You are on page 1of 76

Chapter 10

BRIDGES

Presented By:

M Shahid Mehmood
2k15-PhD/UET-CE-73

BRIDGES
INTRODUTION

Bridges are typically simple structures, in that the number


of structural elements is small.
Piers

Span
Abutments
On the other hand they often are very irregular, with
Variable

column heights

Non uniform span length

Pier Section Shapes


Principal Choices of bridge column section shapes will be
between
Rectangular and Circular sections
Single or Multi-column piers
Solid and Hollow Section shapes

Single-column Bearing Connection

Multi-column Fixed connection

Pier Section Shapes


Rectangular columns in bridge design are less desirable
than circular columns because
Difficulty in providing adequate restraint by transverse
hoops against buckling.
Under diagonal seismic response, cover spalling will
initiate at lower seismic intensity than when responding in
the principal directions.

Pier Section Shapes


Circular columns are generally
Confined by spirals or circular hoops
Easy to construct
Omni-directional strength and stiffness
With

chamfered

rectangular

sections

the

longitudinal

reinforcements can be confined within a series of spirals, with


the advantage of ease of construction noted above for circular
sections.

Pier Section Shapes


For large, long-span bridges, hollow columns may be an
option. These have advantage of
Reducing concrete mass
Reducing inertial response of piers
Reducing the tendency of thermal cracking at an early
age resulting from heat of hydration

Pier Section Shapes


Hollow circular sections are less common than hollow rectangular
sections despite all considerations (which would indicate improved
seismic performance) for circular option noted above for solid
sections.

Tests on hollow circular columns shown that hollow circular

columns provide excellent stable response provided extreme fibre


compression strains are less than about 0.006.
At higher extreme fibre strains, external cover spalling can result in
sudden increase in neutral axis depth, increasing the strain at
internal surface of the section to the stage where internal spalling,
resulting in implosion, occurs.

The Choice Between Single-column and Multicolumn Piers


The choice between single column and multi-column piers
can not be made independently.
With bearing-supported superstructures, the single-column
design has attraction because

The location of plastic hinge will be known to high

degree of certainty
Strength and stiffness can be made equal in orthogonal
directions since the pier will respond as a vertical cantilever
in all directions.

Single-column Bearing Connection

Multi-column Bearing Connection

Multi-column Fixed connection

The Choice Between Single-column and Multicolumn Piers


Multi-column piers are more appropriate when
Monolithic connection details are selected
Superstructure width is large
If superstructure is bearing supported on a multi-column pier
cap then
Strength and stiffness is non-uniform in orthogonal
directions

Bearing-supported vs. Monolithic Connection


A major disadvantage of monolithic connection is
Seismic moments developed at the top of the pier are
transmitted to superstructure. This adds the superstructure
gravity moments. Resisting these may increase the cost of
superstructure.
Monolithic details are appropriate when the superstructure is
continuous over the pier, rather than simply supported.

Bearing-supported vs. Monolithic Connection


Bearing-supported superstructures have the advantage of
minimizing the problems associated with moment transfer from
pier to superstructure.
Seismic displacement of bearing superstructure will
generally be larger than those of structure with monolithic
connections.

Soil-Structure Interaction
Bridges are often require to cross rivers and valleys where
foundation conditions are less than ideal. As a consequence
soil structure interaction effects require special considerations.
In fig 10.13 (a), the pier is supported on spread footing.
Partial uplift of the footing on foundation material cause
increase in base rotation. Thus increasing foundation flexibility
and yield displacement increases. Thus reducing displacement
ductility demand and reduces damping.

A suitable design criterian is to consider that 50% of


footing should still be in contact with foundation material.
This will ensure that footing has sufficient overturning
capacity to support maximum feasible overturning moment.

In fig 10.3 (b), column continues in the foundation to become


a supporting pile. Maximum moment occur some distance
below the ground surface. Elastic rotation at hinge also add to
yield displacement. Thus increasing foundation flexibility.

Fig 10.3 (c) shows a pile supported footing. If soil strength


and stiffness are lower than pile cap translation is significant. If
piles are supported on firm stratum, the pile cap rotation may
be lower.

Influence Of Movement Joints

Superstructure

movement

joints

are

provided

to

accommodate creep and shrinkage displacements.

Minimum number of joints are provided as they require

continual maintenance.
Location of movement joints should be considered from the
seismic as well as serviceability view point.
There will be additional damping associated with relative
joint displacements.

P- Effects For Bridges


P- effects are particularly important for bridges as piers
are often high.
Drift limitations imposed by design codes for buildings will
not be applied for bridges.
Response drifts for bridges are 0.04 or higher.

Design Displacements for Longitudinal


Response
The longitudinal response of straight bridges is simplified by
the fact except for very long bridges, the design displacements
will be the same at all piers.

For very long bridges, the design displacements to be

different at different piers but in such cases it is more


appropriate to separately design segment of bridges between
movement joints.

Pier Yield Displacement


Pier yield displacement in longitudinal direction depends on
a)Yield curvature
b)Degree of fixity at top and bottom
c)Pier height.

(a) Yield Curvature


Yield curvature of different sections are shown in equ. 4.57.
It is discussed in previous chapters that yield curvature is
independent of stiffness and strength.
Moment-Curvature plots of two sections are compared in fig
10.4.

(a) Yield Curvature


In initial stages, there is little difference between strength
and stiffness of two columns having same diameter, same
longitudinal and transverse reinforcement, same axial loads
and same strength but one section is hollow and other is solid.

The biggest difference between the moment-curvature

response of solid and hollow sections result from the limitation


of 0.006 on extreme fibre compression strain for hollow
column. This also limits the curvature ductility capacity as

max
y

,hollow 4

,solid 16.4

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


End-fixity conditions at both top and bottom will effect the yield
displacement of pier. A number of possible conditions are
shown in fig 10.5.
Yield displacement is given by,

y C1 y H Lsp

(10.1)

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


In fig 10.5 (a), Superstructure is
bearing supported and footing is
rigid against rotation and translation.
For this case

C1 1

3
Lsp 0.022 f ye d bl

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


In fig 10.5 (b), superstructure has
monolithic connection to pier and footing
is rigid. For this case,

Lsp 2 Lsp 2 x(0.022 f ye d bl )


C1 1

Superstructure Rigid

1
1

Superstructure Flexible
C1
6 1 C
2

4 EI ( Ls1.Ls 2 )
C2
(10.2)
6 I ss ( H Lsp )( Ls1 Ls 2 )

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


The situation in fig 10.5 (c) is inverse of
fig 10.5 (a), with hinge provided at column
base to reduce foundation moments and
monolithic connection to superstructure.
This detail is only appropriate when pier
consist of more than one column, since
single-column design with this detail would
be unstable transversely.

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


Fig 10.5 (d) has a column supported on
flexible

base

and

pile/superstructure

connection that could be either bearing


supported or monolithic.

Yield displacement increases due to

foundation

flexibility.

The

additional

displacement resulting from

foundation

flexibility is

F ( M B VB hF )( H hF ) kv I

(10.3)

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


Fig 10.5 (e) has a column/pile where the
pile continues in ground into the foundation
material and superstructure/column connection
is either bearing supported or monolithic.
Relationship between HIG/D and H/D are
expressed in dimensionless form in fig 10.6 (a)
and (b).

Fig.10.6 Data for yield displacement calculations for Pile/column

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


It will be noted that in ground depth (HIG-H)
decreases as dimensionless above ground
height H/D increases.
As soil strength increases, In-ground plastic
hinge depth (HIG-H) decreases.
Relationships between HIG/D and H/D are:
Sand, 30o : (H IG /D) 4.3 0.82(H/D)

(10.4a)

Sand, 37 o : (H IG /D) 3.40 0.84(H/D)

(10.4b)

Clay, p u 20kPa : (H IG /D) 6.38 0.69(H/D)

(10.4c)

Clay, p u 40kPa : (H IG /D) 4.96 0.71(H/D)

(10.4d)

(b) Influence Of End-fixity Conditions


The coefficients to be used in equ. 10.1 are plotted in fig. 10.6
(c) and (d) against column above ground heights, internal
friction angle, pinned connection, fixed connection and soil
strength. The data in fig.10.6 is represented by following
equations.
Sand, pinned head, 30 o :
Sand, pinned head, 37 o :
Sand, Fixed head, all :
Clay, p u 20kPa :
Clay, p u 40kPa :
Clay, fixxed head, all p u :

C1 1.187 0.223ln(H/D)
C1 1.137 0.230ln(H/D)
C1 1.137 0.230ln(H/D)
C1 1.840 0.363ln(H/D)
C1 1.767 0.360ln(H/D)
C1 0.447 0.055ln(H/D)

(10.5a)
(10.5b)
(10.5c)
(10.5d)
(10.5e)
(10.5f)

Elastically Responding Piers


Yield displacement of elastically responding piers is given by
y

2.25 y ( H Lsp ) 2

3D

(10.6)

Yield displacements are shown for cantilever piers with

different aspect ratio in fig 10.8 corresponding to different


earthquake magnitude with different PGA.
From aspect ratio and diameter, yield displacement can be
found for PGA and earthquake magnitude as shown in fig 10.8.

Design Displacements for Footing-Supported


Piers
In buildings design displacements are set by drift limits, this
is not the case for bridges.
In bridges, design displacements are set by strain limits. P-
effects may also limit the design displacements.

D y ls y L p H

10.12

When strain limits governs the design, design curvatures are


found by

ls ,c

c ,ls

ls , s

s ,ls

d c

10.7a

10.7b

Design Displacements for Footing-Supported


Piers
As curvature is associated with neutral axis depth c, the neutral
axis depth is given by

0.2 0.65 P

'
ce

f Ag

10.8

The equation is plotted in figure 10.9. Axial load ratio is known


at start of design and value of reinforcement ratio is initially
assumed to find neutral axis depth.

Design Displacements for Footing-Supported


Piers
The design process to determine design displacement for
longitudinal response can be expressed in the following steps.
Step 1: Determine the volumetric ratio

4 Ab

'

10.9

D
S
Step 2: Determine the confined compression strength of core
concrete ( f cc' ).
Step 3: Determine the damage-control compression strain

dc ,c

v f yh su
0.004 1.4
f cc'

10.10

Design Displacements for Footing-Supported


Piers
Step 4: Determine the column axial force ratio.
Step 5: Estimate neutral axis depth.
Step 6: Determine limit state curvature.
Step 7: Determine plastic hinge length.

L p kLc Lsp 2 Lsp

10.11

D y ls y L p H

10.12

Step 8: Determine the design displacement

Design Example 10.1


Determine Design Displacement For A Footing
Supported Column:
To illustrate the sequence of operations described in the
previous section, we consider a footing-supported column
monolithically

connected

to

the

superstructure,

under

longitudinal seismic response. The column diameter is 2.0m


(78.7 in), has a clear height of 12.0 m (39.4 ft), and supports
an axial load including self weight, of 10,000kN (2250 kips),
Specified material strengths are fc = 30MPa (hence, from
Section 4.2.5 fce = 1.3 x 30 = 39 MPa (5.66 ksi)) and

Design Example 10.1


fy = fyh = 420MPa (hence from section 4.2.5 fye = 462MPa
(67.0ksi)). The ratio of ultimate to yield strength of the
longitudinal reinforcement 1.35. Longitudinal bar diameter is 40
mm (1,575 in), with 50 mm (1.97 in) cover, and the transverse
reinforcements initially selected as 20 mm (0.79 in) diameter at
l00 mm (3.94 in) spacing along the column axis. Small
adjustment to the spacing may be made after final design.
Reinforcement strains at ultimate stress are 0.10 and 0.l2 for
longitudinal and transverse reinforcement respectively.

Example 10.1: Determine Design Displacement


For A Footing Supported Column
Given Data;
Column diameter = D = 2 m , Column Height = H = 12 m
Axial Load (including self-weight) = 10,000 kN = 10 MPa

f c' 30 MPa
f y f yh 420 MPa

fu

f ye

1.35

u ,ls 0.10

su 0.12

f ce' 1.3 x 30 39 MPa


f ye 1.1 x 420 462 MPa

d bh 20 mm @100mm
d bl 40 mm

Concrete cover 50 mm

Solution
Case (a) Fixed End Connection.
Step 1: Determine the volumetric ratio (From Equ.10.9)

v 4 Ab

Ab d 2
4

2
(20) 314
4

D'S

Core Diameter = D= 2000 - (2x50) + 20 = 1920 mm

v 4 x 3141920 x100 0.0065


Step 2: Determine Confined compression strength fcc of core
concrete.

f yh
f

'
ce

420

39

10.8

From fig 10.9 (b) with f yh


We find
f cc'

f ce

'

1.23

Thus,

f cc' 1.23 x 39 48.0 MPa


Step 3: Determine damage
control compression strain
From equ. 10.10

dc ,c

v f yh su
0.004 1.4
f cc'

'
ce

10.8 and

v 0.00654

dc ,c

0.00654 x420x0.12
0.004 1.4
48

= 0.0136
Step 4: Determine axial force ratio
P '
10
0.0816
39 x3.14
f ce Ag
Step 5: Estimate neutral axis
depth
longitudinal
reinforcement ratio = 1.8 %
From fig. 10.9 (a),

c / D 0.240
c 0.240 x 2 0.480

Step 6: Determine limit state curvature From Equ. 10.7

ls ,c
ls , s

dc ,c

0.0136

0.48

s ,ls

0.0283 / m

d c
0.06
0.0414 / m
1.93 0.48

governs
s ,ls 0.6 u
0.6 x0.1
0.06

Step 7: Determine Plastic hinge length from Equ.10.11

L p kLc Lsp 2 Lsp


From Equ.4.31b

fu

k 0.2
1 0.08
f

From Equ.4.30

Lsp 0.022 f ye d bl

k 0.21.35 1 0.07 0.08

Lsp 0.022 x 462x 40 407 mm

Hence, with the column in dual bending, since it is fixed at the


top,
Lc 6 m

L p kLc Lsp 2 Lsp


L p 0.07 x 6 0.47 0.827 m
Step 8: Determine Design Displacement. From equ. 10.12

D y ls y L p H

From Equ.10.1

y C1 y H Lsp

f ye

462
2

E
200,000

.00231

From Equ.4.57a

2.25 y

2.25 x 0.00231 / 2 0.0026 / m

For fixed end connection

C1 1

Lsp 2 Lsp

y C1 y H Lsp

= 1/6 x 0.0026 (12+2x.407)2


= 0.0712 m
Design displacement is given by,

D y ls y L p H

= 0.712 + (0.0283 0.0026) x 0.287 x 12


= 0.326 mm
Corresponding displacement ductility capacity is
D 0.326 0.0712 4.58
y

Case (b) Pinned End Connection.


If column is pinned at top then the yield and damage control
curvatures are unaffected.
Values from Step 1 to Step 6 are same as for fixed end
condition.

ls ,c 0.0283 / m

y 0.0026 / m

Step 7: Determine Plastic hinge length

L p kLc Lsp 2 Lsp


fu

k 0.2
1 0.08
f

Lsp 0.022 f ye d bl

k 0.21.35 1 0.07 0.08

Lsp 0.022 x 462x 40 407 mm

since column is pinned at the top,

Lc 12 m

L p kLc Lsp 2 Lsp


L p 0.07 x12 0.47 1.247 m
Step 8: Determine Design Displacement From equ. 10.12

D y ls y L p H

From Equ.10.1

y C1 y H Lsp

y 0.0026 / m As calculated in case (a).

For Pinned end connection

C1 1

Lsp Lsp

y C1 y H Lsp

= 1/3 x 0.0026 (12+0.407)2


= 0.133 mm
Design displacement is given by,

D y ls y L p H

= 0.133 + (0.0283 0.0026) x 1.247 x 12


= 0.518 mm
Corresponding displacement ductility capacity is
D 0.518 0.133 3.90
y

Design Displacement of Pile Column


For pile/column, plastic hinge forming in ground is not affected
by strain penetration (Lsp).
So Plastic hinge length is given
by eq.(10.13)

L p D 1 0.1 H H cp D 1.6
Average value of HCP/HIG are,

0.52
0.57

Sand
Clay

(10.13)

Design Displacement of Pile Column


Step

A:

Determine

Height

from

in

ground

hinge

superstructure.
Step B: Follow steps 1 to 6 for a footing supported pier.
Step C: Determine the plastic hinge length.
Step D: Determine the design displacement.
Pinned Connection : D y , IG ls y L p , IG H IG

(10.14)

Fixed connection : D y , F C3 ls y L p ,T H IG

(10.15)

C3 1.68

Sand

1.54

Clay

to

Example 10.2: Determine Design Displacement


For A Pile/Column
Given Data: Given data is same as for example 10.1.
Column diameter = D = 2 m ,

Column Height = H = 12 m

Axial Load (including self-weight) = 10,000 kN = 10 MPa

f c' 30 MPa
f y f yh 420 MPa

fu

f ye

1.35

u ,ls 0.10

su 0.12

f ce' 1.3 x 30 39 MPa


f ye 1.1 x 420 462 MPa

d bh 20 mm @100mm
d bl 40 mm

Concrete cover 50 mm
Soil is dense sand,

37 o

Solution
Case (a) Pinned End Connection.
Step A: Determine Height from in-ground hinge to superstructure
for

37 o From Eq. 10.4 b

H IG D 3.40 0.84 x H D
H IG D 3.40 0.8412 2
H IG 8.44 x 2 16.88 mm

Step B: Follow steps from 1 to 6 for footing supported piers.


Since the given data is also used for example 10.1, so yield
displacements and limit state curvatures are numerically
identical as for example 10.1

ls 0.0283 / m

y 0.0026 / m

Step C: Determine Plastic hinge length. From Eq.10.11


L p , IG D 1 0.1 H H cp D 1.6
for pinned connection

H CP 0

L p , IG D 1 0.112 0 2 1.6
L p , IG

3.2 mm

Step D: Determine Design displacements. From Eq.10.13


for Pinned Connection : D y , IG ls y L p , IG H IG

y , IG C1 y H 2

C1 1.137 0.230 ln H D

(10.5b)

C1 1.137 0.230 ln12 2 0.725

y , IG 0.725x 0.0026x12 2
0.537 mm

D y , IG ls y L p , IG H IG
0.537 (0.0283 - 0.0026)x3.2x16.88
1.925 m

Corresponding displacement ductility capacity is


D
1.925
3.6
0
.
537
y . IG

Case (b) Fixed-Connection Case.


Step A: Determine Height from in-ground hinge to superstructure
for

37 o From Eq. 10.4 b

H IG

D 3.40 0.84 x H D

H IG 8.44 x 2 16.88 mm

Step B: Follow steps from 1 to 6 for footing supported piers.


Since the given data is also used for example 10.1, so yield
displacements and limit state curvatures are numerically
identical as for example 10.1.

ls 0.0283 / m

y 0.0026 / m

Step C: Determine Plastic hinge length from eq.10.11

L p kH CP Lsp 2 Lsp
For sand

H CP / H IG 0.5

This implies,
So,

H cp 0.5x16.88 8.78 m

L p 0.07 x8.87 0.407


1.022 m

k 0.07

Lsp 407 mm

Step D: Determine Design displacement. From equ. 10.15


Fixed connection : D y , F C3 ls y L p H IG

For sand,

C3 1.68

y , F C1 y

IG

Lsp

C1 0.310 0.030 ln H D

(10.1)
(10.5c)

0.310 0.030 ln 12 2 0.256

So,
Thus,

y , F 0.256x0.0026x(16.88 0.407) 2
0.199 m
D 0.199 1.68(0.0283 - 0.0026)x1.022x16.88
0.624 m

Design Example 10.3: Longitudinal Design of a


Four Bridge span
The four-span bridge of fig 10.14 has a superstructure
depth of 2 m and monolithic connection between piers and
superstructure. Superstructure mass averages 190 kN/m
including weight of internal cap beam but not the column
weight. The 2 m diameter single-column piers based on the
data for design example 10.1.

The data from example 10.1:


Column diameter = D = 2 m ,
Axial Load

= 10,000 kN

f c' 30 MPa
f y f yh 420 MPa

fu

f ye

1.35

u ,ls 0.10

su 0.12

= 10 MPa

f ce' 1.3 x 30 39 MPa


f ye 1.1 x 420 462 MPa

Concrete cover 50 mm
Soil is dense sand,

37 o

1st we check that the column axial loads are compatible with the
assumption of column can support 10,000 kN.
Central pier C: using a tributary length of superstructure 50m
and self weight = d2/4 x 23.5 = 3.14x22/4 x23.5 = 73.8 kN/m,
the axial loads at top and bottom of column C are,
column top: P = 50 x 190 = 9500 kN
column base: P = 9500 + 12 x 73.8 = 10400 kN
Pier B & D: using a tributary length of superstructure 45m, axial
loads are
column top: P = 45 x 190 = 8550 kN
column base: P = 8550 + 16 x 73.8 = 9700 kN

These are close enough to 10MN to justify the calculated value


of neutral axis depth of 0.48 as in example 10.1.
Design Dispalcements: Displacement of central pier C will
govern. Design displacement is same as calculated in example
10.1.

D = 0.326 m

Displacement of central pier B &D will exceed this, so not


calculated.
Yield Dispalcements: Yield displacement of pier C has already
bean calculated in example 10.1.
Pier C:

Y = 0.0712 m

Pier B & D:

Y = (H+2Lsp)2/6
= .0026(16+2x0.407)2/6 = 0.123 m

Displacement ductilities:
Pier C:

D 0.326 0.0712 4.58


y

Pier B & D:

0.326 0.123 2.65

Pier Damping: From eq.(3.17a)

c 0.05 0.444
Pier C:

c 0.05 0.444


4.58 1
0.160
4.58
2.65 1
Pier B & D: B , D 0.05 0.444
0.138
4.58
System Damping:
As all piers have same flexure reinforcement ratio, as a
consequence the flexural strength of all piers will be
essentially the same,

Damping values are simply weighted by lateral shear


force transmitted. With equal moment capacities, the
shear carried by the piers are inverse proportion to their
MC MB
heights. From eq. 10.18
VC H C VB H B
V

i i
VB B VD D VC C
H
m
VC B
VB
sys

H
C
VB VD VC
Vi
m

sys

2(1x 0.138) 1.33x 0.160

1 1 1.33
0.147

16

V 1.33VB
12 B
MB MD
VB H D

HB

16

VD

V 1.0VD
Effective Period:
16 D
The effective period of response is found entering with a
displacement of 0.326m, and intersecting the spectrum
for sys = 0.147 as shown by dashed line in figure (10.15
b). The effective time period is
Te = 1.761 sec

Effective mass:
1/3 of the column mass be added to the mass lumped at the
superstructure level. Hence, the effective mass is
me.g = 190 x 180 + 0.333(12+2x16)x73.8 = 35300kN
Effective Stiffness:
From eq. 3.1

4 2 me
Ke
Te2

4 2 x 35.3

45.9 MN / m
2
9.805x1.761

Base Shear:
From eq. 3.2
Vbase = keD = 45.9 x 0.326 = 14.95 MN

This base shear is distributed to the columns in inverse


proportion to their heights. Thus,
VB = VD = 14.95/3.33 = 4.49 MN
VC = 1.33 x 14.95/3.33= 5.97 MN

VB VC VD VBase
VB 1.33VB VB VBase
3.33VB VBase VB

Column Base Moments are,


MB = MD = VB,D x H/2
= 4.49 x 8 = 35.9 MNm
MC= VC x H/2
= 5.97 x 6 = 35.8 MNm

P- Effect:
From eq. 3.45, the stability index is given by
P max

MD

VBase

3.33

10 x 0.326

0.091
35.9

As this is less than 0.10, the recommendations of 3.6.3


indicates that P- effects can be ignored.
Moment-curvature analysis using CUMBIA indicates that with
axial load of 10 MN, the moment (35.9 MN) can be provided
at a peak compression strain of 0.0136 by 91200 mm 2 of
flexural reinforcement (2.9%).

Thank You