3.

7 DESIGN OF SUB-STRUCTURE:
3.7.1 PIER DESIGN:

(a) Dead Load from super structure:

Dead load from three girders:

49  18.33  3 = 2694.51kN  2695 kN
Cross beams at end:
10.5 24.2 = 88.2 kN
Intermediate cross beam:
10.5 3  4.2 = 132.3 kN

Total un-factored dead load = 2695 +88.2+132.2 = 2915.5 kN 2916 kN

(b) Live Load:

Live load in yy direction = 695.2 kN 700kN

Factored live load in yy = 1050 kN
ex = 150+450/2 = 375 mm = 0.375 m

Live load about xx direction = 413 kN

Factored live load = 1.5  1.1  413 = 682 kN 700 kN
[As the girder-B, reaction passes through the C.G of the pier, no eccentricity is due to that
reaction but the reaction due to girder-A will not pass through the C.G of the pier so that the
eccentricity and that reaction should be taken. ]

ey = 2.5 m

Mux = 682 2.5 =1705 kN-m

Muy = 1050  0.375 = 394 kN-m

So dead load from the super structure un-factored = 2916 kN

factored load = 2916  1.5 = 4374 kN

Live load in yy direction = 682 kN (factored)

Live load in xx direction = 1050 kN (factored)

ex = 0.375 m, ey = 2.5 m , Mux = 1705 kN-m and Muy = 394kN-m

1
 (c) Stability Check:

Pier size = 9 1 = 9m2

We have provided rubber pad which acts as elastomeric bearing.
eeff length = 1.3  6 = 7.8 m (page-114, IRC : 112 – 2011)

Total ht. of pier=6m

Pier cap is provided assuming thickness 250mm and 20mm projection.

So DL of pier cap=9x1.4.0.25x25=78.75KN.

We have to provide 6 pedestal of size (450x450)mm each having ht. 450mm.

DL of 6 pedestals=6x(0.45x0.45x0.45x0.25)=13.67KN

DL of pier=6x1x9x25+2( π /8x0.52x6x25)=1350+29.45≈1380KN

DL due to pier cap, pier, pedestal=1380+78.75+13.67=1472.742=1473 kN

Total DL =1473+2916=4389kN

Factored DL=4389x1.5=6584kN

1. Stress at pier base due to DL=6584/9=731.556kN/m2=0.731556N/mm2

2. Stress due to buoyancy effect

Ht.of water above pier base=5.5m

Submerged vol. of pier=49.5m3

Reaction due to buoyancy effect=49.5x10=495KN

Stress at pier base =495/9=55KN/m2(upward)=0.055N/mm2

3.stress due to eccentric loading due to LL

Stress in XX-dinn=P xx/A+Mx/Z

Max.=1050/9+(1705x6)/1x92

=116.67+129.3

=245.97KN/m2=2.246N/mm2

2
Min.=1050/9-1705/1x92/6

= 116.67-129.30= -12.63KN/m2

= -0.0126N/mm2

Stress in YY dinn

Max.=Pyy/A+M/Z

=Pyy/A+Muy/Z

=682/9+394x 6/9

=75.77+262.667

=338.45KN/m2=0.338N/mm2

Min.=Pyy/A-M/z

=682/9 –{(394x 6)/9}

=-186.897KN/m2=-0.187n/mm2

4. Stress due to Longitudinal forces

i)Due to breaking

According to IRC 6:2000 the breaking force should be considered 20% of LL

i.e. 0.2x700=140KN.

LA=6+0.45+0.15=6.6m(breaking effect is considered from bearing)

Factored moment=140x1.5x6.6=1386kN/m

Z= bd2/6=9x12/6=1.5m3

So M/Z=140x1.5x6.6/1.5=924KN/m2 =0.924N/mm2

ii)Due to resistance of bearing:

from worst case analysis

Left side span=no LL only DL

3
Right side span=DL +LL

Left side coefficient=0(for worst analysis)

=>resistance by left side rubber pad is

=coefficient of bearing x DL of left span=0xDL of left span=0

According to AASHTO LRFD code for elastomeric bearing coefficient of resistance lies between
0.02 to 0.04

2)Right span coefficient of bearing=0.04

Dl + LL =4374+1050=5424KN

Resistance of bearing=0.04x5424+=217KN

La from bearing =6.6m

Z=9x1/6=1.5m3

Stress =I m/2=217x6.6/1.5=955Kn/m2 =0.955N/mm2

5.Wind analysis-(IS -875 part III):

Wind design speed (Vb)=K1VbK1K2K3

K1=1.08(referring to T1)

K2=category II (up to 10m) =1

K3=1(topographic factor)

Design wind pressure (Vz)=0.6Vz2=0.6x542=1750KN/m2

For wind expressed area is super structure area only.

Superstructure exposed area

={(18.33x0.25)+(18.33x1)+18.33x(1.4+0.15)}

=57.234m2

Total wind fence=1.75x51.234=89.82kN

Moment at base of pier=89.82xLA

LA=6+(0.45+0.05+1.4+0.95+0.25/2) =7.15m
4
Moment=89.82x7.15=642.213KN/m=643kNm

Factored wind moment=643x1.2=772kNm

Factored wind load=107.78kN

Wind stress at pier base=772/1x92/6=57.18=0.057N/mm

According to code lead combination IS: 456:200

a)1.5(DL+LL)=1.5(4389+700)=7633.5KN

b)1.5(DL+WL)=1.5(4389+107.89)=6746KN

c)1.2(DL+LL+WL)=1.2(4389+107.89)=5396.27KN

At here LL should not be considered as our wind speed exceeds 130kmph(IRC 6:2000 LL-212.5)

So in our case no wind lead should be considered

6.Water current:

Intensity of water current(P)=52KV2(P-29 IRC-6)

K=0.66(semicircular easeway & cut way)

V=3m/s

P=52KV2=o.52x0.66x32=3.1KN/m2

Factored according to IRC-45:1972

P=3.1x1.4=4.34KN/m2

Area of obstruction=1x5.5=5.5m2

Force due to obstruction=4.43x5.5=23.87KN

It acts at h/3 distance from base ABC is the pressure distribution after water current max. at top
& min. at bottom

So moment = (23.87x5.5)/3=87.53/2≈88/2=44KNm

According to IRC-45:1972 the dirn is assumed to vary by 20.

Pressure IInl to pier=4.34xcos20=4.37kN/m2

Pressure perpendicular to pier =4.34xsin20=1.48KN/m2

5
FP=fence in parallel dinN to pier

=4.07x5.5x1=22.39KN

Fn=fence in perpendicular dinn to pier

=1.48x9x5.5=73.26KN

Moment considering max.stress at pier base

M=73.26x5.5/3=268.62/2 kNm=270/2=135KNm

Z=9x12/6=1.5m3

thus = M/Z=268.62/2/1.5=179.08Kn/m2=(0.179N/4)N/mm2

(d) STABILITY ANALYSIS:

At pier base

When dry(N/mm2) when HFL(N/mm2)

Maxm Minm Max m Minm

1)Di stress 0.732 0.732 0.732 0.732

2)buoyance ____ ____ -0.055 -0.055

3)eccentric

loading due to LL

->XX –dirn 0.246 -0.01263 0.246 - 0.01263

->YY –dirn 0.388 -0.187 0.388 -0.187

4)longitudinal Forces

Breaking 0.924 -0.924 0.924 -0.924

Bearing 0.955 -0.955 0.955 - 0.955

5) Water current

_____ ______ 0.09 -0.09

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6
 3.245 -1.347 3.36 -1.58

Max. permissible bearing stress=0.45x35=15.75N/mm2 >3.360N/mm2 (OK)

Checking for 2m above pile cap

DL of pier=9x1x4x25+2(π/8x0.5x0.5x4x25)≈920KN

So total DL=2916+920+78.67+13.67=3929KN

Factored DL stress=3929/9=436.56KN/m2=.436N/mm2

Stress due to breaking =m/2=140x1.5x4.6/9x1x1/6=633KN/m2=0.644N/mm2

Resistance force due to bearing (stress)=m/2=217x4.6/1.5=665.47=0.666N/mm 2

Above 2 meters above pile cap

When dry when HFL

maxmminm maxm minm

1)DL stress 0.436 0.436 0.436 0.436

2)buoyance ______ ______ -0.055 -0.055

3)eccentric loading

Due to LL

->XX dinn 0.246 -0.01263 0.246 - 0.01263

->YY dinn 0.388 -0.187 0.388 -0.187

4)longitudunaltenus

Breaking 0.644 -0.644 0.644 -0.644

bearing 0.666 -0.666 0.666 -0.666

5)watercurrent _____ _____ 0.09 -0.09

_____________________________________________________

2.38 -1.074 2.414 -1.22

Max. permissible bearing stress=0.45x35=15.75N/mm2 >2.414N/mm2 (OK)

7
Stability analysis above 4m from pik cap

When dry when HFL

Maxm minm maxmminm

1)DL stress 0.385 0.385 0.385 0.385

2)buoyancy _____ _____ -0.055 -0.055

3)eccentric loading

due to LL

XX dirn 0.246 -0.01263 0.246 -0.01263

YY dirn 0.388 -0.187 0.388 -0.187

4)longitudinalForces

Breaking 0.364 -0.364 0.364 -0.364

Bearing 0.376 -0.376 0.364 -0.364

5) Water current _____ ______ 0.09 -0.09

___________________________________________________

1.759 -0.55
1.793 0.78

So max value =1.793N/mm2<0.45x35=15.61N/mm2

(e) REINFORCEMENT IN PIER:

Rectangular column size (1x9)m

Or (1000x9000)mm

M35concrete and Fe 415 steel

Pu (factored) =6584+1050=7634kN

Mux = 682x2.5=1705kNm

Muy=1050x0.375=394kNm

ey=2.5m and ex=0.375m

8
Checking whether column/pier is biaxially loaded or not.According to IRC -112:2011 (clause –
8.3.2 (3),P-74) LL=8.32

Iy=13x9/12=0.75mm4

z=1x93/12=60.75mm4

breq=iy√12=0.75√12=2.59

hreq=iz√12=60.75√12=210.44

As we know and slenderness ratio = eff. Length/center radius of gyration

In our case 2 radius of gyration Kyand Kx and Kz

y=eff.length/Ky;Ky=
√ √i y 0.75
A
=
91
= 0.288

So y =1.3x6/0.288=27.02

z=eff. Length/Kz;
√ √
Kz=
ix
A
=
60.75
91
= 2.59

So z = 1.36/2.59 = 3.00; zz = xx

Condition I

y/y=27.002/3.0022=9>2{both should be satisfied for axially loaded so our isBiaxial loading}

z/y=1/9=0.111<2

ey=1.475m

ez or ex =0.375m

for axial compression

Condition – II

(ey/heq)/(ez/beq) 0.2 or (ez/beq)/(ey/heq)0.2

Or (1.475/210.44)/(0.375/2.59) = (ey/heq)/(ez/heq) = 0.0435<0.2

(ez/beq)/(ey/heq)=(0.375/2.59)/(1.475/210.44)=20.65>0.2

Hence condition-II is satisfied

9
As the condition-I fails it should be designed as Bi-axially loaded column.

Design is done according to Sp-16

Assuming p=1.5

P/fck=1.5/35=0.042857=0.043

Uniaxial bending action about x on z axis

dI=45+20/2+10=65mm

dl/D=65/9000=0.00722

takingdI/D=0.05

Pu/fckbD=7634x103/35x1000x9000=0.0248=0.025

Muy=1050x0.375=394kNm

+ 1386kNm(breaking)

+ 1433kNm (resistance)

+ 135kNm(water current)

So Muy=3349kNm

Mux=1705kNm

Referring to chart-43 of SP-16, following P/fck=0.043

d’/D=0.05and Pu/fckbD=0.072

=>Muy1=0.072x35x1000x90002=204120KNm

dl/D]y axis=65/1000=0.065=0.1

referring to chant-43 of SP-16 following

P/fck=0.043,d1/D=0.1,Pu/fckbD =0.025

Muy1/fck bD2=0.0672

=>Muy1=fck bD20.0672

=>Muy1=0.0672x35x9000x10002=21168KN

10
Referring to chart 63 of SP-16 and following the values of P=1.5 Fe=415 m=3

Puz/Ag=21

Puz=21x9000x1000=189000KN

Pu/Puz=7634/189000=0.041

Muy/Muy1=3349/21168=10.1

Mux/Mux1=1705/204120=0.0084

Referring to chart -64 Sp-16 and following

Pu/Puz=0.041 and Muy/Muy1=0.16

Mux/Mux1=0.85

The chart value of Mux/Mux1=0.85 .>>>Mux/Mux1=0.0084

So providing min. steel

P/fck =0.8/35=0.0228

Pu/fckbD=7634x103/35x1000x9000=0.0248=0.025

Referring to chart-43 and following d1/D=0.05

P/fck=0.0228 Pu/fckbD=7634000/3510009000=0.025

We get Mux1=0.48x35x1000x90002=136080KNm

d1/D for y axis = 65/1000=0.065=0.1

from chart-44 we get

Muy1/fck bD2=0.04

=>Muy1=0.04x35x9000x10002

=12600KNm

From chart-63, p=0.8%

Puz/Ag=18.2

Puz=18.2x9000x1000=163800KN

Pu/Puz=7634/163800=0.0467

Muy/Muy1 =3349/12600= 0.26

11
Mux/Mux1=1705/136080=0.0126

From chart -64,

The value Mux/Mux1=0.74>>>0.0126

So we have to providemin. Steel as 0.8% of Ag.

Ag=0.8/100x1000x9000=72000mm2

Providing 28ф bars, no. of bars=72000/{(π/4)x302}=102 bars

Spacing=18000/102=176.47c/c

Providing spacing 170mm c/c, which is lessthan 200mm(ok) .

IRC-112:2011 16.3.1(4) (P-174)

Astp=18000x(π/4)x302/170=74844mm2

According to IRC-112:2011 CL-16.3.1(2)

Min. vertical ref.=0.0024xAc=0.0024x1000x9000=21600mm2<Astp

Max. vertical ref.=0.04x1000x9000=360000mm2> Astp

f. SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT IN PIER:

 Provide 10 mm # transverse tie at spacing 200mm c/c throughout the section.

 Provide 10mm # 4-legged transverse reinforcement @ 200 mm c/c.

Since 1/4th of the main reinforcing bars i.e. 30mm # is 8.5 mm, that’s why we have chosen
10mm # bars as lateral and transverse reinforcement.
 For reinforcement detailing, refer to Appendix-C

3.7.2 PEDESTAL DESIGN:

12
Fig-29 (Pedestal on pier and abutment)

DL from super structure = 505 kN.

LL from super structure = 453 kN.

Assuming the size of pedestal

Taking ht. as = 450 mm.

DL of pedestal

Total load = 505 + 453 + 2.3 = 960.3 961 kN

factored load = 1441.5 1442 kN.

Taking rubber paid size as

Pressure or rubber paid

So providing rubber paid

Pressure on loaded area = 9.0125 N/mm2

Permissible bearing stress

According to CL – 34.4 IS : 456:2000

Pressure on loaded area and permissible bearing stress

Permissible bearing stress (ok)

13
min. size of pedestal to carry out this type of pressure is

(ok)

= 229

According IRC - 112, P - 171 cc - 16.22

or

min reinforcement

Providing 16mm bans

Providing 3 bans in spacing

According to IRC – 112 page - 121

the spacing should not be more than 200 mm c/c

So providing 4-12 mm bars Fe-415 type

(ok)

Spacing

here eff. cover is assumed to be 25 mm.

So clear length = 450 – 2 = 400 mm.

According toRankire formula

14
 (are end is ticked and other end is hinged)

and

According to cl. - 39.3 1S – 456 : 2000 (P-71)

(ok)
;

3.7.3 ABUTMENT DESIGN:

Fig-30 (Section of Abutment showing all Dimensions)

Preliminary dimensions
15
 base slab width = 8m

thickness = 1.5m (base slab)

ht. of stem = 6m

top width of stem = 1.2m

bottom width of stem = 1.5m

(angle of shearing resistance) = 35°

(bulk density) = 19 kN/m3 (coarse sand)

e = 0.325m (for dead load)

According to IRC-6 : 2014, LL surchargeIS-456:2000,CL - 214.1.1.3 equivalent ht. of soil for

vehicular loading shall be 1.2m.

According IRC-6 : 2014

So

16
 = 9.547

a) STABILITY ANALYSIS:

Earth pressure:

Providing abutment cap

Surcharge due to LL

(assuming class AA tracked vehicle)

Providing 2 wheeled vehicle

So virtual (acc to IRC-6:2014)

According to IRC – 112 : 2014,

Height above base to centre of pressure

(LA for earth pressure)

Live Load Surcharge and approach slab

Horizontal force due to LL surcharge = 56 kN/m

Horizontal force due to approach slab = 18.15 kN/m

The above 2 forces act at a distance act at a distance from base.

Vertical load due to LL surcharge and approach slab

17
 Weight of earth on heel slab:

Vertical load

DL from super structure

Total DL from super structure = 73.5 + 26.25 = 99.75 kN/m.

Table-5 [Stability Analysis of Abutment (Traffic Surcharge + Earth Surcharge)]

Sl no* Details Force(kN) Lever Moment(kNm)

arm(m)

V H Mv MH

1 DL from superstructure 99.75 ---- 2.075 208 ----

2 Active Earth pressure ---- 232 4.179 ---- 960

3 Horizontal force due to

LL surcharge & ---- 74.15 9.95/2 ---- 369
approach slab
4 Vertical load due to LL
surcharge & approach 151.5 ---- 5.5 833.25 -----
slab
5 Self wt (1) 180 ---- 2.4 432 -----

6 Self wt (2) 22.5 ---- 1.833 41.2425 -----

7 Self wt (3) 300 ---- 4 1200 -----

8 Self wt (4) 25.3125 ---- 2.775 70.24 -----

9 Self wt (5) 802.75 ---- 5.5 4416 -----

Total 1581.8125 306.15 7200.7325 -----

mv −mH
x=
v

7200.7325−1329
= =3.712 m
1581.8125

18
 (ok or safe)

FOS against overturning,

FOS against sliding,

(ok)

Taking another arrangement :

Removing surcharge so that providing LL

In our analysis the max. LL was found out to be 682 kN≅ 700kN

Factored LL =

Putting the LL just outside the abutment i.e. on deckslab.

So equivalent virtual surcharge ht. is zero (0).

Live load surcharge and approach slab.

Horizontal force, due to LL surcharge =0

Horizontal force due to approach slab

It acts from base of abutment.

Vertical load due to LL surcharge and approach slab

Table-6 [Stability Analysis of Abutment Considering LL Surcharge]

Sl no* Details Force(kN) Lever Moment(kN-m)

arm(m)

V H Mv MH

1 DL from superstructure 99.75 ---- 2.075 208 ----

19
 2 Active Earth pressure ---- 232 4.179 ---- 960

3 Horizontal force due to

LL surcharge & ---- 18.15 9.95/2 ---- 369
approach slab
4 Vertical force due to LL
surcharge & approach 37.5 ---- 5.5 207 -----
slab
5 Self wt (1) 180 ---- 2.4 432 -----

6 Self wt (2) 22.5 ---- 1.833 41.2425 -----

7 Self wt (3) 300 ---- 4 1200 -----

8 Self wt (4) 25.3125 ---- 2.775 70.24 -----

9 Backfill vertical load 802.75 ---- 5.5 4416 -----

10 Live load 97.22 ---- 0 0 -----

Total 1565 250.15 6575 1050.3

FOS against over turning (ok)

FOS against sliding (ok)

Comparing the two condition we get the worst case as traffic load surcharge and earth
surcharge.

b) DESIGN OF STEM :

Design is done by considering surcharge i.e. both traffic surcharge and earth surcharges.

Pressure at the top of the wall

Pressure at the top of the stem

Pressure at the bottom of the stem

20
Area under the pressure diagram will give force (P).

Fig-31 (Pressure diagram of Stem)

Factored

Providing 25∅ bars,

Spacing d = 1500 – 70 = 1430 mm c/c,

providing 20∅ bars

Spacing

providing 16∅ bars

21
Spacing = 200 mm c/c.

Astp

This rf. to be provided for one face only i.e. in the back fill side.

According to the code both side to be equally reinforced so increasing rf. =

Assuming the rectangular portion or stem should carry all the loads than acc. to

IS 456-2000 0.8% of A g=0.8/100×(1000 ×1200)

Ast required = 9600 mm2 = 10,000 mm2

So rf. to be provided (each side)

providing 28∅ bars.

Spacing

Providing spacing 120 mm c/c.

Astp =

No. of bars

So providing 9 bars of 28 bars in spacing 111 mm c/c.

Astp= (in one face)

% ofAstp (ok)

c) CHECK FOR SHEAR IN STEAM:

22
As calculated shear = 120 kN

Factored shear

From T-19 IS – 456 : 2000

τ cp =0.6476 n/mm2

Checking according IRC-112:2011, cl-10.3.2, page-88

The design for shear resistance VRd,c≥ VEd

(max. value)

(super structure load)

= 1460 kN. (DL from super structure)

23
 (so safe) (No. shear ref. reqd).

d) CHECK FOR LOAD FROM SUPER STRUCTURE:

Assuming the rectangular section will take all the loads.

Loads:

DL from super structure = 1460 kN.

Factored DL = 2190 kN.

LL in xx =

LL in yy = 682 kN.

24
Fig-32 (Plan of top of Abutment Stem)

25
As the both should be less than 2 so we have to design as biaxial bending.

(LL bending)

(breaking moment)

+ 135(water current) 150 kNm

(for DL of super structure)

= 2772.25 kNm 2800 kNm.

(due to eccentric loading of live load)

+ dead load of dirt wall+ dead load of abutment cap+

3 pedestals (stem load)

(dirt wall) + 93kN (pile cap)

=5188 kN (Total factored load by adding above)

Design checking for abutment whether the design reinforcement to be provided will take the
load or no additional reinforcement required. Solved referring to SP - 16.

P = 1.5%

referring to chart-43

26
For YY

referring to chart - 44

Referring to chart – 63,

P = 1.5%, Fe-415, M - 35

referring to chart 64 and comparing values

and

27
We get

So reducing rf. and providing min rf.i.e., P = 0.8%

referring the chart - 43.

= 142884 kNm.

So referring to chart - 44.

P = 0.8%, fck = 35, Fe - 415 and referring to chart - 64.

28
Referring to chart 64 and comparing values

and

We get

So providing min. reinforcement as 0.8% of Ag

Astreqd=0.8/100(1000× 9000)

=72000mm2

So providing min. rf. as 0.8% of Ag.

Ast required

We have provided

Reinforcement required = 72000 – 11288 = 60712 mm2 = 61000 mm2

Spacing

So providing 111 mm c/c spacing for 28 bans.

So % of steel = 1.03%
29
Spacing =

Referring to chart-43 of SP-16 we get

Referring to chart-44 of SP-16 we get

= 197316 kNm

= 24948 kNm

from chart - 64

p – 1.03%, fck = 35, Fe – 415

from chart - 64.

referring to chart - 64,

30
 Pu = 5188 kN

= 204692 kN.

So Pu<Puz

So taking

(ok)

 Providing 10 - 4 legged stirrups throughout the section with spacing 200 mm c/c
(IRC-112:2011)
 Providing approach slab of 3.5m length with 12 mm # bars with spacing 150 mm
c/c. (IRC – 6 : 2014)
 Providing 30 mm # bars with 114 mm c/c spacing throughout the 18m.i.e.,
through both side of long section. Side face reinforcement.
 For reinforcement detailing refer to Appendix-C
e) DESIGN OF HEEL SLAB:

P = 1582 kN

e = 0.325 mm

Maximum soil pressure

Minimum soil pressure = 149.55 kN/m2

Total downward pressure = wt. of earth + self wt. of heel + surcharge

31
Fig-33 (Pressure diagram for Heel Slab)

Net pressure

Net pressure

Shear

Moment about

Factored

Providing 30 mm ∅ bars,

Astreqd

Providing 30 mm # bars @ 90 mm c/c

Provide30 mm ∅ bans with spacing 90 mm c/c.

f) SHEAR CHECK FOR HEEL SLAB:

32
 Factored

Referring T-19 Zs-456 : 2000

(so shear reinforcement(rf.) required)

Providing 24 legged 10 structures

(min. value) = 300 mm

Providing 4 legged – 10 stirrups with spacing 200 mm c/c throughout the heel slabs.
Provide 0.12% of Ag as distribution reinforcement.

Providing 16 bans spacing

33
 So provide 16∅ bans as spacing 100mm c/c as distribution reinforcement.

g) DESIGN OF TOE SLAB:

Self-wt. of toe

(Earth Pressure diagram for toe slab)

(Net Pressure Diagram)

Fig-34 (Pressure diagram for toe slab)

Factored

Mu about

Mu (factored)

= 650 mm2

min. steel

34
 from T – 19, τ cp= 0.33 N/mm2 >Zv (ok)

No shear ref. required.

But provide 2-legged 10∅ stirrups with spacing 200 mm c/c.

Increasing the half reinforcement from stem and heel slab to the intersection portion
of heel slab and stem.

Spacing of bars

So provide 30 mm # bars with spacing 240 mm c/c spacing in toe.

h) DISTRIBUTION REINFORCEMENT:

So provide 16∅ reinforcement with spacing 100 mm in toe slab.

The base slab thickness is increased upto 4.5m as that the abutment can be designed as shallow
foundation and stress at heel & toe will be safe.

3.7.4 DESIGN OF DIRT WALL:

(from previous analysis)

Horizontal force due to live load surcharge

(width of wall)

35
It acts above bare of direct wall.

Maximum moment at the bare of the back wall

Horizontal moment due to surcharge

Un-factored moment = 15 + 9 = 24 kN-m.

Factored moment

Our case M35, Fe-415 grade is used.

assuming 70 mm cover

Our column width is 450 mm (fixed)

So the section size of column is fixed to be 450 (width)  500 mm (breadth)

Pu = 0.446 fck Ag – 0.446fckAst + 0.75 fyAst

According to Cl-39.5, IS – 456 : 2000,

10% should be deducted due to eccentricity

Pu = 0.4 fck Ag – 0.4fckAst + 0.75 fyAst

(so theoretically no rf. required).

but according to IRC-45 : 2000 0.8% of Ag should be provided as reinforcement.

36
 Providing 16 bans

Spacing

So providing 16 bans with 200 mm c/c spacing this are providing to increase ductility,

minimum diameter of lateral tic > diameter of longitudinal bar or 5mm whichever
more.

So providing 8 2 legged stirrups throughout section pitch

least lateral dimension = 450 mm

16 times diameter of bar = 256 mm

300 mm.

Provide 8 mm-∅ 2-legged stirrups with spacing 250 mm c/c.

3.8 FOUNDATION DESIGN:

3.8.1 DESIGN OF PILE CAP:

Vertical force vu = 10867kN

X - direction moment=Mux=1.5 L.L+1.4 W.C = 1747kN-m

X - direction moment=Mux=1.2(L.L)+1.4×W.C = 799 kN-m

Wind force and live load cannot be considered at a time as per IRC:6-2014

Mux=1747kN-m

Muy=3348 kN-m

∑ V ∑ Mux dy ∑ Muy dx
P= ± ±
n ∑ dy
2
∑ dx
2

∑dx 2=3׿ =30.375m2

37
∑dy 2=2׿ =81m2

10867 1747 × 4.5 3348× 4.5

F1 = − +
6 81 2 ×30.375

= 1811.2-97.056+248=1962.144kN

F2= 1811.2-97.056-248 = 1467kN

F3= 1811.2+248 = 2060kN

F4= 1811.2-248 = 1564kN

F5= 1811.2+248+97.056=2157kN

F6 = 1811.2+97.056-248 = 1660.256kN

F1+F3+F5 = 6180 kN

F5 + F6= 3818 kN

a) DESIGN REINFORCEMENT FOR PILE CAP:

Mux=3818× 4.5=17181 kN −m

4.5
Muy=6180× =13905 kN−m
2

(dreq)=
√ 17181×10 6
3
0.36× 35 ×0.48 × 6.2×10 ×(1−0.416 ×0.48)

=756.64mm

dprovided=1800-200(pile+ P.C.C)-55-15=1530mm

0.5 ×3.5
(Ast req.)y-direction¿ × ¿)=32548.206mm 2
415

Providing 30 - mm ∅ bars @ 130 mm c /c

(Ast prov.)y – direction=32896.1mm 2

0.5 ×35
(Ast req.)x-direction = ׿ ]
415

=26194.87mm 2

38
 Providing 30 - mm∅ 280 mm c /c

(Ast)prov x-dir=26507.18mm 2;

After considering the shear criteria (explained in next article), revised reinforcement is given by,
(Ast prov.)revised = 30mm-∅ @110 mm c /c=¿67472.8422mm 2

 For reinforcement detailing, refer to Appendix-D

b) SHEAR FORCE FOR PILE CAP DESIGN:

Shear will be checked at a distance d/2 fromface of column as per IS-2911-part 3

Xx =1.75m, Xy =0 m

d/2=750mm ,(d/2)+150=900mm¿ 1750 mm .

So the full reaction of the piles will be considered as the shear force to be resisted by the cap.
VEd = Vu =6180-361.25= 5820kN-m

As per IRC:112-2011,

VRdc = (0.12K(80 ρ1 fck )0.33+ 0.15 σ cp ¿ × bw d

√ √
K=1+ 200 =¿ 1+ 200 =¿ 1.365<2.0 ¿ ¿ (Hence O.K)
d 1500

Due to no lateral compression pre stressing𝜎cp =0 kN/m2

Vmin =0.2925

(VRdc)min =0.2925×10.7 × 103 × 1500 =4694.29 kN.

A sc
Ρ1= =0.00165<0.02
bw d

VRdc =0.12×1.365 × ( 80 ×0.00165 ×35 )0.33 ×10700 × 1500

= 4356.33kN< (vmin)Rdc < VEd

Hence let us provide 30 mm∅ bars @ 110 mm c /c

(Ast prov.)x-direction=97472.8422mm 2

Ρ1 =0.0042

VRdc =5929.60kN> VEd = 5820 kN (OK)

39
 c) ANCHORAGE LENGTH:

ℓbnet. = αaℓbAstreq./Astprov. ,(cl-15.2.4.3 of IRC:112-2011)

αa=1,ℓb=k∅ =30 × 30=900 mm

(Astreq./Astprov.)x-direction = 0.388

(Astreq./Astprov.)y-direction = 0.989

Hence calculated ℓbnet. will be smaller than ℓb. But let’s continue the bars of base up to top of
the cap having 60 mm cover at top.

3.8.2 DESIGN OF UNDER-REAMED PILE:

3.8.2.1 SOIL DESIGN OF PILE:

Scour depth=3.72m

Pile cap=1.8m

Water current parallel to pier=22.39 kN

Water current to pier=74kN

Maximum load on outer most piles on 4-corners =2157 KN

Фpile¿ 1.2 m

Lpile =11.7m

leffect = 0.7Lpile =0.7×11.7=8.19 m (table 11.1 of IRC:112-2011)

8.19
leff/d¿ =6.825 ( short column ) .
1.2

Qu= ApNcCp+ AaNcCa’ + Ca’As’ + αCaAs (clause-5.2.3.1 of IS: 2911-part 3) [for cohesive soil]
n
π π
Qu= ( Du2 – D2 ) [0.5 DunN + Nq∑ d r]+ D2 (0.5DN + dfNq)
4 r=1 4
+(0.5 πDK tanδ)  (d12 + df2 – dn2) [for sandy soil] (Cl-5.2.3 of IS:2911-part3)

Du =3m,D=1.2m.

n =2,  =18.87 kN/m3(soil testing report)

N=22.21875=22.22(average of all value)

40
Nq=17.293(fig-2 ,is 2911-3-1980,page- 15) and ∑ d r = 6+10.5 = 16.5 m
Df =11.7m,K=1.75

δ= ∅ =25.375° ( average of all values )

d1= 6m, dn=10.5m

(Qu)2ud =39438.41+4602.503+1849.34=45890.253 kN

Providing single under ream at 6m depth, we have

(Qu)1ud = 15359.71+4602.503+4041.44 = 24003.654 kN

Let us provide single under ream

Qu
(Qu)compression =9601.462 kN =
2.5

Qu
(Qu)uplift = = 8001.218 kN
3

Due to group action, 10% strength will be reduced of each pile as per IS:2911-3-1980(CL-
5.2.8.1)

So (Qu)comp =9601.462× 0.9=8641.31=8640 kN

(Qu)uplift=7201.09kN=7200kN

3.8.2.2 ALL FORCES TO BE CARRIED BY EACH PILE:

a. Vertical force due to super-structure+live load +pier+ pile cap+moment(in both

direction)= 2157kN

Though middlepiles will be having lesser load, let us take it as same as that of corner piles.

b. Horizontal /Lateral Force:

As per IS2911-3-1980,appendix-c,

T=5
√ EI
K1
, R=4
EI
K2√
Using table- 2 of appendix-c.IS:2911-3-1980,since all the layers are impervious &66%(approx.)
of soil is sand/gravel group with in 13.50m, let us chose

41
K1 =1.245(dense sand &submerged condition) = 1.245 kg/cm 2 = 0.1245 N/mm 2(category: dense
sand in submerged condition)

Un-confined compression=2Cu

Up to 4.5 m below the ground level ,unconfined compression is varying from 0.50-0.64 in bore
hole -1 up to 4,5 m below ground level of in all other case it is zero let us take

K2 =7.75kg/cm2 ( lower value ) (table -3, appendix-c,IS:2911-3-1980)=0.775N/mm 2

Modulus of elasticity of concrete Ec =5000√ f ck=5000× √ 35=29580 N /mm2

π 4 11 4
I= × d =1.017876 ×10 mm
64

T=777.556 m

R=249.32m

AS per IS:2911-3-1980,Appendix-c,note (above table-2)

Using flexible piles will be those for which embedded length is ≥ 4 R∨4 T

In our case, embedded length will be 11.7-(3.77-1.8)=9.78m≪ 4 R∨4 T

So chart cannot be used as given on appendix-C of IS:2911-3-1980

c. Calculation Of Water Force:

IRC-6;2014 ,cl-210.7(page-36)will be used .

K=1.25, V =3m/sec

P=52 KV 2=52 ×1.25 ×32=585 kg/m2 = 5.85 kN/m2

The area obstructing the flow in short direction=(4.5+1.2)×1.92=10.944 m2

So force FalongW.C =5.85×10.94 =64.022 kN

(Fu)short face=1.4×64.012=89.63 kN

(Fu)long face =1.4×5.85 × sin ⁡(20) ×10.2 ×1.92=54.857 kN

If the table -1 of appendix –B of IS:2911-3-1980 is extrapolated to the required dia of pile

i.e.1.2m ,for single under reaming ,it’ll be found that,
Lateral thrust that safely can be carried is 10.8t= 108kN¿ 89.63 kN

42
 &¿ 54.857 kN

(Hence safe against lateral force)

Also safe load in uplift resistance is given by (using extrapolation),

50.4t=504KN but minimum vertical force in our case is 1467kN¿ 504 kN ( ok )

As per appendix –B -1-11 of IS:2911-3-1980, the loads lesser than above extrapolated loads
need not be designed separately. Since in our case it is lesser, that’s why no need of separate
design for horizontal forces.

Using Brom’s chart (page -274of Foundation Engineering, PHI - publication by P.C. Varghese),

e 1.92 L 9 , 78
= =0.1963=0.2 and = =8.15
L 9.78 b 1.2

From chart;

Hu 1+sin ∅ 1+ sin 25.375

3
=30and Kp = = =2.5
KpB γ 1−sin ∅ 1−sin 25.375

B = (1.2)3 = 1.728 m3 , γ =18.87 kN /m3

So Hu = 301.7282.518.87 = 2445.552 kN
For safe design, taking factor of safety 2.5, Hs = 978.2208 kN >> Fushort face and Fulongface(Safe)

So our piles will be designed as short axially loaded columns with axial force =Pu=2157 kN

3.8.2.3 DESIGN OF REINFORCEMENT FOR PILES:

Let us use IS 456:2000 for design.

Pu=0.4fck Ac+0.67fyAst (cl-39.3, IS456:2000)

Or 2157×10 3=0.4 × 35× ¿0.67× 415 × A st

Or 2157000=15.83×10 6−14 A st +278.05 A st

Or 264.05 A st=(-)1.367×10 7

That means minimum reinforcement will be provided. Since the design is based on
IS456:2000,minimum reinforcement is 0.8% of Ag as against 0.4% of Ag as per IS: 2911 (3)

43
 0.8
Ast = ׿
100

9048
=12.80=13 numbers
Providing 30mm∅ bars, no. of bars= π 2 .
× 30
4

ASper clause -16-2-3 of IRC;112-2011,10 mm ф bars will be provided as transverse

reinforcement @ 200 mm c/c.

 For reinforcement detailing, refer to Appendix-D

4. CONCLUSION:
From our project it’s concluded that using limit state method of design, the economy is
achieved due to reduction in both reinforcing steel and concrete volume due to reduction in
sectional size. Also the limit state of deflection, shear and bending stress are found to be safe as
per IRC:112-2011 which is the latest code of practice for designing reinforced and prestressed
concrete bridges. The whole structure is found to be stable against sliding and overturning.
Besides that, provision of long span decreases the obstruction by increasing the water way.

44