1 reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Decks 4.1 GENERAL FEATURES Reinforced concrete slab type decks are often referred to as culverts and are commonly asedfor small spans. This type of super structure is economical for spans up to 8 m. For larger spans, prestressed concrete slab decks are preferred since the thickness of the shibcan be reduced, Slab decks are simpler for construction due to easier fabrication of form work, reinforcement detailing and placement of concrete. In the case of culverts the slab is supported on the two opposite sides on piers or abutments, The deck slab is designed as a one way slab to support the dead and live loads wi impact. National highway bridge deck slabs are generally designed to support the IRC Class AA or A ‘ype vehicle loads whichever gives the worst effect. Inthe case of reinforced concrete Tee beam and slab decks, the slab spans in two directions since it is cast integrally with main and cross girders at regular intervals. Hence the slab is designed as a two way slab for the wheel loads. The deck slab is Eetenlly designed for the worst effet of either one lane of IRC 70R/Class AA tracked i ioe loading or one lane of 7OR/Class AA wheeled vehicle or two lanes of Class invegeits moving on the deck as specified in IRC: 6-2014!, Based on analytical tigations Victor? has reported that, for the computation of live load bending vehicle only one loading condition need be considered, namely Class AA wheeled con fot spans up to 4 mand Class AA tracked vehicle for spans exceeding 4 m. For veh tions of maximum live load shear in two lane ridge decks, Class AA wheeled ™ Controls the design for all spans from 1 to 8m. i nec “isttbution or secondary transverse reinforcement in the perpendicular reised Should be at least 20 percent of the main reinforcement according to the TRC: 112-2011 code?. designed ene to the new IRC code, reinforced conerete bridge decks should be otis o%fORM to the philosophy of limit state design, The two basic groups ‘ates to be considered are: ~ Scanned with CamScanner62_|_ DESIGN OF BRIDGES | state or the limit state of strength in which the structural | clemeny | | a) Ultimate limit f i ie designed to withstand safely the ultimate design loads obtained by app R suitable partial b) Serviceability intended function satis! displacement, of local cracking. ‘The revised new code replaces the working stress method used in the previous code, with the limit state method. However, the working stress method is includeg a ‘Annexure A-4 of the code as an alternative and restricts its use for concretes of gre up to M-60, The new code envisages the use of high performance concrete classed in the range of M-30 to M-90. The strength and deformation characteristics of normal concrete generally useg for bridge construction are compiled in Table 4.1 (Table 6.5 of IRC: 112-2011), The new IRC code also permits the use of high yield strength deformed bars in the range from Fe-415 to Fe-600. FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGE DECKS 4.2.1. Basic Assumptions The ultimate flexural strength of reinforced concrete sections can be determined by assuming suitable stress block in the concrete compression zone. The basic principles of estimating the ultimate strength of structural elements subjected to flexure are well established and most of the codes have specified idealized stress blocks parameters for concrete in the compression zone with the following assumptions specified in the Indian Roads Congress Code’. a) Plane sections normal to the axis remain plane after bending b) The maximum strain in concrete at the outermost compression fiber is taken as 0.0035 in flexure. c) The relation between the compressive stress distribution and strain in concrete is assumed to be a rectangular parabola which results in prediction of strength in close agreement with test results as shown in Figs. 4.1 & 4.2 fety factors to the service loads. state in which the structural element should perform ; factorily at service loads without excessive deflection © | cr 4.2 The tensile strength of concrete is ignored. The stresses in the reinforcement are derived from representative stress-stit curve for the type of steel used. Typical characteristic and design stress-stit curves are shown in Fig. 4.3. For design purposes the partial safety factors recommended in Table 3.1 are applicable, f) The maximum strain in tension reinforcement in the section not less than that computed by the relation. d) °) at failure shall be A Scanned with CamScanner3! 3 2 suo sosodd yeouramooxd 305 osm 29 2) oan sonst so Kroogn Famdames wo poseg eusnHD aoumadadce ox PUB} YOH29g Ht UanfF woHIMAStOD afpLIq UF posn aq or sfsuaTEU Jo sonsadond (¢) &| 7:1 = teseq ‘1:0 = auorspues“6'9 ~ acorsotm s emojag tiaatf ex onde) q pond aq pinoys koxp ‘saresasA Re soypo 30,4 “sazeFasAe onssayrzrenb Jo} 2x0 “"y Jo sanqea pareyngT aq. (Z) £ Z-V aimxouuy ut wou age pasnsuowen os * ssurene ayy “Sanger UDAr? are uRisap ayy ut pasn 9g 01 sansodoad SuIpuodsaizo9 pur (\ ef REINFORCED CON ve [rc [ ec [ ez | ce [rz [oz [ot [wt ce | oc | se | ve [ ce | ce | ie | oe zs | ov | ov | cr | oe [ oe | rep ot a for lst tes piey or [a] st DF ov | ve | se | ee | oe [sz | sz | cz ean Te SL ol so 09 ss os sh Or se (anys | 7 sc | o | so | o9 | ss | os | sr | or | se | oc | sc | ox can TT ton beere [aris sow [oow [ssw [osiw | sriv | ow | sew | ori | sew [ ow ssep Huang TaD aay Seen STOTT | ever yeunsons yo: Scanner ith Cal ee canned wi “Se64 | DESIGNOF BRIDGES 0.87, fy 1-| +0.002 - +0,002 |= . oa [Fie & = characteristic strength of ‘steel : a E, = modulus of elasticity of steel 0.67 fx |_| 0.67 fx. Design Strength = a “15 Where Characteristic Strength =f. 0.45 fy, The stress block parameters are shown in Fig 4.2. Area of stress block isthe sum of rectangular & parabolic portion & is compu, as: A= (OAS fu. 0428) + 2B * 045 fe, * 0.58,) = 0.36 f, 5 Where x, = depth of Neutral Axis Ju, = Characteristic Compressive Strength Position of centre of compression from extreme compression fibre = 0.42 x, Characteristic curve 1 ! Design | [cure o 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.0035 Strain (ea) Fig. 4.1. Characterisite and Design Strength Curves for Concrete in. ‘Compression. Kb +-0.0035-»1 H+0.45¢,—4 t 0.42x, esl Lo 4) (d-0.42x) Section Strain Stress Fig.4.2 Stress Block Parameters. Scanned with CamScannerLa aHINGEDECHS | 6 acteristic cure Design cune a 3 ' @ 200 | Eps 2010 Win? 8 1 & t o87F, B af bef som L-\& ' 0. 1 10 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 Strain fig 43 Characteristic and Design Stress-Strain Curves for Fe-415 Grade Stee. w Balanced, Under Reinforced and Over Reinforced Sections ste the compressive strain in concrete reaches a value of 0,0035 as shown in Fig, 12 reinforced concrete sections in flexure reach the failure stage. When the sections ‘caferced in such a way that the tension steel reaches the yield strain of £, = [O.87/VE, + 0.002] nj simultaneously the concrete strain is ¢, = 0.0035, then the section is termed as $alanced. In Under reinforced sections, the tension steel reaches yield strain at loads jpser than the load at which concrete reaches the failure strain. There will be excessive s4nctions and cracking with a clear indication of impending failure, when the steel yellsealier than concrete, Hence it is preferable to design beams as under reinforced sect lure will take place after yielding of steel with clear warning signals like acessive deflections & cracking before the ultimate failure. Inthe case of Over reinforced sections, concrete reaches the yield strain earlier ‘tan that of steel. Over reinforced beams fail by compression failure of concrete vithout much warning and with very few cracks and negligible deflections. In practice, wer reinforced concrete beams are not preferred since they require large quantities of sel since they fail suddenly with explosive failures without any warning. 423° Neutral Axis Depth Covsider a rectangular beam section shown in Fig. 4.2. la b= width of section d = Effective depth Area of tension reinforcement 4, x, = depth of neutral Axis Scanned with CamScannerFor equi n Total tension (7) = Total compression(C) (Ay. 087f,) = 0.36 fy. b-Xy i ] 4) Limiting values of (x, /d) to avoid brittle failure is determined from the con the steel strain ¢,, at failure should be not less than the value given by e, -° Bis +00n| E, dition that Assuming E,= 210° N/mm, the yield strain for design purposes for different grade of steel are given in Table 4.2. From proportionality of strains, we have the relation, a fay 0.0035 ae] |e wal, (3) [22] [anes Substituting the various values of ,, for different grades of steel, the maximum limiting values of (x, /d) for different grades of steel are also shown in Table 4.2. Table 4.2 Limiting Values of (x,,.,/¢ for Different Grades of Steel Grade of Concrete t ‘Wield strain 3) gad) ; 5 4) Fe-250 Mild Steel 250 0.0310 0.53 HYSD bars Fe-415 415 0.0038 0.48 HYSD bars Fe — 500 500 0.0042 0.46 4.2.4 Resisting Moment of Reinforced Concrete Sections In the case of under reinforced sections, the moment of resistance can be computed by using the stress diagram assumed at the limit state of collapse shown in Fig.4.2 Taking moments about the centre of compression, M, = T(d-0.42x,) O87f, dy wes from Eq. (4.1) & T= (087A, .f) Substituting x, -| Hence M, = 0.87 Ag. ld 0.42 (0.87f, Ay./ 0.36 fy, 8)) al eel — Scanned with CamScannerRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 67 “ving & rearranging, co iin M, =087 dy Syd (4.3) «for estimating the flexural st fons in whi 3) can be use mating irength of sections in which (x, / fae nthe limiting value given in Table 4.2, This equation is specified in AMienG Hs 496-2000. OY Expressing the area of steel as a percentage of the effective area, we have =| 40 p-[4s}x1m wnerep isthe percentage of steel. Substituting for (A,./ bd) from the above expression ing. (43) We Bet M, -0anh (fie be ala] ow Fora given value of (M,/ bd”), f, & fy the value of ‘p’ can be computed. This is presented in SP: 167 as design tables. In these tables, the percentage of tension steel in tbebeam corresponds to the yield stress in steel when the beam fails by yielding of steel asin under reinforced sections. The design tables 1 to 4 in SP: 16 are very useful for stryctural designers to compute the percentage of tensile steel for known values of (M, /bd*) and different grades of steel & concrete. The moment of resistance of a concrete section can also be determined in terms of concrete strength by taking the moment of ‘compression force about the tension force in steel, which yields the relation, M, =0.36 fu, bx, (d -0.42x,)= 0.36 fx. (2) - oaa( Sf? w()-( Sem i is the limiting value as given in Table 4.2, then the limiting Yalues of the moment of resistance of the section is given by, =026/4( J[-20(s=)e =Khd? 45) K = Aconstant. M, Where Scanned with CamScanner6B_[ DESIGN OF EPIOGES “The expression for M, for different grades of steel is compiled in Table 4,3, VALLE, oy NONE ON Ct of ay Table A3 Wexrent f Petistance Sin Litres co Pe eed | Grate of Steet | | Expression for M4, { i Fe-29 AA { Fe-4i5 Z D134 f, bh) Fe~ A) O46. [| 9133 ,,68 | 4.2.5 Reinforcements in Balanced Singly Reinforced Sections Equating the compressive force in concrete and tensile force in steel (Fig.4.2) we have OBTf,A, = 936 fy bx, Rearranging the terms, Aa) _ (9362, \{ La \_ ie (4)-(B/4}- (cma (£) Since (x, /d) is constant for a given value off, If p, = Limiting percentage of tension steel. 100A, ) om) The Reinforcement Index can be expressed as (44)- waked Ds 3) 413(4) AS) For different grades of steel, the reinforcement index and the limiting moment of resistance for singly reinforced rectangular sections are compiled in Table 4.4. The British-Euro code BS EN 1992-1-1-2004” and the American code ACI 318 117 also specify simplified rectangular stress blocks for the computation of the ultims2 flexural strength. While the Indian code adopts the cube strength, the American 20d the British codes use the cylinder compressive strength for the stress block parameters. The resulting flexural strength estimates are more or less similar in all the the three code procedures. However in contrast to the Indian code, the British and Americ=? codes are more comprehensive in their specifications. Scanned with CamScannerih a —S8IMO8CED Cocrere stag ani0ce OFCKS | 69 table 44 Limiting Moment of Resistance and Reinforcement inde for Singly Reinforced Rectangular Sections (Table-C of SP: 16) 21.97 19.82 13.87 fa gunned percentage of tech Pq vaunted for diffrent grades of concrete and steel Resbown in Table 4.5. gable 4.5. Balanced Percentage of Stee! p, for ingly Reinforced Rectangular Sections, (Table-€ of SP: 16) ‘fo, (Nimnin?) J, (Nima?) 250 aS 300 15 132 0.72 057 20 176 0.96 076 25 2.20 119 094 30 2.64 143 113 42.6 Use of Design Charts and Tables of SP: 16 for Singly Reinforced Beams and Stabs” The Indian Standards Institution’s special Publication SP:16, Design Aids for Reinforced concrete to IS: 456-2000 contains a number of charts and tables for design ofreinforced concrete members. Based on Equations (4.3) and (4.6), the various charts and tables have been evolved. The design tables of SP: 16 are very useful for structural designers, since the designs of beams and slabs can be quickly worked out and checked without using the detailed procedure of using the design equations. Using the data given in Tables 2, 3 and 4 of SP: 16, the percentage reinforcement required in singly reinforced sections like solid bridge deck slabs can be directly read out for a known Value of the ratio [M, /(bd)] for different grades of conerete such as M-20, M-25 and M-30 using Fe-415 high yield strength deformed steel reinforcement — ‘Scanned with CamScanner70 | oF eae ENGTH OF REINFORCED CONCRETE ong. - OF REINFORCED CONCRETE gry 4,3 SHEAR STRENGTH RIDGE Dec Kg 4.3.1. Shear Failures in Bridge Deck Slabs he the supports of bridge decks failures are likely to occur near tl — ne _ ee due to the vehicular loads. The most common typeg ati : : ; failures are identified under the following groups: She a) Diagonal Tension b ¢) Flexure-Shear Shear-Compression d) Shear-Bond ©) Shear-Friction The ultimate shear strength ofa reinforced conerete beam or slab section depend several factors like percentage reinforcement ratio, grade of concrete and depth of slay The reader may refer to specialist literature'"".!2 for theories Conceming the various modes of shear failures. Experimental studies have shown that slabs fail at loads corresponding iy ‘nominal shear stress that is higher than that applicable for beams of usual propor In recognition ofthis Criterion, the Indian standard codes IS: 456-2000 and IRC: 115, 2011 has incorporated the shear strength enhancing factor K which depends upon th, depth of the solid slab, While the IS code specifies values of K ranging from 1.93 to 1:30 for slabs of depths ranging from 300 to 150 mm respectively, the IRC code specifies an empirical equation of the type, 2 K=1+ - $2.00, where dis the effective depth expressed in mm According to the IRC bridge design code, the design shear resistance (V.) of the member without shear reinforcement is given by the expression: Vrac™ (012K (80 pfu)! by d (82) Where = (44) $0.02 A, = area of longitudinal reinforcement in the member 4, = width of member in slabs and width of rib in beams d = effective depth of the member In the case of reinforced concrete slab decks, shear resistance being high, failure dve to shear is a rare phenomenon and shear reinforcements are not generally provided in slabs. If the nominal shear stress exceeds the permissible values, the depth of the slab is increased to avoid the use of shear reinforcements, ai Scanned with CamScannermn amoceo n ANALYSIS OF SLAB DECKS 4 concrete slab decks used for smalls . pan culverts geiteton and hence the moments due aim c (0 dead and | if rial direction ic. the direction of the moving lends pine rte in inom : it . loads. je loot on either side have tobe designed for 16 se es ek slabs ered I IRC loads specified as Cl a epending upon the importance and classification of the bridge, In the ene wo rete Tee beam and slab bridges, the deck slab j reinforeed cone eam a ges, the deck slab is supported alo ° ti tudinal and lateral directions by main and cross girders. Hence the slabs in i fe vet be analyze for moments developed in he longitudinal and lateral Speaons. Analysis of slabs with different support conditions are detailed under the flowing sub Sections. (a) solid Slabs Spanning in One Direction I. Single Concentrated Load: In the case of slabs spanning in one direction, the jad load moments are directly computed assuming the slab to be simply supported perween the bearings. Live loads of vehicles transmitted through wheels are considered seconcenrated loads spread over the contact area ofthe tyres with the deck slab. The pending moment per unit width of slab developed by concentrated loads on solid slabs rnaybe calculated by assuring the width of slab considered as effective in resisting the tending moment due to concentrated loads. In the case of precast slabs, the term ‘actual ‘sith of slab” should include the actual width of each individual precast element. IRC: 112-2011 code specifications outline a method of computing the effective width of slab supporting a concentrated wheel load considering various parameters lite the span length, dimensions of slab and the concentration area of the wheel load. For a single concentrated load, the effective width may be calculated by the equation, b= wt = AG by L where b, = effective width of slab on which the load acts effective span distance of centre of gravity of load from nearer support breadth of concentration area of load, ie the dimension of the tyre or track contact area over the road surface of the slab in a direction at right angles to the span plus twice the thickness of the ‘wearing coat or surface finish above the structural slab. K = Aconstant depending upon the ratio (B/L) where B is the width of the slab mas of the constant ‘K’ for different values of the ratio (B/L) is compiled in 4.6, The effective width shall not exceed the actual width of the slab, Also in the ease of; ‘load near the unsupported edge of a slab, the effective width shall not exceed the Scanned with CamScanner72] desicw or peINGES cass —$_—__ pis the distance of the load from the unsuppong shove value not half the shove val edge. 2. Two or More Concentrated Loads in Line in the Direction of Span: When ty, cot more concentrated loads are positioned in a line in the direction of span, the bending moment per unit width of slab shall be calculated separately for each load according y. ite appropriate effective width of slab as specified under the single concentrated long Table 4.6 Values of Constant’ (IRC: 112-2011) (Annexure ~ 83) ] x x x at For Simply For aL For Simply For Supported | Continuous Supported | Continnony | Slabs Slabs Slabs Slabs [ol 0.40 040s Mt 2.60 2.28 [oz 080 080 12 2.64 236 [eames 116 116 13 272 240 os Tas) 144 14 2.80 248 os 172 1.68 1s 284 248 06 1.96 16 2.88 252 07 212 17 292 256 Os 2.24 18 2.96 2.60 09 236 19) 3.00 2.60 10 248 2.0 & Above 3.00 2.60 3. Two or more Concentrated Loads not in Line in the direction of Span: In cases where the effective width of slab for one load overlaps the effective width of slab for an adjacent load, the resultant effective width for the two loads equals the sum of the effective widths for each load minus the width of overlap, provided that the slab so designed is tested for the two loads acting separately. (b) Solid Cantilever Slab The effective width of dispersion in the direction parallel to the supported edge for a single concentrated load is computed from the equation, b= 120+ dy Where b, = effective width, x = distance of the centre of gravity of the concentrated load from the ice of the cantilever support. by = the breadth of the concentration area of the load Le., the dimension of the tyre or track contact area over the road surface of the slab ina direction parallel to the supporting edge of the cantilever plus twice the thickness of the wearing coat or surface finish above the structural slab, 4 Scanned with CamScannerSe ——— = > i eae ‘e width should be limited to one-third the length of th 1 on raltel to the support. When the concentrated toad is placed near a Fe ends ofthe length of the cantilever slab in the direction paral! tothe 0 pe effective width should not exceed the above value, nor should it exceed ff ove value plus the distance of the concentrated load from the nearer extreme tied inthe direction parallel othe fxed edge, cohen wo or more loads act onthe slab and when the effective width of slab for spd overlaps the effective width of the adjacent load, the resultant effective width oxen Os should be taken as the sum ofthe respective effective widths for each ‘i Trinus the width of the overlap. persion of Loads Along the Span Tecfeive length of lb in the dretion of the pani computed asthe sum of the De tonct aren over te wearing surface of sib nthe dren ofthe span and twice a erl depth of the slab inclusive ofthe thickness of the wearing surface. ois D = depth of the wearing coat H = depth of the slab wheel load contact area along the span y= effective length of dispersion along the span i Weave the relation, vex+2(D+H) (@) Dispersion of Loads in Slabs Spanning in Two Directions Inbridge decks comprising slab integrally cast with longitudinal and cross girders as in the case of Tee beam and slab decks, the moments develop due to wheel loads on the sab both in the longitudinal and transverse directions. These moments are computed by using the design curves developed by M. Pigeaud or Westergaard’s method”. Pigeaud’s method is applicable to rectangular slabs supported freely on all the four sides andthe slab should be symmetrically loaded as shown in Fig, 4.4. The following 2Wiations ae used in calculating the dispersion width and moments due to concentrated Wheel loads on slabs. L = Long span length B = Short span length &v = Dimensions of the load spread after allowing for dispersion through the wearing coat and structural slab. K = Ratio of short to long span of slab (B/L) M, = Moment in the short span direction M; = Moment in the long span direction 'm & mz = Coefficients for moments along the short and long spans 4 = Poisson’s Ratio for conerete generally assumed as 0.15 Scanned with CamScanner74 | DEstGw OF BRIDGES _ = Wheel load under consideration Main girder Cross girder + Dispersion width t Fig. 4.4. Dispersion of Wheel Load through Wearing Coat and Deck Slab at 45°. The dispersion of the wheel or track load may be assumed to be at 45° through the wearing coat and structural slab, Consequently the effect of contact of wheel or track Joad in the direction of span length is equal to the dimensions of tyre contact area over the wearing surface of the slab in the direction of the span plus twice the overall depth of the slab inclusive of the thickness of the wearing coat as shown in Fig. 4.4. The dispersion of the wheel load through the wearing coat only is shown in Fig. 4.5(a). The dispersion of wheel load through the wearing coat and the deck slab at 45° is shown in Fig. 4.5(b). According to Victor’, the dispersion is some times assumed to be at 45 degrees through the wearing coat which is flexible and at a steeper angle through the deck slab which is rigid as shown in Fig. 4.5(c). Scanned with CamScannerRi IEINFORCEO CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 75 4+—— 8 =20m Le4m Fig. 4.5(a) Dispersion of Wheel Load through Wearing Coat. | W=57KN be ‘Wearing coat 80 mm RC. slab mm “e 7 = pcg et Fig.4.5(b) Dispersion of Wheel Load through Wearing Coat and Deck Slab at 45°. “scanned with CamScannera 76 | DESIGN OF BRIDGES W=57KN Wearing coat 80 mm RC. slab 200mm, eeeclels +x = 0.5 mn [eee us \(x+20) +H Fig. 4.5(¢) Dispersion of Wheel Load at Different Angles through Wearing Coat and Deck Slab, The bending moments in the short and long span directions are expressed as M, =(m+um) 7 Mz = (m+ im) W The values of the moment coefficients m, and m, depend upon the parameters (wB) and (v/L) and the value of K = (B/L). Figures 4.6 to 4.12 are the Pigeaud’s curves used for the estimation of moment coefficients m, and mz for various values of K ranging from 0.4 to 1.0. Moment coefficients m, and m; corresponding to K and (1/K) for slabs supporting uniformly distributed load (dead load of slab) are obtained from Fig. 4.13. The effect of different criteria used for determining the dispersion of wheel loads can be examined by a detailed comparative analysis. Hence a comparative study of the bending moments developed in the short and long span directions of a typical deck slab supported on main and cross girders of a Tee beam bridge, assuming different types of load distribution through wearing coat and thickness of structural slab is presented for three different types of cases for a wheel load of IRC Class A type loading using the following data: Data: IRC Class A Wheel Load = 17’ = 57 KN Wheel contact dimensions = $00 mm by 250 mm Thickness of wearing coat = D = 80 mm Thickness of structural slab = = 200 mm Dimensions of slab: L = 4 m and B=2m Ratio = K = (BIL) = (2/4) = 0.5 Poisson’s Ratio = 1 = 0.15 Scanned with CamScanner77 REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 7 *yo=w 20)" pue 'w suapyjeo3 waWoW 9" Bid 001 x tw LN3ID14I309 “¢ 8 sosanwa 0} * "ti LNBIDI4IIOO “e a & sosanwa go zo 90 So YO co ZO 10 00 t or 60 eo Zo 90 So vo FO zo 10 00 or 60 00. 00 010 —usy t CTA +00 ro bo er A bo Zo: — t zo zo" Y zo £0: 7] £0 0 co a 4 ro. —— Ie = vo * vo & 4 & 3 & = sof} >++ so 8 so so fi 4 -~ FE oo 3 3 od 8 : 90: 90 90 > oo 1 | E £0 ro 3 ro Ds [rs E 0 — 0 =; v0 rl | E 60 = £60 60: 60 & i Ob Art ser Fob ot fin mF ont oo oreo #0 20 90 90 Po CO ZO 10 00 tr ‘ or 60 90 10 9 0 SO vO £O ZO 10 | | | Scanned with CamScanner SSL70 | piston ornnnets “50 =929)"w pur 'wnuepyac weWON CY-6IE 001 = Fw INSIO1SI309°9 001 » 'w IN3IDISI309 "8 $ zossnna $ sosanwa oa 60 $0 £0 80 so Fo eo zo 10 00 o4 s0 80 Lo 90 so Fo co zo Fo 00 ot Jegtuud aut ! ov. =< oo 00. +00 ro. SSS. ro i) + + zo ZO e0 £0 i] z ro +0 = @ sos so 8 | ‘| ec z ao = “a RSS Ea cod i . i ood Fo | | oe pom NEA Fou Ct eee 0 ot 60 €0 Lo 90 So FO £0 ZO YO OO ot 60 go 20 90 SO FO EO ZO 10 00 | Scanned with CamScanner"910 =1120) Ww pu ‘wu suapy} oD wAWOW Ory BIE OOF x "WU LNAIDIAIIOO "8 9. 40 sana PEMPORCE: 40 S3NT¥A ey * 3 3 % 1 aan or Oo TO ZO OO GO FO CO ZO VO OO oy Ot Sn on oF} 60 80 20 90 90 FO CO ZO FO OO Scanned with CamScanner 7 sosanta80 | DESIGN OF BRIDGES o1 so eo 10 90 90 oO fo zo Va oO £0 =1 20) °w pue 'w swuapyj209 wOWON 6 6Id 004 x fw ANIOII309 “a 004 "ws LN3IDISIBO9 "e & so sanwn £ sosanwa a nel oo oof ‘ rt t rit SSS vo ovo re t-—t—+—} zo ae Ree SAA Le | ie ta eg vo SA a Se ee fc le so so B so Lo 4 ood fe] 8 MY go + et 90 je 90 3 r—~_| o vo mo eo \ go 80 eo > r>—_| q \ 6025 60 60 \ is on da ‘ ot 04 aS - — ob 60 #0 £0 90 SO vO £0 20 10 OO oF 60 80 20 90 So vO £0 zo to v0 oF 40 S3NTWA 1 * Scanned with CamScannera1 REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS $80 =120)%w pue 'w siuapryjeo> WON OLY Bid (001 x fu ANBIDI443O9 ' (001 x "ws ANIDII309 8 sosanwa & sosanwa Scanned with CamScanner ob 60 #0 20 90 So vO €D ZO LO OO oo 00 es) zo zo eo 0 eee 5 5 5 so 7 so : 80r}< 90 eke ro £0 eo ial so 80 60% a 60 60 01 ate ako ov Be | 7 ro 0% rh 6 0 90 So wo co ZO 10 00 ot 60 Go LO 90 SO wo CO ZO VO OO or 60 80 & |“60= 30) 'w pue 'w swarsyjoo> WOWOW LEP Bt (001 » "Ww LNaIOISIBOD © 008 « “Wi INFID1FIIOO “9 oo co ro so vo £0 go 60 on Scanned with CamScanner 82 | DESIGN OF arinGes £ sosanwa & sosanwa or 60 #0 £0 90 So vO co zo 10 OO oF 60 80 £0 90 so wo co zo 10 00 00 oo 2] oo 0 0 te zo zo ee 2 eco eo £0 & s ro EB vo vo & & 5 a ema ; so 8 so sog | g g i worl 90 90 rte zo ko xo eo eo v0 60 60 60 oF oF oF ot 60 80 40 90 SO ¥O £0 ZO 10 00 ob 60 80 40 90 SO vO €o ZO 10 OO |10 09 08 o7 ac 06 0s VALUES OF 04 03 02 ot 00 te 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 O7 08 09 1.0 VALUES OF 5 Fig. 4.12 Moment Coefficients m, and m, for K= 0.10. Cise 1: Dispersion of Wheel load through wearing coat only Referring to Fig. 4.5(@), u = (0.50 +2 0.08) = 0.66 m 125 +2 x 0,08) = 0.41 m Using Pigeaud’s curves corresponding to K'= 0.5, the moment coefficients are read as m, = 0.18 and m; = 0.13 (on + pm) =57 (0.18 + 0.15 * 0.13) = 11.37 KN : M, = W (ong-+ pm) = 57 (0.13 + 0.15 * 0.18) = 8.94 KN-m 82; Dispersion of Wheel load through wearing coat and Structural Slab at 45° Referring to Fig. 4.5(b), 50 +2 x 0,08) = 0.66 m .25 +2 x 0,08) = 0.41 m 53 Scanned with CamScannerez oz Ls n W/L 405 Fu pue y 405 ‘us 5} 3U9!>4J209 ‘peor painquisia Auwoytun enim paper Apijduo> sqe 0) siuePwjeo) IWEWOW 1° Bis 3 40» 40 santa er ot n i+—~_| 84 |_DESIGNOFARIDGES Scanned with Camsé4nner "WYO 'W LNBIDI3309 LNSWOW- pigenen’s UTES corresponding to X : vay = QUES and me; = QOD fe _ Dispersion of Wheel load through wearing coat and ost : slab : Referring Fig. 4500 my = 1S and Mg= wi pam) Me = Wot em) = 7 (125 + OS XO _Acongurative study of the moments resulting from different ANS of dispersion of Av loed indicates thatthe value of moments are maximum for Case Tin which the epesion fs assumed st 45° dhrough wearing coat only: Ifthe dispersion is assumed Sresteeper angle of $5.9° through the stiffer structural stab the resulting moments Sr gely percent less than Case 1, However ifthe dispersion fs assurned at an uniform, sesle of 45 through both the wearing coat and slab the resulting moments #6 the feat with a difference of 24 percent in comparison with the results of Case 1 NPE Jnad dispersion. Hence itis recommended that Case 1 type of lead dispersion yielding maximum moments may as well be used for the design of two way slabs, 45 DESIGN AIDS AND TABLES FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGE DECK SLABS Pigeaud’s method of computing the live load and dead lead moments in concrete slabs supported oa al sides assumes simple unyielding boundaries and arbitrary continuity cveffcients are applied in order to account for the continuity of the slab over supports. This assumption is not valid particularly when the longitudinal and eross ginfers are cast monolithically with the slab so that the whole deck behaves as an integral structure under loads. In such a case the behaviour of slab can be approximated to that of a slab = fixed boundaries. This factor has been recognized in the German specifications Dovi07s and ONORM B4204. The bridge loadings are generally specified in the form of wheel or tracked loads with the dimensions of loaded area laid down by codes of practice. aa os wheel load pattern does not permit simplitied solutions unlike - egemiomnly distributed load covering the entire stab, Further, the multiplicity 2 conditions with several wheel loads make the designer's job very tedious - Scanned with CamScannerthe work of Roesch, involving slabs with continuous bounda desi ve been preparad by Suryaprakasha Rao et al. for computation of poe © way slabs with simply supported and fixed of continuous edges Te vartous parameters considered are: (1) The width (3) and length (Z) of slab panel (2) Type of support at slab edges (Simply supported or fixed or continuous) (S) Type of loading such as Class 70 R, Class AA tracked and wheeled Vehicles ang Class A tain and uniformly distributed load. ‘The Sesign tbles are based on the following assumptior (1) The slab is analyzed as a thin plate using the elastic analysis with ifferege Doundary conditions. (©) The dispersion of the wheel loads is taken up to the middle surface of the slab, Zee beading moments are tabulated for two different cases which are commonly encountered in highway bridge decks. These ii) All edge fixed or continuous, The variables considered are the slab dimensions in the Perpendicular directions designated as: are i) All edges are simply supported and igth of slab in the longitudinal direction (direction of traffic) vidth of slab in the transverse direction , Positive moments developed at the centre of slabs in the Principal directions. jie and Mj are the negative moments developed at the edges in the principal directions. The range of values of slab dimensions, type of loading and the edge conditions covered in these table are as follows: () The length (©) The width “B* varies from 1 to 5 m with increments of 0.25 m. (c) The type of loading comprises of IRC Class 70 R, Class AA and Class A. (d) A key chart indicates the plan dimensions of the deck slabs, Chart numbers varying from | to 285 cover the entire spectrum of the slab dirgensione (©) Four sets of tables covering the various types of loading (Three types of Live loads and uniformly distributed load due to dead load) and two types of ‘edges viz. all edges simply supported and all edges fixed or continuous are covered in the design tables with bending moments tabulated for all cases, “L’ varies from 3 to 8 m with increments of 0.25 m, orm Scanned with CamScannerREINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 87 generally have slabs continuous at edges enclosed by longitudinal type of fixed slabs covering the slab dimensions idth from 2 to 2.5 m) commonly used in Indian beam slab decks ‘beams and hence only for thi varying from 3 to 5 mand wis decks, bending moments arc tabulated. ments for IRC Class AA tracked loading and Table 4.8 gives the dead load moments for uniformly distributed load of 10 kN/m?, These design tables are very useful in the design of slabs in Tee beam and slab decks. Since slabs occur for IRC Class A tracked loading, only Tee and cross (Length y Highway bridge ‘Table 4.7 gives the live load mon themaximum bending moments in this particular case is covered in the following tables. Table 4.7 Design Tables for Positive and Negative Moments | in Slabs with Continuous Edges for IRC Class AA Tracked Loading Slab Dimensions Positive Moments Negative Moments | L B My My My (mn), (m) {kNvm) (kN-m) -m) 3 2 8.54 10.41 -19.35 4 2 1.73 11.86. 20.22 4 25 10.49 15.64 -28.11 5 25 9.89 16.97 -29.03 5 2 7.54 12.18 -20.43 Table 4.8 Design Tables | for Positive and Negative | Bending Moments in Slab for Uniformly Distributed Load of 10 kN/m? ‘Slab Dimensions Positive Moments Negative ‘Moments L B My My Mu Me (m) (m) (kN'm), (kN'm), (kN-m) (kN: 3 2.0 0.61 1.43 2.27 2.99 4 2.0 0.39 1.64 -2.25 28 4 25 087 234 3.55 483 5 25 0.61 2.58 3.54 5.16 § 2.0 0.29 1,69 3 -3.33 4.6 MINIMUMAND MAXIMUM REINFORCEMENTS IN SLABS ments in solid bridge deck slabs i governed by the the 1) The minimum reinforce specifications in Clause effective cross sectional not less than that require the relation, rnin 7 0-26 Sen b,d but not ” Six 16.6.1 of IRC: 112; area of the longitudinal tensile reinforce .d to control cracking and not less than given by 5 than 0.00130, 4 o(4.8) Scanned wit CamscannerSIGN. OF BRIDGES Where mean width ofthe tension zone in slabs and width of Web ng, “ Is = mean value of axial tensile strength of concrete (Refer Table 4) effective depth 2) The masimum reinforcement should be not greater than 010254. at sections other than at laps. 3) Secondary transverse reinforcement of area not less than 20 percent of th einforcement should be provided in one way slabs. 4) The maximum spacing of main reinforcements should be the lesser of 2 the thickness of the slab or 250 mm. 5) ‘The maximum spacing of the secondary reinforcement in one way slabs shoulg be the lesser of 3 times the thickness of the slab or 400 mm. 'e main, times 4.7 CONTROL OF CRACKING IN BRIDGE DECKS 4.7.1 Permissible Crack Widths The IRC bridge code specifies values for the maximum permissible width of cracks in reinforced and prestressed concrete bridge decks depending upon the conditions of exposures such as moderate, severe and very severe environmental conditions as detailed in Table 4.9. Table4.9 Recommended Values of Maximum Crack Widths (W,,) (Table 12.1 of RC: 112-2011) Condition of Exposure) | Reinforced members and Prestressed members As per Clause 14.3.1 Prestressed members with with bonded tendons tun-bonded tendons ‘Quast-permanent load Frequent load combination® (mm) combination (mm) Moderate 032) 02 Severe 03 020) Very Severe and Extreme 02 0.2 and desompression (1). The condition of exposure considered applies to the most severe exposure the surface will be subjected to in service. (2) For moderate exposure class, crack width has on influence on durability and this limit is Set to guarantee acceptable appearance, (3) For these conditions of exposure, in addition, decompression should be checked under the quasi-permanent combination of loads that include DL + SIDL + Prestress including secondary effect + settlement + temperature effects. (4) _0.2 applies to the parts of the ‘member that do not have to be checked for ‘decompression. The reader may refer to the Clauses 12.3.3 to 12.3.5 of the IRC: 112-2011 for the minimum reinforcements for crack control, calculation of crack width and control of shear cracks within webs respectively. However the code also recommends a simpler Scanned with CariScannerREINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 89 re for control of cracking without ors ds the use of two tables in which menly after cracking is restricted to ity of cracks. Tables 4.10and4.11 giv ert of cracks widths of 0.3 mm and rect calculations. In this method the code the maximum permissible stress in steel ecified values for different bar sizes and es the maximum bar diameters and spacing 0.2 mm for different stress levels in steel. Table 4.10 Maximum Bar Diameters for Crack Control (Table 12.2 of RC: 112-2011) ‘Maximum bar size [mm] steel stress [MPa] = 03mm W=02 mm 160 32 25 200 25 16 240 16 2 [280 2 z 320 10 = Table 4.11 Maximum Bar Spacing for Crack Control (Table 12.3 of RC: 112-2011) ‘Maximum bar size [mm] Steel stress [MPa] W203 mm W,=02 mm 160 300 200 200 250 150) 240 200 100 280 150 Ed 320 100 e 47.2 Calculation of Crack Widths The width of cracks in the tension zone of reinforced concrete bridge depends upon the maximum spacing of bars and the mean strain in reinforcement and concrete between the cracks. IRC: 112-2011 recommends an expression for the width of cracks based on the method specified in British Code!?. According to this method the design surface crack width is computed using the expression: We Serax (Con Fem) Where JY, = the design surface crack width Semax = the maximum crack spacing ¢_. = themeanstrain inthereinforcement under therelevant combination * Of loads, including the effect of imposed deformations, restrained thermal shrinkage effects allowing for the effects of tension stiffening of the concrete. For prestressed members only the additional tensile strain beyond the state of zero strain of the concrete at the same level is considered. Scanned with CamScanner90 | DESGNOFRRIDGES €_.. = the mean strain in the concrete between cracks Ge Af fora Je raPpat)} 7, net of & (49) (6m =Fen) =| ge | (3) : Where 6, = stress in tension reinforcement calculated using the cracked conerete section, . | J, =a factor that accounts for the duration of loading which may be taken as 0.5 Pet ~ [4y/A, pi the effective reinforcement ratio based on an effective conerete tension area (4, q¢) a8 shown in Fig 4.14 agar = concrete tensile strength at the time of cracking and the values as listed in Table 4.1 @,, = modular ratio = [E, /E,.] b+——>———_4 the or [8 the Least of t t Rare 2) 25 (h-d) It b) (h-xy3_ o & ona nit A T Ettective Tension [AarAcw " 1 ite Fig. 4.14 Effective Concrete Tension Area. ‘The maximum crack spacing Scmax #8 given by the empirical formula Saaz = (34e + 0.425 ky ki, OP po] (4.10) Where © = bar diameter (or average value if bars of different sizes have been used) ¢ = cover to the reinforcement k, = 0.8 for high bond bars and k, = 0.5 for flexure and 1.0 for direct tension Substituting these values we have the expression Seman = (BAC + 0.1700, ef] wee.) Scanned with CamsREINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 91 where reinforcement spacing exceeds sri bas a Upper +2) Se here iis the depth of neutral axis, CONTROL OF DEFLECTIONS IN BRIDGE DECKS 48.1 Limiting Values of Deflection IRC: 112-2011 specifies the limiting values of deflection taking into account the ature ofthe superstructure, bridge ‘deck furniture and functional needs of the bridge. jn the absence other criteria, the following deflection limits under live load maybe considered: 2) Vehicular. +) Vehicular and pedestrian Or pedestrian alone. ¢) Vehicular on cantilever. 4) Vehicular & pedestrian and Pedestrian only on cantilever arms. In contrast to the IS: 456-2000" and 343-2012'5 code of practice for reinforced hhich the final deflection due to all loads including the and prestressed conerete in wl and shrinkage is limited to a value of spar/250, the effects of temperature, creep present IRC code limit of span/800 seems to be very conservative resulting in larger ees of deck elements with more reinforcements affecting the overall cost of the deck structure. 4.8.2 Calculation of Deflection Due to Sustained Loads ‘The computation of deflections are considered in two parts: 4) Instantaneous or short term deflections occuring on application of the loads. 5) Long term defections resulting from differential shrinkage and creep due to sustained loading. In case of cracked members, appropriate value of cracked moment of inertia should f actual value of cracked moment of inertia cannot be be used in the computations. I determined, the code permits the use of 70 percent of the gross moment of inertia for computations. For prestressed concrete member, fully under compression, gross moment of inertia can be used. Deflection due Creep effects of sustained loads over a long period is calculated by using the effective modulus of elasticity for concrete using the equation, Eon : Event (eal e-e(412) Scanned with CamScanner92 | desiaworseoces Where = Secant modulus of elasticity © (~.1,) = creep coefficient relevant for the load and time interval as given in Table 4.12 for different ages of loading and atmospheric conditions. Table 4.12 Final Creep Coefficient (@(70 Yrs)] of Concrete (Table 6.9 of !RC: 112-2011) Notional Size 2Ada (in mm) Age at loading oT 10 | 600 50 150 0 | 4, (éays) Dry atmospheric conditions Humid atmospheric conditions (RH-50%) fae (RH -30%) ar | sso | 460 3.70 3.60 320 | 290 | { 7] sso | 460 3.70 2.60 230 2.00 i 2s {380 ~*f~aao | _2.60 1.90 1.70 1.50 {90 300 | 250 2.00 1.50 1.40 120 Liss] 180 [150 {120 1.10 1.00 100 ‘The deflections due to shrinkage is expressed by the relation, a, -(2)e te where & = a constant depending upon the support conditions having values of = 055 for cantilevers = 0.125 for simply supported members 0.036 for members continuous at one end and 0.063 for fully continuous members 1) (4 | = Shrinkage curvature assessed by the relation Le) ce) and €,, = free shrinkage strain = [e,, + €,] a, ~ effective modular ratio = (E/E, 44) 5 = First moment of Area of the reinforcement about centroid of the section J = Second moment of area of the section £,, = drying shrinkage strain g,, = autogenous shrinkage strain Scanned with CamScannerAeinronctocone nese aman’ ems | OF sngenos shrinkage stain develops daring the hardening of enero inthe early Mays ting ane it epends on the strength of vanerete ant the values seesmnnnennte ye iRC ode are compiled in Table 4,13 ! Table 4,13 Autogenous Shrinkage Strain af Concrete (lable 6.6 of RE 1122001) Man [mas [meats [Me [mow | Mot | 1 Grade of Concrete fcorems Sihage aaa ee nate J sain (es 10) | as 45 “ 45 / A strain develops slowly, since It is. function of the migration a the drying shrinkage “The final value of the drying, shrink water through the pores in the hardened concrete, age stain may be taken a fyb Where fi a factor which depends upon the notional size, and h, is the notional size (mim) of the cross section and iv equal 40 24, / where 4, isthe eross sectional area of concrete and 1 is the perimeter of that part ofthe cross section which is exposed to drying, “The values of fy an €,4 are compiled in ‘Tables 4,14 and 4.15 ves ely. Tablea.14 Values fork, (Table 6.7 of NC; 112-2011) Table 4.15. Unrestralned Drying Shrinkage Values (4 10") (Table 6.8 of RC: 112-2011) _ Relative Humidity 4.9 _MINUMUM GRADE OF CONCRETE AND COVER REQUIREMENTS Bridge structures have to be designed for a service life of at least 100 years and the new code specifies the maximum water/cement ratio, minimum cement content and grade of concrete along with the cover requirements for different types of environmental exposure conditions as shown in ‘Table 4,16, Scanned with CamScanner94 | DESIGN OF BRIDGES Table 4.16 Durability Recommendations for Service Life of at least 100 years (20 mm aggregate) (Table 14.2 of IRC: 112-2011) Exposure | Maximum Water/ | Minimum Cement | Minimum Grade | Minimum Cond Cement Ratio_| Content (kg/m!) | of Concrete | Cover (mm) Moderate 0.45 340. M25 40 Severe 045 360 M30 45 ‘Very Severe 040 380 M40 50 Extreme 035 400 MAS 5 4.10 DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB CULVERT FOR IRC CLASS AA LOADS Design a reinforced concrete slab culvert for a National Highway crossing to suit the following data: Carriage way ~ Two lane (7.5 m wide) Foot paths ~ I mon ether side Clear span = 6 m Wearing coat = 80 mm Width of bearing = 400 mm Materials: M-25 Grade Conerete and Fe-415 Grade HYSD bars Loading-IRC Class AA tracked vehicle Design the reinforced concrete slab deck and sketch the details of reinforcements in the longitudinal and cross section of the slab. The design should conform to the specifications of IRC: 6-2014 and IRC: 112-2011. 1, Data Clear span = 6 m Width of bearing = 400 mm IRC Class AA tracked vehicle loading M-25 Grade Concrete and Fe-415 Grade HYSD bars 2. Characteristic Strength of Materials 25 N/mm? E,= 200 GPa a, = [E/E] = 6.66 415 N/mm? E,=30GPa 3. Depth of Slab and Effective Span a) Based on limit state of serviceability considerations of limiting deflections Ratio of Span/Depth (L/d) = 12 to 15 For (L/d) = 15, d= (span/15) = (6000/15) = 400 mm For (L/d) = 12, d= (span/12) = (6000/12) = 500 mm Scanned with CamSéanner—_— 1) For highway solid slabs bridge decks Thickness of the slab is assumed as 80 mm/metre of span Depth of slab = (80 « 6) = 480 mm Based on the above considerations, adopt overall depth of slab = f= $00 [Ascuming moderate exposure conditions, clear cover = 40 mm Using 20 mm diameter HYSD bars as main reinforcements with a clear co 40mm, Effective depth = [500 - 40 ~ 10] = 450 mm Width of bearing = 400 mm Effective span is the least of 2) (Clear span + effective depth) = (6 + 0.45) m= 6.45 m 'b) Centre to centre of bearings = (6 + 0.40) = 6.4 m ‘The cross section of the deck slab is shown in Fig. 4.15. 4 Dead weight of slab |2 kN/m* Dead weight of W: Therefore Total load = (12 + 1.76); 14 KN/m? Dead load bending moment = {0.125(14 * 6.4°)] = 72 KN-m 5, Live Load Bending Moments Generally the bending moment due to live load will be maximum for IRC Clas: tracked vehicle loading. Impact factor for IRC Class AA tracked vehicle is 25° for Sm span decreasing linearly to 10% for 9 m span. Therefore for 6.4 m span. Impact factor = (25 - (15/4) x fo.4~5)] = 19.7% a5 = (282! ‘The tracked vehicle is placed symmetrically on the span 4 Effective length of load = [3.6 + 2(0.5 + 0.08)] = 4.76 m Effective width of slab perpendicular to span is expressed as, SP hoger og Gtece : Gem) 42 (call tre eg 40) heak{i-Z] +0 Referring to Fig. 4.16, we have ~~ Stanned with CamScannerera 96 [pinaworsmoces _, ot ~ 760 IO CIass AA Load — x = 3200 ————»>| 6400 ———————__, Fig. 4.16 Position of Load for Maximum Bending Moment. PSL A 3.2 m, L< 6.4 m, B= 9.5 m and the ratio (B/L) = 1.48 ne = [0.85 + (2 « 0.08)] From Table 4.6, for (B/L) =1.48 and simply supported slab the value of K = 2.84 be = (2.84 3.2(1- 3.2/6.4) + 1.01] = 5.56 m The tracked vehicle is placed close tothe kerb with the required minimum clearance as shown in Fig. 4.17. 1000 1200 a 8501200 850 2625 Y 2050 E 7455 Fig. 4.17 Effective Width of Dispersion for R.C. Class AA Loads. See 7 eee at gt Net effective width of dispersion = 7.455 m _ 2: a Total load of two tracks with impact = (700 * 1.194) = 838 kN Average intensity of load = [838 / (4.76 x 7.455)] = 23.61 kN/m? : 5 tdgtge wae Maximum bending moment due to live loi is given by, 1% Max = (0.5(23.61 * 4.76) x 3.2] ~ [0.5 (23.61 X 4,76) x (4.76 «0.25)] = 113 kN-m _peom Bik +, Total design bending Moment = (113 +73) = 185 kN-m 76 Total design Ultimate moment (M,) = [1.35 M,+ 1.5 M,] ee = [(1.35 « 72) + (1.5 « 113)] =267kN-m/m | 6. Shear due to Class AA Tracked Vehicle For maximum shear at support, the IRC Class A tracked vehicle is arranged as shown in Fig. 4.18 4760 IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle Flg.4.18 Position of Load for Maximum Shear, Scanned with CamScannerr a REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 97 sqetve width of Dispersion is given by by =k] 1-2] 4b x=238m — (BIL)=1.48 B=95m K=2.84 ’ L=64m 4 by {(284 « 2.38) [1 -(2.38/6.4)] + 1.01) = 5.256 m * width of dispersion = [2625 + 2050 + (0.5 x 5256)] = 7303 mm ‘Average intensity of lond = [838/(4,76 x 7.303)] = 24.1 kNim? 1 Shear force = V_ = [(24.1 * 4.76 x 4.02)/ 6.4] = 72 KN Dead load shear = [0.5(14 x 6.4)] = 45 kN G4 - 2.38) ‘Therefore total design shea" force = (72+ 45)= 117 KN ‘otal design ultimate shear force = [1.35 V+ 1.5 %,] = [(1.35 « 45) + (15 «72)] = 169 kNim where 7. Design of Deck Slab Using M-25 grade concrete and Fe-415 HYSD bars Limiting moment of resistance for singly reinforced sections is expressed as (Refer Table 4.3) My jg = 0-138 fy bP e a= {Ma |__267*10___ 378mm 0.138 fy. V0.138x25%1000 Since the effective depth selected is 450 mm, the section is under reinforced. “The area of reinforcement required to resist the ultimate moment can be computed using the Relation, Ashy M, =0. aji- a ost Aa ithe Ag x 415 7 =0. } 1 (26 x10°) = 0.87 x 415 Ay X45 f 1 | | Solving Ay, = 1758 mm? Using 20 mm diameter bars main reinforcement, the spacing is given by 10004, | _[ 1000x314 S=|—# |=| —— |= 178.6 mm [ Ay | [ 1758 | Provide 20 mm diameter bars at 150 mm centres Ay (provided) = 2094 mm? Scanned with CamScannerSS #0 Teinforwement should be designed to resist a moment computed as 3 S169,$) + (0.2 ¥ 97.2)] = 71 kKN-m Ansof dieribaton renfoecement (2094267) 71] = $87 mm? Provide 12 mm diameter bars at a spacing of 200 mm centres. S. Check for Ultimate Flexural Strength My =(OS87S 4152094 <0! - GIFS 104 Nam 314 KN-m> 267 KN-m (Hence sate) 9. Check for Ultimate Shear Strength = ‘The ultimate shear strength of the reinforced concrete deck slab is checked by using the equation 4.7. where and A= (4) $0.02 _ {2094 ~(imoess Fyae = [0.12 81.66 (80 0,0046 x 25)"33] (1000 x 450) N = (188 ¥1000) N = 188 KN > 169 KN (Hence safe) ) = 0.0046 10. Check for Serviceability Limit States a) Limit State of Cracking 1) Crack Width Computations by Rigorous Analysis The width of cracks at the limit state of servicea¥ility’can be calculated using the expression. Ca Beq) at ~~ Scanned with CamScannerREINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 99 o,-k (é sell le +O6Pper)) pet (m7 ten) =| za6(%) substituting the relevant values in the design example, we have vie =25Nimm? K,=0.5, faett = Sexm = 2-2 N/mm? corresponding to the grade of concrete (Refer Table 4.1) G1, = [E,/Ecq] = [200/30] = 6.66 For the cracked section using the parameters = 500 mm, b= 1000 mm, d= 450 mm, A, = 2094 mn, a, = 6.66 Neutral axis depth ‘x’ is computed from the relation, 0.5 6.2 =a,.A,(d-x) (0.5 x 1000 x x2) = 6.66 * 2094 x (450—x) Solving, the neutral axis depth =x = 99 mm. a) 2.5(h—d)=2.5 (500-450) = 125 mm b) (h—x)/3 = [(500 - 99)/3] = 133.6 mm ©) (h/2) = (500/2) = 250 mm Hence the least value of fe = 125mm ro [rata | ro k, = 0.8 for high bond bars , = 0.5 for bending For Jog =25Nimm?, fog = 0.7 [fax = 0.7N25 = 3.5 N/mm? Sel 3.5x10.4%10" 6° af Zork a] SSROSIO’ (72.8 10°) Ni M, (# a (72.8«10°)Nmm (M= 0.125 wL? = (0.125 * 14 x 6.4] = 71.68 kN-m z=Lever am=[4-#]-[4s0-2 417mm. 3 12 -(%e omar = (2.038% 10°)mm* bi? |_| 1000x500" Ig= [= |- [moe =(10.4x10") mm* 000 x99? 10299") (55620983351) Scanned with CamScanner100 | DESIGN OF BRIDGES 1 2.03810? @ et =| Ta Wal 99 |= 28210”) mt 12-( ae \2l- 2a mn 71,68x10° )\ 450 )\"~ 450 450. Also, Shag Shy (2,038 « 105) < (2.82 « 10°) $(10.4 * 10°) Cover provided = ¢ = 40 mm If spacing is less than S(c + 4/2) then maximum final crack spacing may by calculated using the relation, Maximum spacing of cracks = 5,4, = [3.4¢ + 0.176/p, o] In the present example, 5(c + 4/2) = 5(40 + 20/2) = 250 mm But spacing of main tension bars is 150 mm < 250 mm Hence 5; ny = ((3.4 * 40) + (0.17 * 200.0167] = 339 mm Service load moment = M= (72+ 113) = 185 kN-m M__|_|__ 185x108 99 an 450- 4 an ( s0- 8 Using the above values of the various parameters, the width of crack is computed as ef Stress in steel at service load= 5, = ( = 212 N/mm We = Seamax = 026m 206{% 06 212 0.0006 mm E, 200%10° The maximum crack width is less than the permissible value 0.3 mm. (Hen Scanned wi amsScanner ss)REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 101 oo" y) Control of Cracking Without Direct Calculation The IRC: 112-2011 code outlines a simpler method for erack contol by limiting the guess in steel and the maximum bar size and spacing for permissible crack widths of 3 and 0.2 mm, The code recommends the use of Tables 4.10 and 4.11. service load moment = M,, = 185 kN-m ‘The stress in stecl at working load is computed as M 6 0, =| —“ | =| 1 = 22mm? a-2)4 “}(450-2 ( 3) (45 3 12094 ‘The slab is reinforced with 20 mm diameter bars spaced at 150 mm centers. Referring to tables 4.10 and 4.11, the bar size and spacing are well within the safe limits for control of cracking. b) Limit State of Deflection 1) Thedeflection due to shrinkage can be computed by the relation ag, = KYyey Where, k= aconstant = 0.125 for simply supported beams Ss Wey = shrinkage curvature =| [-« a, (3) ,, = Total shrinkage strain = (€,4 + &,) Where, ¢,, is the drying shrinkage strain £,, 8 the autogenous shrinkage strain ‘The development of drying shrinkage strain with time is expressed as 24 (0) = [Bast thi, cal i Bald] es (t-4 +0.04)h,> And A, = Notional size (mm) of the cross section = (24/u) A, = cross sectional area of concrete U = perimeter of that part of the cross section exposed to drying 1 age of the concrete in days at the time considered 1, = age of concrete in days at the beginning of drying shrinkage, normally this is at the end of curing (28 days) &, = Values given Table 4.14 Substituting the numerical values, we have hh, = (2A,Ju) = (2. 1000 x 5002000) = 500 mm Scanned with CamScanner102 | dEsIGWOF ARIDGES 1 = 36S days, 1, = 28 days and h, = 500 Ba (tt, af a OS) eat Lo | Final value of drying shrinkage strain €,4..~ Ay, From Table 4.14 the value of &, = 0.70 For relative humidity of $0 percent, and M-25 grade concrete ‘The value of unrestrained drying shrinkage strain from Table 4.18is extrapolated as 535 « 10°) £3 (0 = [Balt 4 )KyE eg] = (0.42 * 0.70 * 535 « 10-4] = 0.000157 Autcgenous shrinkage strain is interpolated from Table 4.13 for concrete of grade M-25 as, €., = 30 10) Total shrinkage strain = €,, = (€,4 +€,,) = (157 +30) 10-6 = (187« 10-4) settee] ‘= First moment of area of reinforcement about centroid of the section (2904 x 200) = (580.8 x 103) mm? 10.4 x 10) mm* s (3) = [(980.8 * 10°)(10.4 x 10°)] = (55.8 x 10-4) Ves = [(187 * 10°) x 6.66 x 55.8 x 10-5] = (69494 x 10-12) a, = [kY,, L?] = [0.125 x 69494 x 10-12) x 64007] = 0.355 mm 2) Long term deflection due to sustained (dead) loads Total dead load = g = 14 kN/m = 14 N/mm Effective span = L = 6.4m = 6400 mm Modulus of elasticity of concrete = E, = 30 N/mm? = 30,000 N/mm? Effective moment of inertia = /,-= (2.82 x 10°) mm* Sgl* Maximum short term deflection due to dead load = ay = [55] "| 5x 14x 6400" 384 x 25000 x 2,82 10" = 434mm at a ornnnnerain nerennnrreraaa— 81.12 KN (Hence safe) IRC Class A-wheo! load W.C. 80. mm_ i | TE 00 m0) | | | Ae | Fig. 4.26 Position of IRC Class-A Wheel Load on Slab for Maximum Shear. 6. Check for Cracking According to IRC: 112-2011, cracking can be controlled without direct computations of the width of cracks by limiting the size of reinforcing bars, spacing of the bars, stress in steel and the permissible crack width as listed in Tables 4.10 and 4.11. This empirical method will be followed in this example to check for the serviceability limit state of cracking in the deck slab. Depth of neutral axis (x) is determined using the relation, (0.5 * 1000 x x2) = [6.66 754 x (154 -x)] Solving x = 37.3 mm Stress in steel under working loads is computed as, ‘ 4b My 1) | 18ST) 174 Nimo? Ay {ist *3 rss ‘The deck slab is reinforced using 12 mm diameter bars at 150 mm centers Referring to Table 4.10, for a stress of 174 N/mm*, maximum bar diameter Permissible to Limit the crack width to 0,3 is interpolated as 28 mm as against 12 mm Used in the slab. Scanned with CamScanner112. or s6woF amines. From Table 4.11, maximum spacing of bars to limit the crack width to 0.3 mm should not exceed 290 mm as against 150 mm used in the slab. Nence the stab is safe regarding the serviceability limit stat of cracking according to the specifications of IRC: 112-2011 7. Check for Deflection Effective moment of inertia of the slab is computed using the relation | oa 12-(“r fz (Gi 5 Where, I Sema! =) Gesoxrsier (85.68 « 10°) mm* = 0.7 fx = 0.7925 =3.5N/mm? bh*) _(1000%200° 6) ed AZ | =| 2000200") | (666 «10° 2 ( ] (666%10°) mm’ > " 6 een eeen Its = (23.31x10°) Numm 100 2 trem =(t—2) (154-223) a141's7m M = Service load moment = 18.578 KN-m. d= 154 mm and x= 37.3 mm 85.68%10° —— SHI 12-{ 2331108 Gat } "(18,587 x10 JU 154 154 Service dead load of slab and wearing coat = g = 6.56 kN/m? Maximum short term deflection due to dead load is computed as sgl! |_| 5x6.56x2s00! 3842, lege | | 384% 29000 x 262 x 10° Vege = = (262 10°) mm* a= |- 0.43mm Scanned with CamScannerREINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB BRIDGE DECKS | 113 Creep coefficient depends upon notional size of member given by ( *.) u (#* -(= aoe uw) (2000 )=70mm From Table 4.12, interpolate the final creep coeffici ven notional s 2, interpola P coefficient for the ti 200 mm at relative humidity of 50% and age at loading of 28, rt o- rhe “ Effective modulus of elasticity of concrete = Exe = (45 -|#]]& ™ I+ 143. 4 Long term deflection due to dead loads = 4, = (4 * 0.43) = 1.72 mm Deflection due to live load of $7 kN at centre of span of 2.5 m is given by a, -(22 57x10? x2500° MO" ABE Te 48 x30000 x 262 x 10° Maximum permissible deflection (zz) bi (=) “(800 }=2360m Imm>2.36mm due to live load “| “g99 Total deflection due to dead and live loads = (1.72 + 2.36) 2500 50 = 4.08 mms (2 )-0 mm Hence the slab is safe regarding the serviceability limit stat of deflection according to the specifications of IRC: 112-2011. EXAMPLES FOR PRACTICE 1. Areinforced concrete slab culvert is required for a National highway crossing to suit the following data: Width of carriageway = 7.5 m Width of kerb = 600 mm Clear span = Width of bearing = 400 mm Foot paths I m on either side ‘Type of loading: IRC Class AA or A whichever gives the worst effect Materials: M-30 Grade Concrete & Fe-415 HYSD bars Design the deck slab conforming to the specifications of IRC codes and draw the following views: (@)_ Half ross section of deck slab showing details of reinforcements (b) Halflongitudinal section: of deck slab showing the details of reinforcements and bearing pads. (Bangalore University 1985) Scanned with CamScanner