Introduction to Bridge Engineering: Concrete Bridges Lecture 4 Design (II

Introduction to
Bridge Engineering
CONCRETE BRIDGES
Lecture 4
(II)
CONCRETE BRIDGES
Presented To:
PROF. DR. AKHTAR NAEEM KHAN

&
CLASSMATES
Presented By:
YASIR IRFAN BADRASHI

&
QAISER HAYAT
2
CONCRETE BRIDGES
Topics to be
Presented:
Example Problem on:

(i).
(ii).
(iii).
Concrete Deck Design

Solid Slab Bridge Design
T-Beam Bridge Design
7.10.1
CONCRETE DECK
DESIGN
4
CONCRETE DECK DESIGN

Problem Statement:
Use the approximate method of

analysis [4.6.2] to design the deck
of the reinforced concrete T-Beam
bridge section of Fig.E-7.1-1 for a
HL-93 live load and a PL-2
performance level concrete barrier
(Fig.7.45).
The T-Beams supporting the deck
are 2440 mm on the centers and
have a stem width of 350 mm. The
deck overhangs the exterior TBeam approximately 0.4 of the
distance between T-Beams. Allow
for sacrificial wear of 15mm of
concrete surface and for a future
wearing surface of 75mm thick
bituminous overlay. Use fc=30
MPa, fy=400Mpa, and compare the
selected reinforcement with that
obtained by the empirical method
[A9.7.2]
A. DECK THICKNESS
The minimum thickness for concrete deck slabs is 175 mm

[A9.7.1.1].
Traditional minimum depths of slabs are based on the deck span

length S to control deflection to give [ Table A2.5.2.6.3-1]
h min
S 3000 2440 3000
181mm175mm
30
30
Use hs = 190 mm for the structural thickness of the deck. By

adding the
15 mm allowance for the sacrificial surface, the dead weight of the
deck
slab is based on h= 205mm. Because the portion of the deck that
overhangs the exterior girder must be designed for a collision load
on the barrier, its thickness has been increased by 25mm to
ho=230mm
6
B. WEIGHTS OF THE COMPONENTS

[ TABLE A3.5.1-1 ]
For a 1mm width of a transverse strip.
Barrier
Pb = 2400 x 10-9 Kg/mm3 x 9.81 N/Kg x 197325 mm2
= 4.65 N/mm
Future Wearing Surface

WDW = 2250 x 10-9 x 9.81 x 75 = 1.66 x 10-3
N/mm
Slab 205mm thick

Ws = 2400 x 10-9 x 9.81 x 205 = 4.83 x 10-3
N/mm
Cantilever Overhanging
Wo = 2400 x 10-9 x 9.81 x 230 = 5.42 x 10-3
N/mm
C. BENDING MOMENT
FORCE EFFECTS GENERAL
An approximate analysis of strips perpendicular

to girders is considered acceptable [A9.6.1]. The
extreme positive moment in any deck panel
between girders shall be taken to apply to all
positive moment regions. Similarly, the extreme
negative moment over any girder shall be taken
to apply to all negative moment regions
[A4.6.2.1.1]. The strips shall be treated as
continuous beams with span lengths equal to the
center-to-centre distance between girders. The
girders are assumed to be rigid [A4.6.2.1.6]
For ease in applying the load factors, the bending

moments will separately be determined for the
deck slab, overhang, barrier, future wearing
surface, and vehicle live load.
8
1. DECK SLAB
h = 205 mm,
Ws = 4.83 x 103 N/mm,
S = 2440 mm
WsS 2
(4.83 10 3 )(2440) 2
FEM
2396 Nmm / mm
12
12
Placement of the deck slab dead

load and results of a moment
distribution analysis for
negative and positive moments
in a 1-mm wide strip is given in
figure E7.1-2
A deck analysis design aid

based on influence lines is given
in Table A.1 of Appendix A . For a
uniform load, the tabulated
areas are multiplied by S for
Shears and S2 for moments.
Fig.E7.1-2: Moment
distribution for deck
slab dead load.
1. DECK SLAB
R200 = Ws (Net area w/o cantilever) S

= 4.83 x 10-3 (0.3928) 2440 = 4.63 N/mm
M204 = Ws (Net area w/o cantilever) S2
= 4.83 x 10-3 (0.0772) 24402
= 2220 N mm/mm
M300 = Ws (Net area w/o cantilever) S2
= 4.83 x 10-3 (-0.1071) 24402
= - 3080 N mm/mm
Comparing the results from the design aid
with those from moment distribution shows
good agreement. In determining the
remainder of the bending moment force
effects, the design aid of Table A.1 will be
used.
10
2. OVERHANG
The parameters are

ho = 230 mm,
Wo = 5.42 x 10-3 N/mm2
L = 990 mm
Placement of the overhang dead load is shown in the figure
E7.1-3. By using the design aid Table A.1, the reaction on the
exterior T-Beam and the bending moments are:
Fig.E7.13
Overhan
g dead
load
placeme
nt
11
2. OVERHANG
R200 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L

= 5.42 x 10-3 (1+ 0.635 x 990/2440) 990 = 6.75
N/mm
M200 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L2

= 5.42 x 10-3 (-0.5000) 9902 = -2656 N mm/mm

= 5.42 x 10-3 (-0.2460) 9902 = -1307 N mm/mm

= 5.42 x 10-3 (0.1350) 9902 = 717 N mm/mm
12
3. BARRIER
The parameters are

Pb = 4.65 N/mm
L = 990 127 = 863 mm
Placement of the center of gravity of the barrier dead

load is shown in figure E7.1-4. By using the design aid
Table A.1 for the concentrated barrier load, the intensity
of the load is multiplied by the influence line ordinate for
shears and reactions. For bending moments, the
influence line ordinate is multiplied by the cantilever
length L.
Fig.E7.14
Barrier
dead
load
placeme
nt
13
3. BARRIER
R200 = Pb (Influence line ordinate)

= 4.65(1.0+1.27 x 863/2440) = 6.74 N/mm
M200 = Pb (Influence line ordinate) L

= 4.65(-1.0000) (863)
mm/mm
= -4013 N

= 4.65 (-0.4920) (863)
= -1974 N mm/mm

= 4.65 (0.2700) (863)
= 1083 N mm/mm
14
4. FUTURE WEARING SURFACE
FWS = WDW = 1.66 x 10-3 N/mm2
The 75mm bituminous overlay is placed curb to curb

as shown in figure E7.1-5. The length of the loaded
cantilever is reduced by the base width of the barrier
to give
L = 990 380 = 610 mm.
Fig. E7.1-5: Future wearing surface dead load

placement
15
4. FUTURE WEARING SURFACE

If we use the design aid Table A.1, we have
R200 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L + (Net area w/o cantilever) S]

= 1.66 x 10-3 [(1.0 + 0.635 x 610/2440) x 610 + (0.3928) x 2440)]
= 2.76 N/mm
M200 = WDW (Net area cantilever) L2

= 1.66 x 10-3 (-0.5000)(610)2 = -309 N mm/mm
M204 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L2 + (Net area w/o cantilever)

S2 ]
= 1.66 x 10-3 [(-0.2460)(610)2 + (0.0772)24402 ] = 611 N mm/mm
M300 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L2 + (Net area w/o cantilever)

S2 ]
= 1.66 x 10-3 [(0.1350)(610)2 + (-0.1071)24402 ] = -975 N
mm/mm
16
D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD
Where decks are designed using the

approximate strip method [A4.6.2.1], and
the strips are transverse, they shall be
designed for the 145 KN axle of the design
truck [A3.6.1.3.3]. Wheel loads on an axle
are assumed to be equal and spaced 1800
mm apart [Fig.A3.6.1.2.2-1]. The design
truck should be positioned transversely to
produce maximum force effects such that
the center of any wheel load is not closer
than 300mm from the face of the curb for
the design of the deck overhang and
600mm from the edge of the 3600 mm
wide design lane for the design of all other
components [A3.6.1.3.1]
17
The width of equivalent interior transverse

strips (mm) over which the wheel loads can be
considered distributed longitudinally in CIP
concrete decks is given as
[Table A4.6.2.1.3-1]
Overhang, 1140+0.883 X
Positive moment, 660+0.55 S
Negative moment, 1220+0.25 S
Where X is the distance from the wheel load to

centerline of support and S is the spacing of
the T-Beams. Here X=310 mm and S=2440
mm
(Fig.E7.1-6)
18
Figure E 7.1-6 : Distribution of Wheel

load
on Overhang
19
Tire contact area [A3.6.1.2.5] shall be

assumed as a rectangle with width of
510 mm and length given by
IM
l 2.28 1
P
100
Where
is the load factor, IM is the
dynamic load allowance and P is the
Wheelload.
Here
= 1.75, IM = 33% , P = 72.5 KN.

20

Thus
the tire contact area is

510 x 385mm
with the 510mm in the

transverse direction as
shown in Figure.E7.1-6
21
22
Figure E 7.1-6 : Distribution of Wheel

load
on Overhang
Back
23
24
mm
25
Fig.E7.1-7: Live load placement for maximum positive

moment
(a) One loaded lane, m = 1.2
(b) Two loaded lanes, m = 1.0
26
If we use the influence line ordinates from

Table A-1, the exterior girder reaction and
positive bending moment with one loaded
lane (m=1.2) are
200
204
27

For two loaded
lanes (m=1.0)
Thus, the one loaded lane case

governs.
28

3. MAXIMUM INTERIOR NEGATIVE LIVE LOAD MOMENT.
the critical placement of live load for maximum
negative moment is at the first interior deck support
with one loaded lane (m=1.2) as shown in Fig.E7.18.
The equivalent transverse strip width is

1220+0.25S = 1220+0.25(2440) = 1830 mm
Using Table A-1, the bending moment at location
300 is
29

4. MAXIMUM LIVE LOAD REACTION ON EXTERIOR GIRDER
30
E. STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
The gravity load combination can be

stated as [Table A.3.4.1-1]
P
31
32
The T-Beam stem width is 350mm, so the design

sections will be 175mm on either side of the support
centerline used in the analysis. The critical negative
moment section is at the interior face of the exterior
support as shown in the free body diagram
[Fig. E7.1-10]
Back
33
The values of the loads in Fig E7.1-10 are for a

1-mathematical model strip. The concentrated
wheel load is for one loaded lane, that is,
W = 1.2(72500)1400 = 62.14 N/mm
1.
Deck Slab:
34

2. Overhang
o
3. Barrier
200
35

4. Future Wearing Surface
5. Live Load
36

6. Strength-I Limit State
37
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
The effective concrete
depths for positive and
negative bending will
be different because of
the different cover
requirements
as
indicated in this Fig
shown.
38
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
39
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
40
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
Maximum reinforcement keeping in view
the ductility requirements is limited by
[A5.7.3.3.1]a 0.35d
Minimum reinforcement [5.7.3.3.2] for

components containing no prestressing
steel is satisfied if
As
fc '
0.03
(bd )
fy
41
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
42
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
1. POSITIVE MOMENT REINFORCEMENT :
43
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
Check Ductility
Check Moment Strength
44
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
2. Negative Moment Reinforcement
Back
45
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
Check Moment Strength
For transverse top bars,

Use No. 15 @225 mm.
46
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
3.
DISTRIBUTION REINFORCEMENT:
Secondary reinforcement is placed in the bottom of the
slab to distribute the wheel loads in the longitudinal
direction of the bridge to the primary reinforcement in the
transverse direction. The required area is a percentage of
the primary positive moment reinforcement. For primary
reinforcement perpendicular to traffic [A9.7.3.2]
3840
Percentage
Se
67%
Where Se is the effective span length [A9.7.2.3]. Se is the

distance face to face of stems, that is,
Se=2440-350= 2090mm
3840
Percentage
84%, Use67%
2090
47
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
So
So
Dist.As = 0.67(Pos.As)=0.67(0.889)
= 0.60 mm2/mm
For longitudinal bottom bars,
Use No.10 @ 150 mm,
As = 0.667 mm2/mm
48
F. Selection Of
Reinforcement
4.
SHRINKAGE AND TEMPRATURE REINFORCEMENT.
The minimum amount of reinforcement in each direction shall be

[A5.10.8.2]
Temp . As 0.75
Ag
fy
Where Ag is the gross area of the section for the full 205 mm
thickness.
Temp . As 0.75
(205 1)
0.38mm 2 / mm
200
For members greater than 150 mm in thickness, the shrinkage and

temperature reinforcement is to be distributed equally on both faces.
1
(Temp . As ) 0.19mm 2 / mm
2
Use No.10 @ 450 mm, Provided As = 0.222 mm2/mm
49
G. CONTROL OF CRACKINGGENERAL
Cracking is controlled by limiting the tensile

stress in the reinforcement under service loads fs
to an allowable tensile stress fsa [A5.7.3.4]
Z
f s f sa
0.6 f y
1/ 3
(d c A)
Where
Z = 23000 N/mm for severe exposure conditions.
dc = Depth of concrete from extreme tension fiber
to center of closest bar
50 mm
A = Effective concrete tensile area per bar having
the
same centroid as the reinforcement.
50
M = MDC + MDW + 1.33 MLL
51
Where
c = density of concrete = 2400 Kg/m3.

fc
= 30 MPa.
So that
Ec 0.043(2400)1.5 30 27700 MPa.

200000
n
7.2,
27700
Use n = 7
52
1.
CHECK OF POSITIVE MOMENT REINFORCEMENT.

The service I positive moment at Location 204 is
The calculation of the transformed section properties is based on a

1-mm wide doubly reinforced section shown in the Figure E7.112
53
Sum of statical moments about the neutral axis yields
54
The positive moment tensile reinforcement of No.15 bars

at 25mm on centers is located 33 mm from the extreme
tension fiber. Therefore,
c
sa
sa
s
55
2.
CHECK OF NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT:

The service I negative moment at location 200.72 is
The cross section for the negative moment is shown in Fig.E7.113.
56
Balancing the statical moments about the
neutral axis gives
57
The negative moment tensile reinforcement of

No.15 bars at 225 mm on centers is located
53 mm from the tension face. Therefore dc is
the maximum value of 50mm, and
sa
sa
58
H. FATIGUE LIMIT STATE
The investigation for fatigue is not

required in concrete decks for
multigirder applications [A9.5.3]
59
I.
TRADITIONAL DESIGN FOR INTERIOR

The SPANS
design sketch in Fig.E7.1-14 summerizes the
arrangement of the transverse and longitudinal
reinforcement in four layers for the interior spans
of the deck. The exterior span and deck overhang
have special requirements that must be dealt with
separately.
60
J. EMPERICAL DESIGN OF CONCRETE

DECK
SLABS
Research has shown that the

primary structural action of the
concrete deck is not flexure, but
internal arching. The arching
creates an internal compression
dome. Only a minimum amount
of isotropic reinforcement is
required
for
local
flexural
resistance.
61

DECK
SLABSCONDITIONS [A9.7.2.4]
1. DESIGN
Design depth excludes the loss due to wear,
h=190mm. The following conditions must be satisfied:
62

DECK
SLABS
2. REINFORCEMENT
REQUIREMENTS [A9.7.2.5]
63

DECK
SLABS DESIGN SUMMARY
3. EMPERICAL
while using the empirical design approach there is no need of
using any analysis. When the design conditions have been met,
the minimum reinforcement in all four layers is predetermined.
The design sketch in the Fig.E7.1-15 summarizes the
reinforcement arrangement for the interior deck spans.
64
K. COMPARISON OF REINFORCEMENT
QUANTITIES
The weight of reinforcement for the traditional and
empirical design methods are compared in
Table.E7.1-1 for a 1-m wide transverse strip.
Significant saving, in this case 74% of the
traditionally designed reinforcement is required,
can be made by adopting the empirical design
method.
(Area = 1m x 14.18m)
65
L. DECK OVERHANG DESIGN
The traditional and the empirical

methods does not include the design of
the deck overhang.
The design loads for the deck overhang
are applied to a free body diagram of a
cantilever that is independent of the
deck spans.
The resulting overhang design can then
be incorporated into either the
traditional or the empirical design by
anchoring the overhang reinforcement
into the first deck span.
66
Two limit states must be

investigated.
Strength I [A13.6.1] and Extreme
Event II [A13.6.2]
The strength limit state considers
vertical gravity forces and it
seldom governs, unless the
cantilever span is very long.
67
The extreme event limit state

considers horizontal forces
caused by the collision of a
vehicle with the barrier.
The extreme limit state usually

governs the design of the deck
overhang.
68

1. STRENGTH I LIMIT STATE:
The design negative moment is taken at
the exterior face of the support as shown
in the Fig.E7.1-6 for the loads given in
Fig.E7.1-10.
Because the overhang has a single load
.05
path
and
is,1therefore,
a nonredundant
member, then
R
69
70
71

2. EXTREME EVENT II LIMIT STATE
the forces to be transmitted to the deck
overhand due to a vehicular collision with the
concrete barrier are determined from a
strength analysis of the barrier.
In this design problem, the barriers are to be
designed for a performance level PL-2, which
is suitable for
High-speed main line structures on freeways,
expressways, highways and areas with a
mixture of heavy vehicles and maximum
tolerable speeds
72
The maximum edge thickness of the deck

overhand is 200mm[A13.7.3.1.2] and the
minimum height of barrier for a PL-2 is 810mm.
The transverse and longitudinal forces are
distributed over a length of barrier of 1070mm.
This length represents the approximate diameter
of a truck tire, which is in contact with the wall at
the time of impact.
The design philosophy is that if any failures are
to occur they should be in the barrier, which can
readily be repaired,
rather than in the deck
overhang.
The resistance factors
are taken as 1.0 and
73
the vehicle collision load factor is 1.0
M. CONCRETE BARRIER STRENGTH
All traffic railing systems shall be proven

satisfactory through crash testing for a
desired performance level [A13.7.3.1]. If a
previously tested system is used with only
minor modification that do not change its
performance, then additional crash testing
is not required [A13.7.3.1.1]
The concrete barrier shown in the
Fig.E7.1-17 (Next Slide) is similar to the
profile and reinforcement arrangement to
traffic barrier type T5 analyzed by
Hirsh(1978) and tested by Buth et al
(1990)
74
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
Fig. W7.1-17 (Concrete Barrier and connection

to deck
overhang.)
75
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
Rw
2 Lc Lt
M L
8 M b 8M w H c c
..(E7.1-8)
76

t
77

1. MOMENT STRENGTH OF WALL ABOUT
VERTICAL AXIS,MWH.
The moment strength about the
vertical axis is based on the horizontal
reinforcement in the wall. The
thickness of the barrier wall varies
and it is convenient to divide it for
calculation purposes into three
segments as shown in Fig. E7.1-18
78
79

Neglecting the contribution of compressive
reinforcement, the positive and negative bending
strengths of segment I are approximately equal
and calculated as
nI
80
For segment II, the moment strengths are slightly

different. Considering the moment positive if it
produces tension on the straight face, we have
n
pos
n neg
n II
81
For segment III, the positive and negative

bending strengths are equal and
nIII
nI
nII
nIII
82
Now considering the wall to have uniform

thickness and same area as the actual wall
and comparing it with the value of MwH.
This value is close to the one previously calculated

and is easier to find
83

2. MOMENT STRENGTH OF WALL ABOUT HORIZONTAL
AXIS
The moment strength about the horizontal axis is
determined from the vertical reinforcement in the
wall.
The yield lines that cross the vertical reinforcement
(Fig.E7.16-16) produce only tension in the sloping
wall, so that the only negative bending strength need
to be calculated.
Matching the spacing of the vertical bars in the
barrier with the spacing of the bottom bars in the
deck, the vertical bars become No.15 at 225mm
(As = 0.889 mm2/mm) for the traditional design
(Fig.E7.1-14).
84
For segment I, the average wall thickness is

175mm and the moment strength about the
horizontal axis becomes
At the bottom of the wall the vertical

reinforcement at the wider spread is not
anchored into the deck overhang. Only the
hairpin dowel at a narrower spread is anchored.
the effective depth of the hairpin dowel is
[Fig.E7.1-17]
d=50+16+150+8 = 224 mm
85
II+III
86

3. CRITICAL
LENTH OF YIELD LINE PATTERN,LC

Now with moment strengths and Lt=1070mm
known, Eq.E7.1-9 yields
t
c
w
c
87

4. NOMINAL RESISTANCE TO TRANVERSE
LOAD,RW
From Eq.E7.1-8, We have
c c
88

5. SHEAR TRANSFER BETWEEN BARRIER AND DECK
The nominal resistance Rw must be transferred acroass a
cold joint by shear friction. Free body diagrams of the
forces transferred from the barrier to the deck overhang
are shown in the Fig.E7.1-19
89
The nominal shear resistance Vn of the

interface plane is given by [A5.8.4.1]
n
cv
vf
90
The last two factors are for concrete placed

against hardened concrete clean and free of
laitance, but not intentionally roughened.
Therefore for a 1-mm wide design strip
n
cv
vf fy
91
The minimum cross-sectional area of

dowels across the shear plane is [A5.8.4.1]
vf
v
y
92
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
The basic development length lhb for a hooked bar

with fy = 400 MPa. Is given by [A5.11.2.4.1]
100d b
lhb
fc '
and shall not be less than 8db or 150mm. For a
No.15 bar, db=16mm and
lhb
100(16)
292mm
30
which is greater than 8(16) = 128mm and 150mm.

The modifications factors of 0.7 for adequate cover
and 1.2 for epoxy coated bars [A5.11.2.4.2] apply,
so that the development length lhb is changed to
lhb=0.7(1.2)lhb = 0.74(292) = 245mm
93
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
94
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
The standard 90o hook with an extension of

12db=12(16)=192mm at the free end of the bar is adequate
95
[A5.10.2.1]
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
6. TOP REINFORCEMENT IN DECK OVERHANG

The top reinforcement must resist the negative
bending moment over the exterior beam due to
the collision and the dead load of the overhang.
Based on the strength of the 90o hooks, the
collision moment MCT (Fig.E7.1-19) distributed
over a wall length of (Lc+2H) is
96
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
The dead load moments were calculated

previously for strength I so that for the
Extreme Event II limit state, we have
u
97
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
Bundling a No.10 bar with No.15 bar at

225mm on centers, the negative moment
strength becomes
s
98
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
this moment strength will be reduced

because of the axial tension force
T = Rw/(Lc+2H)
By assuming the moment interaction

curve between moment and axial tension
as a straight line (Fig.E7.1-20]
99
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
st
100
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
101
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
102
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
The development length available for the hook in the overhang

before reaching the vertical leg of the hairpin dowel is
available ldh=16+150+8=174mm>155mm
103
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
104
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
105
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
106
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
db
107
M. CONCRETE BARRIER
STRENGTH
108
7.10.2
SOLID SLAB BRIDGE

DESIGN
109
7.10.2: SOLID SLAB BRIDGE DESIGN
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
Design the simply supported solid slab
bridge of Fig.7.2-1 with a span length of
10670mm center to center of bearing for a
HL-93 live load. The roadway width is
13400mm curb to curb. Allow for a future
wearing surface of 75mm thick bituminous
overlay. Use fc=30MPa and fy=400 MPa.
Follow the slab bridge outline in Appendix
A5.4 and the beam and girder bridge
outline in section 5-Appendix A5.3 of the
AASHTO (1994) LRFD bridge specifications.
110
7.10.2: SOLID SLAB BRIDGE DESIGN
111
A. CHECK MINIMUM
RECOMMENDED
DEPTH [TABLE A2.5.2.6.3-1]
112
B. DETERMINE LIVE LOAD STRIP

WIDTH [A4.6.2.3]
1. One-Lane loaded:
Multiple presence factor included

[C4.6.2.3}
1 1
113
B. DETERMINE LIVE LOAD STRIP

WIDTH [A4.6.2.3]
114
C. APPLICABILITY OF LIVE LOADS FOR

DECKS
1. MAXIMUM
SHEAR
FORCE AXLE LOADS [FIG.E7.2-2]
AND DECK
SYSTEMS
115

DECKS
AND DECK SYSTEMS
116

DECKS
AND DECK
SYSTEMS
1. MAXIMUM
BENDING
MOMENT AT MIDSPANAXLE LOADS [FIG.E7.2-3]
117
D. SELECTION OF RESISTANCE
FACTORS (Table 7.10 [A5.5.4.2.1]
118
E. Select load modifiers

[A1.3.2.1]
119
F. SELECT APPLICABLE LOAD

COMBINATION
(TABLE 3.1
[TABLE
A3.4.1-1])
1. STRENGTH
I LIMIT
STATE
2. SERVICE I LIMIT STATE
3. FATIGUE LIMIT STATE
120
G. CALCULATE LIVE LOAD FORCE

EFFECTS
1. INTERIOR STRIP.
121

EFFECTS
2. EDGE STRIP [A4.6.2.1.4]
122

EFFECTS
123
H. CALCULATE FORCE EFFECTS FROM

OTHER loads
1. INTERIOR STRIP, 1-mm WIDE
124
H. CALCULATE FORCE EFFECTS FROM

OTHER loads
2. EDGE STRIP, 1-MM WIDE
125
I. INVESTIGATE SERVICE LIMIT

STATE
1. DURIBILITY
126

STATE
a. MOMENT- INTERIOR STRIP
127

STATE
b. MOMENT-EDGE
STRIP
128

STATE
2. CONTROL OF CRACKING
s
a.
sa
INTERIOR STRIP
r
c
s
c
129

STATE
Location of neutral axis
cr
130

STATE
STEEL STRESS
s
y
sa
131

STATE
b. EDGE STRIP
(103)(x2) = (35 x 103)(510-x)
cr
132

STATE
STEEL STRESS
s
133

STATE
3. DEFORMATIONS [A5.7.3.6]
c e
cr
cr
cr
134

STATE
g
cr
135

STATE
By using Ig: [A5.7.3.6.2]
136

STATE
b. LIVE LOAD DEFLECTION: (OPTIONAL)[A2.5.2.6.2]

allow
LL IM
137

STATE
4607mm
138

STATE
Back
139

STATE
140

STATE
DESIGN LANE LOAD
Lane
141

STATE
The live load deflection estimate of 17mm

is conservative because Ie was based on
the maximum moment at midspan rather
than an average Ie over the entire span.
Also, the additional stiffness provided by
the concrete barriers has been neglected,
as well as the compression reinforcement
in the top of the slab.
Bridges typically deflect less than the
calculations predict and as a result the
deflection check has been made optional.
142

STATE
5. Concrete stresses [A5.9.4.3].

As there is no prestressing
therefore concrete stresses does
not apply.
143

STATE
5. FATIGUE [A5.5.3]
Fatigue load should be one truck with 9000-mm

axle spacing [A3.6.1.1.2]. As the rear axle spacing
is large, therefore the maximum moment results
when the two front axles are on the bridge. as
shown in Fig.E7.2-8, the two axle loads are placed
on the bridge.
No multiple presence factor is applied (m=1).
From Fig.E7.2-8
144

STATE
145

STATE
a. TENSILE LIVE LOAD STRESSES:

One loaded lane, E=4370mm
146

STATE
b. REINFORCING BARS:[A5.5.3.2]
min
147
J. INVESTIGATE STRENGTH LIMIT STATE

1. FLEXURE [A5.7.3.2]
RECTANGULAR STRESS DISTRIBUTION
[A5.7.2.2]
(2/7)
a. INTERIOR STRIP:
148
149
150

For simple span bridges, temperature gradient
effect reduces gravity load effects. Because
TG
temperature gradient may not always
be there, so
assume
=0
151
So the strength limit state governs.

Use No.30 @ 150 mm for interior strip.
152
b. EDGE STRIP
153
STRENGTH I:
Use No. 30 @ 140mm for edge strip.
154
2. SHEAR
Slab bridges designed for moment
in conformance with
AASHTO[A4.6.2.3] maybe
considered satisfactory for shear.
155
K. DISTRIBUTION REINFORCEMENT
[A5.14.4.1]
The amount of bottom transverse
reinforcement maybe taken as a
percentage of the main reinforcement
required for positive moment as.
156
[A5.14.4.1]
a. INTERIOR SPAN:
157
[A5.14.4.1]
b. EDGE STRIP:
158
L. SHRINKAGE AND TEMPRATURE

REINFORCEMENT
Transverse reinforcement in the top of the

slab [A5.10.8]
159
M. DESIGN SKETCH
160
TABLE A-1
BACK
161
BACK
162
163

Introduction to Bridge Engineering: Concrete Bridges Lecture 4 Design (II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to Bridge Engineering: Concrete Bridges Lecture 4 Design (II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to

PROF. DR. AKHTAR NAEEM KHAN

YASIR IRFAN BADRASHI

Example Problem on:

Concrete Deck Design

CONCRETE DECK DESIGN

Use the approximate method of

The minimum thickness for concrete deck slabs is 175 mm

Traditional minimum depths of slabs are based on the deck span

S 3000 2440 3000

Use hs = 190 mm for the structural thickness of the deck. By

B. WEIGHTS OF THE COMPONENTS

For a 1mm width of a transverse strip.

Future Wearing Surface

Slab 205mm thick

An approximate analysis of strips perpendicular

For ease in applying the load factors, the bending

Placement of the deck slab dead

A deck analysis design aid

R200 = Ws (Net area w/o cantilever) S

The parameters are

R200 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L

M200 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L2

M204 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L2

M300 = Wo (Net area cantilever) L2

The parameters are

Placement of the center of gravity of the barrier dead

R200 = Pb (Influence line ordinate)

M200 = Pb (Influence line ordinate) L

M204 = Pb (Influence line ordinate) L

M300 = Pb (Influence line ordinate) L

4. FUTURE WEARING SURFACE

FWS = WDW = 1.66 x 10-3 N/mm2

The 75mm bituminous overlay is placed curb to curb

Fig. E7.1-5: Future wearing surface dead load

4. FUTURE WEARING SURFACE

R200 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L + (Net area w/o cantilever) S]

M200 = WDW (Net area cantilever) L2

M204 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L2 + (Net area w/o cantilever)

M300 = WDW [(Net area cantilever) L2 + (Net area w/o cantilever)

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

Where decks are designed using the

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

The width of equivalent interior transverse

Where X is the distance from the wheel load to

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

Figure E 7.1-6 : Distribution of Wheel

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

Tire contact area [A3.6.1.2.5] shall be

= 1.75, IM = 33% , P = 72.5 KN.

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

the tire contact area is

with the 510mm in the

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

Figure E 7.1-6 : Distribution of Wheel

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

Fig.E7.1-7: Live load placement for maximum positive

D. VEHICULAR LIVE LOAD

If we use the influence line ordinates from