Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck

[Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck and Girders by ASTRA Pro / microSAP]
Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck-Girder

Superstructure by ASTRA Pro / microSAP
Sandipan Goswami, B.Sc, BE, M.Tech, FIE, C.Eng, PE (M)
Abstract: In the grillage model the bridge deck-girder superstructure is schematized. First, the
theoretical principles on which this kind of modeling is based are recalled; the equivalent condition
between three-dimensional Beam Elements and corresponding grillage models are imposed through
the use of a kinematics and an energetic criterion. Secondly, the same technique is generalized to
three-dimensional structures and specialized to the case of cellular decks. For this kind of deck,
structural behaviors usually neglected by the current technical approaches, like shear lag, distortion
and warping, are considered. The chapter presents the method introducing these effects in a
grillage analysis; the method provides a series of criteria with which it’s possible to define the
rigidities of the equivalent model. These criteria are applied with finite element solutions. Finally,
the application is executed in order to obtain the desired results for forces developed in the
nodes/joints and beam elements/members. Note: For any query write to techsoftinfra@gmail.com
SAP-IV was developed by the Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, College of Engineering,
University of California, Berkeley, USA. It was the first complete structural analysis package which
introduced the basic concepts like multiple element types, disk based large capacity equation
solution, etc., used by all major structural analysis packages today. mSAP is Structural Analysis
Program for Microcomputers and is an adaptation of SAP-IV to the Microcomputer environment.
The package has been thoroughly edited and source code revised to conform to the Fortran-77
standard, and to utilize the facilities provided by MS-Windows operating environment. In this
article the data file for the model is explained as it is created by software ASTRA Pro in user-friendly
text file format, by taking various input from user, which is next formatted into SAP data and finally
the SAP data is processed by running the mSAP program to obtain the analysis report.
The bridge deck analysis is done by the use of a grillage model, the assignment of rigidities to the
grillage members is certainly the main phase of this pattern. The expression of the rigidities must
be assigned to the beams are given by various manuals for more common types of deck. These
estimations of the equivalent rigidities derive from theoretical considerations and experimental
observations referred to only “principal” deformation modes, or flections and torsion of deck in
longitudinal and transverse directions.
This article emphasizes on introducing the typical process of designing deck-girder superstructure
of pre-stressed concrete (PSC) ‘I-Girder’ concrete bridge, along with the consideration that a design
engineer needs to take through each phases of the design process. A wide range of contents with
respect to bridge design process are covered in this chapter. Upon the completion of structural
analysis, the bridge will be designed in detail. The step by step procedure of determining the
concrete section dimensions, pre-stressing tendon profile, reinforcing bar layout and material
properties are specified in this chapter.
1
The analysis by ‘Grillage Model’ of deck-girder superstructure of the bridge consists of the sections
as: Geometry with Cantilever Footpaths, Member Section Properties, Member Material Properties,
Bearing Supports, Dead Loading (DL), Super Imposed Dead Loading (SIDL), Live Loading (LL) by
moving vehicle loads, which of various classes and applied lane wise on the bridge deck by
following the relevant design standards.
Geometry Grillages are most widely used to analyze beam/girder and slab type bridge decks. Solid
slab type decks are generally modeled using finite elements, however grillages may be used for this
type of deck with reasonably accurate results.
Longitudinal grillage members are arranged to represent the main beams with transverse members
representing the deck slab and diaphragm beams.
The spacing of transverse grillage members are chosen to be about 1.5 times the spacing of the
main longitudinal members, but may vary up to a limit of 2:1. Transverse members are required at
the diaphragm positions and, in order to achieve a member at mid span, there needs to be an odd
number of members.
In the case of skew decks the transverse members should be arranged orthogonally to the main
members to achieve the correct magnitude for moments and deflections. However this
arrangement can be impractical for small skew angles (below 35o) and a skew mesh is usually
adopted. The skew mesh will tend to slightly overestimate the magnitude of moments and
deflections and is therefore considered to be a safe solution. The section properties of transverse
members in skew meshes should be calculated using the orthogonal spacing.
2
Member Section Properties The bending inertia and torsion inertia are required for all the
members in the grillage model.
The bending inertia for the composite sections can be calculated using a suitable Performa.
Member properties for the grillage are calculated for the local member axis as shown and
care will be needed to ensure you are using the correct notation. If the spread sheet is
used then Ixx from the spread sheet will be input as Iy for the local member axis shown.
Similarly Iyy from the spread sheet will be input as Iz and the torsion inertia J will be input
as Ix.
3
The torsion inertia for a rectangle is given by J=k1b3bmax
where:
b is the length of the short side
bmax is the length of the long side
k1={1-0.63(b/bmax)(1-b4/12b4max)}/3
The torsion inertia of the section is the summation of the inertias of the individual
rectangles. As the deck slab is used in both the longitudinal members and transverse
members then the inertia of this rectangle is halved. This only relates to the Torsion
Inertia, the full section is used to calculate the Bending Inertia.
Cantilever Footpaths When the deck is cantilevered from the edge of the main deck beams
it is convenient to extend the grillage to the parapet beam. This will simplify the
application of footway loading and accidental wheel loading.
However the torsion effects in the edge beam can be significantly overestimated in a beam
and slab type deck if the members are not modeled correctly.
Most of the cantilever effects should induce bending in the deck slab with secondary
torsion effects being induced in the supporting edge beams.
If a simple two dimensional (2D) grillage is used then the bending effects from the
cantilever will be resisted by torsion in the edge beam. This will overestimate the torsion in
the edge beam and underestimate the bending in the deck.
Some grillage programs allow the centroids of the members to be offset from the 2D plane
(as shown in Figure 1.3). Alternatively a three dimensional model may be used by including
rigid, vertical, dummy members into the model, although this solution does make the
geometry more complicated.
Bearing Supports Most grillage analyses allow the supports to be modeled either as free,
or rigid or sprung. Spring supports are used to model the elastic deformation either of the
bearing or of the support structure. Rubber bearings will distort under load and have a
4
significant effect on the distribution of loads throughout the deck. Even the elastic
deformation of concrete columns can have an effect on the distribution of loads in a
continuous deck.
A simple line beam analysis will give an approximate magnitude for the reactions. This will
enable a suitable bearing to be chosen for the grillage model. Alternatively the grillage
analysis can be carried out with rigid vertical supports and modified later.
Bearings may be chosen as either of:
• 'Free and sliding-guided bearings' will be fixed or sprung in the vertical direction
and releases applied for rotational directions.
• The 'Fixed' bearing will be fixed or sprung in all directions.
When using spring supports it is usual to have to fix one bearing in the vertical direction to
achieve a stable solution. A grillage model is not analyzed for in-plane loading as any
longitudinal or transverse restraint cannot be modeled.
Loading All loading is proportioned to the grillage members and grillage joints (nodes)
before the moments, shears and torsions are calculated. Many programs have the facility
for applying patch loads and point loads which do not necessarily coincide with joints or
members. The program will distribute these loads to the members before calculating the
moments, shears and torsion effects.
There are a number of ways of proportioning the loads to the joints if the program does
not have this facility. The 48kN point load shown acting within a 600 square grid can be
proportioned to a pair of opposite members and then again to the joints. This distribution
will achieve sufficiently accurate results.
It is convenient to apply all loads to the structure as nominal loads. Load factors can be
applied to the combination cases to avoid inputting numerous load cases. Consequently
load cases should not be too complex. For example carriageway construction 150mm thick
is considered in BD21 as 100mm surfacing with 50mm fill and should be applied as two
load cases as different load factors are applied to fill than to surfacing.
Dead Loading Dead load or DL is applied to the main longitudinal members. Some
programs automatically generate dead load by applying a density to the cross-sectional
area of the member. Care is needed to avoid double accounting for the weight of the deck
slab.
5
Superimposed dead load or SIDL (carriageway surfacing, footpath fill and surfacing and
parapets) are input as uniformly distributed loads along the length of the longitudinal
grillage members. Some programs have the facility of applying patch loads which can be
used for the surfacing providing it is of constant thickness.
Live Loading Live load or LL can consist of HA (udl + kel) load, HB load, Pedestrian load,
Accidental Wheel load and Wind load. Collision load on parapets is only included if high
containment parapets are required. Horizontal loads such as traction or braking and
skidding are generally not included as the deck is very stiff for resisting horizontal loads
compared with vertical loads. Unless the deck has a very high superelevation or steep
longitudinal gradient then the load component in the vertical direction for skidding and
centrifugal loads will be negligible.
Results
It is always good practice to carry out approximate checks of the output as the job
proceeds. One simple check is to obtain the total reactions for each load case to see if they
match with an estimate of the total load applied in each load case.
Standard procedure for most bridges deck. The grillage analogy method for analyzing
bridge superstructures has been in use for quite some time. Various studies were done on
grillage idealization by mesh layout of the structure, together with the relevant
background information. The bridge deck is analyzed by both grillage analogy as well as by
finite element method. In grillage analysis the three dimensional beam elements are used,
which are also a member of finite element library. By calling the finite element method it is
meant the usage of plate elements in modeling the bridge deck. By lumped mass technique
the deck-girder structure of the bridge is more correctly defined in grillage model by using
beam elements. In finite element method the model is difficult idealize the actual deck-
girder structure, by using the plate elements. For slab bridges without any girder the
modeling by using plate elements may be more appropriate. Bridge deck analysis for
grillage model by using beam elements is many times compared with finite element model
with plate elements. Though finite element method gives lesser values for bending
moment in deck as compared to grillage analysis, the later method seems to be easy to use
and comprehend.
! "
The grillage model of a deck-girder is created by idealization of the beam and slab bridge
where an assembly of interconnected linear beam elements forms a grid in the horizontal
6
plane. This is more acceptable to structural engineering than a grillage model for a slab
bridge, where a model by plate elements is more realistic. The T- beams and I-beams are
most commonly adopted type of bridge decks consisting of longitudinal girders at definite
spacing, with or without connected by cross girders to support the deck slab. Commonly,
the diaphragms are used to connect the longitudinal girders, the diaphragms are provided
at the supports.
The longitudinal grid lines in the grillage model for T-beam or I-beam decks are made to
coincide with the centre lines of physical girders and these longitudinal members are given
the material and section properties of the girders plus associated portions of the slab,
which they represent. Additional dummy grid lines between physical girders and at the
edges of the bridge deck or at suitable distance from the edge are also set in the grillage
model for extra nodes to obtain force information and also to improve the accuracy of the
result. To consider the bridge footpaths, one extra longitudinal grid line along the centre-
line of each footpath slab is also provided in the grillage model. The above procedure for
setting longitudinal grid lines is applicable to both normal and skew decks.
When intermediate cross-girders are considered in the actual deck, the transverse grid
lines represent the properties of cross girders and associated deck slabs. The grid lines are
set-in along the centre-lines of cross-girders. If after considering the effective flange widths
of these girders, some portions of the slab are left out then, additional dummy grid lines
are also placed in between these transverse physical cross-girders. If the spacing of
transverse grid line is still greater than two times the spacing of longitudinal grid lines, the
left-over slabs are to be replaced by two or more grid lines so that the above requirement
for spacing is fulfilled.
In the actual deck, if a diaphragm is considered on the supports, the grid lines should also
be placed by coinciding with these diaphragms. A typical grillage lay-out of Deck-Girder
system is shown in Figure 1.2.
7
!# $ % %
When no intermediate diaphragms are provides, the transverse medium i.e. deck slab is
assumed as a number of transverse strips, replaced by transverse grid lines. The spacing of
transverse grid lines should be about 1/8 of effective span for making the grid convenient.
As a guideline, the ratio of spacing of transverse and longitudinal grid lines may be
maintained between 1 and 2 and the total number of lines should be odd. This spacing
ratio should reflect the span-width ratio of the deck. Therefore, for square and wider
decks, the ratio tentatively becomes 1 and for long and narrow decks it is tentatively 2.
At abutments the transverse grid lines are placed by joining the centres of bearings and
minimum seven transverse grid lines are recommended, including transverse edge lines. In
cases where cross-girders are not provided, the transverse grid lines should be normal to
8
[Grillag
rillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck and Girders by ASTRA
AST Pro / microSAP]
the longitudinal lines.. The transverse grid lines are to be extended
d up
u to the extreme
longitudinal grid lines, at th
the edges.
In skew bridges with small

mall skew angle up to 15° and with no intermediat
diate diaphragms, the
transverse grid lines are made parallel to the support lines as shown wn in Figure 1.3 (a).
Additional transverse grid lines are provided in between these suppor pport lines with their
spacing not exceeding twi
twice the spacing of longitudinal lines, which is the
th same as normal
bridges.
In skew bridges with high skew angle in between 15° to 45°, the transv nsverse grid lines are
set along abutments, at ei
either end. The interior transverse grid lines are not parallel to the
end transverse lines, but are set by following the skew angle of the e bridge,
br as shown in
Figure 1.3 (b).
& #' (" " *

)
The Deck-Girder system mm may be either, precast I-sections with in-situu reinforced
re concrete
slab or cast-in-place T-bea
beam where the girder is cast as monolithic withith the deck slab. For
the first case, the ratio
o of modulus of elasticity of slab and precast beam materials are to
be mentioned properlyy in tthe analysis. This is referred as a two-stage construction.
con
9
& " + "
Idealization of box-girder bridge as grillage model is similar to that of slab-on-girders type

of deck systems but there is some behavior difference between them. The box-girder
bridge usually has problems of shear deformations or shear lag due to usually wide flanges
of the deck and distortions of the cells, if intermediate transverse diaphragms are not
provided in sufficient numbers. The grillage analogy in this structural system has the added
advantage in respect of time taken for the analysis and simple to comprehend.
The method is suitably adopted for multi-cell rectangular box-girder decks (Figure 1.4),
where the effects of shear deformations and cell-distortions are negligible and could be
ignored,. However, it can also be used for decks with one or two cells only. The outer webs
may be vertical or inclined, as shown in Figure 1.5.
,#$ $ ) " + *
- .
10
/#$ $ ) " + *
0 .
In rectangular box girders the longitudinal grid lines are placed by coinciding with webs of
the actual structure (Figure 1.4). For box girders with sloping end webs (Figure 1.5), the
grillage simulation is to be done by engineering judgment for placing the longitudinal
members. However, a grid line is placed at the junction of the inclined web with slab as
shown in figure 1.5. Longitudinal grid lines are placed along the edges of the side
cantilevers with nominal stiffness for making the grillage model convenient for analysis.
For bridges with footpaths, additional longitudinal grid lines are to placed at their centres
of the footpaths in the similar way of slab and T-beam bridges, discussed earlier.
The top and bottom slabs with no diaphragms, are represented by equally spaced
transverse grid lines along the span. The number of grid lines and their spacing are similar
to as adopted for slab-on-girder bridge. If the deck is provided with diaphragms, the
transverse grid lines are placed along each intermediate diaphragm and at supports.
Additional grid lines, if needed, to meet the minimum requirements of transverse grid
lines, may also be placed to account for top and bottom slabs and are placed in between
the diaphragms. A closer spacing of transverse grid lines in the grillage model gives analysis
results of more continuous structural behavior and will provide more details of forces and
displacements.
For skew box-girder bridges, the procedure for placing of longitudinal and transverse grid
lines is the same as that in the case of slab-on-girders bridge, discussed earlier.
, 1 12 1
11
Once the bridge structure is simulated into equivalent grillage model, by a set of
longitudinal and transverse grid lines meeting at discrete nodes, the next step for grillage
analogy method is to assign appropriate elastic properties. The evaluation of flexural and
torsional stiffness of each member of the idealized grillage model needs the computation
of equivalent flexural moment of inertia ‘I’ and torsional inertia ‘J’ for the members.
This is accomplished by considering isolated sections of the deck by considering them as

individual beams. The inertias are calculated for each section and attributed to the related
grillage members representing that section.
, + 0 3 405
For different individual components like slab, ‘T’ or ‘I’ beams, box-girders etc. the
computation of flexural moment of inertia ‘I’ is straight forward and needs no elaboration.
However, in beams having the slab cast monolithically with the web of the beam, effective
flange-width of the associated slab is considered.
,! ( 0 3 465
The torsional inertia ‘J’, is generally not a simple geometric property of the cross-section
like the flexural moment of inertia ‘I’ and needs proper consideration. There is no accurate
analytical method for obtaining ‘J’. Therefore, for determining ‘J’ for different cross-
sections, the approximate method which is based on the elastic theory of torsion of
prismatic beams is discussed here.
12
Saint-Venant derived an approximate expression for computing the torsional inertia ‘J’, of
open sections and this is applicable to all cross-sectional shapes without having re-entrant
corners as below,
J=
where ‘A’ is the area of cross-section and ‘IP’ is the polar moment of inertia.
For a rectangle of sides b and d, the expression for ‘J’ becomes,
J=
For a thin rectangle where b > 5d, the value of ‘J‘ is more accurate by the expression
J=
If the cross-section has re-entrant corners, then ‘J‘ is quite less than that given by the first
of above three equations, therefore, the value of ‘J‘ is obtained by conceptually sub-
dividing the section into rectangular shapes avoiding re-entrant corners and summing the
values of ‘J‘ of these sub-divisions. The value of ‘J‘ of a sub-divided part with conceptual
cuts on two opposite faces may be computed as if the sub-division is a part of the thin and
wide strip for which ‘J‘ = bd3/3. A typical T-section with re-entrant corners and its sub-
division is described in Figure 1.6. For the portions 1, 2, 3 and 4 the ‘J‘ values are
designated as J1, J2, J3 and J4 respectively, then,
J1 = J2 =
J3 = J4 =
and the value of ‘J‘ for the beam section as a whole, J = J1 + J2 + J3 + J4
13
7# *8 )
It may be noted that the value of ‘J’ of the part of deck slab forming the flange is to be
divided into two halves to maintain the continuity in the other direction. Widths b3 and b4
of segments 3 and 4 are so adjusted to make the areas b3 × d3 and b4 × d4 same as
original areas of the corresponding segments.
It is to be noted that the load distribution is likely to be more sensitive to the value of
flexural moment of inertia ‘I’ rather than to that of torsional inertia ‘J’, and therefore, a
small error in computing ‘J’ is not likely to affect much the final results. But, an incorrect
sub-division of a section will invariably lead to an under-estimation of ‘J’ and this may
result a conservative design to a small extent.
14
/ ' 3' % 3 8
0
The loads consisting of dead load, superimposed dead load, live and impact loads acting on
the bridge deck-girder superstructure are to be appropriately distributed to the nodes of
the grillage model. In the following sections, the application of various types of loads and
their placement on the deck are discussed.
The dead loads (DL) including the superimposed dead loads (SIDL) of the deck-girder
superstructure is comprising of its self weight, wearing course, parapet, kerb etc. which are
permanent and stationery in nature. The dead loads are acting as distributed loads on the
deck surface and distributed on longitudinal grid members by idealizing into equivalent
nodal loads. This is more relevant when the distributed load is non-uniform.
If the load is uniform all along the length of the linear grid members then it is not
necessary to calculate the equivalent nodal load, rather it can be treated as uniformly
distributed load (UDL). If the dead load is ‘UDL’ , but its centroid does not coincide with the
grid member then it is to be applied as vertical ‘UDL’ combined with torsion ‘UDL’.
Figure 1.7 shows a solid slab with non-uniform spacing of grid lines of the grillage model.
The equivalent vertical load along each grid line is calculated in the form of vertical UDL by
considering its tributary area. For grid line ‘A’ the applied load is un-symmetric, therefore
the equivalent load will consist of a combination of vertical and torsional UDL. Whereas,
for grid line ‘B’ the applied load is un-symmetric, therefore the equivalent load will be the
vertical load only.
15
9#$ $ * * 4 5 2 4 5
The self-weight of cross beam members and diaphragms needs additional considerations.
These beams located at specific intervals are actually small discrete loads on the grid
members. However, for simplicity in of computation the total weight of all the cross beams
in each span are calculated and equally divided in the form of distributed loads to various
grid members of the grillage model. The weights of railings, kerbs, footpaths etc. are
applied as lumped mass on the edge member of the grid.
$ $
The live load on the highway bridges is by the moving vehicle loads. The design standards
of AASHTO-LRFD, BS Eurocode 2-BD 37/01, IRC 6 recommend different types of
hypothetical loadings based on lane configuration of the carriageway on the bridge deck,
for which a bridge is to be designed. The above design standards may be referred for detail
elaborations.
16
The vehicle live loads consist of a set of wheel loads. These are distributed over small areas
of contacts of wheels forming patch loads. These patch loads are treated as concentrated
loads acting at the centres of contact areas. This is a conservative assumption and
facilitates the analysis. This assumption has very negligible effects on the results and does
not make any significant difference in the design.
For example, a standard live load by a vehicle class of 10 axles and 20 wheel loads each of
3.5 tonnes may be idealized as 20 point loads of 3.5 tonnes each, 10 loads on each track.
The total load of the vehicle in this case is 70 tonnes.
For any standard live load by a vehicle class only one vehicle loading per two lanes of the
carriageway is considered. For a three lane bridge, the live loading may be either by three
lane loading by one same class of vehicle or two lanes of loading by two different class of
vehicles. It is specified by loading standards that vehicles are not allowed to go close to the
kerb for some specified distances. The distances are different for different types of loading.
The wheel loads of vehicles are placed either in the panels formed by the longitudinal and
transverse members of the grid or directly on the nodes of the grid. The wheel loads falling
in the panels are transferred to the surrounding nodes of the panels to facilitate the
analysis. The procedure of distributing the point wheel loads to the four surrounded nodes
of the panels are explained in the next section.
To obtain the worst force on the nodes by the wheel loads different positions of each type
of loading system are to be tried on the grillage model, which is the bridge deck. This is
achieved by placing the wheel loads of a vehicle on the bridge and by moving it
longitudinally and transversely in small increment by occupying a large number of different
positions on the bridge deck.
0 $
The impact load on the bridge deck-girder superstructure is a major loading caused by the
vibrations by the vehicle moving on the bridge. It is commonly considered as a percentage
of the moving live load. Some design standards consider that the impact load varies with
type of live load, span length and bridge type whether concrete or steel. The impact load is
provided as a factor that is applied on the live load, to include the effect of impact.
/ *
17
The longitudinal and transverse members cross each other and panels are formed either of
rectangular or parallelogram or triangular shapes, in normal skew bridges. All the wheels of
a vehicular loading may not come directly on the nodes but mostly they come on inside the
panels of surrounded nodes. These wheel loads acting on the panels are transferred to the
contiguous nodes forming the panel., next the grid is analyzed as a grillage model. It is
therefore important to identify the panels in the idealized grillage model in which a
particular wheel load is coming.
The identification of the panel includes its type as rectangular or parallelogram or

triangular. In the grillage model the longitudinal members are parallel to the length of the
bridge and transverse members are at right angles to the long members. The panels in a
normal bridge are rectangular as shown in figure 1.8 (a), whereas, the panels in a skew
bridge has triangular panels near the ends and rectangular panels in the central zone as
shown in figure 1.8 (b). In case of skew bridges where the skew angle is small, there the
transverse members are considered not at right angle with the long members, rather these
are parallel to the supports which are at an angle with the long members. This results
forming of parallelogram panels and are shown in figure 1.8 (c).
In skew decks, it may so happen that, one wheel of an axle may fall either on the triangular
panel or on the parallelogram panel and other wheels are outside the bridge deck, similar
to the loads P1 and P6 in figure 1.8 (b) and 1.8 (c). In case of normal right bridges all the
wheels of an axle are either on a panel in the grid or outside it or outside the span, as
shown in figure 1.8 (a). This happens when the axle loads are either entering a span or
leaving a span. The grillage model is analyzed by taking into account for only those wheel
loads which are present in between the either end supports of the grillage model.
At the time the wheels of vehicular loading system enters the bridge deck, the positions of
the wheels are determined along with identifying the encountered panels one by one. The
co-ordinates of the nodes and the grillage geometry are considered for such identification.
Next, the load in the panel is transferred as equivalent loads to the contiguous nodes of
the panels.
A panel may be subjected to one or more wheel loads. Each load is transferred to the
nodes individually and the effects of all equivalent loads are algebraically summed up at
18
[Grillag
AST Pro / microSAP]
each node for all the whee
wheel loads located inside the panel. The nodess will
w also receive the
loads from adjacent panels
nels around them and the loads directly comingg on the nodes.
: 8 ; "
19
[Grillage Model Analysis of B
Bridge Deck and Girders by ASTRA Pro / microSAP]
P]
: (
"
/! ( $ * ;
The grillage analysis is don

done by transferring the wheel loads in the pane
anels to the nodes as
equivalent loads. The equ
equivalent nodal loads are computed by usingg any
an of the following
approaches:
(i) By static approach

ach where the wheel load is apportioned as equiva
uivalent vertical shear
by considering tha
that the panel in the grillage model is simplyy supported
su along its
boundary.
20
(ii) By the approach where the equivalent load consists of vertical shear and bending
moments by considering that the panel in the grillage model has fixed supports
with applied degrees of freedom along its boundary.
The first approach is simpler, but it neglects the fixed end moments causing some error,
which is not significant in longitudinal direction but such neglect in transverse direction
may result incorrect transverse moments. The effect is more significant in the following
situations:
(iii) When the wheel loads are applied on cantilever part of the deck slab grillage model
(iv) When the spacing of the girders are large
(v) When a very few wheel loads are acting on the deck.
If static division of the wheel load is intended for simplicity then it is required to keep
smaller transverse spacing of the grid members to distribute the loads effectively in
longitudinal and transverse directions. In such case, additional 9dummy) longitudinal grid
lines are introduced in the grillage model. These dummy grid members are assigned zero
section inertia values.
In the second approach, the wheel loads are distributed in the form of vertical shear and
bending moments. Although the procedure is tedious but is superior in respect of results.
Good computer software takes care of such tedious computations and is reliable for
providing better results. Both the approaches are used in the industry and for small grillage
models both give almost similar results. For large size grillage model for larger span of the
bridge deck in between the supports at either end the second approach is recommended.
/! ( $
The dead load act as UDL on longitudinal grid members. These are distributed to the nodes
of the grillage model in following two ways:
(i) By considering the longitudinal grid members are simply supported at nodes, the
vertical load at each node of the longitudinal grid member due to UDL is obtained
statically. The total equivalent vertical load on each node is obtained by summing
up the loads coming from the adjacent members connected to the node.
(ii) By considering the longitudinal grid members are fixed at nodes, the equivalent
nodal loads will consist of a vertical load and a moment. Thus, if the UDL due to
dead load is ‘W’ per unit length and is acting on any longitudinal grid line as shown
in Figure 1.9, the vertical force ‘V’ and moment ‘M’ at node 2 is given by
21
2 2
V = W x (L1 + L2) / 2 and M = (WL2 – WL1 ) / 12
< ( $ * ;
In the similar way, the torsion ‘T’ per unit length due to the transverse eccentricity of loads
is also distributed on the nodes treating the concerned longitudinal grid lines as fixed. For
sign convention, downward vertical force is considered positive and for moments, right
hand screw rule is followed.
/!! ( $ $
The live load are considered on footpaths, if provided, and on the bridge deck, by vehicular
loading system moving, in the form of UDL. These live loads are suitably transferred to the
nodes of the grillage model for the analysis.
= *$ $
If footpaths are provided on the bridge deck, the live loads carried by the footpaths are to
be considered for the analysis. The footpath live load consists of a uniformly distributed
load on its area over part or full length. Its magnitude etc. is considered as specified in the
applicable design standard. The footpath live load may be distributed to the longitudinal
grid members situated in their vicinity according to the tributary area of each grid member,
and further transfer of this live load to the nodes of the grillage will also be done in the
similar manner as dead load. The bridge structure is analyzed for footpath live load either
on one side or both sides of the deck applied over part length and the developed forces are
added to the forces due to other live loadings. Such combination may result increase of
forces.
= - * $ $
The vertical wheel loads acting inside the panels of the grillage model are distributed in as
equivalent loads to the nodes of the concerned panel. This is done by following any one of
22
the approaches as discussed above in (i) or (ii) in paragraph 1.5.2. Both the approaches are
applicable for rectangular, triangular and parallelogram panels.
The concentrated wheel load acting in the panel of the grillage model is transferred to the
concerned nodes in two steps. First the load is distributed, as equivalent forces, along the
direction parallel to transverse grid members and then these forces are transferred to the
adjacent nodes of the longitudinal grid members.
) 0> 12 - ; $
It is assumed that the panel is simply supported along its boundary.
In a rectangular panel (Figure 1.10), the equivalent vertical nodal loads are obtained by
simple static division and are given by the following equations:
P1 = a x d x P / (Lx x Ly) P2 = a x c x P / (Lx x Ly)
P3 = b x c x P / (Lx x Ly) P4 = b x d x P / (Lx x Ly)
For a triangular panel at lower side of the model, with load ‘P’ as shown in Figure 1.11, the
equivalent nodal vertical loads are obtained by (i) distributing the load on longitudinal 1-2
and (ii) end transversal 1-3 at edges E and F respectively, in a direction parallel to the
transversal 2-3. The equivalent vertical loads at E and F and on nodes 1, 2 and 3 are given
by,
PE = (s – d) x P / s and PF = d x P / s
P1 = (c x PE / Lx) + (c x PF / Lx) = (c x P / Lx)
P2 = (a x PE / Lx) = (a x Ly - d x Lx) x P / (Lx x Ly)
P3 = a x PF / Lx = (d x P / Ly)
23
$ 8
$ (
The nodal forces can also be obtained alternatively, by dividing the panel load P in ratios of the
equivalent corresponding areas of triangles formed and the total area of the triangular element.
The expressions for these may be as given below,
24
P1 = (Area of Triangle BPC) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)
P2 = (Area of Triangle APC) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)
P3 = (Area of Triangle APB) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)
The nodal loads P1, P2 and P3 obtained from the first set of equations above will be same as given
by the second set of equations above, by substituting the dimensions in the figures 1.10 and 1.11.
The equivalent nodal loads in triangular elements at the upper side of the grillage model (Figure
1.8b) will be same in magnitude and direction as in lower triangular element given above. In panels
having parallelogram shape and containing the wheel load P (Figure 1.12), the equivalent nodal
vertical loads at E and F and on nodes 1, 2, 3 and 4 are similarly evaluated and given in equations
below.
PE = a x P / Ly and PF = b x P / Ly
P1 = a x d x P / (Lx x Ly)
P2 = a x c x P / (Lx x Ly)
P3 = b x c x P / (Lx x Ly)
P4 = b x d x P / (Lx x Ly)
) 00 > 12 - ; $
The concentrated wheel load located in a panel of the grillage model, is distributed to the
corresponding nodes of the panel in the form of vertical shear and moments. The panel is treated
as bound by the contiguous grillage members as fixed along the edges. Again, the transfer of wheel
load is done in two steps, as in Case I, first the load is distributed on the longitudinal at its edge
parallel to the transversals in the form of vertical loads and moments and next, these are again
transferred to the nodes of the longitudinal as in a fixed beam subjected to concentrated load and
moments on its span. The distributions of loads to the nodes of the rectangular, triangular and
parallelogram panels are Illustrated and the resulting equations for vertical shear and two
moments at the nodes of the panels in each case are derived.
25
P]
! $
Forces on the diagramss aare shown in the positive direction of axes but bu proper signs are
incorporated in the equation
ations given. Negative sign preceding the equation indicates
indi that the force
is in opposite direction to
o the vector drawn on the diagrams. Also, the equation
tions pertaining to fixed
end distribution of a point
int loload, a bending moment and a torsional moment nt for
f a beam element
are given below; these willill b
be useful in subsequent discussions.
a) Fixed End Distributio

ution of forces by the Point Load ‘P’ on beam AB are
e given
giv by the
expressions as below
elow, and are illustrated in Figure 1.8a,
2 3 2 3
PA = b x (3a + b) x P/L PB = a x (3b + a) x P/L
2 2 2 2
MA = a x b x P/L MB = - a x b x P/L
26
[Grillag
AST Pro / microSAP]
& $
b) Fixed End Distributio

ution of forces by the Bending Moment ‘M’ on beam m AB are given
by the expressions
ns aas below, and are illustrated in Figure 1.8b,
3
PA = - PB = - 6 x a x b x M / L
2 2
MA = - b x (2
(2a – b) x M / L MB = - a x (2b – a) x M / L
& "
c) Fixed End Distribut

ribution of forces by the Torsional Moment ‘T’ onn beam
be AB are given by
below, and are illustrated in Figure 1.13 (c),
the expressions as b
TA = T x b / L TB = T x a / L
& (
Sign Convention: Cloc

Clockwise Moment and Torsion and Downward Load
d are ‘+ve’
/& 8 ?; @ " =
27
A wheel load ‘P’ is acting on a rectangular panel with nodes 1, 2, 3 and 4 as shown in Figure
1.14. The load ‘P’ is first transferred to points ‘E’ and ‘F’ lying on the longitudinal members
1-2 and 3-4. By considering the edges ‘E’ and ‘F’ as fixed, the vertical forces and moments
about X-axis at ‘E’ and ‘F’ are given by the following expressions,
2 3 2 3
PE = a x (3xb + a) x P / Ly PF = b x (3xa + b) x P / Ly
2 2 2 2
MXE = a x b x P / Ly MXF = - a x b x P / Ly
By considering the member 1-2 as fixed at its ends, at node 1, ‘PE’ will induce vertical force
‘P1’ and moment ‘MY1’ and ‘MXE’ will generate moment ‘MX1’ in the directions shown is
Figure 1.14 and the expressions are as follows:
2 3 2 2
P1 = d x (3 x c + d) x PE / Lx Mx1 = d x MXE / Lx My1 = - c x d x PE / Lx
, $ 8
In the similar way, the vertical force and the two moments, at other nodes of the panel can
be calculated by the following expressions:
28
At node 2,
2 3 2 2
P2 = c x (3 x d + c) x PE / Lx Mx2 = c x MXE / Lx My2 = - c x d x PE / Lx
At node 3,
2 3 2 2
P3 = c x (3 x d + c) x PF / Lx Mx3 = c x MXF / Lx My3 = - c x d x PF / Lx
At node 4,
2 3 2 2
P4 = d x (3 x c + d) x PF / Lx Mx4 = d x MXF / Lx My4 = - c x d x PF / Lx
/, ( ? " =
A lower triangular panel of the grillage model is described in Figure 1.15, acted upon by a
load ‘P’. The load ‘P’ is first distributed to members 1-2 and 1-3, parallel to the transversal
2-3 at ‘E’ and ‘F’ respectively. The vertical forces ‘PE’ and ‘PF’ and associated moments ‘MXE’
and ‘MXF’ at ‘E’ and ‘F’ respectively, are given by the following expressions,
29
P]
/#$ $ (
Now, ‘PE’ will result verti

vertical forces ‘P1’ and ‘P2’ and moments ‘MY1’ and a ‘MY2’ and the
moment ‘MXE’ will result ult m
moments ‘MXI’ and ‘MX2’ at nodes 1 and 2 respectively
resp as shown.
Similarly, ‘PF’ on member ber 1-3 will result vertical forces ‘P1[1]’ and ‘P3[1]’ and moments
‘M1[1]’ and ‘M3[1]’ at nodnodes 1 and 3 respectively. The vertical forces and moments due to
‘PE’, ‘MXE’ and ‘PF’ at node
odes 1 and 3 are obtained by the expressions ass described
de below,
At node 1 due to PE,

2 3 2 2
P1 = c x (3 x a + c) x PE / Lx Mx1 = c x MXE / Lx My1 = - c x a x PE / Lx
At node 2 due to PE,

2 3
P2 or PB = a x (3 x c + a) x PE / Lx
2 2
Mx2 or MXB = a x MXE / Lx My1 or MYB = - a x c x PE / Lx
At node 1 due to PF
2 3 2 2
P1[1] = c x (3 x a + c) x PF / Lx M1[1] = c x a x PF / (Lx x sin α)
At node 3 due to PF
2 3 2 2
P3[1] = a x (3 x c + a) x PF / Lx M3[1] = a x c x PF / (Lx x sin α)
30
Next, ‘MXF’ is acting in the direction of X-axis, and is resolved into components ‘MXF sin α’
and ‘MXF’ cos α’ in the directions parallel and perpendicular to member 1-3 respectively.
‘MXF’ sin α will result torsional moments ‘M1[3]’ and ‘M3[3]’ at nodes 1 and 3 and ‘MXF’ cos
α will result bending moments ‘M1[2]’ and vertical force ‘P1[2]’ at node 1 and bending
moment ‘M3[2]’ and vertical force ‘P3[2]’ at node 3. These resulting forces are obtained by
the expressions as described below,
M1[3] = c x MXF x sin α / L M3[3] = a x MXF x sin α / LX

3
P1[2] = - 6 x a x c x MXF x sin α x cos α / LX
2
M1[2] = - c x (2xa – c) x MXF x cos α / LX
3
P3[2] = 6 x a x c x MXF x sin α x cos α / LX
2
M3[2] = - a x (2xc – a) x MXF x cos α / LX
At node 1, the total vertical force ‘PA’, moment about x-axis ‘MXA’ and about y-axis ‘MYA’
are given by the following equations,
PA = P1 + P1[1] + P1[2]
2 3 2 3 3
= [c x (3 x a + c) x PE/LX ]+[c x (3 x a + c) x PF/LX ]-[6 x a x c) x MXF x sin α x cos α/LX ]
MXA = M1[1] x cos α + MX1 + M1[2] x cos α + M1[3] x sin α

2 2 2 2
= [c x a x PF x cot α /LX ] + [c x MXE/LX] - [c x (2xa – c) x MXF x cos α /LX ]
2
+ [c x MXF x sin α /LX]
MYA = MY1 - M1[1] x sin α - M1[2] x sin α + M1[3] x cos α

2 2 2 2 2
= -[c x a x PE /Lx ] -[c x a x PF /Lx ] + [c x (2xa – c) x MXF x sin α x cos α /Lx ]
+ [c x MXF x sin α x cos α /LX]
Similarly at node 3, the total forces ‘PC’, ‘MXC’ and ‘MYC’ are given by the following
equations,
31
PC = P3[1] + P3[2]
2 3 3
= [a x (3 x c + a) x PF/LX ] + [6 x a x c) x MXF x sin α x cos α/LX ]
MXC = M3[1] x cos α + M3[2] x cos α + M3[3] x sin α

2 2 2 2
= - [a x c x PF x cot α /LX ] - [a x (2xc – a) x MXF x cos α /LX ]
2
+ [a x MXF x sin α /LX]
MYC = - M3[1] x sin α – M3[2] x sin α + M3[3] x cos α

2 2 2
= - [a x c x PF /LX ] + [a x (2xc – a) x MXF x sin α x cos α /LX ]
+ [a x MXF x sin α x cos α /LX]
Similar equations can be derived for a upper triangular panel also. The distributions of
vertical forces, bending moments and torsion on nodes of the panel are explained in Figure
1.16.
7#$ A (
The resultant vertical forces at joints A, B and C will remain same as described in the case
of lower triangular panel. Also, the bending moments and torsion at the three nodes will
be the same in magnitude but opposite in direction of that of the lower triangular panel.
32
// ? " =
The load in a parallelogram panel can be distributed to its nodes in the similar manner as in
the case of rectangular or triangular panels explained above. a parallelogram panel and the
distribution of load to its nodes in the form of equivalent vertical loads and moments are
shown in Figure 1.17.
9#$
The vertical loads and moments at edges E and F are given as

2 3
PE = [a x (3 x b + a) x P / LY ]
2 3
PF = [b x (3 x a + b) x P / LY ]
2 2 2 2
ME = [a x b x P x sec α /LY ] MF = - [a x b x P x sec α /LY ]
33
2 2 2 2
MXE = [a x b x P /LY ] MXF = - [a x b x P /LY ]
2 2 2 2
MYE = [a x b x P x tan α /LY ] MYF = - [a x b x P x tan α /LY ]
The forces at ‘E’ and ‘F’ are distributed to the nodes 1, 2, 3 and 4 and the resultant vertical
loads, bending moments and torsions at each node are directly obtained by the following
equations,
At node1,
2 3 3
P1 = [d x (3 x c + d) x PE / LX ] – [6 x c x d x MYE / LX ]
MX1 = [d x MXE / LX]
2 2 2
MY1 = - [c x d x PE / LX ] - [d x (2 x c - d) x MYE / LX ]
At node2,
2 3 3
P2 = [c x (3 x d + c) x PE / LX ] + [6 x c x d x MYE / LX ]
MX2 = [c x MXE / LX]
2 2 2
MY2 = [c x d x PE / LX ] - [c x (2 x d - c) x MYE / LX ]
At node3,
2 3 3
P3 = [c x (3 x d + c) x PF / LX ] + [6 x c x d x MYF / LX ]
MX3 = [c x MXF / LX]
2 2 2
MY3 = [c x d x PF / LX ] - [c x (2 x d - c) x MYF / LX ]
At node4,
2 3 3
P4 = [d x (3 x c + d) x PF / LX ] - [6 x c x d x MYF / LX ]
MX4 = [d x MXF / LX]
2 2 2
MY4 = [c x d x PF / LX ] - [d x (2 x c - d) x MYF / LX ]
34
The distribution of wheel loads acting in panels of different shapes to the associated nodes
is done either as vertical forces only by static distribution or as combination of vertical
loads and moments. The decision is with the designer. A good bridge design software
should use the transfer of loads, by replacing the vertical load lying in the panel by a
combination of vertical loads and moments, for better analysis results.
/7 ' % 8
The grillage model is given the geometry, material properties, section properties, support
conditions and applied dead loads, super imposed dead loads and live loads. The computer
program will transfer the live loads in the form of applied wheel loads to the nodes of the
grillage model in the form of equivalent forces, and gives the results by determining the
nodal deformations and member forces.
/7 ' %
The grillage model is analyzed by using Direct stiffness method by computer programs.
There are three possible displacements at each joint of the grillage model. The grillage
model being in the X-Y plane is the concept followed in this book. The displacements in
each node are joint rotations about X and Y axes and joint translation in Z-direction,
normal to X-Y plane. The displacements in the same X-Y plane of grillage model and
rotation about Z-axis are small and are ignored. However, in software ASTRA Pro the plane
of grillage model is considered in X-Z plane, where Y-axis is vertical which is perpendicular
to the X-Z plane and is described in the relevant section of the User’s Manual of ASTRA Pro.
The analysis of grillage model by the stiffness method has the steps as described below,
> +
The first step in the analysis of grillage involves the formation of the stiffness matrix of the
structure corresponding to the appropriate degrees of freedom. A 6 x 6 member stiffness
matrix [Km] is created for each member of the grillage in terms of its geometric and elastic
properties. The matrix [Km] is developed in terms of local degrees of freedom and is
different for each member meeting at a joint. The matrix [Km] for a grillage member is
therefore transformed into global degrees of freedom by using a 6 x 6 transformation
35
matrix [λ], by considering the orientation of the member. Hence, for each grillage member,
the member global stiffness matrix [K′m] is obtained.
The assemblage of all the members meeting at that joint is considered, to satisfy the
equilibrium conditions at the joint. The structure stiffness matrix [K] of the entire grillage
model is obtained by assembling all member global stiffness matrices [K′m]. This
assembled matrix [K] is the addition of all internal forces which will be subsequently
equated to the externally applied loads along the same degree of freedom.
The symmetry and banded nature of the matrix [K] is utilized in storing only the banded
upper triangular portion of the matrix. This enables the computer program to analyse the
grillage model of the bridge deck with a large number of nodes.
!> $ -
The transferred External equivalent loads to the joints (nodes) of the grillage model
constitute the load vector {B}, which are the moments about X and Y axes and vertical
force along Z axis. The load vectors may either be formed separately for dead load, live
load and impact load or their effects are added to form a single vector.
&> 0 )
The stability of the structure is made by defining boundary conditions at the supports of
the bridge deck grillage model. The support may be either on compressible (sinking)
neoprene or elastomeric type bearings or rigid (non-yielding) steel or concrete (POT/PTFE)
bearings. Depending on the type of bearings used, stiffness matrix developed above is
modified accordingly. The supports are commonly defined in ASTRA Pro as ‘PINNED’ or
‘FIXED BUT MX MZ’, which releases or restrains the relevant degrees of freedoms of the
node at the support and is based on considering the type of bearing proposed.
The elastomeric neoprene bearings have negligible rotational stiffness. The axial stiffness
of the neoprene bearing is only considered in the stiffness matrix at the position
corresponding to the vertical deflection of the supported node. Since bearing dimensions
are not known in the beginning, a suitable size of the bearing is assumed initially and its
axial stiffness is evaluated for analysis which may be modified, if reactions obtained are not
as desired. Commonly rigid bearings are assumed initially and based on the reaction and
rotations, as obtained from the analysis, the elastomeric neoprene bearing suitably
dimensioned may be used as replacements and a revised analysis is carried out. The
36
stiffness of the bearings has marked effects on the structural behaviour in skew bridges,
and it is very important to account for their effects properly.
The use of simple rigid type supports, need the removal of the rows and columns
corresponding to the vertical deflections from the stiffness matrix. The load vector is also
to be modified by removing the rows corresponding to the vertical deflection at the
supported nodes. By solving the modified stiffness matrix using the modified load vector,
the result gives the deformation vector and it does not contain the vertical deflections at
the supported nodes. The support locations in the grillage model are defined at the same
nodes where these actually exist.
For obtaining the reactions at the supports, the structure stiffness matrix [K] is partitioned
into four sub-matrices pertaining to the free and restrained deformation vectors {DP} and
{DR} and correspondingly load vectors is sub-divided into external load vector {P} and
reaction vector {R}.
,> 12
A large number of simultaneous equations is created from the assembly of stiffness matrix
considering equilibrium at each joint/node. The number of these equations depends upon
the size of the grid. To solve these simultaneous equations the efficient techniques like
Gauss-Elimination and Cholesky Factorisation are used. The resulting deformation vector is
used to compute member forces be using basic member material and section properties.
/> ;
The solution of simultaneous equations will produce nodal deformations of the structure.
The member displacements in global as well as local coordinates can be evaluated by
multiplying member stiffness matrix with the member displacement vector. The output
consists of vertical deflection and rotations about X and Y axes at each node, shear force
and bending moments at both the ends of each member and torsional moment in each
member, along with reactions at the supports.
/7! 8
37
It is mentioned that, the solution of equations result nodal deformations i.e. deflection,
slope and rotation at each end of the member. The shear force for a member, the bending
moments at the two ends of the member, the torsional moment in a member and
reactions at the supported nodes are usually produced as the output. Ordinarily the output
is obtained for various longitudinal and transverse positions of different types of live
loading. But, always the output obtained is very large. Scanning of the analysis report for
this output, for the worst ember and joint forces obtained by analysis of a grillage model,
even of moderate size, is a problem. Only, the critical values of the force responses are
extracted from the analysis report for the design of various components of the bridge
deck-girder structure.
For the design of any bridge structure we need the force envelope of various responses on
it. The envelopes are the force response are the largest values of responses picked up
under dead load, SIDL and live load listed at each node of each grillage member along the
beam/girder, from its start to middle to end.
This is achieved for same dead load and SIDL but a particular live load by moving it over the
deck in small increments both longitudinally and transversely. Each moving increment is
considered as a separate load case for new wheel positions applying the loads, and the
deck is analysed. When the load moves from one position to the next position, for each
load case, the force responses are again obtained for the new position of load and these
values computed and algebraically added with the previous force values, stored for each
node. The largest values of each force responses like shear force bending moment and
torsion for each grillage member shall be extracted from the output along corresponding
to the load case. The process is repeated till the whole length and breadth of the bridge is
moved by the live load.
The number of movements of loads in longitudinal and transverse directions by

mentioning user given increment depends upon the factors like span, carriageway width,
type of live loading, extent of accuracy desired, available computer time, etc. However, as
a preliminary guidance, the minimum increment of movements of loads may be about
1/15th of span length or half the size of the mesh in longitudinal direction is chosen,
smaller the increment of movement will result more number of load cases, hence longer
processing time. The movement of loads in transverse direction, for single or multi-lane
loading of bridge deck by moving vehicles is very much limited due to the restrictions on
wheels from coming closer to the kerb by a specified distance. For multi-lane loading the
lateral clearance between the vehicles in separate lanes also to be considered in
38
mentioning the z-coordinates in ASTRA Pro, a-coordinate is always measured from the
edge of the bridge deck in transverse direction. The value of x-coordinate is the length of
the train of vehicles moving along the longitudinal direction of the bridge deck. At the start
of the movement of vehicles, the x-coordinate is given as negative value equal to the
length/span of the bridge deck, by considering the x-coordinates as zero at the start of the
bridge deck. In transverse analysis of bridge deck by effective width method, the loads may
be moved transversely in five to seven equal intervals in a two lane bridge and in steps of
about 750 mm in wider bridges.
/9 0 8 ' %
The output or the result obtained from the analysis of grillage consists of vertical
deflections and X and Y rotations of each node, shear force and torsional moment of each
beam element as the grillage member, bending moments at the two ends of each beam
element and reactions at each support.
The above results are to be judiciously used while designing a bridge deck. Since the deck
has been initially idealized as a grillage model and the analysis has been performed on the
idealized grid, the results depend on the boundary conditions of the supports. This may
sometimes need modifications and proper interpretations before the result are finally used
in design. Some of the important interpretations of the output and its modifications are
required due to the local effects for slab bridges, slab-beam bridges and cellular/box-girder
bridges are discussed below
. /: ' % "
Modifications in the output results may be made, if necessary, due to local effects for slab
bridges which are not considered earlier in the grillage analysis. The modified force
responses may be used in the design for better accuracy. Some of the significant
observations pertaining to force responses for slab bridges are described below.
The ‘Per unit force response’ is the basis for the design of slabs. The computer output gives
force response for the width which is particular for a grillage member. Hence, these force
responses obtained from analysis output should be converted into ‘Per unit width’, before
these values are considered for design.
The analysis output gives various force responses with positive or negative values for each
beam element. This needs careful consideration to the sign conventions adopted in the
39
computer program. For example, a negative bending moment value at end 1 of a grillage
member will denote a sagging moment while it indicates a hogging moment at end 2 of the
same member.
When a grillage member is continued across a node, the values of moment at end 2 of one
member and end 1 of the adjacent member in continuation are usually different.
This is because of the torsional moments in other adjacent members framing in other
directions. To deal with such different values of moments at nodes along a line in the
grillage model, the average value of the two moments may be taken, such pattern of “Saw
Tooth” is described in Figure 1.19.
<# ( * A ' %
8
Only one value of the shear force for a grillage member is obtained from the output and
may be used in design. Similarly, maximum reactions given in the analysis report, are taken
as design values for reactions at supported nodes.
In an orthotropic slab with two different materials, the torque per unit width is same in
orthogonal directions in the plane of the slab, however, it is often found different in the
grillage analysis output. The torque per unit width at any point may be taken as the
average of the two values.
The design of the section for the bending as shown in Figure 1.20 are based upon the
principal moments m1 and m2,. The principal moments m1, m2 and their deviation at the
40
point of interest is obtained from the values of bending moments per unit width mX and mY
in X and Y directions and the corresponding averaged torsional moment per unit width mxy
by using the equations as given below,
! # * B C '+
The direction of reinforcement, in reinforced concrete bridges, may not always along the
direction of principal moment. This is more common in slab bridges with skew. For such
case, the reinforcement component in the direction of each principal moment should be
adequate.
At some a critical load combination, if at a bearing support has a net negative or downward
reaction force as opposed to the usual positive or upward reaction force, then it indicates
that under that combination of loading there is upward displacement at the bearing point.
This may happen for bridges where skew angle is large and there may be one or more such
bearing support in the deck.
In the analysis, conditions of zero deflections are assumed at all the bearing points. Thus
the behaviour of the actual structure is not consistent with the assumed condition of the
grillage model. In such case a repeat-analysis by force-deflection stage analysis is
necessary. In the repeat-analysis, the displacements are imposed at the support nodes
41
when analysing under loading forming the above critical load combination. Displacements
at the bearing supports are not desirable and should be prevented as far as possible. This
could be done by providing tension POT/PTFE bearings at such bearing points as opposed
to the usual compression bearings. In case where a downward reaction force is small,
lateral displacements in the position of the bearing supports can also change it to net
upward reactions to achieve ‘No lift’.
A slab bridge, can be idealised as an assembly of orthogonal beams only if Poisson’s ratio
of the slab material is zero. By ignoring the Poisson’s ratio which is about 0.15 for concrete
leads to under estimated moments. Such under estimation is usually negligible for
longitudinal bending moments but considerable for transverse bending moments, as the
curvature along the span is considerably large in the transverse direction. The following
equations may be used to minimize errors resulting by ignoring the Poisson’s ratio,
Mx = Mxo + Y x Myo
MY = MYo + Y x Mxo
Where Mxo and MYo are the values obtained by grillage analysis for which Poisson’s ratio
= 0 and Mx and MY are the relevant corrected moments for an applicable value of
Poisson’s ratio.
For load dispersion, the actual area of application of load becomes larger than the contact
area of the wheel with the slab. If such application area is larger than the panels of the
grillage model, the load gets sufficiently dispersed for the grillage model to reproduce the
distribution of moments throughout the slab. For such case no further modification of
moments is necessary. On the other hand, if the application area of the load is small
compared to the panels of the grillage model, no worthwhile information can be obtained
about the local high values of force under the load, though the distributed moment field in
the grillage model will simulate that in the deck.
/< ' % " *
The forces obtained from the analysis result, may be considered for design in respect of
certain assumption in analysis and actual structure. This may need some additional manual
exercise to calculate the shear force, bending moments and torsion to be used in the
structural design of the slab and girders of the bridge deck. In following sections some
42
special consideration are discussed to make the analysis output useful for the structural
design.
In decks with beam and slab system, the stepping of moments in members on either side
of a node also occurs. The difference in bending moments in two adjacent members
meeting at a node will generally be large in outer girders, as exist in the grillage model. In
the grillage model some grid members are actual beams as exist in the deck structure and
some are dummy members. The dummy members are used to create additional nodes for
getting forces at these nodes to facilitate the structural design. Where all the members
meeting at the node are physical beams, the actual values of bending moment as obtained
from the analysis result should be used. If at a node there are no physical beams in the
other direction and the grid beam elements are dummy or represent a slab linear way, the
average of the bending moments on either side of the node should be taken as there is no
real beam of any significant torsional strength.
Design shear forces and torsions can be read directly from analysis output of the grillage
model without any modifications.
In composite construction, where the stiffness of the member of the grillage model are
calculated from two dissimilar material properties of slab and beam elements, the output
force responses for shear, bending moment or torsion are attributed proportionally by
considering the contribution to the particular stiffness by each element.
In grillage model when the longitudinal grid lines not physically supported at ends, the load
carried by these lines are transferred towards the nearby supports through the end
transversals. If this phenomenon is ignored, this will give lower value of shear in supported
longitudinal grid lines. To account for this under-estimation, shear force of these un-
supported beams may be added to the shear force of the adjacent physically supported
beams. Similarly, in order to avoid under-estimation of bending moment in supported
longitudinal beams, the bending moments of unsupported grid lines also have to be
considered for design of supported longitudinal beams.
Similarly, there may be under-estimation of bending moment in supported longitudinal

beams, as obtained by the analysis output. The bending moments of unsupported grid
lines also have to be taken into account by adding the values to the bending moments in
supported longitudinal beams. This will result a safer design of supported longitudinal
beams.
! ' % " + ) "
The grillage model of box-girder is not by straight forward lumped mass technique. This is
also a lumped mass technique but considering contribution of the judiciously attributed
43
section properties to the grid members of the grillage model. After obtaining the section
properties for cross sectional area, Moment of Inertia about two principal axes for the
whole section, the parts of these are assigned to the grid members of the grillage model,
thus creating the idealized grillage model.
For this grillage model the forces obtained from the analysis result, may also be considered
for design in respect of certain assumption in analysis and actual structure. This may also
need some additional manual exercise to calculate the shear force, bending moments and
torsion to be used in the structural design of the slab and girders of the bridge deck. In
following sections some special consideration are discussed to make the analysis output
useful for the structural design.
The bending moment diagrams if drawn by using the analysis output for box-girder or
cellular deck will also indicate the pattern of “Saw Tooth” as described in Figure 1.19 with
large differences in bending moments at the nodes. This reason is the transfer of the
torsional moment in the transverse members at each joint to bending moments and shear
forces in the longitudinal member. The true design bending moment is obtained by taking
the average value of the bending moments on the two sides of each joint. The stresses in
the top and bottom slab are calculated from these average moments.
The transverse bending moment in the grillage member is equivalent to the opposed
transverse compression of the top slab and tension of the bottom slab or the reverse. This
is for the transverse flexure without distortion. In narrow decks, except in the diaphragms,
the transverse bending moment is significantly small compared to the longitudinal bending
moment. But in wide decks the transverse bending moment may be large, especially near
skew supports. From grillage analysis output the transverse moment diagram also has a
‘saw-tooth’ pattern like the longitudinal moment diagram. The top and bottom slab
stresses are calculated from the average moments.
The bending moments for slab are derived from the shear force in the transverse grillage
members. Some fractions of this shear force carried by the top and bottom slabs of the cell
are assumed proportional to the flexural stiffness of the slabs. It is also assumed that the
points of contraflexure lie midway between the webs and the moment at each end of a
slab is simply the shear force it carries multiplied by half the distance between webs. The
transverse moment in the cantilever slab can be taken directly from the output of grillage
analysis, because members defining the cantilever slab are not representing the cells of the
box-girder. The total design moment in cellular box-girder deck is obtained by adding the
slab moments of the cell, cantilever moment and the local moments.
44
The transfers of torsion-shear in the slabs of the box-girder must be calculated from the
average torsion per unit width of transverse and longitudinal grillage model members. The
shear force from grillage analysis output represents the total shear force in each web of
the box-girder deck.
As the grillage model analysis ignores the effects of Poisson’s ratio on the interaction of
longitudinal and transverse moments, causes neglect little error in narrow decks. In case
of wide decks with little stiffness against cell-distortion, and while the moments are small
and the Poisson’s ratio is significant, the error is considerable in calculated transverse
moments. However, since the concrete has relatively low Poisson’s ratio of approximately
0.15, ignoring it may not result any considerable error.
The grillage analogy method of analysis for bridge decks, is straight forward and is also
acceptable to engineers without being well conversant with higher mathematics and
numerical techniques. The setting out of the grid lines for physical as well as dummy
members and the evaluation of elastic properties of the members can be handled by
following the guidelines provided above. The determination of the dead loads and super
imposed dead loads etc, is simple, as determined by the computer program by using the
sectional area and density of materials relevant for the grid members. The transfer of live
loads to nodes, formulation and inversion of matrix, solution of equations, evaluation of
design responses etc. are done by efficient computer software package. Preparation of
input data is also simple as described in following section of this chapter, by referring to
the versatile software ASTRA Pro and making it almost the same for many other market
available software packages. The analysis input data can be done mechanically even
without fully understanding the computer program. In ASTRA Pro the Input data for a set
of analysis for various live loads is prepared by software itself based on the general
arrangement data for the bridge deck given by the user. The interpretations of results and
its modifications due to local effects relevant to a particular type of deck may appear a bit
difficult for the beginners but after a few trials the users shall develop better
understanding of the analysis input, the analysis process and the structural behaviour of
the bridge deck obtained by the grillage analysis output report.
45
46
7 (* ' % *
7 ( * ' %
The first line of the analysis input data has to start with the title, for example “ASTRA FLOOR
PSC I GIRDER BRIDGE DECK ANALYSIS WITH MOVING LOAD”. For understanding various data syntax user
may refer to relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
7! A * ' %
The analysis input data has to define the linear and load measurement units, for example
‘UNIT FT KIP’. For understanding various data syntax user may refer to relevant section of
ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
7& 6 )
Referring to the AASHTO model in three dimensions, we have the joint co-ordinates data in
the analysis file, the data mentions about the section header as ‘JOINT COORDINATES’ followed
by data as ‘1 0.000 0.000 0.000’,
There are four values in each line of data, these are joint/node numbers, X Co-ordinates, Y
Co-ordinates and Z Co-ordinates. It may be observed that the ‘Y co-ordinates’ are of ‘zero’
values, for making the grillage model as in ‘x-z’ plane, where ‘x’ is measured along the
length and ‘z’ is measured along the width of the bridge deck. In case the bridge is in skew
the co-ordinates are modified by applying the skew angle. For understanding various data
syntax user may refer to relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
7, 1 D ) %
The girders and edges of the deck slab along with cantilever slab are defined as linear
beam members/elements. Every single beam element is defined between two nodes at the
start and end of the element. The cross sections of part of girders and part of deck
supported by that part of the girder are considered to compute their masses. The masses
are attributed to the beam elements forming the grillage model and the model is created
as a ‘Lumped Mass Model’, for finite element method of analysis. The data mentions about
the section header as ‘MEMBER CONNECTIVITY’ followed by data as ‘1 1 2’. There are three
values in each line of data, the beam element/member number, start node/joint and end
node/joint. For understanding various data syntax user may refer to relevant section of
ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
7/ * " 1 D
47
For providing the section properties, the data mentions about the section header as
‘SECTION PROPERTIES’, followed by the data values. The data values are of two alternative
types, either the data type (i) as ‘1 TO 7 15 TO 84 92 TO 161 169 TO 223 320 TO 367 PRIS YD 8.0000 ZD 1.0’,
which mentions about the beam element/member numbers, width of beam element (YD)
and depth of beam element/member (ZD) or the data type (ii) as ‘8 TO 14 162 TO 168 PRIS AX
783.2800 IX 105729.9933 IZ 259268.4480’, which mentions about the beam element/member
numbers, cross section area of beam element (AX), moment of Inertia about x-axis (IX) and
moment of Inertia about x-axis (IZ). Any of the above two alternative is used in the analysis
data as per user’s convenience. For understanding various data syntax user may refer to
relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
77 * " 1 D
For providing the material properties, the data mentions about the section header as
‘MATERIAL CONSTANT’, followed by the data the data values‘’. The data values are the elastic
modulus as ‘E 4696 ALL’, unit weight as ‘DENSITY CONCRETE ALL’ and the Poisson’s ratio as ‘POISSON
CONCRETE ALL’ applicable for all the beam element/member numbers. For understanding
various data syntax user may refer to relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
79 * DE * " 1 D
For defining the supports, the data mentions about the section header as ‘SUPPORT’,
followed by the data either as ‘1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PINNED’, which mentions the node/joint numbers
for the support locations and the support type, or data type as ‘193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200
FIXED BUT FX MZ’, which mentions the node/joint numbers for the support locations, the
support type and removal of restraints along any desired degrees of freedom (DOF). There
are three translational degrees of freedom (DOF) mentioned as FX-FY-FZ and three
rotational degrees of freedom MX-MY-MZ, at each node/joint. For understanding various
data syntax user may refer to relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
7: ' $ * " 1 D
7 : Dead Loads and Super Imposed Dead Loads: For defining the Dead Loads (DL) and
Super Imposed Dead Loads (SIDL) on Beam Elements/Members, the data mentions about
the load name for the section header as ‘LOAD 1 DEAD LOAD SELF WEIGHT1’, followed by load type
as ‘MEMBER LOAD’, followed by the applied load data as ‘248 249 270 TO 273 294 295 250 TO 269
274 TO 293 UNI GY -1.0229’, which essentially contains the Beam Element/Member numbers, the
load type UNI for Uniformly Distributed Loads, the sign -/+ for downward/upward direction
of the load and the magnitude of the load in units as specified in paragraph 1.5.2 above.
There are three translational degrees of freedom (DOF) mentioned as FXFY-FZ and three
rotational degrees of freedom MX-MY-MZ, at each node/joint. For understanding various
48
7 : ! '' F( $8 ) $ $ > For defining the AASHTO-LRFD Live Loads
(LL) on the grillage model, the data mentions about the section header as ‘DEFINE MOVING
LOAD FILE LL.TXT, followed by mentioning the applied load type as ‘TYPE 1 LRFD_HL_93
1.10’ where the live load type of AASHTO is mentioned along with the impact factor of
‘1.10’, which is 10% additional to the live load. Various moving load details are mentioned
and taken from the text file “LL.TXT” that contains the details of each live load class.
The next data is ‘LOAD GENERATION 307’, which mentions that the applied one-lane loading of
‘TYPE 1’ on the model is generated by moving the single train of loads on the grillage
model for ‘307’ times. The next data is ‘TYPE 1 -43.620 0 6.500 XINC 0.5’ which mentions about
start co-ordinates and increment for moving of the live load, by placing the start of the
train of loads at ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘-43.620’ feet and at a distance of ‘6.5’ feet, which is the ‘z’
co-ordinate from the side edge of the bridge deck. The single train of load of length 43.620
feet will be moved along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction of the model, at an increment
‘XINC’ of ‘0.5’ feet for 307 times.
The data for start co-ordinates and increment for moving of the live load, may be
mentioned as ‘TYPE 1 -43.620 0 6.500 XINC 0.5’ and next ‘TYPE 1 -43.620 0 16.500 XINC 0.5’, which defines that
the applied two-lane loading of ‘TYPE 1’ on the model is generated by moving the two train
of loads side-by-side on the grillage model for ‘307’ times. The start of each of two trains of
loads is placed at the ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘-43.620’ feet, which is the longitudinal distance away
from the start of the bridge deck at the ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘0.0’. The two trains of loads are at
lateral distances of ‘6.5’ and ’16.5’ feet respectively from the side edge of the bridge deck,
which are the ‘z’ co-ordinates for the trains of loads. Each of the two trains of load of
length 43.620 feet will be moved along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction of the model, at an
increment ‘XINC’ of ‘0.5’ feet for 307 times. For understanding various data syntax user
may refer to relevant section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
The various types of AASHTO-LRFD Live Loads are mentioned in FILE LL.TXT. There are four
lines of data for each load type, the first line mentions for load type and vehicle load class,
the second line mentions about axle loads in kip, the third line mentions about the spacing
between axles and the fourth line mentions the width between wheels in the axle.
TYPE 1 LRFD_HTL57
10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 4.5
1.6 4.572 4.572 1.6 4.572
1.800
TYPE 2 LRFD_HL93_HS20
4.0 16.0 16.0
4.2672 4.2672
1.800
TYPE 3 LRFD_HL93_H20
4.0 16.0
4.2672
1.800
49
TYPE 4 LRFD_H30S24
6.0 24.0 24.0
4.25 8.0
1.800
! (* '' F( $8 ) $ $
> G? = H ? =I G? = H ? =I
7:&" * 1 !3 " &9D ) $ $ > For defining the British

Eurocode2, BD 37/01 Live Loads (LL) on the grillage model, the data below mentions as
‘DEFINE MOVING LOAD FILE LL.TXT, followed by mentioning the applied load type as ‘TYPE
1 HB_UNIT_6 1.25’ and with impact factor of ‘1.25’, which is 25% additional to the live
load. The moving load details are taken from the file “LL.TXT” that contains the details of
50
each live load class. For understanding various data syntax user may refer to relevant
section of ASTRA Pro User’s Manual.
The data set below defines that there are 25 types of loads and the applied one-lane
loading of ‘TYPE 1’ on the model is generated by moving the single train of loads on the
grillage model for ‘191’ times, by placing the start of the train of loads at ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘-
18.800’ metres and at a distance of ‘2.750’ metre, which is the ‘z’ co-ordinate from the side
edge of the bridge deck. The single train of load of length 18.800 metres will be moved
along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction of the model, at an increment ‘XINC’ of ‘0.2’ metre
for 191 times.
<<
DEFINE MOVING LOAD FILE LL.TXT
TYPE 1 HB_UNIT_6 1.250
TYPE 6 HB_25_6 1.250
TYPE 7 HB_25_11 1.250
TYPE 8 HB_25_16 1.250
TYPE 9 HB_25_21 1.250
TYPE 10 HB_25_26 1.250
TYPE 11 HB_30_6 1.250
TYPE 12 HB_30_11 1.250
TYPE 13 HB_30_16 1.250
TYPE 14 HB_30_21 1.250
TYPE 15 HB_30_26 1.250
TYPE 16 HB_37.5_6 1.250
TYPE 17 HB_37.5_11 1.250
TYPE 18 HB_37.5_16 1.250
TYPE 19 HB_37.5_21 1.250
TYPE 20 HB_37.5_26 1.250
TYPE 21 HB_45_6 1.250
TYPE 22 HB_45_11 1.250
TYPE 23 HB_45_16 1.250
TYPE 24 HB_45_21 1.250
TYPE 25 HB_45_26 1.250
LOAD GENERATION 191
TYPE 1 -18.8 0 2.75 XINC 0.2
>>
The data set below defines that there are 25 types of loads and the three-lane loading as
applied by load of ‘TYPE 1’ on the model is generated by moving the three train of loads
side-by-side on the grillage model, for ‘191’ times. The start of each of three trains of loads
is placed at the ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘-18.800’ metres, which is away from the start of the bridge
deck considered at the ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘0.0’. The three trains of loads are at distances of
‘2.750’, ‘6.250’ and ’9.750’ metres respectively from the side edge of the bridge deck,
which are the ‘z’ co-ordinates for the trains of loads. Each of the three trains of load of
length 18.800 metres will be moved along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction of the model, at
an increment ‘XINC’ of ‘0.2’ metre for 191 times.
51
<<
TYPE 6 HB_25_6 1.250
TYPE 7 HB_25_11 1.250
TYPE 8 HB_25_16 1.250
TYPE 9 HB_25_21 1.250
TYPE 10 HB_25_26 1.250
TYPE 11 HB_30_6 1.250
TYPE 12 HB_30_11 1.250
TYPE 13 HB_30_16 1.250
TYPE 14 HB_30_21 1.250
TYPE 15 HB_30_26 1.250
TYPE 16 HB_37.5_6 1.250
TYPE 17 HB_37.5_11 1.250
TYPE 18 HB_37.5_16 1.250
TYPE 19 HB_37.5_21 1.250
TYPE 20 HB_37.5_26 1.250
TYPE 21 HB_45_6 1.250
TYPE 22 HB_45_11 1.250
TYPE 23 HB_45_16 1.250
TYPE 24 HB_45_21 1.250
TYPE 25 HB_45_26 1.250
LOAD GENERATION 191
TYPE 1 -18.8 0 2.75 XINC 0.2
TYPE 1 -18.8 0 6.25 XINC 0.2
TYPE 1 -18.8 0 9.75 XINC 0.2
>>
52
The various types of BS Eurocode2, BD 37/01 Live Loads are mentioned in FILE LL.TXT.
There are four lines of data for each load type, the first line mentions for load type and
vehicle load class, the second line mentions about axle loads in kip, the third line mentions
about the spacing between axles and the fourth line mentions the width between wheels
in the axle.
TYPE 1 HB_UNIT_6
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.8 6.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 2 HB_UNIT_11
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.8 11.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 3 HB_UNIT_16
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.8 16.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 4 HB_UNIT_21
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.8 21.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 5 HB_UNIT_26
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.8 26.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 6 HB_25_6
25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
1.8 6.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 7 HB_25_11
25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
1.8 11.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 8 HB_25_16
25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
1.8 16.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 9 HB_25_21
25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
53
1.8 21.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 10 HB_25_26
25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
1.8 26.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 11 HB_30_6
30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
1.8 6.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 12 HB_30_11
30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
1.8 11.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 13 HB_30_16
30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
1.8 16.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 14 HB_30_21
30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
1.8 21.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 15 HB_30_26
30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
1.8 26.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 16 HB_37.5_6
37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50
1.8 6.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 17 HB_37.5_11
37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50
1.8 11.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 18 HB_37.5_16
37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50
1.8 16.0 1.8
54
1.000
TYPE 19 HB_37.5_21
37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50
1.8 21.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 20 HB_37.5_26
37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50
1.8 26.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 21 HB_45_6
45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
1.8 6.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 22 HB_45_11
45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
1.8 11.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 23 HB_45_16
45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
1.8 16.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 24 HB_45_21
45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
1.8 21.0 1.8
1.000
TYPE 25 HB_45_26
45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
1.8 26.0 1.8
1.000
The HA wheel load still needs to be considered even though the HA UDL and KEL may be
replaced by HB loading (see clause 6.4.1.3 of BD 37/01, BS Eurocode2) If 45 units of HB are
used then the factored wheel load is of similar magnitude to the factored HA wheel load
(150 kN). Any HB vehicle less than 45 units will underestimate wheel load effects
consequently the HA wheel needs to be considered.
The assessment code BD 21 gives guidance on loads on transverse spanning slabs (see
clause 5.2)
The maximum wheel load on all vehicles over 7.5 tonnes is 100 kN. The 11.5 tonne axle
with impact gives :
55
Wheel load = (11.5 x 9.81 x 1.8)/2 = approx 100 kN
Although it is not stated, the design capacity of the parapet should be calculated with
material factors = 1.0. If the material factors stated in the design code are included in the
capacity then there is a possibility that the parapet will be stronger than the designed
capacity. Consequently the load factors applied to protect the supporting structure may be
greatly reduced.
TD 19/06 Clause 4.58 amends the value of γm to be used for the design of reinforced
concrete parapets to avoid under-designing the parapet support.
Highway Bridge Live Loads reference BD 37/01
General Standard highway loading consists of HA and HB loading. HA loading is a formula loading
representing normal traffic in Great Britain. HB loading is an abnormal vehicle unit loading. Both
loadings include impact. (See Appendix A for the basis of HA and HB loading).
Loads To Be Considered The structure and its elements shall be designed to resist the more severe
effects of either:
design HA loading (see 6.4.1) or

design HA loading combined with design HB loading (see 6.4.2)
Notional lanes, hard shoulders, etc. The width and a number of notional lanes, and the presence
of hard shoulders, hard strips, verges and central reserves are integral to the disposition of HA and
HB loading. Requirements for deriving the width and number of notional lanes for design purposes
are specified in 3.2.9.3. Requirements for reducing HA loading for certain lane widths and loaded
length are specified in 6.4.1.
Distribution analysis of structure The effects of the design standard loadings shall, where
appropriate, be distributed in accordance with a rigorous distribution analysis or from data derived
from suitable tests. In the latter case the use of such data shall be subject to the approval of the
appropriate authority.
Type HA loading. Type HA loading consists of a uniformly distributed load (see 6.2.1) and a knife
edge load (see 6.2.2) combined, or of a single wheel load (see 6.2.5).
Nominal uniformly distributed load (UDL). For loaded lengths up to and including 50m the UDL,
expressed in kN per linear metre of notional lane, shall be derived from the equation,
56
W = 336 x (1/L) 0.67
and for loaded lengths in excess of 50m but less than 1600m the UDL shall be derived from the
equation,
W = 36 x (1/L) 0.1
where L is the loaded length (in m) and W is the load per metre of notional lane (in kN). For loaded
lengths above 1600m, the UDL shall be agreed with the appropriate authority. Values of the load
per linear metre of notional lane are given in table 13 and the loading curve is illustrated in figure
10.
Table 1.1 (Ref. Table 13 BD 37/01) Type HA uniformly distributed load
57
Table 1.2 (Ref. Table 14 BD 37/01) HA lane factors
Generally, the loaded length for the member under consideration shall be the full base length of
the adverse area (Cl. 3.2.5). Where there is more than one adverse area, as for example in
continuous construction, the maximum effect should be determined by consideration of the
adverse area or combination of adverse areas using the loading appropriate to the full base length
or the sum of the full base lengths of any combination of the adverse areas selected. Where the
influence line has a cusped profile and lies wholly within a triangle joining the extremities of its
base to its maximum ordinate, the base length shall be taken as twice the area under the influence
line divided by the maximum ordinate.
Nominal knife edge load (KEL). The KEL per notional lane shall be taken as 120 kN.
Distribution. The UDL and KEL shall be taken to occupy one notional lane, uniformly distributed
over the full width of the lane and applied as specified in Cl. 6.4.1.
Dispersal. No allowance for the dispersal of the UDL and KEL shall be made on the carriageway and
uniformly distributed over a circular contact area assuming an effective pressure of 1.1 N/mm2 (ie
340mm diameter), shall be considered. Alternatively, a square contact area may be assumed, using
the same effective pressure (ie 300mm side).
58
Dispersal. Dispersal of the single nominal wheel load at a spread-to-depth ratio of 1 horizontally to
2 vertically through asphalt and similar surfacing may be assumed, where it is considered that this
may take place. Dispersal through structural concrete slabs may be taken at a spread-to-depth ratio
of 1 horizontally to 1 vertically down to the neutral axis.
Design HA loading. For design HA load considered alone, γfL shall be taken as follows:
For the ultimate For the serviceability limit state limit state
For combinations 1 1.50 1.20

For combinations 2 & 3 1.25 1.00
Where HA loading is coexistent with HB loading (Cl. 6.4.2), γfL, as specified in Cl. 6.3.4, shall be
applied to HA loading.
Type HB loading. For all public highway bridges in Great Britain, the minimum number of units of
type HB loading that shall normally be considered is 30, but his number may be increased up to 45
if so directed by the appropriate authority.
Nominal HB loading. Figure 12 shows the plan and axle arrangement for one unit of nominal HB
loading. One unit shall be taken as equal to 10 kN per axle (ie 2.5 kN per wheel).
The overall length of the HB vehicle shall be taken as 10, 15, 20, 25 or 30 m for inner axle spacings
of 6, 11, 16, 21 or 26 m respectively, and the effects of the most severe of these cases shall be
adopted. The overall width shall be taken as 3.5m. The longitudinal axis of the HB vehicle shall be
taken as parallel with the lane markings.
Contact area. Nominal HB wheel loads shall be assumed to be uniformly distributed over a circular
contact area, assuming an effective pressure of 1.1 N/mm2.
Alternatively, a square contact area may be assumed, using the same effective pressure.
Dispersal. Dispersal of HB wheel loads at a spread-to-depth ratio of 1 horizontally to 2 vertically

through asphalt and similar surfacing may be assumed, where it is considered that this may take
place.
Dispersal through structural concrete slabs may be taken at a spread-to-depth ratio of 1

horizontally to 1 vertically down to the neutral axis.
59
!! ? = 3 F" *
(* " 1 !3 " &9D $ $
Design HB loading. For design HB load, γfL shall be taken as follows:
For the ultimate limit state For the serviceability limit state
For combination 1 1.30 1.10
For combinations 2 & 3 1.10 1.00
Application of types HA and HB loading
Type HA loading. Type HA UDL determined for the appropriate loaded length and type HA KEL
loads shall be applied to each notional lane in the appropriate parts of the influence line for the
element or member under consideration*. The lane loadings specified in Cl. 6.4.1.1 are
interchangeable between the notional lanes and a notional lane or lanes may be left unloaded if
this causes the most severe effect on the member or element under consideration. The KEL shall be
applied at one point only in the loaded length of each notional lane. Where the point under
consideration has a different influence line for the loading in each lane, the appropriate loaded
length for each lane will vary and the lane loadings shall be determined individually.
60
Figure 1.22 (2) Design of Cantilever Slab

The BS Eurocode2, BD 37/01 Live Loads
The lane factors given in Cl. 6.4.1.1 shall be applied except where otherwise specified by the
appropriate authority. The HA UDL and KEL shall be multiplied by the appropriate factors from
table 14 before being applied to the notional lanes indicated.
Where the carriageway has a single notional lane as specified in Cl. 3.2.9.3.2, the HA UDL and KEL
applied to that lane shall be multiplied by the appropriate first lane factor for a notional lane width
of 2.50m. The loading on the remainder of the carriageway width shall be taken as 5kN/m
NOTE 1. α1 = 0.274 bL and cannot exceed 1.0 α2 = 0.0137 [bL (40-L) + 3.65 (L-20)] where bL is the
notional lane width (m)
NOTE 2. N shall be used to determine which set of HA lane factors is to be applied for loaded
lengths in excess of 50m. The value of N is to be taken as the total number of notional lanes on the
bridge (this shall include all the lanes for dual carriageway roads) except that for a bridge carrying
one-way traffic only, the value of N shall be taken as twice the number of notional lanes on the
bridge.
Multilevel structures. Where multilevel superstructures are carried on common substructure

members (as, eg columns of a multilevel interchange) the most severe effect at the point under
consideration shall be determined from type HA loading applied in accordance with Cl. 6.4.1. The
number of notional lanes to be considered shall be the total number of lanes, irrespective of their
level, which contribute to the load effect at that point.
61
Transverse cantilever slabs, supported on all four sides and slabs spanning transversely. HA UDL
and KEL shall be replaced by the arrangement of HB loading given in Cl. 6.4.3.1. Please note that,
Slabs shall be deemed to cover plates.
Combined effects. Where elements of a structure can sustain the effects of live load in two ways, ie
as elements in themselves and also as parts of the main structure (eg the top flange of a box girder
functioning as a deck plate), the element shall be proportioned to resist the combined effects of
the appropriate loading specified in Cl. 6.4.2.
Knife edge load (KEL). The KEL shall be taken as acting as follows:
(a) On plates, right slabs and skew slabs spanning or cantilevering longitudinally: in a direction
which has the most severe effect. The KEL for each lane shall be considered as acting in a single line
in that lane and having the same length as the width of the notional lane and the intensity set out
in Cl. 6.4.1. As specified in Cl. 6.4.1, the KEL shall be applied at one point only in the loaded length.
(b) On longitudinal members and stringers: in a direction parallel to the supports.
(c) On piers, abutments and other members supporting the superstructure: on the deck, parallel to
the line of the bearings.
(d) On cross members, including transverse cantilever brackets: in a direction in line with the span
of the member.
Single wheel load. The HA wheel load is applied to members supporting small areas of roadway
where the proportion of UDL and KEL that would otherwise be allocated to it is small.
Types HA and HB loading combined. Types HA and HB loading shall be combined and applied as
follows:
(a) Type HA loading shall be applied to the notional lanes of the carriageway in accordance with Cl.
6.4.1, modified as given in (b) below.
(b) Type HB loading shall occupy any transverse position on the carriageway, either wholly within
one notional lane or straddling two or more notional lanes. Where the HB vehicle lies wholly within
the notional lane (BD 37/01, figure 13 (1)) or where the HB vehicle lies partially within a notional
lane and the remaining width of the lane, measured from the side of the HB vehicle to the edge of
62
the notional lane, is less than 2.5 metres (BD 37/01, figure 13 (2)(a)), type HB loading is assumed to
displace part of the HA loading in the lane or straddled lanes it occupies. No other live loading shall
be considered for 25 metres in front of the leading axle to 25 metres behind the rear axle of the HB
vehicle.
The remainder of the loaded length of the lane or lanes thus occupied by the HB vehicle shall be
loaded with HA UDL only; HA KEL shall be omitted. The intensity of the HA UDL in these lanes shall
be appropriate to the loaded length that includes the total length displaced by the type HB loading
with the front and rear 25 metre clear spaces. Where the HB vehicle lies partially within a notional
lane and the remaining width of the lane, measured from the side of the HB vehicle to the far edge
of the notional lane, is greater or equal to 2.5 metres (BD 37/01, figure 13 (2)(a)),, the HA UDL
loading in that lane shall remain but shall be multiplied by an appropriate lane factor for a notional
lane width of 2.5 metres irrespective of the actual lane width; the HA KEL shall be omitted. Only
one HB vehicle shall be considered on any one superstructure or on any substructure supporting
two or more superstructures. BD 37/01, Figure 13 illustrates typical configurations of type HA
loading in combination with type HB loading.
6.4.3 Highway loading on transverse cantilever slabs, slabs supported on all four sides, slabs
spanning transversely and central reserves. Type HA loading shall be applied to the elements
specified in 6.4.3.1 and 6.4.3.2.
6.4.3.1 Transverse cantilever slabs, slabs supported on all four sides and slabs spanning
transversely. These elements shall be so proportioned as to resist the effects of the appropriate
number of units of type HB loading occupying any transverse position in the carriageway or placed
in one notional lane in combination with 30 units of type HB loading placed in one other notional
lane. Proper consideration shall be given to transverse joints of transverse cantilever slabs and to
the edges of these slabs because of the limitations of distribution*. This does not apply to
members supporting these elements.
6.4.3.2 Central reserves. On dual carriageways the portion of the central reserve isolated from the
rest of the carriageway either by a raised kerb or by safety fences is not required to be loaded with
live load in considering the overall design of the structure, but it shall be capable of supporting 30
units of HB loading.
6.5 Standard footway and cycle track loading. The live load on highway bridges due to pedestrian
traffic shall be treated as uniformly distributed over footways and cycle tracks. For elements
supporting footways or cycle tracks, the intensity of pedestrian live load shall vary according to
loaded length and any expectation of exceptional crowds. Reductions in pedestrian live load
intensity may be made for elements supporting highway traffic lanes as well as footways or cycle
tracks. Reductions may also be made where the footway (or footway and cycle track together) has
a width exceeding two metres.
63
* This is the only exception to the rule that not more than one HB vehicle shall be considered to act
on a structure. The 30 unit vehicle is to be regarded as a substitute for HA loading for these
elements only.
7 : , 08) ) $ $ > For defining the IRC standard Live Loads (LL) on the
grillage model, the data below mentions as ‘DEFINE MOVING LOAD FILE LL.TXT, followed
by mentioning the applied load type as ‘TYPE 3 IRC70RWHEEL 1.25’ and with impact factor
of ‘1.25’, which is 25% additional to the live load. The moving load details are taken from
the file “LL.TXT” that contains the details of each live load class. For understanding various
The data set below defines the applied one-lane loading of ‘TYPE 3’ on the model is
generated by moving the single train of loads on the grillage model for ‘115’ times, by
placing the start of the train of loads at ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘-13.400’ metres and at a distance of
‘1.500’ metre, which is the ‘z’ co-ordinate from the side edge of the bridge deck. The single
train of load of length 13.400 metres will be moved along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction
of the model, at an increment ‘XINC’ of ‘0.5’ metre for 115 times.
<<
TYPE 3 IRC70RWHEEL 1.25
LOAD GENERATION 115
TYPE 3 -13.400 0 1.500 XINC 0.5
>>
The data set below defines that there are two types of loads and applied as two-lane
loading by ‘TYPE 3 and TYPE 1’ on the model is generated by moving the two trains of loads
side-by-side on the grillage model, for ‘115’ times. The starts of two trains of loads are
placed at the ‘x’ co-ordinates ‘-13.400 and 18.8’ metres, which are away from the start of
the bridge deck considered at the ‘x’ co-ordinate ‘0.0’. The two trains of loads are at
distances of ‘2.750’, ‘1.500’ and ’6.500’ metres respectively from the side edge of the
bridge deck, which are the ‘z’ co-ordinates for the trains of loads. The two trains of loads of
length 13.400 and 18.800 metres will be moved along the longitudinal or ‘x’ direction of
the model, at an increment ‘XINC’ of ‘0.5’ metre for 191 times.
<<
TYPE 3 IRC70RWHEEL 1.25
TYPE 1 IRCCLASSA 1.179
LOAD GENERATION 115
TYPE 3 -13.400 0 1.500 XINC 0.5
TYPE 1 -18.800 0 6.500 XINC 0.5
>>
64
The various types of IRC 6 Class Live Loads are mentioned in FILE LL.TXT. There are four
lines of data for each load type, the first line mentions for load type and vehicle load class,
the second line mentions about axle loads in kip, the third line mentions about the spacing
between axles and the fourth line mentions the width between wheels in the axle.
TYPE 1 IRCCLASSA
2.7 2.7 11.4 11.4 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8
1.10 3.20 1.20 4.30 3.00 3.00 3.00
1.800
TYPE 2 IRCCLASSB
1.6 1.6 6.8 6.8 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1
1.10 3.20 1.20 4.30 3.00 3.00 3.00
1.800
TYPE 3 IRC70RWHEEL
17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 12.0 12.0 8.0
1.37 3.05 1.37 2.13 1.52 3.96
2.900
TYPE 4 IRC70RTRACK
7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457 0.457
2.900
TYPE 5 IRCCLASSAATRACK
7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360
2.900
TYPE 6 IRC24RTRACK
2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366
2.900
TYPE 7 IRC70RW40TBM
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
0.795 0.38 0.795
2.790
TYPE 8 IRC70RW40TBL
10.0 10.0
1.93
2.790
TYPE 9 IRC40RWHEEL
12.0 12.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 5.0
65
1.07 4.27 3.05 1.22 3.66
2.740
TYPE 10 BG_RAIL_1
24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52 24.52
2.05 1.95 5.56 1.95 2.05 5.94 2.05 1.95 5.56 1.95 2.05
1.676
TYPE 11 BG_RAIL_2
22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06 22.06
1.65 1.65 6.4 1.65 1.65 3.0 1.65 1.65 6.4 1.65 1.65
1.676
TYPE 12 MG_RAIL_1
11.87 11.87 11.87 11.87 11.28 12.94 12.94 12.94 12.94 7.94
1.372 2.286 1.372 2.680 2.133 1.346 1.346 1.397 2.197
1.676
TYPE 11 MG_RAIL_2
9.61 9.61 9.61 9.61 9.12 10.49 10.49 10.49 10.49 6.47
1.372 1.372 1.372 2.806 1.829 1.346 1.346 1.397 2.197
1.676
66
Figure 1.23 (1) Class – A Train of Vehicles

The IRC 6 Class Live Loads
67
Figure 1.23 (2) 70R Wheeled and Tracked Vehicles

The IRC 6 Class Live Loads
7< ' %
The data for analysis specification is mentioned at the end of the analysis data as ‘PRINT
SUPPORT REACTIONS, PRINT MAX FORCE ENVELOPE LIST, PRINT MAX FORCE ENVELOPE LIST, PERFORM ANALYSIS and
FINISH’
each in separate lines. User is suggested not to modify the data, as the output may
be affected in generating the essential details in the results.
68
9 ) ' * % )0 "
* '' F( $8 $ $
Step 1: The software ASTRA Pro may be run, by double clicking on the desktop icon,
Step 2: Select menu item ‘File’, then ‘Select Working Folder’,
Step 3: Select folder “Work” on the desktop as the Working Folder, click on ‘OK’,
69
Step 4: Select menu item ‘File-Bridge Design-Pre Stressed Concrete (PSC) I Girder Bridge-
Limit State Method’,
Step 5: Select design standard option ‘AASHTO – LRFD Standard’,
70
Step 6: The Design workspace is opened, current tab page is ‘Analysis-User Input Data’,
various general arrangement data is displayed and may be changed, click on ‘New Design’,
Step 7: Open tab page is ‘Analysis-Section Properties-Long Main Girder Inputs’, various
dimension data for Girder are displayed and may be changed,
71
Step 8: Open tab page is ‘Analysis-Section Properties-Cross Girder Inputs’, various

Step 9: Open tab page is ‘Analysis-Section Properties-Summary of Member Properties’,

various calculated values are displayed in blue color and these are not to be changed,
72
Step 10: Open tab page is ‘Analysis-Moving Load Data’, User may use ‘Select to view
Moving Load’ and ‘View Moving Load’,
Step 11: The window opens with for ‘View Moving Load’, click on ‘Run’,
73
Step 12: Open tab page ‘Analysis-Analysis Process-Analysis Data’ for normal analysis, click
on button ‘Create Analysis Data’, as the message comes click on ‘OK’,
Step 13: Select any particular analysis data from list,
74
Step 14: Click on ‘View Analysis Data’ to see the selected data,
Step 15: The selected analysis data is opened with Notepad,
75
Step 16: After viewing the analysis data close the Notepad,
Step 17: The analysis data may also be viewed with Graphical User Interface (GUI), Select
any particular analysis file and click on ‘View Pre Process’,
76
Step 18: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Data File’, the grillage
model and the analysis data are displayed in the window for viewing,
Step 19: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Geometry-Joints’, the
‘Joint Coordinates’ in the analysis data are displayed in the window,
77
Step 20: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Geometry-Members’,
the member numbers with their either end node numbers’ are displayed,
Step 21: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Properties’, the member
numbers with their section dimensions are displayed, any modification may be done here,
78
Step 22: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Constants’, the member
numbers with their material properties are displayed, any modification may be done here,
Step 23: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Supports’, the
node/joint numbers with support types are displayed, any modification may be done here,
79
Step 24: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Moving Load’, the
moving loads are listed from the data file and click on ‘Run’ to view,
Step 25: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Analysis Specifications’,
the specified options are listed from the data file and should be kept unchanged,
80
Step 26: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Data File’, in case of any
modification the data is to be saved by clicking ‘Analysis File Save’ icon, close the GUI,
Step 27: We are back to the tab page ‘Analysis Process’, click on ‘Process Analysis’, the
process dialog box comes with list of five processes, click on ‘Process’,
81
Step 28: The ‘User Data Interface’ comes, click on ‘Proceed’, the process for data
validation for analysis is done, the message comes, click on ‘OK’,
Step 29: The ‘ANALYSIS PROCESS’ comes, click on ‘PROCEED’,
82
Step 30: As the process for analysis is done for first of five analyses in the list, the message
comes, click on ‘OK’,
Step 31: In similar way all the five analyses in the list are processed, and as the message
comes after the fifth process, click on ‘OK’,
83
Step 32: All the analyses reports are read for the forces at worst case,
Step 33: The forces at worst case collected from all the analyses are displayed in the
window as the result of Normal Analysis, the current tab page is ‘Analysis Results’,
84
Step 34: Next, open the tab page ‘Support Reactions (DL)’, which shows support reactions
for the dead loads,
Step 35: Next, open the tab page ‘Support Reactions (SIDL)’, which shows support
reactions for the super imposed dead loads,
85
Step 36: Next, open the tab page ‘Support Reactions (LL)’, which shows support reactions
for the live loads,
Step 37: Next, open the tab page ‘Maximum Forces’, which shows maximum support
reactions obtained,
86
Step 38: Next, open the tab page ‘Analysis-Stage Analysis-Stage 1’, for load-deflection
analysis at five stages. At each stage the joint co-ordinates are modified by taking from
previous stage and adding deflections of the previous stage. Click on ‘Create Analysis Data,
as a set of data files is created for stage 1 analysis, the message comes, click on ‘OK’,
Step 39: Next the analysis process starts exactly as the normal analysis and will be done
for all five sets of analysis data,
87
Step 40: As all the five analyses for Stage 1 are over the results are displayed for worst
forces, in the same way of the normal analysis,
Step 41: Similarly, as all the five analyses for Stage 2 are over the results are displayed for
worst forces,
88
worst forces,
worst forces,
89
worst forces,
Step 45: Finally, as all the analyses for five Stages are over, the tab page ‘Design Forces’ is
opened and the desired analysis forces are selected for the design of PSC girders.
90
This is the end of analysis of the Grillage Model with AASHTO-LRFD Live Load.
91
: ) ' * % )0 "
*" 1 !" &9D $ $
92
93
94


95
96
97
98
99
model and the analysis data are displayed in the window for viewing,
‘Joint Coordinates’ in the analysis data are displayed in the window,
100
the member numbers with their either end node numbers’ are displayed,
101
102
Step 24: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Loading’, the various
‘Member Loads’ are listed from the data file,
103
104
process dialog box comes with list of eight processes, click on ‘Process’,
105
Step 31: As the process for analysis is done for first of eight analyses in the list, the
message comes, click on ‘OK’,
106
Step 32: In similar way all the eight analyses in the list are processed, and as the message
comes after the eighth process, click on ‘OK’,
107
for the dead loads,
108
for the live loads,
109
reactions obtained,
110
111
worst forces,
worst forces,
112
worst forces,
worst forces,
113
Step 46: Finally, as all the analyses for five Stages are over, open tab page ‘Design Forces’
and ‘Select analysis stage’, related forces shall be taken for the design of PSC girders.
This is the end of analysis of the Grillage Model with BS Eurocode2 BD 37/01 Live Load.
< ) ' * % )0 "

* 08) 7 $ $ 08) !
114
115
116
117


118
119
120
121
122
model in skew and the analysis data are displayed in the window for viewing,
‘Joint Coordinates’ of model in skew in the analysis data are displayed in the window,
123
the members in skew with their numbers and either end node numbers are displayed,
124
125
Step 24: The current tab page of Graphical User Interface (GUI) is ‘Loading’, the various
‘Member Loads’ are listed from the data file,
126
127
process dialog box comes with list of eight processes, click on ‘Process’,
128
Step 31: As the process for analysis is done for first of eight analyses in the list, the
message comes, click on ‘OK’,
129
Step 32: In similar way all the eight analyses in the list are processed, and as the message
comes after the eighth process, click on ‘OK’,
130
for the dead loads,
131
for the live loads,
132
reactions obtained,
133
134
worst forces,
worst forces,
135
worst forces,
worst forces,
136
Step 46: Finally, as all the analyses for five Stages are over, open tab page ‘Design Forces’
and ‘Select analysis stage’, related forces shall be taken for the design of PSC girders.
This is the end of analysis of the Grillage Model with IRC 6 Live Load, for IRC 112 design.
137
References:
1. Design Specifications, Customary U.S. Units, Sixth Edition 2012, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials. 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249, Washington, DC
20001, Phone 202-624-5800 / Fax 202-624-5806, Web site: www.transportation.org
2. Bridge Engineering Handbook, Second Edition, Superstructure Design, Edited by Wai Fah Chen
and Lian Duan, Published by CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 6000 Broken Sound Parkway,
NW, Suite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487, Web site: www.crcpress.com
3. British Standard, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures, BS EN 1992-1-1:2004, Published

by: British Standards Institution.
4. British Standard, Design Manual for Roads And Bridges, Volume 1, Section 3, Part 14, BD 37/01,
Loads For Highway Bridges, Published by: British Standards Institution.
5. IRC 112-2011, Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Published by Indian Roads Congress.
6. IRC 6-2017, Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section: II, Loads
and Load Combinations, Seventh Revision, March 2017, Published by Indian Roads Congress,
Kama Koti Marg, Sector -6, R. K. Puram, New Delhi 110022.
7. BAKHT, B. And JAEGER, L. G., “Bridge Analysis Simplified”, McGraw Hill, New York, 1985.
8. GERE, M.J. and WEAVER, W., “Matrix Analysis of Framed Structure”, D. Van Nostrand Co., USA,
1965.
9. Grillage Analogy in Bridge Deck Analysis, Prof. C. S. Surana and Prof. R. Agrawal, Narosa
Publishing House, 6-Community Centre, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi 110017.
10. HAMBLY, E.C., “Bridge Deck Behaviour”, Chapman and Hall, London, 1976.
11. PUCHER, A., “Influence surfaces of Elastic Plates”, Springer Verlag, Wien and New York, 1964.
12. RUSCH, E.H.H. and HERGENROEDER, A., “Influence Surfaces for Moments in Skew Slabs”,
Werner-Verlag, Dusselforf, 1969.
13. ASTRA Pro User’s Manual and Design Manual, Web site: www.techsoftglobal.com
138

Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

[Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck and Girders by ASTRA Pro / microSAP]

Grillage Model Analysis of Bridge Deck-Girder

Sandipan Goswami, B.Sc, BE, M.Tech, FIE, C.Eng, PE (M)

b is the length of the short side

bmax is the length of the long side

Bearings may be chosen as either of:

• The 'Fixed' bearing will be fixed or sprung in all directions.

In skew bridges with small

& #' (" " *

Idealization of box-girder bridge as grillage model is similar to that of slab-on-girders type

This is accomplished by considering isolated sections of the deck by considering them as

For a rectangle of sides b and d, the expression for ‘J’ becomes,

and the value of ‘J‘ for the beam section as a whole, J = J1 + J2 + J3 + J4

The identification of the panel includes its type as rectangular or parallelogram or

The grillage analysis is don

(i) By static approach

It is assumed that the panel is simply supported along its boundary.

P1 = a x d x P / (Lx x Ly) P2 = a x c x P / (Lx x Ly)

P3 = b x c x P / (Lx x Ly) P4 = b x d x P / (Lx x Ly)

P1 = (c x PE / Lx) + (c x PF / Lx) = (c x P / Lx)

P2 = (a x PE / Lx) = (a x Ly - d x Lx) x P / (Lx x Ly)

P1 = (Area of Triangle BPC) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)

P2 = (Area of Triangle APC) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)

P3 = (Area of Triangle APB) x P / (Area of Triangle ABC)

a) Fixed End Distributio

b) Fixed End Distributio

c) Fixed End Distribut

Sign Convention: Cloc

Now, ‘PE’ will result verti

At node 1 due to PE,

At node 2 due to PE,

M1[3] = c x MXF x sin α / L M3[3] = a x MXF x sin α / LX

MXA = M1[1] x cos α + MX1 + M1[2] x cos α + M1[3] x sin α

MYA = MY1 - M1[1] x sin α - M1[2] x sin α + M1[3] x cos α

MXC = M3[1] x cos α + M3[2] x cos α + M3[3] x sin α

MYC = - M3[1] x sin α – M3[2] x sin α + M3[3] x cos α

The vertical loads and moments at edges E and F are given as

MX1 = [d x MXE / LX]

MX2 = [c x MXE / LX]

MX3 = [c x MXF / LX]

MX4 = [d x MXF / LX]

The number of movements of loads in longitudinal and transverse directions by

/< ' % " *

Similarly, there may be under-estimation of bending moment in supported longitudinal

! ' % " + ) "

7:&" * 1 !3 " &9D ) $ $ > For defining the British

Wheel load = (11.5 x 9.81 x 1.8)/2 = approx 100 kN

Highway Bridge Live Loads reference BD 37/01

design HA loading (see 6.4.1) or

Table 1.1 (Ref. Table 13 BD 37/01) Type HA uniformly distributed load

Table 1.2 (Ref. Table 14 BD 37/01) HA lane factors

For combinations 1 1.50 1.20

Dispersal. Dispersal of HB wheel loads at a spread-to-depth ratio of 1 horizontally to 2 vertically

Dispersal through structural concrete slabs may be taken at a spread-to-depth ratio of 1

Design HB loading. For design HB load, γfL shall be taken as follows:

Application of types HA and HB loading

Figure 1.22 (2) Design of Cantilever Slab

Multilevel structures. Where multilevel superstructures are carried on common substructure

(b) On longitudinal members and stringers: in a direction parallel to the supports.

Figure 1.23 (1) Class – A Train of Vehicles

Figure 1.23 (2) 70R Wheeled and Tracked Vehicles

Step 2: Select menu item ‘File’, then ‘Select Working Folder’,

Step 5: Select design standard option ‘AASHTO – LRFD Standard’,

Step 8: Open tab page is ‘Analysis-Section Properties-Cross Girder Inputs’, various