Design Parameters. Span 1. Span 2. Span 3. All Spans. Bents


 Brent Simpson
 1 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 County: Any Hwy: Any Design: BRG Date: 6/2010 Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example Design example is in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Ed. (2010) as prescribed by TxDOT Bridge Design Manual  LRFD (May 2009). Design Parameters Span 1 54' Type TX54 Girders (0.851 k / ft ) 6 Girders 8.00' with 3' overhangs 2" Haunch Span 2 112' Type TX54 Girders (0.851 k / ft ) 6 Girders 8.00' with 3' overhangs 3.75" Haunch Span 3 54' Type TX54 Girders (0.851 k / ft ) 6 Girders 8.00' with 3' overhangs 2" Haunch All Spans Deck is 46ft wide Type T551 Rail (0.382k/ft) 8" Thick Slab (0.100 ksf) Assume 2" 140 pcf (0.023 ksf) Use Class "C" Concrete f' c =3.60 ksi w c =150 pcf (for weight) w c =145 pcf (for Modulus of Elasticity calculation) Grade 60 Reinforcing F y =60 ksi "AASHTO LRFD" refers to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, 5th Ed. (2010) "BDMLRFD" refers to the TxDOT Bridge Design Manual  LRFD (May 2009) "TxSP" refers to TxDOT guidance, recommendations, and standard practice. "Furlong & Mirza" refers to "Strength and Servicability of Inverted TBeam Bent Caps Subject to Combined Flexure, Shear, and Torsion", Center for Highway Research Research Report No F, The University of Texas at Austin, August 1974 The basic bridge geometry can be found on the Bridge Layout located in the Appendices. (TxSP) (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Materials) (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Materials) Bents Use 36" Diameter Columns (Typical for Type TX54 Girders) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 1 June 2010
2 Design Parameters Define Variables (Con't) Back Span Span1 GdrSpa1 Forward Span 54ft Span2 112ft 8ft GdrSpa2 8ft GdrNo1 6 GdrNo2 6 GdrWt1 Haunch klf GdrWt klf 2in Haunch2 3.75in Span Length Girder Spacing Number of Girders in Span Weight of Girder Size of Haunch Bridge Skew 0deg BridgeW 46ft RdwyW 44ft GirderD 54in BrgSeat 1.5in BrgPad 2.75in SlabThk 8in OverlayThk 2in RailWt 0.382klf w c 0.150kcf Skew of Bents Width of Bridge Deck Width of Roadway Depth of Type TX54 Girder Bearing Seat Buildup Bearing Pad Thickness Thickness of Bridge Slab Thickness of Overlay Weight of Rail Unit Weight of Concrete for Loads W Olay 0.140kcf Unit Weight of Overlay Bents f c 3.60ksi Concrete Strength w ce 0.145kcf Unit Weight of Concrete for E c 1.5 E c = w ce f c E c 3457ksi Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete, (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) f y 60ksi Yield Strength of reinforcement E s 29000ksi Modulus of Elasticity of Steel D column 36in Diameter of Columns Other Variables IM 33% Dynamic load allowance, (AASHTO LRFD Table ) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 2 June 2010
3 Determine Cap Dimensions Stem Width b stem D column 3in b stem 39in Stem Height The stem is typically at least 3" wider than the Diameter of the Column (36") to allow for the extension of the column reinforcement into the Cap. (TxSP) Distance From Top of Slab to Top of Ledge D Slab_to_Ledge SlabThk Haunch2 GirderD BrgPad BrgSeat Haunch 2 is the larger of the two haunches. D Slab_to_Ledge 70.00in StemHaunch 3.75in The top of the stem must be 2.5" below the bottom of the slab. (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Geometric Constraints) Accounting for the 1/2" of bituminus fiber, the top of the stem must have at least 2" of haunch on it, but the haunch should not be less than either of the haunches of the adjacent spans. d stem D Slab_to_Ledge SlabThk StemHaunch 0.5in Use: d stem 57in d stem 57.75in The stem must accommodate 1/2" of bituminous fiber. Round the Stem Height down to the nearest 1". (TxSP) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 3 June 2010
4 Determine Cap Dimensions Ledge Width (Con't) The Ledge Width must be adequate for Bar M to develop fully. 26" is typically used for TX54 girders, as it is adequate to develop a # 6 bar with the typical 2.5" cover. If the cover is increased to 3", allowing for a modification factor of 0.7, a 24" Ledge is adequate to develop a # 7 bar. IBeams have 9.5" from the face of the cap to the CL of Bearing. The typical ledge width for these bridges is 23". "L dh,prov " must be greater than or equal to "L dh,req " for bar M. cover 2.5in "cover" is measured from the center of the transverse bars. L 8in Determine the Required Development Length of Bar M: "L" is the length of the Bearing Pad along the girder. A typical type TX54 bearing pad is 8"x21" as shown in the IGEB standard. Try # 6 Bar for Bar M. d bar_m 0.750in A bar_m 0.44in 2 Basic Development Length L dh = 38.0d bar_m L dh 15.02in (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) f c Modification Factors for L dh: (AASHTO LRFD ) Is Top Cover greater than or equal to 2.5", and Side Cover greater than or equal to 2"? SideCover cover d bar_m 2 SideCover 2.13in TopCover cover d bar_m 2 TopCover 2.13in "Side Cover" and "Top Cover" are the clear cover on the side and top of the hook respectively. The dimension "cover" is measured from the center of Bar M. No, Factor = 1.0 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 4 June 2010
5 Determine Cap Dimensions (Con't) The Required Development Length is the larger of the following: (AASHTO LRFD ) L dh Factor 8d bar_m 6in Therefore, L dh_req 15.02in 6.00in 15.02in L b ledge_min L dh_req cover 12in b 2 ledge_min 25.52in The distance from the face of the stem to the center of bearing is 12" for TxGirders. (IGEB) Use: b ledge 26in Width of Bottom Flange b f 2b ledge b stem b f 91in Ledge Depth Use a Ledge Depth of 28" d ledge 28in As a general rule of thumb Ledge Depth is greater than or equal to 2'3". This is the depth at which a bent from a typical bridge will pass the punching shear check (calculations found on Pg. 21). Total Depth of Cap h cap d stem d ledge h cap 85in Summary of Cross Sectional Dimensions b stem 39in From Pg. 3 d stem 57in From Pg. 3 b ledge 26in d ledge 28in h cap 85in LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 5 June 2010
6 Determine Cap Dimensions (Con't) Length of Cap First define Girder Spacing and End Distance: S 8ft c 2ft L Cap S( GdrNo1 1) 2c L Cap 44 ft Girder Spacing "c" is the distance from the Center Line of the Exterior Girder to the Edge of the Cap measured along the Cap. Length of Cap TxDOT policy is as follows, "The edge distance between the exterior bearing pad and the end of the inverted Tbeam shall not be less than 12in." (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) replacing the statement in AASHTO LRFD stating it shall not be less than d f. Preferably, the stem should extend at least 3" beyond the edge of the bearing seat. Bearing Pad Dimensions L 8in (IGEB standard) Length of Bearing Pad W 21in Width of Bearing Pad Cross Sectional Properties of Cap A g d ledge b f d stem b stem A g 4771in 2 ybar d ledge b f 1 2 d ledge 1 d stem b stem d ledge 2 d stem A g Distance from bottom of cap to the center of gravity of the cap ybar 33.80in 3 b f d ledge I g 12 3 b stem d stem 12 b f d ledge 2 1 ybar 2 d ledge I g in 4 1 b stem d stem ybar d ledge 2 d stem 2 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 6 June 2010
7 Cap Analysis Cap Model Assume: 4 Columns 12'0" The cap will be modeled as a continuous beam with simple supports using TxDOT's CAP18 program. TxDOT does not consider frame action for typical multicolumn bents. (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Structural Analysis) Cap 18 Model Station = 0.5' The circled numbers are the stations that will be used in the CAP 18 input file. One station is 0.5ft in the direction perpendicular to the pgl, not parallel to the bent. station 0.5ft Station increment for CAP18 Recall: E c ksi (Pg. 2) I g in 4 (Pg.6) E c I g kipin 2 / 12 in ft 2 = E c I g kipft 2 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 7 June 2010
8 Cap Analysis Dead Load SPAN 1 Rail1 (Con't) Span1 2RailWt 2 kip Rail min( GdrNo1 6) girder Values used in the following equations can be found on Pg. 2. Rail weight is distributed evenly among stringers, up to 3 stringers per rail. (TxSP) Slab1 Span1 kip w c GdrSpa1SlabThk 1.10 Slab girder Increase slab DL by 10% to account for haunch and thickened slab ends. Girder1 GdrWt1 Span1 kip Girder girder kip DLRxn1 Rail1 Slab1 Girder1 DLRxn girder Overlay is calculated separately, because it has a different load factor than the rest of the dead loads. Overlay1 Span1 kip W Olay GdrSpa1OverlayThk Overlay girder Design for future overlay. SPAN 2 Rail2 Slab2 Span2 2RailWt 2 kip Rail min( GdrNo2 6) girder Span2 kip w c GdrSpa2SlabThk 1.10 Slab girder Girder2 GdrWt2 Span2 kip Girder girder kip DLRxn2 Rail2 Slab2 Girder2 DLRxn girder Overlay2 Span2 kip W Olay GdrSpa2OverlayThk Overlay girder CAP Cap w c A g kip * ft 0.5ft station kip = Cap station LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 8 June 2010
9 Cap Analysis (Con't) Live Load (AASHTO LRFD and ) LongSpan ShortSpan max( Span1 Span2) min( Span1 Span2) LongSpan ft ShortSpan ft IM 0.33 Lane 0.64klf Lane kip lane LongSpan ShortSpan LongSpan 14ft Truck 32kip 32kip 8kip LongSpan Truck kip lane LLRxn Lane Truck( 1 IM) LLRxn kip lane P 16.0kip( 1 IM) P 21.28kip LLRxn ( 2P) w 10ft w 9.83 kip * ft 0.5ft station kip w 4.92 station 2 LongSpan 28ft LongSpan Use HL93 Live Load. For maximum reaction at interior bents, "Design Truck" will always govern over "Design Tandem". For the maximum reaction when the long span is more than twice as long as the short span, place the rear (32 kip) axle over the support and the middle (32 kip) and front (8 kip) axles on the long span. For the maximum reaction when the long span is less than twice as long as the short span, place the middle (32 kip) axle over the support, the front (8 kip) axle on the short span and the rear (32 kip) axle on the long span. Combine "Design Truck" and "Design Lane" loadings. (AASHTO LRFD ) Dynamic load allowance, IM, does not apply to "Design Lane." (AASHTO LRFD ) The Live Load is applied to the slab by two 16 kip wheel loads increased by the dynamic load allowance with the remainder of the live load distributed over a 10 ft (AASHTO LRFD ) design lane width. (TxSP) The Live Load applied to the slab is distributed to the beams assuming the slab is hinged at each beam except the outside beam. (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Structural Analysis) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 9 June 2010
10 Cap Analysis Cap 18 Input Multiple Presence Factors, m (AASHTO LRFD Table ) Input "Multiple Presence Factors" into Cap18 as "Load Reduction Factors". No. of Lanes Factor "m" >3 (Con't) Limit States (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) The cap design need only consider Strength I Live Load and Dynamic Load Allowance LL + IM = 1.75 Dead Load Components DC = 1.25 Strength I, Service I, and Service I with DL. (TxSP) Dead Load Wearing Surface (Overlay) Service I Live Load and Dynamic Load Allowance DW = 1.50 LL + IM = 1.00 TxDOT allows the Overlay Factor to be reduced to 1.25 (TxSP), since overlay is typically used in design only to increase the safety factor, but in this example we will use DW = Dead Load and Wearing Surface DC & DW = 1.00 Dead Load TxDOT considers Service level Dead Load only with a limit reinforcement stress of 22 ksi to minimize cracking. (BDMLRFD, Chapter 4, Section 5, Design Criteria) Cap 18 Output Max +M Max M Dead Load: M posdl 250.1kipft M negdl 379.4kipft Service Load: M posserv 492.5kipft M negserv 590.9kipft These loads are the maximum loads from the Cap 18 Output File located in the Appendices. Factored Load: M posult 741.7kipft M negult 852.1kipft LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 10 June 2010
11 Cap Analysis (Con't) Girder Reactions on Ledge: Dead Load kip DLSpan1 Rail1 Slab1 Girder1 DLSpan girder kip Overlay girder kip DLSpan2 Rail2 Slab2 Girder2 DLSpan girder kip Overlay girder For calculations of these loads see Pg. 8. Live Load (AASHTO LRFD and ) Loads per Lane: Use HL93 Live Load. For maximum reaction at interior bents, "Design Truck" will always govern over "Design Tandem" for Spans greater than 26ft. For the maximum reaction, place the back (32 kip) axle over the support. LaneSpan1 LaneSpan2 Span1 0.64klf LaneSpan kip 2 lane Span2 0.64klf LaneSpan kip 2 lane Span1 14ft TruckSpan1 32.0kip 32.0kip Span1 28ft 8.0kip TruckSpan kip Span1 Span1 lane Span2 14ft TruckSpan2 32.0kip 32.0kip Span2 28ft 8.0kip TruckSpan kip Span2 Span2 lane LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 11 June 2010
12 Cap Analysis (Con't) Girder Reactions on Ledge (Con't) : Live Load (Con't) Loads per Lane (Con't) : IM 0.33 LLRxnSpan1 LaneSpan1 TruckSpan1 ( 1 IM) LLRxnSpan kip lane LLRxnSpan2 LaneSpan2 TruckSpan2 ( 1 IM) LLRxnSpan kip lane gv Span1_Int gv Span1_Ext gv Span2_Int gv Span2_Ext Combine "Design Truck" and "Design Lane" loadings. (AASHTO LRFD ) Dynamic load allowance, "IM", does not apply to "Design Lane." (AASHTO LRFD ) The Live Load Reactions are assumed to be the Shear Live Load Distribution Factor multiplied by the Live Load Reaction per Lane. The Shear Live Load Distribution Factor was calculated using the "LRFD Live Load Distribution Factors" Spreadsheet found in the Appendices. The Exterior Girders must have a Live Load Distribution Factor equal to or greater than the Interior Girders. This is to accommodate a possible future bridge widening. Widening the bridge would cause the exterior girders to become interior girders. LLSpan1Int gv Span1_Int LLRxnSpan1 kip LLSpan1Int girder LLSpan1Ext gv Span1_Ext LLRxnSpan1 kip LLSpan1Ext girder LLSpan2Int gv Span2_Int LLRxnSpan2 kip LLSpan2Int girder LLSpan2Ext gv Span2_Ext LLRxnSpan2 kip LLSpan2Ext girder LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 12 June 2010
13 Cap Analysis (Con't) Girder Reactions on Ledge (Con't) : Span 1 Interior Girder Service Load Service I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V s_span1int DLSpan1 Overlay1 LLSpan1Int V s_span1int 134kip Factored Load Strength I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V u_span1int 1.25DLSpan1 1.5Overlay1 1.75LLSpan1Int V u_span1int 208kip Exterior Girder Service Load Service I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V s_span1ext DLSpan1 Overlay1 LLSpan1Ext V s_span1ext 134kip Factored Load Strength I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V u_span1ext 1.25DLSpan1 1.5Overlay1 1.75LLSpan1Ext V u_span1ext 208kip Span 2 Interior Girder Service Load Service I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V s_span2int DLSpan2 Overlay2 LLSpan2Int V s_span2int 215kip Factored Load Strength I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V u_span2int 1.25DLSpan2 1.5Overlay2 1.75LLSpan2Int V u_span2int 322kip Exterior Girder Service Load Service I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V s_span2ext DLSpan2 Overlay2 LLSpan2Ext V s_span2ext 215kip Factored Load Strength I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) V u_span2ext 1.25DLSpan2 1.5Overlay2 1.75LLSpan2Ext V u_span2ext 322kip LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 13 June 2010
14 Cap Analysis (Con't) Torsional Loads Strength I Limit State, (AASHTO LRFD 3.4.1) To maximize the torsion, the live load only acts on the longer span in the configuration shown. The loads are applied to the cap as depicted in the following picture: a v 12in "a v " is the value for the distance from the face of the stem to the center of bearing for the girders. 12" is the typical value for TxGirders on Inverted Tee Bents (IGEB). 9" is the typical value for IBeams (IBEB). The lever arm for the torsional loads is the distance from the center line of bearing to the centerline of the cap ( 1 / 2 b stem + a v ). b stem 39in From Pg. 3 1 LeverArm a v 2 b stem LeverArm 31.5in LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 14 June 2010
15 Cap Analysis (Con't) Torsional Loads (Con't) Interior Girders Girder Reactions R u_span1 1.25DLSpan1 1.5Overlay1 R u_span1 70kip R u_span2 Torsional Load 1.25DLSpan2 1.5Overlay2 1.75gV Span2_Int [ LaneSpan2 TruckSpan2 ( 1 IM) ] R u_span2 322kip T u_int R u_span1 R u_span2 LeverArm T u_int 660kipft Exterior Girders Girder Reactions R u_span1 1.25DLSpan1 1.5Overlay1 R u_span1 70kip R u_span2 Torsional Load 1.25DLSpan2 1.5Overlay2 1.75gV Span2_Ext [ LaneSpan2 TruckSpan2 ( 1 IM) ] R u_span2 322kip T u_ext R u_span1 R u_span2 LeverArm T u_ext 660kipft Torsion on Cap Analyzed assuming Bents are torsionally rigid at Effective Face of Columns. T u 660kipft Maximum Torsion on Cap LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 15 June 2010
16 Cap Analysis (Con't) Load Summary Ledge Loads Interior Girder Service Load V s_int max V s_span1int V s_span2int V s_int kip Factored Load V u_int max V u_span1int V u_span2int V u_int kip Exterior Girder Service Load V s_ext Factored Load max V s_span1ext V s_span2ext V s_ext kip V u_ext max V u_span1ext V u_span2ext V u_ext kip Cap Loads Positive Moment (From CAP 18) Dead Load: M posdl kipft Service Load: M posserv kipft Factored Load: M posult kipft Negative Moment (From CAP 18) Dead Load: M negdl kipft Service Load: M negserv kipft Factored Load: M negult kipft Maximum Torsion and Concurrent Shear and Moment (Strength I) T u 660kipft V u 448.1kip M u 335.6kipft Located two stations away from centerline of column. V u and M u values are from CAP 18 In this example the maximum Torsion and the maximum Shear are concurrent with each other. If they are not, it becomes necessary to check the location of the maximum Torsion with its concurrent Shear and the location of the maximum Shear with its concurrent Torsion. LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 16 June 2010
17 Locate and Describe Reinforcement Recall: b stem 39in From Pg. 3 d stem 57in From Pg. 3 b ledge 26in From Pg. 5 d ledge 28in From Pg. 5 b f 91in From Pg. 5 h cap 85in From Pg. 5 cover 2.50in From Pg. 4 Measured from Center of bar LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 17 June 2010
18 Locate and Describe Reinforcement Describe Reinforcing Bars (Con't) Use # 11 bars for Bar A A bar_a 1.56in 2 d bar_a 1.410in Use # 11 bars for Bar B A bar_b 1.56in 2 d bar_b 1.410in Use # 6 bars for Bar M A bar_m 0.44in 2 d bar_m 0.75in Bar M must be a # 6 bar or smaller to allow it to fully develop, as stated on Pg 4. Use # 6 bars for Bar N A bar_n 0.44in 2 d bar_n 0.75in To prevent confusion, use the same bar size for Bar N as Bar M. Use # 6 bars for Bar S A bar_s 0.44in 2 d bar_s 0.75in Use # 6 bars for Bar T A bar_t 0.44in 2 d bar_t 0.750in Calculate Dimensions d s_neg h cap cover 1 2 d bar_s 1 2 d bar_a d s_neg 81.42in d s_pos h cap cover 1 2 max d bar_s d bar_m 1 2 d bar_b d s_pos 81.42in a v 12in Typical for TX Girders on Inverted Tee Bent Caps (IGEB standard) a f a v cover a f 14.50in d e d ledge cover d e 25.50in 1 d f d ledge cover 2 d 1 bar_m 2 d bar_b d f 24.42in h d ledge BrgSeat h 29.50in "BrgSeat" is the height of the Bearing Seat Buildup. This value is defined on Pg. 2. LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 18 June 2010
19 Locate and Describe Reinforcement Calculate Dimensions (Con't) (Con't) α 90deg Angle of Bars S Recall: L 8in From Pg. 4 W 21in From Pg. 6 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 19 June 2010
20 Check Bearing (AASHTO LRFD 5.7.5) The load on the bearing pad propagates along a truncated pyramid whose top has the area A 1 and whose base has the area A 2. A 1 is the loaded area (the bearing pad area: LxW ). A 2 is the area of the lowest rectangle contained wholly within the support (the Inverted Tee Cap). A 2 must not overlap the truncated pyramid of another load in either direction, nor can it extend beyond the edges of the cap in any direction. Elevation View Plan View ϕ 0.7 A 1 WL A 1 168in 2 (AASHTO LRFD ) Area under Bearing Pad Interior Girders 1 B min b ledge a v 2 L a 1 v 2 b stem 1 2 L 2d 1 ledge 2 S 1 2 W B 10.00in L 2 L 2B L in "B" is the distance from the perimeter of A 1 to the perimeter of A 2, as seen in the above figures. W 2 W 2B W in A 2 L 2 W 2 A in 2 m = the minimum of: Modification Factor A & 2 m 2.00 (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) A 1 ϕv n ϕ0.85f c A 1 m ϕv n 720kip (AASHTO LRFD Eq & AASHTO LRFD Eq ) V u_int 322kip < ϕv n BearingChk "OK!" V u_int From Pg. 16 Exterior Girders B min b ledge a v 1 2 L a v 1 2 b stem 1 2 L 2d 1 ledge 2 S 1 2 W c 1 2 W B 10.00in L 2 L 2B L in W 2 W 2B W in "B" is the distance from the perimeter of A 1 to the perimeter of A 2. A 2 L 2 W 2 A in 2 m = the minimum of: Modification Factor A A 1 & 2 m 2.00 (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) ϕv n ϕ0.85f c A 1 m ϕv n 720kip V u_ext 322kip < ϕv n BearingChk "OK!" (AASHTO LRFD Eq & AASHTO LRFD Eq ) V u_ext From Pg. 16 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 20 June 2010
21 Check Punching Shear (AASHTO LRFD with modifications from BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) ϕ 0.9 (AASHTO LRFD ) Determine if the Shear Cones Intersect Is 1 2 S 1 2 W d f? Yes. Therefore Shear Cones do not intersect in the longitudinal direction of the Cap. Is 1 2 S 1 d f 2 W 24.42in 1 2 b stem a v in 1 2 L TxDOT uses "d f " instead of "d e " for Punching Shear (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria). This is because "d f " has traditionally been used for inverted tee bents and was used in the Inverted Tee Research (Furlong & Mirza pg. 58). d f? Yes. Therefore Shear Cones do not intersect in the transverse direction of the Cap. 1 2 b stem a v d f 24.42in 1 2 L in Interior Girders V n f c W 2L 2d f d f V n 497kip (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) ϕv n 447kip V u_int 322kip < ϕv n PunchingShearChk "OK!" V u_int From Pg. 16 Exterior Girders V n = minimum of: (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) f c 2 W L d f c d f 388kip V n f c W 2L 2d f 388kip d f 497kip ϕv n 349kip V u_ext 322kip < ϕv n PunchingShearChk "OK!" V u_ext From Pg. 16 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 21 June 2010
22 Check Shear Friction (AASHTO LRFD ) Checks are for concrete only see ϕ 0.9 (AASHTO LRFD ) Determine the Distribution Width (AASHTO LRFD ) Interior Girders b s_int = minimum of: W 4 a v 69.00in "Ledge Reinforcement" for reinforcement checks for Bars M and N. b s_int S 69.00in 96.00in "S" is the girder spacing. Exterior Girders b s_ext = minimum of: W 4 a v 69.00in b s_ext S 96.00in 2 c 48.00in 48.00in "S" is the girder spacing. Interior Girders A cv d e b s_int A cv 1759in 2 V n = minimum of: 0.2 f c A cv 1267kip (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) 0.8 ksia cv 1408kip (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) V n ϕv n V u_int 1267kip 1140kip 322kip < ϕv n ShearFrictionChk "OK!" V u_int From Pg. 16 Exterior Girders A cv d e b s_ext A cv 1224in 2 V n = minimum of: 0.2 f c A cv 0.8 ksia cv 881kip 979kip (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) V n ϕv n V u_ext 881kip 793kip 322kip < ϕv n ShearFrictionChk "OK!" V u_ext From Pg. 16 LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 22 June 2010
23 Flexural Reinforcement for Negative Bending (Bars A) (Tension in Top) M dl M negdl M dl 379.4kipft M s M negserv M s 590.9kipft From Cap 18 Output. See Pg. 10 M u M negult M u 852.1kipft Minimum Flexural Reinforcement (AASHTO LRFD ) Factored Flexural Resistance, M r, must be greater than or equal to the lesser of 1.2 M cr (Cracking Moment) or 1.33 Mu (Ultimate Moment) I g in 4 Gross Moment of Inertia (From Pg. 6) h cap 85in Depth of Cap (From Pg. 5) ybar 33.80in f r = 0.24 f c f r 0.455ksi y t h cap ybar y t 51.20in Distance to the Center of Gravity of the Cap from the bottom of the Cap (From Pg. 6) Modulus of Rupture (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) Distance from Center of Gravity to extreme tension fiber S I g S in 3 y t Section Modulus for the extreme tension fiber M cr 1ft Sf r M 12in cr kipft Cracking Moment (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) M f = minimum of: 1.2M cr 1.33M u kipft kipft Design for the lesser of 1.2M cr or 1.33Mu when determining minimum area of steel required. Thus, M r must be greater than M f kipft LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 23 June 2010
24 Flexural Reinforcement for Negative Bending (Con't) (Bars A) Moment Capacity Design (AASHTO LRFD ) Try, 5 ~ #11's Top BarANo 5 d bar_a 1.41in Number of bars in tension Diameter of main reinforcing bars A bar_a 1.56in 2 Area of one main reinforcing bar A s ( BarANo) A bar_a A s 7.80in 2 Area of steel in tension d stirrup d bar_s d stirrup 0.75in Diameter of shear reinforcing bars From Pg. 18 d d s_neg d 81.42in See Pg. 18 for the calculation of "d s_neg, " b b f b 91in See Pg. 5 for the calculation of "b f." f c 3.60ksi Compressive Strength of Concrete f y 60ksi Yield Strength of Rebar β 1 = f c 4ksi (AASHTO LRFD ) Bounded by: 0.65 β β c A s f y c 1.98in 0.85f c β 1 b Depth of Cross Section under Compression under Ultimate Load (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) This "c" is the distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis, not the distance from the center of bearing of the last girder to the end of the cap. a cβ 1 a 1.68in Depth of Equivalent Stress Block (AASHTO LRFD ) Note: "a" is less than "d ledge " therefore the equivalent stress block acts over a rectangular area. If "a" was greater than "d ledge " it would act over a Tee shaped area. a 1ft M n A s f y d M 2 12in n kipft d c ε s c ε s Nominal Flexural Resistance (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) Strain in Reinforcing at Ultimate ε s > FlexureBehavior "Tension Controlled" (AASHTO LRFD ) ϕ M 0.90 (AASHTO LRFD ) M r ϕ M M n M r kipft Factored Flexural Resistance (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) M f kipft < M r MinReinfChk "OK!" M u 852.1kipft < M r UltimateMom "OK!" LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 24 June 2010
25 Flexural Reinforcement for Negative Bending (Con't) (Bars A) Check Serviceability (AASHTO LRFD ) To find s max : Modular Ratio: E s n n 8.39 E c For service loads, the stress on the crosssection is located as drawn: Tension Reinforcement Ratio: A s ρ bd ρ k dk ( 2ρn) ( ρn) 2 ( ρn) k in < d ledge 28.00in k j 1 j Therefore, the compression force acts over a rectangular area. If the compression force does not act over a rectangular area, j will not be 1k/3. f ss M s 12in f A s j d 1ft ss 11.65ksi f a 0.6f y f a 36.00ksi f ss < f a ServiceStress "OK!" 1 d c cover 2 d 1 stirrup 2 d bar_a d c 3.58in Exposure Condition Factor: γ e 1.00 d c β s 1 β 0.7 h cap d s 1.06 c s max = minimum of: Service Load Bending Stress in outer layer of the reinforcing Allowable Bending Stress in the outer layer of the reinforcing (BDMLRFD Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) "cover" is measured to center of shear reinforcement. For class 1 exposure conditions. For areas where deicing chenicals are frequently used, design for Class 2 Exposure ( e = 0.75). (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) 700γ e β s f ss 2d c 49.38in (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) & 12in A good practice is to place a bar every 12in along each surface of the s max 12.00in bent. (TxSP) 1 b stem 2 cover 2 d 1 stirrup 2 d bar_a s Actual BarANo 1 s Actual 7.96in < s max ServiceabilityCheck "OK!" Check Dead Load Check allowable M dl : f dl 22ksi BDMLRFD, Chapter 4, Section 5, Design Criteria 1ft M a A s dj f dl M 12in a kipft TxDOT limits dead load stress to 22 ksi. This is due to observed cracking under dead load. Allowable Dead Load Moment M dl kipft < M a DeadLoadMom "OK!" LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 25 June 2010
26 Flexural Reinforcement for Positive Bending (Bars B) (Tension in Bottom) M dl M posdl M dl 250.1kipft M s M posserv M s 492.5kipft From Cap 18 Output. See Pg. 10 M u M posult M u 741.7kipft Minimum Flexural Reinforcement (AASHTO LRFD ) Factored Flexural Resistance, M r, must be greater than or equal to the lesser of 1.2 M cr (Cracking Moment) or 1.33 Mu (Ultimate Moment) y t S M cr ybar y t 33.80in I g S in 3 y t 1ft Sf r M 12in cr kipft M f = minimum of: 1.2M cr 1.33M u kipft 986.5kipft Distance to the Center of Gravity of the Cap from the top of the Cap See Pg. 6 for calculations of "ybar" Section Modulus for the extreme tension fiber Cracking Moment (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) Design for the lesser of 1.2M cr or 1.33Mu when determining minimum area of steel required. Thus, M r must be greater than M f 986.5kipft Moment Capacity Design (AASHTO LRFD ) Try, 11 ~ #11's Bottom BarBNo 11 d bar_b 1.41in A bar_b 1.56in 2 Number of bars in tension Diameter of main reinforcing bars Area of one main reinforcing bar A s ( BarBNo) A bar_b A s 17.16in 2 Area of steel in tension d d s_pos d 81.42in See Pg. 18 for the calculation of "d s_pos." b b stem b 39in See Pg. 3 for the calculation of "b stem." c A s f y c 10.15in 0.85f c β 1 b Depth of Cross Section under Compression under Ultimate Load (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) This "c" is the distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis, not the distance from the center of bearing of the last girder to the end of the cap. a cβ 1 a 8.63in Depth of Equivalent Stress Block (AASHTO LRFD ) Note: "a" is less than "d stem " therefore the equivalent stress block acts over a rectangular area. If "a" was greater than "d stem " it would act over a Tee shaped area. M n a 1ft A s f y d M 2 12in n kipft Nominal Flexural Resistance (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 26 June 2010
27 Flexural Reinforcement for Positive Bending (Con't) (Bars B) Moment Capacity Design (Con't) d c ε s c ε s > FlexureBehavior ε s Strain in Reinforcing at Ultimate "Tension Controlled" (AASHTO LRFD ) ϕ M 0.90 (AASHTO LRFD ) M r ϕ M M n M r kipft Factored Flexural Resistance (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) M u 741.7kipft < M r MinReinfChk "OK!" M f 986.5kipft < M r UltimateMom "OK!" Check Serviceability (AASHTO LRFD ) To find s max : 1 d c cover 2 d 1 stirrup 2 d bar_b d c 3.58in "cover" is measured to center of shear reinforcement. Tension Reinforcement Ratio: A s ρ ρ bd For service loads, the stress on the crosssection is located as drawn: k dk ( 2ρn) ( ρn) 2 ( ρn) k in < d stem 57.00in Therefore, the compression force acts over a rectangular area. k j 1 j f ss M s 12in f A s j d 1ft ss 4.63ksi f a 0.6f y f a 36.00ksi f ss < f a ServiceStress "OK!" Exposure Condition Factor: γ e 1.00 d c β s 1 β 0.7 h cap d s 1.06 c s max = minimum of: & 12in s max 12.00in 700γ e 2d β s f c ss in Service Load Bending Stress in outer layer of the reinforcing Allowable Bending Stress in the outer layer of the reinforcing (BDMLRFD Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) For class 1 exposure conditions. For areas where deicing chenicals are frequently used, design for Class 2 Exposure ( e = 0.75). (BDMLRFD, Ch. 4, Sect. 5, Design Criteria) (AASHTO LRFD Eq ) A good practice is to place a bar every 12in along each surface of the bent. (TxSP) LRFD Inverted Tee Bent Cap Design Example 27 June 2010
SLAB DESIGN EXAMPLE. Deck Design (AASHTO LRFD 9.7.1) TYPICAL SECTION. County: Any Hwy: Any Design: BRG Date: 7/2010
County: Any Hwy: Any Design: BRG Date: 7/2010 SLAB DESIGN EXAMPLE Design example is in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Ed. (2010) as prescribed by TxDOT Bridge Design
More informationA transverse strip of the deck is assumed to support the truck axle loads. Shear and fatigue of the reinforcement need not be investigated.
Design Step 4 Design Step 4.1 DECK SLAB DESIGN In addition to designing the deck for dead and live loads at the strength limit state, the AASHTOLRFD specifications require checking the deck for vehicular
More informationLongterm serviceability of the structure Minimal maintenance requirements Economical construction Improved aesthetics and safety considerations
Design Step 7.1 INTEGRAL ABUTMENT DESIGN General considerations and common practices Integral abutments are used to eliminate expansion joints at the end of a bridge. They often result in Jointless Bridges
More informationFOOTING DESIGN EXAMPLE
County: Any Design: BRG Date: 10/007 Hwy: Any Ck Dsn: BRG Date: 10/007 FOOTING DESIGN EXAMPLE Design: Based on AASHTO LRFD 007 Specifications, TxDOT LRFD Bridge Design Manual, and TxDOT Project 04371
More informationPrestressed Concrete IBeam and TxGirder Haunch Design Guide
Prestressed Concrete IBeam and TxGirder Haunch Design Guide Components of the Haunch Camber: Camber is the upward deflection in the beam after release of the prestressing strands due to the eccentricity
More informationSECTION 5 ANALYSIS OF CONTINUOUS SPANS DEVELOPED BY THE PTI EDC130 EDUCATION COMMITTEE LEAD AUTHOR: BRYAN ALLRED
SECTION 5 ANALYSIS OF CONTINUOUS SPANS DEVELOPED BY THE PTI EDC130 EDUCATION COMMITTEE LEAD AUTHOR: BRYAN ALLRED NOTE: MOMENT DIAGRAM CONVENTION In PT design, it is preferable to draw moment diagrams
More informationIntroduction to LRFD, Loads and Loads Distribution
Introduction to LRFD, Loads and Loads Distribution Thomas K. Saad, P.E. Federal Highway Administration Chicago, IL Evolution of Design Methodologies SLD Methodology: (f t ) D + (f t ) L 0.55F y, or 1.82(f
More informationDESIGN OF SLABS. 3) Based on support or boundary condition: Simply supported, Cantilever slab,
DESIGN OF SLABS Dr. G. P. Chandradhara Professor of Civil Engineering S. J. College of Engineering Mysore 1. GENERAL A slab is a flat two dimensional planar structural element having thickness small compared
More informationA.2 AASHTO Type IV, LRFD Specifications
A.2 AASHTO Type IV, LRFD Specifications A.2.1 INTRODUCTION A.2.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS 1'5.0" Detailed example showing sample calculations for design of typical Interior AASHTO Type IV prestressed concrete
More informationIndex 20010 Series Prestressed FloridaI Beams (Rev. 07/12)
Index 20010 Series Prestressed FloridaI Beams (Rev. 07/12) Design Criteria AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 6th Edition; Structures Detailing Manual (SDM); Structures Design Guidelines (SDG)
More informationReinforced Concrete Slab Design Using the Empirical Method
Reinforced Concrete Slab Design Using the Empirical Method BridgeSight Solutions for the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications BridgeSight Software TM Creators of effective and reliable solutions for
More informationDesign of reinforced concrete columns. Type of columns. Failure of reinforced concrete columns. Short column. Long column
Design of reinforced concrete columns Type of columns Failure of reinforced concrete columns Short column Column fails in concrete crushed and bursting. Outward pressure break horizontal ties and bend
More informationSLAB DESIGN. Introduction ACI318 Code provides two design procedures for slab systems:
Reading Assignment SLAB DESIGN Chapter 9 of Text and, Chapter 13 of ACI31802 Introduction ACI318 Code provides two design procedures for slab systems: 13.6.1 Direct Design Method (DDM) For slab systems
More informationChapter 8. Flexural Analysis of TBeams
Chapter 8. Flexural Analysis of Ts 8.1. Reading Assignments Text Chapter 3.7; ACI 318, Section 8.10. 8.2. Occurrence and Configuration of Ts Common construction type. used in conjunction with either
More information16. BeamandSlab Design
ENDP311 Structural Concrete Design 16. BeamandSlab Design BeamandSlab System How does the slab work? L beams and T beams Holding beam and slab together University of Western Australia School of Civil
More informationDetailing of Reinforcment in Concrete Structures
Chapter 8 Detailing of Reinforcment in Concrete Structures 8.1 Scope Provisions of Sec. 8.1 and 8.2 of Chapter 8 shall apply for detailing of reinforcement in reinforced concrete members, in general. For
More informationINTRODUCTION TO BEAMS
CHAPTER Structural Steel Design LRFD Method INTRODUCTION TO BEAMS Third Edition A. J. Clark School of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Part II Structural Steel Design and Analysis
More informationTwoWay PostTensioned Design
Page 1 of 9 The following example illustrates the design methods presented in ACI 31805 and IBC 2003. Unless otherwise noted, all referenced table, figure, and equation numbers are from these books. The
More informationFOUNDATION DESIGN. Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples
FOUNDATION DESIGN Proportioning elements for: Transfer of seismic forces Strength and stiffness Shallow and deep foundations Elastic and plastic analysis Foundation Design 141 Load Path and Transfer to
More informationSECTION 3 DESIGN OF POST TENSIONED COMPONENTS FOR FLEXURE
SECTION 3 DESIGN OF POST TENSIONED COMPONENTS FOR FLEXURE DEVELOPED BY THE PTI EDC130 EDUCATION COMMITTEE LEAD AUTHOR: TREY HAMILTON, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA NOTE: MOMENT DIAGRAM CONVENTION In PT design,
More informationAPPENDIX H DESIGN CRITERIA FOR NCHRP 1279 PROJECT NEW BRIDGE DESIGNS
APPENDIX H DESIGN CRITERIA FOR NCHRP 1279 PROJECT NEW BRIDGE DESIGNS This appendix summarizes the criteria applied for the design of new hypothetical bridges considered in NCHRP 1279 s Task 7 parametric
More informationReinforced Concrete Design Project Five Story Office Building
Reinforced Concrete Design Project Five Story Office Building Andrew Bartolini December 7, 2012 Designer 1 Partner: Shannon Warchol CE 40270: Reinforced Concrete Design Bartolini 2 Table of Contents Abstract...3
More informationSession 5D: Benefits of Live Load Testing and Finite Element Modeling in Rating Bridges
Session 5D: Benefits of Live Load Testing and Finite Element Modeling in Rating Bridges Douglas R. Heath P.E., Structural Engineer Corey Richard P.E., Project Manager AECOM Overview Bridge Testing/Rating
More informationQuality Control and Quality Assurance Guide
Quality Control and Quality Assurance Guide Bridge Division, Design Section October 2013 Table of Contents Chapter 1 About this Guide... 3 Chapter 2 Goals and Objectives... 5 Chapter 3 Participants...
More informationFEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 41
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 41 4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION The analysis of bridges and structures is a mixture of science and engineering judgment. In most cases, use simple models with
More informationThe following sketches show the plans of the two cases of oneway slabs. The spanning direction in each case is shown by the double headed arrow.
9.2 Oneway Slabs This section covers the following topics. Introduction Analysis and Design 9.2.1 Introduction Slabs are an important structural component where prestressing is applied. With increase
More informationTechnical Notes 3B  Brick Masonry Section Properties May 1993
Technical Notes 3B  Brick Masonry Section Properties May 1993 Abstract: This Technical Notes is a design aid for the Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures (ACI 530/ASCE 5/TMS 40292) and Specifications
More informationLOAD TESTING FOR BRIDGE RATING: DEAN S MILL OVER HANNACROIS CREEK
REPORT FHWA/NY/SR06/147 LOAD TESTING FOR BRIDGE RATING: DEAN S MILL OVER HANNACROIS CREEK OSMAN HAGELSAFI JONATHAN KUNIN SPECIAL REPORT 147 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUREAU New York State
More informationSECTION 3 DESIGN OF POST TENSIONED COMPONENTS FOR FLEXURE
SECTION 3 DESIGN OF POST TENSIONED COMPONENTS FOR FLEXURE DEVELOPED BY THE PTI EDC130 EDUCATION COMMITTEE LEAD AUTHOR: TREY HAMILTON, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA NOTE: MOMENT DIAGRAM CONVENTION In PT design,
More informationCopyright. Eulalio Fernandez Gomez
Copyright by Eulalio Fernandez Gomez 2012 The Dissertation Committee for Eulalio Fernandez Gomez Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Design Criteria for Strength
More informationCHAPTER 13 CONCRETE COLUMNS
CHAER 13 CONCREE COUMNS ABE OF CONENS 13.1 INRODUCION... 131 13.2 YES OF COUMNS... 131 13.3 DESIGN OADS... 131 13.4 DESIGN CRIERIA... 132 13.4.1 imit States... 132 13.4.2 Forces... 132 13.5 AROXIMAE
More informationInternational Nursing and Rehab Center Addition 4815 S. Western Blvd. Chicago, IL
PROJECT International Nursing and Rehab Center Addition 4815 S. Western Blvd. Chicago, IL EXP. 11/30/2014 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS July 24, 2014 BOWMAN, BARRETT & ASSOCIATES INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 312.228.0100
More informationType of Force 1 Axial (tension / compression) Shear. 3 Bending 4 Torsion 5 Images 6 Symbol (+ )
Cause: external force P Force vs. Stress Effect: internal stress f 05 Force vs. Stress Copyright G G Schierle, 200105 press Esc to end, for next, for previous slide 1 Type of Force 1 Axial (tension /
More informationAASHTOWare BrDR 6.8 Miscellanous Tutorial How BrDR Computes the Effective Flange Width
AASHTOWare BrDR 6.8 Miscellanous Tutorial How BrDR Computes the Effective Flange Width Std Effective Flange Width BrD/BrR/BrDR computes Std effective flange width based on AASHTO Standard Specifications
More informationSEISMIC DESIGN. Various building codes consider the following categories for the analysis and design for earthquake loading:
SEISMIC DESIGN Various building codes consider the following categories for the analysis and design for earthquake loading: 1. Seismic Performance Category (SPC), varies from A to E, depending on how the
More informationOverhang Bracket Loading. Deck Issues: Design Perspective
Deck Issues: Design Perspective Overhang Bracket Loading Deck overhangs and screed rails are generally supported on cantilever brackets during the deck pour These brackets produce an overturning couple
More informationDesign of Steel Structures Prof. S.R.Satish Kumar and Prof. A.R.Santha Kumar. Fig. 7.21 some of the trusses that are used in steel bridges
7.7 Truss bridges Fig. 7.21 some of the trusses that are used in steel bridges Truss Girders, lattice girders or open web girders are efficient and economical structural systems, since the members experience
More informationChapter 5 Bridge Deck Slabs. Bridge Engineering 1
Chapter 5 Bridge Deck Slabs Bridge Engineering 1 Basic types of bridge decks Insitu reinforced concrete deck (most common type) Precast concrete deck (minimize the use of local labor) Open steel grid
More informationSEISMIC UPGRADE OF OAK STREET BRIDGE WITH GFRP
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 16, 2004 Paper No. 3279 SEISMIC UPGRADE OF OAK STREET BRIDGE WITH GFRP Yuming DING 1, Bruce HAMERSLEY 2 SUMMARY Vancouver
More informationReinforced Concrete Design
FALL 2013 C C Reinforced Concrete Design CIVL 4135 ii 1 Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1. Reading Assignment Chapter 1 Sections 1.1 through 1.8 of text. 1.2. Introduction In the design and analysis of reinforced
More informationOptimum proportions for the design of suspension bridge
Journal of Civil Engineering (IEB), 34 (1) (26) 114 Optimum proportions for the design of suspension bridge Tanvir Manzur and Alamgir Habib Department of Civil Engineering Bangladesh University of Engineering
More informationSafe & Sound Bridge Terminology
Safe & Sound Bridge Terminology Abutment A retaining wall supporting the ends of a bridge, and, in general, retaining or supporting the approach embankment. Approach The part of the bridge that carries
More informationDraft Table of Contents. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary ACI 31814
Draft Table of Contents Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary ACI 31814 BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (ACI 318 14) Chapter 1 General 1.1 Scope of ACI 318
More informationDesign of an Industrial Truss
Design of an Industrial Truss Roofing U 2 U 3 Ridge U 4 Sagrod 24 U 1 U 5 L 0 L 1 L 2 L 3 L 4 L 5 L 6 6@20 = 120 Elevation of the Truss Top Cord Bracing Sagrod Purlin at top, Bottom Cord Bracing at bottom
More informationETABS. Integrated Building Design Software. Concrete Shear Wall Design Manual. Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA
ETABS Integrated Building Design Software Concrete Shear Wall Design Manual Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA Version 8 January 2002 Copyright The computer program ETABS and all
More informationStructural Axial, Shear and Bending Moments
Structural Axial, Shear and Bending Moments Positive Internal Forces Acting Recall from mechanics of materials that the internal forces P (generic axial), V (shear) and M (moment) represent resultants
More informationModule 3. Limit State of Collapse  Flexure (Theories and Examples) Version 2 CE IIT, Kharagpur
Module 3 Limit State of Collapse  Flexure (Theories and Examples) Lesson 4 Computation of Parameters of Governing Equations Instructional Objectives: At the end of this lesson, the student should be able
More informationREINFORCED CONCRETE. Reinforced Concrete Design. A Fundamental Approach  Fifth Edition. Walls are generally used to provide lateral support for:
HANDOUT REINFORCED CONCRETE Reinforced Concrete Design A Fundamental Approach  Fifth Edition RETAINING WALLS Fifth Edition A. J. Clark School of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
More informationDESIGN OF SLABS. Department of Structures and Materials Engineering Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
DESIGN OF SLABS Department of Structures and Materials Engineering Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia Introduction Types of Slab Slabs are plate elements
More informationEvaluation of Bridge Performance and Rating through Nondestructive
Evaluation of Bridge Performance and Rating through Nondestructive Load Testing Final Report Prepared by: Andrew Jeffrey, Sergio F. Breña, and Scott A.Civjan University of Massachusetts Amherst Department
More informationChapter  3 Design of Rectangular Beams and Oneway Slabs
Rectangular Beams and Oneway Slabs Page 1 of 9 Chapter  3 Design of Rectangular Beams and Oneway Slabs 12 h A 12 strip in a simply supported oneway slab h b=12 L Rectangular Beams and Oneway Slabs
More informationAPE T CFRP Aslan 500
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) Tape is used for structural strengthening of concrete, masonry or timber elements using the technique known as Near Surface Mount or NSM strengthening. Use of CFRP
More informationMATERIALS AND MECHANICS OF BENDING
HAPTER Reinforced oncrete Design Fifth Edition MATERIALS AND MEHANIS OF BENDING A. J. lark School of Engineering Department of ivil and Environmental Engineering Part I oncrete Design and Analysis b FALL
More informationPage 1 of 18 28.4.2008 Sven Alexander Last revised 1.3.2010. SBProduksjon STATICAL CALCULATIONS FOR BCC 250
Page 1 of 18 CONTENT PART 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS PAGE 1.1 General 1. Standards 1.3 Loads 1. Qualities PART ANCHORAGE OF THE UNITS.1 Beam unit equilibrium 3. Beam unit anchorage in front..1 Check of capacity..
More informationConcrete Frame Design Manual
Concrete Frame Design Manual Turkish TS 5002000 with Turkish Seismic Code 2007 For SAP2000 ISO SAP093011M26 Rev. 0 Version 15 Berkeley, California, USA October 2011 COPYRIGHT Copyright Computers and Structures,
More information4B2. 2. The stiffness of the floor and roof diaphragms. 3. The relative flexural and shear stiffness of the shear walls and of connections.
Shear Walls Buildings that use shear walls as the lateral forceresisting system can be designed to provide a safe, serviceable, and economical solution for wind and earthquake resistance. Shear walls
More informationSTRENGTHENING AND LOAD TESTING OF THREE BRIDGES IN BOONE COUNTY, MO
STRENGTHENING AND LOAD TESTING OF THREE BRIDGES IN BOONE COUNTY, MO S. Schiebel 1, R. Parretti 1, A. Nanni 2, and M. Huck 3 ABSTRACT Three bridges in Boone County, Missouri (Brown School Road Bridge, Coats
More information9.3 Twoway Slabs (Part I)
9.3 Twoway Slabs (Part I) This section covers the following topics. Introduction Analysis and Design Features in Modeling and Analysis Distribution of Moments to Strips 9.3.1 Introduction The slabs are
More informationChapter 12 LOADS AND LOAD FACTORS NDOT STRUCTURES MANUAL
Chapter 12 LOADS AND LOAD FACTORS NDOT STRUCTURES MANUAL September 2008 Table of Contents Section Page 12.1 GENERAL... 121 12.1.1 Load Definitions... 121 12.1.1.1 Permanent Loads... 121 12.1.1.2 Transient
More informationFlexural Strength of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete TBeams
Flexural Strength of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete TBeams Richard Brice, P.E. Bridge Software Engineer Bridge & Structures Office Washington State Department of Transportation Olympia, Washington
More information3.2 DEFINITIONS, cont. Revise or add the following definitions::
CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS TO AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS THIRD EDITION W/ INTERIMS THRU 2006 _32A, 33A 3.2 DEFINITIONS, cont. Revise or add the following definitions:: Permanent Loads Loads
More informationModule 5 (Lectures 17 to 19) MAT FOUNDATIONS
Module 5 (Lectures 17 to 19) MAT FOUNDATIONS Topics 17.1 INTRODUCTION Rectangular Combined Footing: Trapezoidal Combined Footings: Cantilever Footing: Mat foundation: 17.2 COMMON TYPES OF MAT FOUNDATIONS
More informationChallenging Skew: Higgins Road Steel IGirder Bridge over I90 OTEC 2015  October 27, 2015 Session 26
2014 HDR Architecture, 2014 2014 HDR, HDR, Inc., all all rights reserved. Challenging Skew: Higgins Road Steel IGirder Bridge over I90 OTEC 2015  October 27, 2015 Session 26 Brandon Chavel, PhD, P.E.,
More information1997 Uniform Administrative Code Amendment for Earthen Material and Straw Bale Structures Tucson/Pima County, Arizona
for Earthen Material and Straw Bale Structures SECTION 70  GENERAL "APPENDIX CHAPTER 7  EARTHEN MATERIAL STRUCTURES 70. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish minimum standards of safety
More informationPENNDOT enotification
PENNDOT enotification Bureau of Project Delivery Bridge Design and Technology Division BRADD No. 036 October 18, 2013 Release of BRADD Version 3.2.0.0 The next release of PennDOT's Bridge Automated Design
More informationEUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR TECHNICAL APPROVALS
E TA TECHNICAL REPORT Design of Bonded Anchors TR 29 Edition June 27 EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR TECHNICAL APPROVALS TABLE OF CONTENTS Design method for bonded anchors Introduction..4 1 Scope...2 1.1 Type
More informationTYPES OF FOUNDATIONS
TYPES OF FOUNDATIONS 1 Foundation Systems Shallow Foundation Deep Foundation Pile Foundation Pier (Caisson) Foundation Isolated spread footings Wall footings Combined footings Cantilever or strap footings
More informationChapter 3 PreInstallation, Foundations and Piers
Chapter 3 PreInstallation, Foundations and Piers 31 PreInstallation Establishes the minimum requirements for the siting, design, materials, access, and installation of manufactured dwellings, accessory
More informationFINAL REPORT STRUCTURAL LOAD TESTING AND FLEXURE ANALYSIS OF THE ROUTE 701 BRIDGE IN LOUISA COUNTY, VIRGINIA
FINAL REPORT STRUCTURAL LOAD TESTING AND FLEXURE ANALYSIS OF THE ROUTE 701 BRIDGE IN LOUISA COUNTY, VIRGINIA Jeremy Lucas Graduate Research Assistant Charles E. Via, Jr. Department of Civil and Environmental
More informationMECHANICS OF SOLIDS  BEAMS TUTORIAL 1 STRESSES IN BEAMS DUE TO BENDING. On completion of this tutorial you should be able to do the following.
MECHANICS OF SOLIDS  BEAMS TUTOIAL 1 STESSES IN BEAMS DUE TO BENDING This is the first tutorial on bending of beams designed for anyone wishing to study it at a fairly advanced level. You should judge
More informationETABS. Integrated Building Design Software. Concrete Frame Design Manual. Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA
ETABS Integrated Building Design Software Concrete Frame Design Manual Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA Version 8 January 2002 Copyright The computer program ETABS and all associated
More informationIntroduction to Beam. Area Moments of Inertia, Deflection, and Volumes of Beams
Introduction to Beam Theory Area Moments of Inertia, Deflection, and Volumes of Beams Horizontal structural member used to support horizontal loads such as floors, roofs, and decks. Types of beam loads
More informationRetrofitting of RCC Structure WIH Strengthening of Shear Wall with External Post Tensioning Cables
Retrofitting of RCC Structure WIH Strengthening of Shear Wall with External Post Tensioning Cables Yogesh Ghodke, G. R. Gandhe Department of Civil Engineering, Deogiri Institute of Engineering and Management
More informationTXDOT ENGINEERING SOFTWARE SUPPORT INFORMATION. Prestressed Concrete Girder SUPERstructure Design and Analysis Program (PGSuper TM )
Last Update: June 21, 2016 TXDOT ENGINEERING SOFTWARE SUPPORT INFORMATION Prestressed Concrete Girder SUPERstructure Design and Analysis Program (PGSuper TM ) This document provides enduser support information
More informationTable of Contents. July 2015 121
Table of Contents 12.1 General... 3 12.2 Abutment Types... 5 12.2.1 FullRetaining... 5 12.2.2 SemiRetaining... 6 12.2.3 Sill... 7 12.2.4 SpillThrough or Open... 7 12.2.5 PileEncased... 8 12.2.6 Special
More informationPreliminary steel concrete composite bridge design charts for Eurocodes
Preliminary steel concrete composite bridge 90 Rachel Jones Senior Engineer Highways & Transportation Atkins David A Smith Regional Head of Bridge Engineering Highways & Transportation Atkins Abstract
More informationMECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMCOLUMN ASSEMBLAGES WITH ECCENTRICITY
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 16, 2004 Paper No. 4 MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMCOLUMN ASSEMBLAGES WITH ECCENTRICITY Tomohiko KAMIMURA
More information[TECHNICAL REPORT I:]
[Helios Plaza] Houston, Texas Structural Option Adviser: Dr. Linda Hanagan [TECHNICAL REPORT I:] Structural Concepts & Existing Conditions Table of Contents Executive Summary... 2 Introduction... 3 Structural
More informationA. Cylindrical Tank, FixedRoof with Rafter & Column (cont.)
According to API 650 Code, Edition Sept. 2003 Page : 23 of 34 9. Seismic Design. [APPENDIX E, API 650] 9.1. Overturning Moment due to Seismic forces applied to bottom of tank shell, M = Z I (C1 Ws Xs +
More informationENGINEERING SCIENCE H1 OUTCOME 1  TUTORIAL 3 BENDING MOMENTS EDEXCEL HNC/D ENGINEERING SCIENCE LEVEL 4 H1 FORMERLY UNIT 21718P
ENGINEERING SCIENCE H1 OUTCOME 1  TUTORIAL 3 BENDING MOMENTS EDEXCEL HNC/D ENGINEERING SCIENCE LEVEL 4 H1 FORMERLY UNIT 21718P This material is duplicated in the Mechanical Principles module H2 and those
More informationJoist. Reinforcement. Draft 12/7/02
Joist Reinforcement Draft 12/7/02 1 JOIST REINFORCING The purpose of this CSD Design Aid is to provide procedures and suggested details for the reinforcement of open web steel joists. There are three basic
More informationDESIGN OF PRESTRESSED BARRIER CABLE SYSTEMS
8601 North Black Canyon Highway Suite 103 Phoenix, AZ 8501 For Professionals Engaged in PostTensioning Design Issue 14 December 004 DESIGN OF PRESTRESSED BARRIER CABLE SYSTEMS by James D. Rogers 1 1.0
More informationABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SEGMENTAL BEAM
Ninth LACCEI Latin American and Caribbean Conference (LACCEI 11), Engineering for a Smart Planet, Innovation, Information Technology and Computational Tools for Sustainable Development, August 3, 11,
More informationReport on. Wind Resistance of Signs supported by. Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete (GFRC) Pillars
Report on Wind Resistance of Signs supported by Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete (GFRC) Pillars Prepared for US Sign and Fabrication Corporation January, 2006 SUMMARY This study found the attachment of
More information5 G R A TINGS ENGINEERING DESIGN MANUAL. MBG Metal Bar Grating METAL BAR GRATING MANUAL MBG 53412 METAL BAR GRATING NAAMM
METAL BAR NAAMM GRATNG MANUAL MBG 53412 5 G R A TNG NAAMM MBG 53412 November 4, 2012 METAL BAR GRATNG ENGNEERNG DEGN MANUAL NAAMM MBG 53412 November 4, 2012 5 G R A TNG MBG Metal Bar Grating A Division
More informationAISI CHEMICAL COMPOSITION LIMITS: Nonresulphurized Carbon Steels
AISI CHEMICAL COMPOSITION LIMITS: Nonresulphurized Carbon Steels AISI No. 1008 1010 1012 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 10 1026 1027 1029 10 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 10 1041 1042 1043
More informationINSERVICE PERFORMANCE AND BEHAVIOR CHARACTERIZATION OF THE HYBRID COMPOSITE BRIDGE SYSTEM A CASE STUDY
INSERVICE PERFORMANCE AND BEHAVIOR CHARACTERIZATION OF THE HYBRID COMPOSITE BRIDGE SYSTEM A CASE STUDY John M. Civitillo University of Virginia, USA Devin K. Harris University of Virginia, USA Amir Gheitasi
More informationGuidelines for the Design of PostTensioned Floors
Guidelines for the Design of PostTensioned Floors BY BIJAN O. AALAMI AND JENNIFER D. JURGENS his article presents a set of guidelines intended to T assist designers in routine posttensioning design,
More informationLyang, J., Lee, D., Kung, J. "Reinforced Concrete Bridges." Bridge Engineering Handbook. Ed. WaiFah Chen and Lian Duan Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2000
Lyang, J., Lee, D., Kung, J. "Reinforced Concrete Bridges." Bridge Engineering Handbook. Ed. WaiFah Chen and Lian Duan Boca Raton: CRC Press, 000 Section II Superstructure Design 9 Reinforced Concrete
More informationBasics of Reinforced Concrete Design
Basics of Reinforced Concrete Design Presented by: Ronald Thornton, P.E. Define several terms related to reinforced concrete design Learn the basic theory behind structural analysis and reinforced concrete
More informationDesign and Construction of Cantilevered Reinforced Concrete Structures
Buildings Department Practice Note for Authorized Persons, Registered Structural Engineers and Registered Geotechnical Engineers APP68 Design and Construction of Cantilevered Reinforced Concrete Structures
More informationMETHOD OF STATEMENT FOR STATIC LOADING TEST
Compression Test, METHOD OF STATEMENT FOR STATIC LOADING TEST Tension Test and Lateral Test According to the American Standards ASTM D1143 07, ASTM D3689 07, ASTM D3966 07 and Euro Codes EC7 Table of Contents
More informationLRFD Bridge Design. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Loading and General Information
LRFD Bridge Design AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Loading and General Information Created July 2007 This material is copyrighted by The University of Cincinnati, Dr. James A Swanson, and Dr.
More informationFormwork for Concrete
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CM 420 TEMPORARY STRUCTURES Winter Quarter 2007 Professor Kamran M. Nemati Formwork for Concrete Horizontal Formwork Design and Formwork Design
More informationSPECIFICATIONS, LOADS, AND METHODS OF DESIGN
CHAPTER Structural Steel Design LRFD Method Third Edition SPECIFICATIONS, LOADS, AND METHODS OF DESIGN A. J. Clark School of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Part II Structural
More informationCivilBay Anchor Bolt Design Software Using ACI 31814 and CSA A23.314 Code
CivilBay Anchor Bolt Design Software Using ACI 31814 and CSA A23.314 Code http://asp.civilbay.com CivilBay anchor bolt design software http://asp.civilbay.com is a complete anchorage design software
More informationPerformance of Existing Reinforced Concrete Columns under Bidirectional Shear & Axial Loading
Performance of Existing Reinforced Concrete Columns under Bidirectional Shear & Axial Loading Laura M. Flores University of California, San Diego REU Institution: University of California, Berkeley REU
More informationSection 5A: Guide to Designing with AAC
Section 5A: Guide to Designing with AAC 5A.1 Introduction... 3 5A.3 Hebel Reinforced AAC Panels... 4 5A.4 Hebel AAC Panel Design Properties... 6 5A.5 Hebel AAC Floor and Roof Panel Spans... 6 5A.6 Deflection...
More informationREPAIR AND STRENGTHENING OF HISTORICAL CONCRETE BRIDGE OVER VENTA RIVER IN LATVIA
1 REPAIR AND STRENGTHENING OF HISTORICAL CONCRETE BRIDGE OVER VENTA RIVER IN LATVIA Verners Straupe, M.sc.eng., Rudolfs Gruberts, dipl. eng. JS Celuprojekts, Murjanu St. 7a, Riga, LV 1024, Latvia email:
More informationAASHTOWare Bridge Design and Rating Training. STL8 Single Span Steel 3D Example (BrDR 6.6)
AASHTOWare Bridge Design and Rating Training STL8 Single Span Steel 3D Example (BrDR 6.6) Last Modified: 4/28/2015 STL81 AASHTOWare BrDR 6.5 AASHTOWare Bridge Design and Rating Training STL8 Single Span
More information