transporting vehicle stopped on a curved
roadway with adverse superelevation.
Prestress force after initial prestress losses: 1,251.5 kips
Girder bunking point on transport: 10 ft
Roll Center below girder bottom flange: 48 in.
Total hauling rig rotational stiffness: 40,500 in.-kip per radian
Bunking eccentricity: 1.00 in.
Roll center to centerline of tire group: 36 in.
Height of roll center above roadway: 24 in.
Roadway Superelevation: 6%
Transport Speed: 0 mph
Turning Radius: 1,000 ft
Impact: 0%
Initial girder lateral deflection: 2.70 in. (1 in. plus sweep tolerance)
86 (Feb 16)
Check of Stability during Transport to Project Site

The girder is assumed to be transported to the project site bunked a distance, abunk, from both girder ends.
Concrete Properties at Transport to Site
Concrete Compressive Stress: fc.trans  7.00  ksi
 
Modulus of Elasticity - at Transport: Ec.trans  Econc Kmod.1 conc fc.trans  5164.914 ksi
 
Modulus of Rupture - at Transport: fr.trans  fr fc.trans  0.635 ksi
Camber at Transport to Project Site

Camber:  camb.trans  2.92  in
Lbeam 1
Lateral Deflection (sweep) Tolerance: ei.tol    in  1.700 in
10 ft 8
Use Lateral Deflection: ei.total := 2.70·in· Assume 1 in. plus full sweep tolerance
Prestress Force at Transport to Project Site

Prestress Force at Transport: Peff.trans  1251.5  kip with ycgs.mid  7.91 in
Other Parameters at Transport

Lateral Wind at Transport wwind.trans  00  plf
Other Parameters at Transport to Project Site

Bunking Bunk Locations from End of Beam: abunk  10.0  ft
in kip
Hauling Rig Stiffness: K.trans  40500 
rad
Height from Roll Center to Beam Seat: yseat.trans  48.0  in
Impact: IMtrans  00  % positive for downward acceleration, negative for upward rebound acceleration
kips

Effective Weight of Beam with Impact: wDC.beam.trans  wDC.beam 1  IMtrans  0.826 
ft
Bunking Tolerance from Centerline of Beam to Centerline of Support: ebunk.trans  1.0  in

2
 Lbeam  2 abunk  1 Mast 2 Figure B1
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsettrans      0.394
Lbeam 3
 
Eccentricity of Lateral Deflection Sweep: ei.trans := ei.total·offsettrans + ebunk.trans = 2.064 in
87 (Feb 16)
Centrifugal Force (CF)

ft Note: CF is not intended to increase the Factor of
Maximum Superelevation: trans  0.060  Safety around curves. The possibility that a hauling
ft
vehicle will stop should be assumed.
Minimum Turn Radius: Radius trans  1000  ft
Design Speed in Turn: Veltrans  00  mph

2
Veltrans
Centrifugal Force: CFtrans  w  0.000 klf
g Radius trans DC.beam.trans
Deflection Due to Centrifugal Force:
 
zCF.trans   cg CFtrans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  0.000 in
Deflection Due to Wind Deflection:  

zwind.trans   cg wwind.trans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  0.000 in
Total Deflection with CF and Wind: zt.trans  zwind.trans  zCF.trans  0.000 in
Height of Center of Gravity of Beam above Roll Center:

yr.trans  yseat.trans  yb  offsettrans   camb.trans  85.751 in
Height of Girder Midpoint above Roll Center:

hbeam
hwind.trans  yseat.trans   offsettrans   camb.trans  85.151 in
2
Effective Beam Weight: Wbeam.trans  wDC.beam.trans  Lbeam  112.280 kips
 
z0.trans   cg wDC.beam.trans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  8.760 in
 
Moment Due to Gravity Load: Mg.trans  Mt.x wDC.beam.trans Lbeamabunk aharp  1271.013 ft  kips
Lateral Girder Moment Due to Wind and Centrifugal:
 
MCF.trans  Mt.x CFtrans Lbeamabunk aharp  0.000 ft  kips
 
Mwind.trans  Mt.x wwind.trans Lbeamabunk aharp  0.000 ft  kips
Mt.trans  MCF.trans  Mwind.trans  0.000 ft  kips
Overturning Moment Due to Wind and Centrifugal:
 
Mot.trans  Lbeam CFtrans  yr.trans  wwind.trans  hwind.trans  0.000 ft  kips
88 (Feb 16)
 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.trans Mt.trans

ft.trans  Peff.trans       0.292 ksi
A Sx.t Sx.t Sy.t
 beam 
fb.trans  Peff.trans        3.016 ksi
A Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 beam 

K.trans  trans  W beam.trans  zt.trans  ei.trans  Mot.trans 
eq.trans   0.089

K.trans  W beam.trans  yr.trans  z0.trans 
Mg.trans  eq.trans
feq.b.trans  fb.trans   3.486 ksi
Sy.b
feq.t.trans  ft.trans   465.594 psi
Sy.t

Check Compressive Stress: Check_feq.b.trans  if feq.b.trans  0.60 fc.trans "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 

Check Tension Stress: Check_feq.t.trans  if feq.t.trans  fr.trans "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 

Lateral Moment to Cause Cracking: Mlat.trans  ft.trans  fr.trans  Sy.t  138.490 ft  kips 
Mlat.trans
Tilt Angle at Cracking: cr.trans   0.108960 rad
Mg.trans

K.trans  cr.trans  trans 
FScr.trans   1.429
 
W beam.trans   z0.trans  yr.trans  cr.trans  zt.trans  ei.trans  Mot.trans
 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.trans  if FScr.trans  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
89 (Feb 16)

Try θ = 0.4000 rad  
Check_FSroll.trans  if FSroll.trans  1.5 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."
Given
Factor of Safety Function:

K.trans    trans 
FSult.trans ( ) 
 
W beam  z0.trans  zt.trans   ( 1  2.5 )  yr.trans    ei.trans  Mot.trans
 
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad

max.ult.trans  Maximize FSult.trans   0.400001 rad
FSult.trans  FSult.trans max.ult.trans  2.857 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSult.trans  if FSult.trans  1.5 "O.K." "Add Bracing"  "O.K." 
Check Factor of Safety Against Rollover (Cracked)
Horizontal Distance from Roll Axis to Centerline of Tire Group: zmax.trans  36  in
Height of Roll Center above Roadway : hroll.trans  24 in
Overturning Moment from W and CF:
 
Mroll.trans  Lbeam CFtrans  wwind.trans  hroll.trans  Mot.trans  0.000 ft  kips
Tilt Angle at Maximum Resisting Moment Arm:


W beam.trans  zmax.trans  hroll.trans trans  ebunk.trans  Mroll.trans 
max.p.trans   trans  0.153040 rad
K.trans
Corresponding Lateral Deflection due to Tilt Angle:
 
z0.p.trans  z0.trans  1  2.5 max.p.trans  11.343 in

K.trans  max.p.trans  trans 
FSroll.trans 
     
W beam.trans   z0.p.trans  yr.trans  max.p.trans  ei.trans  zt.trans  1  2.5 max.p.trans   Mroll.trans
FSroll.trans  1.983
Check Factor of Safety:

Check_FSroll.trans  if FSroll.trans  1.5 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
90 (Feb 16)
6.2.2 Girder during Transport at Intersection

This calculation demonstrates the effects of a transporting vehicle turning in an intersection with adverse
cross-slope.
Girder bunking point on transport: 10 ft
Roll Center below girder bottom flange: 48 in.
Total hauling rig rotational stiffness: 40,500 in.-kip per radian
Bunking eccentricity: 1.00 in.
Roll center to centerline of tire group: 36 in.
Height of roll center above roadway: 24 in.
Roadway Superelevation: 2% opposite to the direction of travel
Transport Speed: 10 mph
Turning Radius: 120 ft
Impact: 0%
91 (Feb 16)
Check of Stability at Transport to Project Site

The girder is assumed to be transported to the project site bunked a distance abunk from both girder ends.
Concrete Properties at Transport to Site
Concrete Compressive Stress: fc.trans  7.00  ksi
 
Modulus of Elasticity - at Transport: Ec.trans  Econc Kmod.1 conc fc.trans  5164.914 ksi
 
Modulus of Rupture - at Transport: fr.trans  fr fc.trans  0.635 ksi
Camber at Transport to Project Site

Camber:  camb.trans  2.92  in
Lbeam 1
Lateral Deflection (sweep) Tolerance: ei.tol    in  1.700 in
10 ft 8
Prestress Force at Transport to Project Site
Prestress Force at Transport: Peff.trans  1251.5  kip with ycgs.mid  7.91 in
Other Parameters at Transport

Lateral Wind at Transport wwind.trans  00  plf
Other Parameters at Transport to Project Site
Bunk Locations from End of Beam: abunk  10.0  ft
in kip
Hauling Rig Stiffness: K.trans  40500 
rad
Height from Roll Center to Beam Seat: yseat.trans  48.0  in
Impact: IMtrans  0  % Positive for downward acceleration, negative for upward rebound acceleration
kips

Effective Weight of Beam with Impact: wDC.beam.trans  wDC.beam 1  IMtrans  0.826 
ft
Bunking Tolerance from Centerline of Beam to Centerline of Support: ebunk.trans  1.0  in
2
 Lbeam  2 abunk  1
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsettrans      0.394 Mast 2 Figure B1
Lbeam 3
 
Eccentricity of Lateral Deflection Sweep: ei.trans := ei.total·offsettrans + ebunk.trans = 2.064 in
92 (Feb 16)
Centrifugal Force (CF)

Note: CF is not intended to increase the Factor
ft of Safety around curves. CF is assumed in this
Maximum Superelevation: trans  0.020 
ft calculation represent adverse superelevation
sloping away from the turning direction.
Minimum Turn Radius: Radius trans  120  ft
Design Speed in Turn: Veltrans  10  mph

2
Veltrans
Centrifugal Force: CFtrans  w  0.046 klf
g Radius trans DC.beam.trans
Deflection Due to Centrifugal Force:
 
zCF.trans   cg CFtrans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  0.488 in
Deflection Due to Wind Deflection:  

zwind.trans   cg wwind.trans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  0.000 in
Total Deflection with CF and Wind: zt.trans  zwind.trans  zCF.trans  0.488 in

yr.trans  yseat.trans  yb  offsettrans   camb.trans  85.751 in

hbeam
hwind.trans  yseat.trans   offsettrans   camb.trans  85.151 in
2
Effective Beam Weight: Wbeam.trans  wDC.beam.trans  Lbeam  112.280 kips
 
z0.trans   cg wDC.beam.trans Lbeamabunk Ec.trans Iy  8.760 in
 
Moment Due to Gravity Load: Mg.trans  Mt.x wDC.beam.trans Lbeamabunk aharp  1271.013 ft  kips
Lateral Girder Moment Due to Wind and Centrifugal:
 
MCF.trans  Mt.x CFtrans Lbeamabunk aharp  70.815 ft  kips
 
Mwind.trans  Mt.x wwind.trans Lbeamabunk aharp  0.000 ft  kips
Mt.trans  MCF.trans  Mwind.trans  70.815 ft  kips
Overturning Moment Due to Wind and Centrifugal:
 
Mot.trans  Lbeam CFtrans  yr.trans  wwind.trans  hwind.trans  44.703 ft  kips
93 (Feb 16)

ft.trans  Peff.trans       0.182 ksi
A Sx.t Sx.t Sy.t
 beam 
fb.trans  Peff.trans        3.310 ksi
A Sx.b Sx.b Sy.b
 beam 

K.trans  trans  W beam.trans  zt.trans  ei.trans  Mot.trans 
eq.trans   0.055

K.trans  W beam.trans  yr.trans  z0.trans 
feq.b.trans  fb.trans   3.598 ksi
Sy.b
feq.t.trans  ft.trans   646.833 psi
Sy.t

Check Compressive Stress: Check_feq.b.trans  if feq.b.trans  0.60 fc.trans "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 

Check Tension Stress: Check_feq.t.trans  if feq.t.trans  fr.trans "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. " 

Lateral Moment to Cause Cracking: Mlat.trans  ft.trans  fr.trans  Sy.t  67.675 ft  kips 
Mlat.trans
Tilt Angle at Cracking: cr.trans   0.053245 rad
Mg.trans

K.trans  cr.trans  trans 
FScr.trans   0.970
 
W beam.trans   z0.trans  yr.trans  cr.trans  zt.trans  ei.trans  Mot.trans
 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.trans  if FScr.trans  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. " 
94 (Feb 16)

Try θ = 0.40000 rad
Given

K.trans    trans 
FSult.trans ( ) 
 
W beam  z0.trans  zt.trans   ( 1  2.5 )  yr.trans    ei.trans  Mot.trans
 
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad

max.ult.trans  Maximize FSult.trans   0.400001 rad
FSult.trans  FSult.trans max.ult.trans  2.824

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSult.trans  if FSult.trans  1.5 "O.K." "Add Bracing"  "O.K." 
Horizontal Distance from Roll Axis to Centerline of Tire Group: zmax.trans  36  in
Height of Roll Center above Roadway : hroll.trans  24 in
Overturning Moment from W and CF:
 
Mroll.trans  Lbeam CFtrans  wwind.trans  hroll.trans  Mot.trans  57.215 ft  kips

 
W beam.trans  zmax.trans  hroll.trans trans  ebunk.trans  Mroll.trans
max.p.trans   trans  0.132654 rad
K.trans
Corresponding Lateral Deflection due to Tilt Angle:
 
z0.p.trans  z0.trans  1  2.5 max.p.trans  11.665 in

K.trans  max.p.trans  trans 
FSroll.trans 
    
W beam.trans   z0.p.trans  yr.trans  max.p.trans  ei.trans  zt.trans  1  2.5 max.p.trans   Mroll.trans

FSroll.trans  1.868

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSroll.trans  if FSroll.trans  1.5 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
95 (Feb 16)
6.2.3 Girder during Transport Comparisons

The following table summarizes the stability factors of safety for the cases checked in Sections 6.2.1 and 6.2.2.
Superelevation Factor of Safety
Factor of Safety Factor of Safety
Condition Check and Transport against
against Failure against Rollover
Speed Cracking
Stopped on Curve 6% stopped 1.43 2.83 1.97
Intersection 2% and 10 mph 0.97 2.82 1.87
From this table it can be seen that the different superelevation and transport speed conditions have an
appreciable effect on the factor of safety. Note that the factor of safety against cracking for the intersection case is
below the recommended value of 1.00 with an equilibrium cracking stress greater than the modulus of rupture.
An acceptable factor of safety can be achieved through use of slower speed, modified bunking location, or
investigation of potential alternate routes.
96 (Feb 16)
6.3 SEATED GIRDER

The seated girder calculation determines the bracing requirements for seating the first girder with construction
active wind condition (20 mph), followed by all girders seated with construction inactive wind condition (90
mph), then deck casting with construction active wind condition (20 mph).
Wind Load: construction active: 15 plf of beam (20 mph 3-second gust)
Wind Load: construction inactive: 274 plf of beam (90 mph 3-second gust)
Wind Uplift: construction inactive: 37 plf of beam (90 mph 3-second gust)
Impact: 0%
97 (Feb 16)
Check of Stability of Single Girder Seated on Bearings

This analysis uses the same methods used for transportation to the site, except that the stiffness of the
transport vehicle is exchanged with the stiffness of the bearing pads. Rollover is checked to the kern point
of the bearing.
Concrete Properties at Single Girder Seating
Default Concrete Compressive Stress: fc.seat2  7.0  ksi
 
Modulus of Elasticity - at Single Girder Seating: Ec.seat2  Econc Kmod.1 conc fc.seat2  5164.914 ksi
 
Modulus of Rupture - at Single Girder Seating: fr.seat2  fr fc.seat2  0.635 ksi
Camber at SIngle Girder Seating

Default Camber:  camb.seat2  2.55  in
Lbeam 1
10 ft 8
Prestress Force at Single Girder Seating

Prestress Force at Transport: Peff.seat2  1251.5  kip with ycgs.mid  7.91 in
Other Parameters at at Single Girder Seating
Lateral Wind Pressure at Single Girder Seating: wwind.seat2  15  plf
98 (Feb 16)
Note: Roll stiffness calculation assumes full bearing on pad with no
liftoff. If liftoff occurs, roll stiffness reduces dramatically.
Bearing Locations from End of Beam: dbrg  10.000 in
W brg  Lbrg
Bearing Shape Factor: Sbrg   7.500 LRFD Eq. 14.7.5.1-1

2 h ri W brg  Lbrg 
Bearing set normal to centerline of girder
3
Lbrg  W brg 4
Bearing Moment of Inertia - Bearing z Axis: Ibrg.z   8000.000 in
12
Gbp
Compressibility Index:   Sbrg  3  0.219 LRFD Eq. C14.7.5.3.3-6
Kbp
Dimensionless Constants from NCHRP Report 596 (NCHRP, 2008) NCHRP 596 App. F Eq. F-20
A r  1.0
  W brg  
B.z.trans  ( 0.24  0.024  )  ( 1.15  0.89  )   1  exp 0.64    0.861
Lbrg
  
Bearing Rotational Stiffness (2 bearings):
3 Gbp Ibrg.z in kip

  Ar  B.z.trans  Sbrg   74725
2 NCHRP 596 App. F Eq. F-18
K.z  2

nri hri 1  cr   rad Note: Adjusted for Creep
99 (Feb 16)
h brg
Height from Roll Center to Beam Seat: yseat.brg   1.922 in
2
Bearing Tolerance from Centerline of Beam to Centerline of Support: ebrg.seat2  0.5  in
Equivalent bunk points: aseat2  dbrg  10.000 in

2
 Lbeam  2 aseat2  1
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetseat2      0.642 Mast 2 Figure B1
Lbeam 3
 
Eccentricity Due to Lateral Deflection Sweep and Tolerance: ei.seat2 := ei.total·offsetseat2 + ebrg.seat2= 2.234 in
ft
Maximum Transverse Seating Tolerance from Level: seat2  0.005 
ft
Eccentricity Due to Wind Deflection:  
zwind.seat2   cg wwind.seat2Lbeamaseat2Ec.seat2 Iy  0.357 in
yr.seat2  yseat.brg  yb  offsetseat2  camb.seat2  3.347ft
hbeam
ymid.seat2  yseat.brg   offsetseat2  camb.seat2  3.297 ft
2
Overturning Moment Due to Wind: Mot.seat2  Lbeam wwind.seat2 ymid.seat2  6.725 ft  kips
100 (Feb 16)


z0.seat2   cg wDC.beamLbeamaseat2Ec.seat2 Iy  19.665 in

Moment Due to Gravity Load: Mg.seat2  Mt.x wDC.beamLbeamaseat2aharp  1785.631 ft  kips 
Lateral Moment Due to Wind:  
Mwind.seat2  Mt.x wwind.seat2Lbeamaseat2aharp  32.443 ft  kips

 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.seat2 Mwind.seat2
ft.seat2  Peff.seat2      0.476 ksi
 
 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.seat2 Mwind.seat2
fb.seat2  Peff.seat2      2.737 ksi
 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b

K.z seat2  W beam zwind.seat2  ei.seat2  Mot.seat2 
eq.seat2   0.010959

K.z  W beam yr.seat2  z0.seat2 
Mg.seat2 eq.seat2
feq.b.seat2  fb.seat2   2.818 ksi
Sy.b
feq.t.seat2  ft.seat2   344.544 psi
Sy.t

Check Compressive Stress: Check_feq.b.seat2  if feq.b.seat2  0.60 fc.seat2 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 

Check Tension Stress: Check_feq.t.seat2  if feq.t.seat2  fr.seat2 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
 
Lateral Moment to Cause Cracking: Mlat.seat2  ft.seat2  fr.seat2  Sy.t  165.852 ft  kips
Mlat.seat2
Tilt Angle at Cracking: cr.seat2   0.092882 rad
Mg.seat2

K.z cr.seat2  seat2 
FScr.seat2   6.596
 
W beam  z0.seat2  yr.seat2  cr.seat2  zwind.seat2  ei.seat2  Mot.seat2
 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.seat2  if FScr.seat2  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K." 
101 (Feb 16)


Try   .4
Given

K.z   seat2 
FSult.seat2( ) 
 
W beam  z0.seat2   zwind.seat2  ( 1  2.5 )  yr.seat2   ei.seat2  ebrg.seat2  Mot.seat2
 
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad
Find Angle at Maximum Factor of Safety: 

max.ult.seat2  Maximize FSult.seat2  0.276170 rad 
Factor of Safety:  
FSult.seat2  FSult.seat2 max.ult.seat2  7.574

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSult.seat2  if FSult.seat2  1.5 "O.K." "Add Bracing"  "O.K." 
Wbrg
Horizontal Distance from Roll Axis to Kern Point of Pad: zmax.seat2 = – bchamfer = 2.583 in
6
hbrg
Height of Roll Center above Bearing Pedestal: hroll.seat2 = = 1.922 in
2
Overturning Moment from W: Mroll.seat2 = Lbeam . wwind.trans . hroll.seat2 + Mot.seat2 = 6.725 ft kips

 
W beam zmax.seat2  hroll.seat2 seat2  ebrg.seat2  Mroll.seat2
max.p.seat2   seat2  0.009196 rad
K.z

Corresponding Lateral Deflection due to Tilt Angle: z0.p.seat2  z0.seat2 1  2.5 max.p.seat2  1.676ft 

K.z max.p.seat2  seat2 
FSroll.seat2 
 
W beam  z0.p.seat2  max.p.seat2  yr.seat2 max.p.seat2  ei.seat2  ebrg.seat2  Mot.seat2
 
FSroll.seat2  0.721

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSroll.seat2  if FSroll.seat2  1.2 "O.K." "Add Bracing"  "Add Bracing" 
Overturning Moment to be resisted by bracing (service) at each end, if needed:
 
W beam  z0.p.seat2  max.p.seat2  yr.seat2 max.p.seat2  ei.seat2  ebrg.seat2  Mot.seat2
 
Mot.seat2 
2
Mot.seat2  16.408 ft  kips for each brace
Lbeam wwind.seat2
Concurrent Lateral Force: Fot.seat2   1.020 kip
2
102 (Feb 16)

Check of Stability of Multiple Girders Seated on Bearings - Inactive Construction

Concrete Properties at Multiple Girder Seating
Concrete Compressive Stress: fc.seat3  fc.seat2  7.000 ksi
 
Modulus of Elasticity - at Multiple Girder Seating: Ec.seat3  Econc Kmod.1 conc fc.seat3  5164.914 ksi
 
Modulus of Rupture - at Multiple Girder Seating: fr.seat3  fr fc.seat3  0.635 ksi
Camber at Multiple Girder Seating

Camber:  camb.seat3   camb.seat2  2.550 in
Lbeam 1
10 ft 8
Prestress Force at Multiple Girder Seating
Prestress Loss at Multiple Girder Seating: Peff.seat3  Peff.seat2  1251.500 kip
Other Parameters at Multiple Girder Seating
Exterior Girder Lateral Wind Pressure at Multiple Girder Seating: wwind.seat3  274 plf
nbeams  1
Total Wind Pressure resisted by all Girders: wwind.global  wwind.seat3  959.000 plf
2
Vertical Wind Uplift Pressure: wlift.seat3  37  plf Full wind on windward beam
and half wind on sheltered beams
ft
Maximum Transverse Seating Tolerance from Level: seat3  seat2  0.005
ft
Bearing Tolerance from Centerline of Beam to Centerline of Support: ebrg.seat3  ebrg.seat2  0.500 in
Eccentricity Reduction Factor: offsetseat3  offsetseat2  0.642
Equivalent bunk points: aseat3  aseat2  10.000 in
103 (Feb 16)

Check Unbraced Stability
Eccentricity Due to Lateral Deflection Sweep: ei.seat3 := ei.total·offsetseat3 = 1.734 in
 
Eccentricity Due to Wind Deflection: zwind.seat3   cg wwind.seat3Lbeamaseat3Ec.seat3 Iy  6.527 in
Height of Center of Mass of Beam above Roll Center:

yr.seat3  yseat.brg  yb  offsetseat3  camb.seat3  3.347ft

hbeam
ymid.seat3  yseat.brg   offsetseat3  camb.seat3  3.297 ft
2
 
Moment Due to Gravity Load: Mg.seat3  Mt.x wDC.beamLbeamaseat3aharp  1785.631 ft  kips
Uplift Moment Due to Wind:  

Mlift.seat3  Mt.x wlift.seat3Lbeamaseat3aharp  80.026 ft  kips
Lateral Moment Due to Wind:  

Mwind.seat3  Mt.x wwind.seat3Lbeamaseat3aharp  592.622 ft  kips
Overturning Moment Due to Wind: Mot.seat3  Lbeam wwind.seat3 ymid.seat3  122.847 ft  kips
 
z0.seat3   cg wDC.beamLbeamaseat3Ec.seat3 Iy  19.665 in
Check Exterior Girder Stresses

 1 yb  ycgs.mid  Mg.seat3  Mlift.seat3 Mwind.seat3
ft.seat3  Peff.seat3      3.338 ksi
 
 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b
 
K.z seat3  W beam zwind.seat3  ei.seat3  Mot.seat3
eq.seat3   0.041

K.z  W beam yr.seat3  z0.seat3 
feq.b.seat3  fb.seat3   5.425 ksi
Sy.b
feq.t.seat3  ft.seat3   3825.630 psi
Sy.t
 
Check Compressive Stress: Check_feq.b.seat3  if feq.b.seat3  0.60 fc.seat3 "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. "
 
Check Tension Stress: Check_feq.t.seat3  if feq.t.seat3  fr.seat3 "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. "
104 (Feb 16)

 
Lateral Moment to Cause Cracking: Mlat.seat3  ft.seat3  fr.seat3  Sy.t  403.627 ft  kips
Mlat.seat3
Tilt Angle at Cracking: cr.seat3   0.226042 rad
Mg.seat3

K.z cr.seat3  seat3 
FScr.seat3   18.377
 
W beam  z0.seat3  yr.seat3  cr.seat3  zwind.seat3  ei.seat3  ebrg.seat3  Mot.seat3
 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FScr.seat3  if FScr.seat3  1.0 "O.K." "N.G. "  "N.G. " 
Try   .4
Given
K.z   seat3  
FSult.seat3( ) 
 
W beam  z0.seat3  zwind.seat3   ( 1  2.5 )  yr.seat3   ei.seat3  ebrg.seat3  Mot.seat3
 
Angle Range: 0.000000    0.400000 rad

max.ult.seat3  Maximize FSult.seat3  0.400001 rad
FSult.seat3  FSult.seat3 max.ult.seat3  5.019 

Check Factor of Safety: Check_FSult.seat3  if FSult.seat3  1.5 "O.K." "Add Bracing"  "O.K." 
Check Bearing Pad Effectiveness under Service Loads
Try   .0100
Given

K.z   seat3 
1
 
W beam  z0.seat3  zwind.seat3    yr.seat3   ei.seat3  ebrg.seat3  Mot.seat3
 
serv.seat3  Find ( )  0.031195 rad
W brg
eccserv.limit   2.778 in
6 1.2
Check for Full Bearing:
 
W beam  z0.seat3  zwind.seat3  yr.seat3  serv.seat3  ei.seat3  ebrg.seat3  Mot.seat3
 
eccserv.seat3   17.433 in
W beam

Check_full_brgroll.seat3  if eccserv.seat3  eccserv.limit "Add Bracing" "Full Bearing"  "Add Bracing" 
105 (Feb 16)

Design of Bracing
Number of Braces Proposed: nbraces  4 total, including braces at girder ends
Imperfection (Play) in Each Bracing: ebrace  0.25  in

 cg wwind.seat3 Lbeamaseat2 Ec.seat3 Iy  nbeams  1
Beam Deflection: ewind.seat3    ebrace  1.713 in
nbeams 2
Total Eccentricity with Wind:
etotal.seat3  ei.seat3  ewind.seat3  ebrg.seat2  3.947 in
Effective Moment Coefficient Due to Bracing: Mmod  0.107 for three span continuous
 
Mwind.seat3  Mmod  Mt.x wwind.seat3Lbeamaseat2aharp  63.411 ft  kips

ft.seat3  Peff.seat3      0.206 ksi
 
 Abeam Sx.b
 Sx.b Sy.b
 
Check Compressive Stress: Check_fc.seat3  if fb.seat3  0.6 fc "O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."

Check Tension Stress: Check_ft.seat3  if ft.seat3  0.19 fc  ksi"O.K." "N.G. "  "O.K."
Effective Resistance of Bracing: Fmod  if nbraces  
21.00if nbraces 31.251.15   1.150
Overturning Moment to be resisted by bracing (service), if needed:
  
Fmod  W beam  z0.seat3  serv.seat3  yr.seat3 serv.seat3  ei.seat3  ebrg.seat3  Mot.seat3
 
Mot.seat3 
nbraces
Mot.seat3  46.349 ft  kips per brace

Fmod  wwind.seat3 Lbeam
Horizontal Bracing Force (Service): Fbrace.seat3   10.713 kips per brace
nbraces
106 (Feb 16)

Check of Stability of Exterior Beam—Active Construction
Overhang from Centerline of Exterior Beam to Coping: s oh  3.75  ft
Walkway Formwork Extension Length Beyond Coping: s ext  2.00  ft
Distance from Coping to Screed Rail: s screed  2.5  in
Girder Spacing Adjacent to Exterior Beam: s beam  7.0  ft
Concrete Deck Thickness: tdeck  8.0  in
Build-up Thickness: tbup  1.0  in
Unit Weight of Concrete for Deck Pour:  conc.deck  150  pcf
Unit Weight of Stay-In-Place Forms and Concrete Fill in Flutes:  sip  20  psf
Unit Weight of Removable Cantilever Deck Form and Handrails:  form.cant  20  psf
Construction Live Load on Deck: wCLL1  20  psf
Construction Live Load from Screed Machine: PCLL2  5.0  kips
Construction Live Load on Walkway Extension: wCLL3  75  plf over LCLL3  20  ft
Weight Calculations
Weight of Concrete Deck–Between Beams:
s beam  btop.fl 
W DC1   tdeck   conc.deck  0.175 klf applied at tip of girder flange
0 2
btop.fl ft  kips
TDC1  W DC1   0.306
0 0 2 ft
Weight of Concrete Deck–Over Beam:

 
WDC1  btop.fl  tdeck  tbup   conc  0.394 klf applied at centerline of beam
1
ft  kips
TDC1  0.0
1 ft
Weight of Concrete Deck–Cantilever:
 btop.fl 
WDC1   s oh    tdeck  conc.deck  0.200 klf applied at cg of deck outside tip of girder flange.
2  2 
 btop.fl s oh  ft  kips
TDC1  W DC1      0.550
2 2  4 2  ft
107 (Feb 16)

s beam  btop.fl 
Weight of Forms - SIP: WDC2    sip  0.035 klf applied at tip of girder flange
0 2
btop.fl ft  kips
TDC2  W DC2   0.061
0 0 2 ft
kips
No Forms over Beams: W DC2  0.0 klf TDC2  0.0 ft 
1 1 ft
Weight of Forms–Cantilever:
 btop.fl 
WDC2   s oh  s ext     form.cant  0.080 klf applied at cg of formwork outside tip of girder flange.
2  2 
 btop.fl s oh s ext  ft  kips

TDC2  W DC2       0.300
2 2  4 2 2  ft
Pattern Live Load over Cantilever

Live Load on Concrete Deck–Between Beams: (assumed to be zero for maximum overturning)
W CLL1  0.0 kips applied at tip of girder flange
0
btop.fl kips
TCLL1  W CLL1   0.000 ft 
0 0 2 ft
Live Load on Concrete Deck–Over Beam:

btop.fl
W CLL1   wCLL1  0.035 klf applied at centerline of beam
1 2
btop.fl ft  kips
TCLL1  W CLL1   0.031
1 1 4 ft
Live Load on Concrete Deck–Cantilever:
 btop.fl 
WCLL1   s oh    wCLL1  0.040 klf applied at cg of deck outside tip of girder flange.
2  2 
 btop.fl s oh  kips
TCLL1  W CLL1      0.110 ft 
2 2  4 2  ft
Other Live Loads

Live Load due to Screed Machine: PCLL2  5.000 kips applied at screed rail

TCLL2  PCLL2 s oh  s screed  19.792 ft  kips 
Live Load on Walkway: PCLL3  wCLL3 LCLL3  1.500 kips
 s ext 
TCLL3  PCLL3  s oh    7.125 ft  kips
 2 
108 (Feb 16)

Service Loads
2
kips
Total Overturning on Beam from Uniform Torques: Tuni 
  TDC1n  TDC2n  TCLL1n  0.623 ft  ft
 
n 0
Number of Braces: nbraces  4
Effective Resistance of Bracing: Fmod  1.150
Tuni Lbeam
Moment Resistance of Brace (Service): Mbrace.const   TCLL2  TCLL3  45.339 ft  kips
nbraces  Fmod
Check Rotation of Beam

Lbeam  2 aseat2
Unbraced Length between Braces: Lb   44.778 ft
n braces  1
0.5 Mbrace.const Lb
Rotation of Girder due to Torsion:  const   0.00974 rad
.41667 Ec.seat3 Jbeam
 
Deflection of Screed rail due to Rotation: screed   const s oh  s screed  0.463 in
btop.fl
s beam  btop.fl
2
Reduction in Concrete Cover: Coverred  screed     const  0.426 in
s beam  s oh  s screed 2
Check Cover Reduction:
 
Check_Cover  if Coverred  0.25  in "O.K." "Add More Bracing. "  "Add More Bracing. "
109 (Feb 16)

Addition of Bracing
Change Number of Braces: nbraces  6

Effective Resistance of Bracing: Fmod  if nbraces 
21.00if nbraces   1.150
31.251.15
Tuni Lbeam
Moment Resistance of Brace (Service): Mbrace.const   TCLL2  TCLL3  39.199 ft  kips
nbraces  Fmod
Check Rotation of Beam

Lbeam  2 aseat2
Unbraced Length Between Braces: Lb   26.867 ft
n braces  1
0.25 Mbrace.const Lb
Rotation Due to Torsion:  const   0.00253 rad
.41667 Ec.seat3 Jbeam
 
Deflection of Screed rail: screed   const s oh  s screed  0.120 in
btop.fl
Reduction in Concrete Cover: Coverred  screed    const  0.173 in
2

Check Cover Reduction: Check_Cover  if Coverred  0.25  in "O.K." "Add Bracing. "  "O.K." 
Calculation Summary
The calculations for bracing requirements indicate that bracing is required at seating of the first girder to control
rollover at the bearing. Bracing can be added at the girder ends to control bearing instability. Additional
intermediate bracing is required to control the girder stability under the inactive wind case. Additional
intermediate bracing is also required to control the rotation of the girder during the casting of the bridge deck to
maintain concrete cover over the reinforcing steel.
110 (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS ____________________ SECTION 7
CITED REFERENCES
7.0 CITED REFERENCES

AASHTO. 2014. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Seventh Edition with 2015 and 2016 Interim
Revisions. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. 1,960 pp.
https://bookstore.transportation.org/collection_detail.aspx?ID=132 (Fee)
AASHTO. 1995. Guide Design Specifications for Bridge Temporary Works, First Edition with 2008 Interim
Revisions, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. 90 pp.
https://bookstore.transportation.org/collection_detail.aspx?ID=92 (Fee)
ASCE. 2013. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Standards 7-10, Third Printing. American
Society of Civil Engineers, Baltimore, Maryland. 636 pp.
http://www.asce.org/templates/publications-book-detail.aspx?id=6725 (Fee)
ASCE. 2015. Design Loads on Structures during Construction. Standards 37-14. American Society of Civil Engineers,
Baltimore, Maryland. 48 pp.
http://www.asce.org/templates/publications-book-detail.aspx?id=11702 (Fee)
Consolazio, Gary R., H.R. Hamilton, III, and Megan Salvetti Beery. 2012. Experimental Validation Of Bracing
Recommendations For Long-Span Concrete Girders, Structures Research Report No. 2012/72909-74040,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla., 222 pp.
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_STR/FDOT-BDK75-977-03-rpt.pdf
Consolazio, Gary. R., Kurtis R. Gurley, and Zachary S. Harper. 2013. Bridge Girder Drag Coefficients and Wind-
Related Bracing Recommendations, Structures Research Report No. 2013/87322, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Fla.
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_STR/FDOT-BDK75-977-33-rpt.pdf
Cojocaru, Razvan. 2012. Lifting Analysis of Precast Prestressed Concrete Beams, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, Va. M.Sc. Thesis.
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05092012-122937/unrestricted/Cojocaru_R_T_2012.pdf
Cojoaru, R. and Christopher D. Moen. 2013. “VT Lifting Stability Analysis - US Customary Units.” An Excel
spreadsheet program. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Va.
http://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/23723
FDOT Beam Stability. 2015. Mathcad 15 Program. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL.1.2MB
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/structures/ProgLib.shtm
FDOT Structures Manual. 2015. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL. Approx 700 pp.
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/Structures/StructuresManual/CurrentRelease/StructuresManual.shtm
Imper, Richard R. and George Laszlo. 1987. “Handling and Shipping of Long Span Bridge Beams”, PCI Journal,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL. V.32, No. 6 (November-December), pp. 86-101.
http://www.pci.org/pci_journal-1987-november-december-6/?terms=November-December%201987
Mast, Robert F. 1989. “Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams—Part 1,” PCI Journal,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, V. 34, No. 1, (January-February), pp 34-53.
http://www.pci.org/pci_journal-1989-january-february-3/
Mast, Robert F. 1993. “Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams—Part 2”, PCI Journal,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, V. 38, No. 1, (January-February), pp 70-88.
http://www.pci.org/pci_journal-1993-january-february-6/
111 (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS ____________________ SECTION 7
CITED REFERENCES
Moen, Christopher D. 2014. Direct Calculation of Deflections and Stresses in Precast Prestressed Concrete Beams
During Lifting. Proceedings of the National Bridge Conference. September 6-9, Washington, DC.
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL,
http://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/23723
NCHRP. 2008. Rotation Limits for Elastomeric Bearings, Report 596. National Cooperative Highway Research
Program. Published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC., 63 pp. (Appendix F, 78 pp).
http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=8556
PCI. 2014. Bridge Design Manual, Third Edition, Second Release, (MNL-133-14). Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Institute, Chicago, IL. 1620 pp.
https://netforum.pci.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?webcode=storeItemDetail&parentKey=345d2a31-53c2-43f9-
8578-a7514e34b0a3&catKey=5d967c30-b4c7-4993-bab8-f3cd6142e004 (Fee)
PCI. 2000. Tolerance Manual for Precast and Prestressed Concrete Construction, (MNL-135-00). First Edition,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL. 95 pp.
https://netforum.pci.org/eweb/dynamicpage.aspx?webcode=category&ptc_key=76df87cf-beac-442d-b4fd-
f15439f86d71&ptc_code=Tolerance (Fee)
PCI. 1999. Manual for Quality Control for Plants and Production of Structural Precast Concrete Products MNL-116-
99, Fourth Edition. Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL.
https://www.pci.org/bookstore/storefront.aspx (Fee)
Tadros M, F Fawzy, K Hanna. 2011. “Precast, Prestressed Girder Camber Variability”, PCI Journal,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, V. 56, No. 1, Winter, pp 135-154.
http://www.pci.org/pci_journal-2011-winter-10/
112 (Feb 16)

LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS APPENDIX A
STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS
APPENDIX A—STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS

The following survey was distributed to all State Bridge Engineers and PCI Bridge Committee
Members before May 31, 2010. This appendix includes a copy of the survey, a list of the
respondents, and graphs of the results.
113 (Feb 16)

GIRDER STABILITY SURVEY
Respondent Information:
Name: Title:
Firm/Agency:
Address:
Phone: Email:
State(s) of Principal Activity: (Check all that apply)
AL AK AR AZ CA CO CT DC DE
FL GA HI IA ID IL IN KS KY
LA MA MD ME MI MN MO MS MT
NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH
OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT
VA VT WA WI WV WY OTHER:
Principal Activity:
Owner or Owner Agent Bridge Engineer of Record
Contractor’s Specialty Engineer Fabricator
Hauler/Transporter Bridge Contractor Erector
Inspector
Other:
If Contractor’s Specialty Engineer, indicate entities for which you perform services: (Check all
that apply)
Fabricator Hauler/Transporter Bridge Contractor Erector
Other:
In your State(s) of Principal Activity, who is responsible for these design activities? (Check all
that apply)
Lift locations and lift stability checks:
Bridge Engineer of Record Fabricator Hauler/Transporter
Erector
Bridge Contractor Other:
Dunnage locations:
Erector
Transportation to project site stability checks:
Erector
Transportation to project site stability checks:
Erector
Transportation within project site stability checks:
Erector
114 (Feb 16)

Temporary bracing requirements during erection:
Erector
Temporary bracing requirements after erection:
Erector
Do you personally have experience with failures/rejections related to girder stability from bed
to bridge?
Yes No
If yes, where did this failure/rejection occur? (Check all that apply)
Fabricator’s yard Shipping from yard to site During erection After
erection
Major factor contributing to failure/rejection: (Check all that apply)
Lifting configuration Wind Bearing geometry Out of
level bearing
Excess sweep/lateral deflection Impact Inadequate bracing
Roadway surface issues
Other:
If we have any additional questions regarding these failures/rejections, are you willing to
discuss your knowledge and findings? Yes No
115 (Feb 16)

Respondents:
Respondent Title Firm/Agency
Agencies
Jim Ma Prestressed Concrete Specialist California DOT
Jim Tribo Staff Bridge Engineer Arkansas Highway & Trans.
Dept.
Sam Fallaha Asst. State Structures Design Florida DOT
Engineer
Ahmad Abu-Hawash Chief Structural Engineer Iowa DOT
Paul Fossier Assistant Bridge Design Louisiana DOTD
Administrator
Kent Nelson Fabrication Operations Engineer Missouri DOT
Fouad Jaber Assistant State Bridge Engineer Nebraska Department of Roads
Todd Stefonowicz Asst. Chief Structures Engineer Nevada DOT
Richard Dunne Exec. Manager Structural New Jersey DOT
Engineering
Ray Trujillo State Bridge Engineer New Mexico DOT
Michael Twiss Civil Engineer III (Structures) New York State DOT
Walter Peters Asst. Bridge Engineer - Operations Oklahoma DOT
Tom Macioce Chief Bridge Engineer Pennsylvania DOT
Kevin Goeden Chief Bridge Engineer South Dakota DOT
David Hohmann Director, Bridge Division Texas DOT
Jugesh Kapur State Bridge Engineer Washington State DOT
Industry
Chuck Prussack VP and General Manager Central Pre-Mix Prestress Co.
Steve Seguirant VP and Director of Engineering Concrete Technology Corporation
David L. Bracewell Chief Engineer, Retired Coreslab Structures
Finn Hubbard Bridge Engineer HNTB Corporation
116 (Feb 16)

Survey Results
Responsibilities: Lift Locations and Initial

Lift Stability Checks
16 15
Number of Responses
14
12
10 9
8 6
6
4
2 1
0 0
0
Bridge Engineer of Record
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
Responsibilities: Dunnage Locations

18 17
16
Number of Responses
14
12
10
8 6
6
4 3
2
2 0 0
0
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
117 (Feb 16)

Responsibilities: Transportation to Project

Site Stability Checks
Number of Responses 18 16
16
14
12
10
8 7
6 5
4 2
2 0 0
0
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
Responsibilities: Transportation within

Project Site
16 15
Number of Responses
14 12
12
10
8 7
6
4
2 0 0 0
0
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
118 (Feb 16)

Responsibilities: Temporary Bracing

during Erection
Number of Responses 20 18
18
16
14
12
10
8 7
6
4 3
2 0 1 0
0
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
Responsibilities: Temporary Bracing

Requirements after Erection
18 17
Number of Responses
16
14
12
10
8
6
4 3 3
2 1
0 0
0
Fabricator
Erector
Other
Bridge Contractor
Hauler/Transporter
Responsible Entity
119 (Feb 16)

Number of Responses Number of Responses
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
5
Lift Config.
5
Fabricator's yard
1
Wind
4
Bearing Geom.
6
Shipping from Yard to Site
2
Out of Level Brgs.
8
Excess Late. Defl.
1
Impact
4
During Erection
Responsible Entity
Responsible Entity
8
Failure/Rejection Locations
Inadequate Bracing
Major Failure/Rejection Factors
120
2
Roadway Surface
3
After Erection
4
Other
LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS
(Feb 16)
APPENDIX A
LATERAL STABILITY—CONCRETE BRIDGE GIRDERS ___________________ APPENDIX B
ALTERNATE WIND LOAD CALCULATION PROVISIONS
APPENDIX B—ALTERNATIVE WIND LOAD CALCULATION

PROVISIONS
Development of wind pressures in accordance with Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,
ASCE 7-10, (ASCE, 2013) and the 2016 Interim Revisions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
(AASHTO, 2014)uses drag coefficients for horizontal pressure and vertical lift with adjustments for exposure (and
height). Wind pressures are calculated in accordance with the following formulas.
𝑞𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑑 = 0.00256 𝐾𝑧 𝐺 𝐶𝑑 (𝑉𝑚 𝑉)𝟐
where
Kz = velocity pressure exposure coefficient
G = gust effect factor
Cd = pressure (drag) coefficient
Vm = velocity modification factor
V = basic wind velocity in miles per hour
𝐸 𝐼𝑦
𝑓 = π2 √𝑤
𝐿4
𝑔
where
E = modulus of elasticity
Iy = lateral moment of inertia of the girder
w = unit weight
g = gravitational acceleration
L = girder span length
Girders during transport and erection have changing orientations that negate the reduction due to the lower
probability of wind direction being in the critical direction. In these cases, the directionality factor should be
assumed as 1.0.
Drag coefficients for individual girders and erected girder groups without concrete deck are significantly higher
than those for a completed bridge. The Florida Department of Transportation has undertaken a significant
amount of research to establish the following guidance for horizontal drag:
Cd = 2.2 for I-shaped girders with no deck forms in place
Cd = 1.5 for U-shaped girders with no deck forms in place
Cd = 1.1 for I-shaped and U-shaped girders with deck forms in place
For vertical drag (lift), the research also has shown that a drag coefficient of -0.30 can be assumed to calculate
uplift during extreme wind events. Wind uplift can be neglected for all active construction cases because the uplift
force under low wind velocity conditions is usually inconsequential.
121 (Feb 16)

The design wind velocity, V, from ASCE 7-10 for the 700-year mean recurrence interval may be reduced based on
the duration of the exposure during construction. The following multipliers were developed based on the
probability functions assumed in ASCE 7-10 (ASCE, 2013):
Less than 6 weeks = 75%
6 weeks to 1 year = 80%
1 year to 2 years = 85%
2 years to 5 years = 90%
Lifting operations are limited to low wind velocity conditions in order to:
 provide safe working conditions for crane operators and other construction personnel,
 protect the lifting equipment from failure,
 enhance the stability of the girder, and
 control setting tolerances by minimizing sway of the girders during seating.
122 (Feb 16)

Alternate Wind Pressure Calculation for Erecting a 136-ft-long PCI BT-72 Girder Using ASCE Methods
  2.0 3
conc   fc
Concrete Modulus of Elasticity: Ec Kmod.1 conc fc   ( 120000 ksi)  Kmod.1   
 kcf   ksi
where:
Kmod.1 = Adjustment Factor for Modulus of Elasticity LRFD Eqn. 5.4.2.4-1
conc = Unit Weight of Plain Concrete
fc = Concrete Compressive Strength
   Z   7.35
2  LRFD Eqn. 3.8.1.2.1-3
 2.5 ln    Category C Exposure
  1.00
Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient: Kz( Z)  max   0.0984 ft 
 LRFD Eqn. 3.8.1.2.1-3
Assumed
where: Z = Height Above Ground (ft)  478.4
2
V 
Wind Velocity Pressure: Pz VKzGCd  0.00000256 
    K  G C  ksf LRFD Eqn. 3.8.1.2.1-1
 mph  z d
where:
V = Design Wind Speed
Kz = Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
G = Gust Effect Factor
Cd = Drag Coefficient
123 (Feb 16)

Beam Section Properties

Overall Girder Length: Lbeam  136.00  ft
Girder Section Height: hbeam  72  in
Unit Weight of Plain Concrete:  conc  0.150  kcf
Girder Weight: wDC  0.826  klf
4
Vertical Axis Moment of Inertia: Iy  37634 in
Material Properties
Concrete Compressive Stress: fc  7.0  ksi
Adjustment Factor for Concrete Modulus of Elasticity: Kmod.1  1.0
Wind Criteria
Wind speeds utilized in this analysis are based on the 3-second gust speed criteria.
Gust Effect Factor

2  
Ec Kmod.1 conc fc  Iy
Girder Lateral Natural Frequency: frequency     3.869 Hz
wDC.beam 4
 Lbeam
g
Gust Effect Factor G  1.00 Use 1.00 for Natural Frequency greater than 1 Hz LRFD Table 3.8.1.2.1-1
and LRFD 3.8.3.1
Construction Wind Criteria

Basic Wind Speed (3-second gust): V  20  mph ASCE 37 Section 6.2.1
Wind Speed Factor for Construction Active Loads: Vm  1.00
Wind Speed for Construction: V  Vm V  20.000 mph
User Defined Wind Speed for Construction (optional): Vuser  0  mph
 
Design Wind Speed for Construction: V  if Vuser  0.000 mph Vuser V  20.000 mph
124 (Feb 16)

Prestressed Beam Wind Drag Coefficients

Wind Drag Coefficient (Single Beam): Cdrag  2.2 Consolazio (2012)
Wind Lift Coefficient (Single Beam): Clift  0.30
Wind Pressure Calculation

Height of Beam above Surrounding Base Ground: Z  50  ft
Height Coefficient: Kz  Kz( Z)  1.099
 
Lateral Wind Pressure: wwind  Pz VKzGCdrag  hbeam  15 plf
 
Lift Wind Pressure: wlift  Pz VKzGClift  hbeam  2 plf (negligible)
125 (Feb 16)

126 (Feb 16)

Rep
Rep
o r to r t
Black only logos
Black only logos

Rev
ColR
Rep o r t
Black only logos

BlaB
Rev
Bla
8770 W. Bryn Mawr Ave. | Suite 1150 | Chicago, IL 60631-3517 | 312-786-0300 | www.pci.org
200200
WestWest
Adams
Adams
Street
Street
I Suite
I Suite
2100
2100
I Chicago,
I Chicago,
IL 60606-5230
IL 60606-5230
Phone:
Phone:
312-786-0300
312-786-0300 I Fax:
I Fax:
312-621-1114
312-621-1114 I www.pci.org
I www.pci.org

Recommended Practice For Lateral Stability of Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders CB-02-16

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Recommended Practice For Lateral Stability of Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders CB-02-16

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Repor t

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute

Phone: 312-786-0300 Fax 312-621-1114 www.pci.org

First Edition 2016

This document has been prepared and reviewed through an extensive

Printed in the United States of America

iii (Feb 16)

Kevin R. Eisenbeis, Chair Matt Farrar Michael L. McCool

vii (Feb 16)

viii (Feb 16)

INFORMATION FOR USERS

U1.0 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

U1.1 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT

U1.1.1 Using Links

U1.1.2 Numbered Paragraphs

U1.1.3 Page Header

U1.1.4 Page Footer

U1.1.5 Figures and Tables

U1.2 REVISIONS AND REGISTRATION

U1.2.1 Registering Your Copy

U1.2.2 Errors and Omissions

UI 1.2.3 Dissemination of Corrections

U1.3 EXCHANGE OF SUGGESTIONS

U1.3.1 Send Your Suggestions

UI 3.2 Our Suggestion

4.1.3 Environmental Loads .............................................................................................................. 22

xii (Feb 16)

5.4 STABILITY DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE DECK ....................................................... 39

xiii (Feb 16)

xiv (Feb 16)

This page intentionally left blank

xvi (Feb 16)

This page intentionally left blank

2.0 CURRENT PRACTICE

This page intentionally left blank

3.0 GIRDER STABILITY OVERVIEW

3.1 THEORY OF GIRDER STABILITY

3.2 HANGING GIRDERS

3.2.1 Girder Equilibrium

3.2.2 Factor of Safety

The factor of safety against failure must be at least 1.5:

3.2.3.1 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Increased Rotation

3.2.3.2 Girder Equilibrium with Wind Resulting in Decreased Rotation

3.3 SEATED GIRDERS

3.3.1 Girder Equilibrium during Transport

3.3.2 Girder Equilibrium Considering Lateral Forces

3.3.3 Girder Equilibrium on Elastomeric Bearings

3.4 SPECIAL CASE 1—GIRDER LIFTED FROM ONE END

3.5 SPECIAL CASE 2—GIRDER LIFTED WITH INCLINED CABLES

3.7 GIRDER STABILITY SOFTWARE

This page intentionally left blank

4.0 CRITERIA FOR GIRDER STABILITY

4.1 APPLIED DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION LOADS

4.1.1 Permanent Loads

4.1.1.1 Dead Load of Structural Components

4.1.2 Transient Loads

4.1.2.1 Dynamic Loads

4.1.2.2 Centrifugal Force

4.1.2.3 Construction Live Load

4.1.3 Environmental Loads

4.1.3.2 Thermal Force Effects

4.2 MATERIAL PROPERTY ASSUMPTIONS

4.2.1 Concrete Compressive Strength