0% found this document useful (0 votes)

40 views

Design of A Composite Bridge by BOUDIAF DJASSE

Design of a composite Bridge.

Uploaded by

Boudiaf Djassé, civil engineer

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

40 views

Design of A Composite Bridge by BOUDIAF DJASSE

Design of a composite Bridge.

Uploaded by

Boudiaf Djassé, civil engineer

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 87

UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA

NATIONAL ADVANCED SCHOOL

Department of civil,
OF PUBLIC WORKS
environmental and
Architectural engineering

Cycle: MEng 5, civil engineering

Academic Year: 2020/2021
Course: DESIGN OF BRIDGES (9 credits)
Lecturer: Dr. Eng. EMANUELE
MAJORANA
Student: BOUDIAF DJASSE, 16TP21218

Worked Project: Design of a

composite bridge.
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 5
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURE OF A BRIDGE ......................................................... 6
2.1 Substructure .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Piers ................................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.2 Abutments ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Superstructure ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 bearings.......................................................................................................................... 7
3 NORMS OF DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 8
4 Materials ......................................................................................................................................... 8
4.1 Concrete ................................................................................................................................. 8
4.1.1 Concrete for slabs......................................................................................................... 8
4.1.2 Concrete for piers ......................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Steel ........................................................................................................................................ 9
4.2.1 Reinforcing steel bars .................................................................................................. 9
4.2.2 Structural steel ............................................................................................................ 10
4.2.3 Bolt class 10.9 ............................................................................................................. 10
4.2.4 Steel for connectors.................................................................................................... 10
5 PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE DECK................................................................................ 10
5.1 Span distribution ................................................................................................................. 10
5.2 Transverse characteristics ................................................................................................ 11
6 .DURABILITY ................................................................................................................................... 16
6.1 .Exposure classes and prescriptions for concrete elements........................................ 16
6.2 . Concrete cover of reinforcement bars. .......................................................................... 17
7 Loads analysis............................................................................................................................. 17
7.1 Self-weight of structural elements G1.............................................................................. 17
7.1 Self-weight of non-structural elements G2...................................................................... 19
7.1 . Traffic load ......................................................................................................................... 21
7.2 Shrinkage and creep .......................................................................................................... 25
7.3 Thermal effect ..................................................................................................................... 29
7.4 Wind action .......................................................................................................................... 30
8 .GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SECTION .................................................... 33
8.1 Collaborating width of the slab ......................................................................................... 33
8.1 Characteristics of the mixed section ................................................................................ 35
9 LOADS COMBINATIONS.......................................................................................................... 41
9.1 Calculation models ............................................................................................................. 43
9.2 Ultimate limit state combinations ...................................................................................... 44
9.3 Diagrams of solicitations .................................................................................................... 47
10 . STRESS VERIFICATION .................................................................................................... 57
10.1 Classification of the cross section .................................................................................... 57
10.2 Stress verification on mains girders ................................................................................. 59
10.2.1 Calculation of stresses in section SA3 .................................................................... 65
10.3 Shear verification on main girder...................................................................................... 67
11 DESIGN AND VERIFICATIONS OF THE STUDS ............................................................ 67
12 DESIGN AND VERIFICATION OF THE SLAB ................................................................................. 70
12.1 Geometrics characteristics and loads analysis .............................................................. 70
12.2 Characteristics of the calculation model and result ....................................................... 73
12.3 Ultimate limit state design.................................................................................................. 75
12.3.1 Ultimate limit state design.......................................................................................... 75
12.3.2 . Shear design ............................................................................................................ 76
12.4 Serviceability limit state check .......................................................................................... 77
12.4.1 Stress limitation ........................................................................................................... 78
12.4.2 Cracking verification ................................................................................................... 79
13 DESIGN AND VERIFICATIONS OF THE PIER ................................................................ 80
13.1 Geometry of the pier........................................................................................................... 80
........................................................................................................................................................... 80
........................................................................................................................................................... 80
........................................................................................................................................................... 81
13.2 Actions on the pier .............................................................................................................. 81
13.3 M_N interaction diagram of the pier................................................................................. 82
14 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 84
15 SOME DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 84
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wanted to address my sincere thanks to all those who helped me to

develop this project. I would particularly like to thanks professor Carmelo
Majorana and Dr-ing Emanuele MAJORANA for this quality formation in
the design of bridges. Without you, I would not have been able to do this
project.
1 INTRODUCTION
A bridge is a structure built to span physical obstacles such as a body of
water valley or road, for the purpose of providing passage over obstacle.
A bridge is made up of two main parts, namely: the substructure
(foundation, piers, abutments, bearings) and the superstructure (desk,
any structure above bearing support the roadway). Four main factors are
used in describing a bridge , by combining these terms a general
description of most types may be given :the static scheme( girder ,arch,
truss…), the span(cantilever, simple span, multiple span ,continues
,simply supported ,Gerber scheme), the materials (stones
,masonary,reinforced concrete,prestressednreinforced concrete, steel
composite …), and the placement of the travel surface in relation to the
structure (deck…). Concerning the types of bridge, we have: girders
bridge, arch bridge, truss bridges, cable, stayed bridge the work in this
presentation consists to design a composite bridge, this is the reason
why we choose the site of Kaele (in Far north region in Cameroon) to
accommodate our construction. The bridge in question will facilitate the
free movement of agricultural crops and farmers. This bridge will be a
mixed structure(steel-concrete) with a total of 180m, a height of 14m, a
width of 9,4m, it will be defined on four spans: two extreme spans of 40m
and two intermediate spans of 50m, two lanes of 3m, a remaining of 1m
and two parquets of 1,2m. During our work, we will use four software’s:
MS WORD to write, MS Excel to do the structural calculation, AutoCAD
to draw section of structural elements and sap2000 to model and
analyze our structure. The following figures give us a first quintessence
of our project.

Presentation of the obstacle

Top view of the bridge

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURE OF A BRIDGE

The principal parts of a bridge structure are: the substructure and the
superstructure separated by bearings
2.1 Substructure
the parts of the substructure are: piers, abutments, and piles
2.1.1 Piers
Piers structure may be designed using design procedure of columns.
Many factors influence the selection of pier type
 Type of superstructure (steel or concrete)
 Location (over land or water, hydraulic )
 Height: tall piers may be hallow to reduce weight (space available,
aesthetics)
 Load on piers
2.1.2 Abutments
Abutments have many roles :
 Provide support for bridge superstructure at the bridge ends
 Connect the bridge with the approach roadway
 Retain the roadway material (soil , rocks ) from the bridge span
Types of abutments are :
 Open end abutment
 Close end abutment
In our project we have two abutments and piers .for foundations, we
choose piers because the site soil has a poor bearing capacity the
height of piers is 20m , the distances between piers is 50m and the
distance between the last pier and the abutment is 40m( see the
longitudinal profile of our bridge). For our structure, we use reinforced
concrete.
2.2 Superstructure
All elements situated above bearing constitute the superstructure . for
bridge , the superstructure is composed by
 *3 I-girders bolted longitudinally every 10m,
 - a wind bracing placed in a horizontal plane, -
 reticular beams placed transversally every 5m, -
 steel studs which create a composite section
 and - a 30cm slab (5cm predalle and 25cm cast in place concrete
2.2.1 bearings
bearings are used to transfer forces from the superstructure to the
substructure whilst either tolerating or constraining relative movements.
The principal action that give rise to displacements and rotations at
supports are :
 temperature change
 shrinkage of concrete deck slab
 permanent actions (dead loads and superimposed dead loads )
 variable actions , mainly traffic loads
 settlement of supports
 accidental actions vehicular collusion
bearings have many roles :
3 NORMS OF DESIGN
Design and verification of all the structural elements of this composite
bridge is done using the appropriate Eurocodes. Italian (UNI), British
(BS) and local documents were also consulted for further specifications.
The following is a non-exhaustive list of documents used for the design
and verifications.
 Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design (EN 1990)
Eurocode 1: Actions on structures (EN 1991)
Part 1-1: Densities, self-weight, imposed loads for buildings EN 1991-1-1
Part 1-4: General actions - Wind actions EN 1991-1-4
Part 1-5: General actions - Thermal actions EN 1991-1-5
Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges EN 1991-2
 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures (EN 1992)
Part 1-1: General rules, and rules for buildings EN 1992-1-1
Part 2: Reinforced and prestressed concrete bridges EN 1992-2
 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures (EN 1993)
Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings EN 1993-1-1
Part 1-5: Plated structural elements EN 1993-1-5
Part 1-8: Design of joints EN 1993-1-8
Part 2: Steel Bridges EN 1993-2
 Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures
(EN 1994)
Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings EN 1994-1-1
Part 2: General rules and rules for bridges

4 Materials
4.1 Concrete
4.1.1 Concrete for slabs
Designation C40/50
Cylindrical Characteristic Strength fck= 40 MPa
Average Cylindrical Strength fcm =33 MPa
Average Tensile Strength fctm= 2,56496392 MPa
Average Flexural Strength fcfm =3,077956704 MPa
Elastic Modulus Ecm =31475,80621 MPa
Cracked Elastic Modulus Ecracked =15737,90311 MPa
ULS Safety Factor c =1,5 Cylindrical
Design Strength fcd =14,16666667 MPa
Design Tensile Strength fctd =1,196983163 MP
4.1.2 Concrete for piers
Designation: C30/37
Cylindrical Characteristic Strength fck =30 MPa
Average Cylindrical Strength fcm =38 MPa
Average Tensile Strength fctm= 2,896468154 MPa
Average Flexural Strength fcfm =3,475761785 MPa
Elastic Modulus Ecm= 32836,56803 MPa
Cracked Elastic Modulus Ecracked =16418,28402 MPa
ULS Safety Factor c =1,5
Cylindrical Design Strength fcd= 17 MPa
Design Tensile Strength fctd= 1,351685138 MPa
4.2 Steel
4.2.1 Reinforcing steel bars
Steel grade B 500C
Characteristic yield strength of reinforcement 𝐹𝑦𝑘= 500 MPa
Design value of modulus of elasticity of reinforcing steel Es =200 GPa
Partial factor for reinforcing or pre-stressing steel  s= 1.15 [-]
Design yield strength of reinforcement 𝐹𝑦𝑑 =434 MPa
Design value of yielding strain of reinforcement (𝐹𝑦𝑑 𝐸𝑠 ) syd  1.96 ‰
Design value of ultimate strain of reinforcement 2.5.
4.2.2 Structural steel
Nominal thickness of the element 𝑡 ≤ 40𝑚𝑚
Steel grade :S355
Impact and temperature codes for weldable (non-weldable) J2 (J0)
Steel
Characteristic ultimate strength 𝐹𝑢𝑘 =470 MPa
Characteristic yield strength 𝐹𝑦𝑘 =335 MPa
Design value of modulus of elasticity Es =210 GPa
Partial factor for structural steel  s= 1.05 [-]
Design value of yield strength 2.6.
Steel for bolted connections
4.2.3 Bolt class 10.9
Nominal value of the ultimate strength 𝐹𝑏𝑡= 1000 MPa
Nominal value of the yield strength 𝐹𝑏𝑦 =900 MPa
Design value of modulus of elasticity Es= 210 GPa
Partial factor for bolts M 2  =1.25
Design value of yield strength 𝐹𝑦𝑑,𝑏 =720 MPa
4.2.4 Steel for connectors
Studs diameter :20mm
Connector height :200mm
Characteristic yield strength:450MPa
Partial factor for connector:1,25

5 PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE DECK

5.1 Span distribution
The following table gives the economic rang of girder or box girder bridge
In our case we can take four spans bridges the total length our bridge is
180m
The distribution of spans is indicated in the following scheme and let’s
make the computation span length

we have: 0.8LC+LC+LC+0.8LC=180
3.6LC=180 means that LC=180/3.6=50m 0.8LC=0.8*50=40m
So, we have this distribution span
 Length of the end span=40m
 Length of the standard span =50m
5.2 Transverse characteristics
According to the following design data :
The total desk width is LT= 9,4m and the length of the standard span is
X=50m

The main girder depth H is : H== max ( ( )0.45;0.4+ )=max(1.64;1.83)

So we can take H=2m

The main girder c/c is : l=0.55LT=0.55*10=5.5m, we assume l=6m

The bottom flange width is : Binf=(0.25+ + )*(0.92+ )=0.888m , we

)
assume Binf=1m
The top flange distance is : Bsup=Binf-0.1=0.8m
Thickness of the slap: we assume 30cm
We adopt thickness of 40 mm for lower and upper flange, thickness of
20mm for the web
The thickness of the pavement is 17cm and 25 cm for the lateral side
Cross sections of the deck and the girder is shown by the following
figures (the unit of distance is the meter)

Cross section of girder
Cross section of the deck

The transversal section has been diaphragm to deal with possible

phenomena of loss of shape due to eccentric loads. The crosspieces are
reticular, composed of L-profiles coupled with steel plates of dimensions
150 x 150 x 12 mm and placed in the longitudinal direction of the bridge
with 3.5 m interaxis, joining of these elements is carried out by bolting.
The following figure illustrate the situation
Distribution of crosspieces along the bridge

The total length of the bridge is 180m , the total number of crosspieces
along the bridge is :n=180/3.5=51.43 so we can take 51
crosspiecesspaced one another to 3.5m
Deck support is obtained by using pot bearings with elastomeric confined
elements and PTFE (Teflon) layers connected to steel and greased
plates to reduce sliding resistance. The type of restrain offered by the
bearing system has a scheme which permits it to expand from SA4 to the
free transversal end and also expand longitudinally towards both
abutments where expansion joints are present (5cm and 3cm joints). The
restraints are showed by the following figure
distribution of bearings under the deck of the bridge

6 .DURABILITY
6.1 .Exposure classes and prescriptions for concrete elements
According to EN206-1 standard, environmental conditions of the bridge
structures can be considered as in the following exposure classes
Exposure Description of Informative Element
classes the environment examples where
exposure
classes may
occurs
XC2 Wet, rarely dry Concrete Pier, abutment,
surfaces subject Foundations
to long-term
water contact
Many
foundations
XF4 High water Road and Deck and curbs
saturation with bridge decks (if no protected
de-icing agents exposed to de- by
or sea water icing agents waterproofing
layers)
XC4 Cyclic wet and Concrete Pier and
dry surfaces subject abutment
to water elevations Deck
contact, not slab (if
within exposure protected by
class XC2 waterproofing
layer)
Values of minimum cover, Cmin, dur, requirements with regard to
durability for reinforcement steel in accordance with [EC2-1]
Exposure Class 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑑𝑢𝑟 (mm) Strength Class
XC2 30 C25/30
XC4 35 C35/45
6.2 . Concrete cover of reinforcement bars.
We consider a Design Working Life of 100 years. The greater value for
minimum cover 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 satisfying the requirements for both bond and
environmental conditions shall be used:
𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 = max [𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑏 ; 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑑𝑢𝑟 ; 10 mm]. 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑏 is the minimum cover
due to bond requirement, 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑑𝑢𝑟 is the minimum cover due to
environmental conditions (durability).
The nominal cover shall be specified on the drawings. It is defined as a
minimum cover 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛, plus an allowance in design for deviation ∆𝐶𝑑𝑒𝑣
(recommended value is 10 mm): 𝐶𝑛𝑜𝑚 = 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 + ∆𝐶𝑑𝑒𝑣 According to
these prescriptions, in this design example we assume the following
nominal covers for the structural elements. Structural element
Structural Exposure 𝑪𝒎𝒊𝒏 (mm) ∆𝑪𝒅𝒆𝒗 (mm) 𝑪𝒏𝒐𝒎 (𝒎𝒎)
element Class
Deck, piers, XC4 30 10 40
abutments
Foundations XC2 25 10 35

7 Loads analysis
7.1 Self-weight of structural elements G1
The following table shows a self-weight esteem concerning the steel
structure and the concrete slab, both of which are expressed as a line
load (in terms of weight per meter). In order to take account of the weight
of the joints, stiffening plates, crosspieces etc. the weight of the steel
girder is increased by a 20% factor.
The density of the steel is equal to 78.5KN/m3
The cross-section area of girder is
A=0.04*1+0.04*0.8+1.92*0.02=0.1104m2
The self-weight of steel girder = 78.5*0.1104=8.67kN/m
The density of the concrete is equal to 25KN/m3, the width of the slab is
equal to 10m and its thickness is 30cm=0.3m
The following table gives the first stage permanent loads of steel
structure and the slab
Part of the Notation of the Value of the first Unities
structure load stage
permanent
loads
Steel structure G1steel 8.67*1.2=10.4 KN/m
Slab G1slab 10*0.3*25=75 KN/m
The distribution of the slab self-weight is given by the following figure

Distribution of the self-weight of the slab applied on the structure

Courbon’s theoretical method is considered to evaluate how the deck
distribute the acting loads. The results derived will then be compared
with those of FEM model. Courbon’s analytical method considers the
following hypothesis
 Flexural stiffness of the crosspiece’s infinite
 Torsional stiffness of the main beam zero
the formula of the Courbon’s partition coefficient, which express the
∗
rate of load absorbed by the i-th beam (girder) is: 𝛼 = +∑
the formula of load applied on the girder is: Pi=P*αi
where n is the number of girders
xi is the eccentricity of the girder
xp is the eccentricity of the load applied on the deck
P is the load applied on the deck
For our case studied, the table of the results is the following
Note that in our case xp=o and n=2
 Case of first stage permanent load
Load case Girder Eccentricity xi(m) Courbon's coefficient αi Load applied on the girder (KN/m)
1 -3 0,5 37,5
2 3 0,5 37,5
 concrete slab G1slab=75KN/m
The mechanical scheme of each girder is the following

7.1 Self-weight of non-structural elements G2

Load G2 Second permanents loads Results in KN/m
3
Road pavement G2pav 0,17m*7m*20KN/m 23,8
3
Lateral curbs G2curb 0,25m*1m*25KN/m 6,25
Lateral paraquet G2par 0,5KN/m 0,5
Concret veill G2vei l 1KN/m 1

We have this following mechanical scheme

Let’s apply the courbon’s theory for the second permanent load (the
results are summarized in the following table)

Case load Load excentricity (m) Girder 1 eccentricity (m) Girder 2 eccentricity (m) α1 α2
Road pavement G2pav 0 -3 3 0,5 0,5
Lateral curbs G2curb -4,1 -3 3 1,18 -0,18
Lateral paraquet G2par -4,1 -3 3 1,18 -0,18
Concret veill G2veil -4,1 -3 3 1,18 -0,18

For loads with the negative Courbon’s coefficient, we can neglect them.
the structure is symmetric, we can compute the loads applied on one
half part and we assume that the result is the same for the second half
part. we summarize the result in the following table

Case load value of the load (KN/m) α1 Load applied on girder1(KN/m)

Road pavement G2pav 23,8 0,5 11,9
Lateral curbs G2curb 6,25 1,18 7,38
Lateral paraquet G2par 0,5 1,18 0,59
Concret veill G2veil 1 1,18 1,18
Total 21,05

This load applied on the girder is illustrated by the following mechanical

scheme
7.1 . Traffic load
For the application of the load models, the carriageway is divided in
notional lanes according to the following table.

In our design the carriageway width is w=7m ; we see that 6m≤w=7m ,so
we can take n=2 national lanes of 3m each other (width ).The width of
the position of the national lanes and the width of remaining area depend
on the remaining area is equal to w-3n=7-3*2=1m.Note that the number
and the particular member under consideration .The configuration of
traverse load action group 1 is reported in the figure below .This
configuration permit to maximize the flexural bending on the lateral girder
Always with the courbon-Eigessen method, we gave
 For concentrated loads

Load applied
Load case Load (KN) α1 on girder 1(KN)
600KN(lane1) 600 0,83 498
400KN(lane2) 400 0,33 132
 For distributed loads
Load case Load eccentricity (m) Girder 1 eccentricity (m) Girder 2 eccentricity(m) α1 α2
2
9KN/m ( lane1) -2 -3 3 0,83 0,17
2,5KN/m2(lane 2) 1 -3 3 0,33 0,67
2,5KN/m2( right latral side +remaining area ) 3,5 -3 3 -0,08 1,08
2
2,5kN/m (left lateral side ) -4 -3 3 1,2 -0,2
We neglect always loads with negative Courbon’s coefficient
The summary of the calculation is the following tables ( the
structure is symmetric we calculate the loads applied one
girder , we assume that the result is the same for the other
girder )
 Concentrated loads
Load case Load (KN) α1 Load applied on girder 1(KN)
600KN(lane1) 600 0,83 498
400KN(lane2) 400 0,33 132
Total 630
 Distributed loads
Load case Load (KN/m) α1 Load applied on girder 1(KN/m)
2
9KN/m ( lane1) 9*3=27 0,83 22,41
2
2,5KN/m (lane 2) 2,5*3=7,5 0,33 2,48
2
2,5kN/m (left lateral side ) 2,5*1,20=3 1,0 3
Total 27,89
In order to define the longitudinal position of vertical traffic
loads, influence lines are usually employed. We are interested
to the following design forces:
 Maximum shear forces at support 1, 2 and 3.
 Maximum bending moment at mid-span 1 and 2.
 Maximum shear forces at mid-span 1 and 2
 Minimum (negative) bending moment at support 2 and 3.
In the following figures, the longitudinal distribution of vertical
loads is represented accordingly to the influence line for the
loads of group 1 configuration of loads.
The longitudinal distribution of vertical loads is represented
accordingly to the
accordingly, to the influence line for the loads of group 1
configuration of loads.
 Maximum shear at support 1 (section SA1)

 Maximum bending moment on span 1 (section SC1

 Maximum shear in SC1

 Maximum shear in SA2

 Maximum moment in SA2

 Maximum moment in SC2

 Maximum shear in SC2

 Maximum moment in SA3

 Maximum shear in SA3

The braking or acceleration force, denoted by 𝑄3, should be taken as

longitudinal force acting at finished carriageway level. The characteristic
values of Q3 depend on the total maximum vertical load induced by Load
Model 1 on notional lane 1, as follows: 180 KN ≤ 𝑄3 = 0.6 (2Q1k) + 0.10
q1k ∙ w1 ∙ L ≤ 900 KN for Class 1 Bridges;
144 KN ≤ 𝑄3 = 0.6 (2Q1k) + 0.10 q1k ∙ w1 ∙ L ≤ 900 KN for
Class 2 Bridges
Where w1 is the width of the notional lane N°1 and L the length
bridge. The force Q1k, that includes dynamic magnification,
should be applied along the axis of any lane.
For our design , we assume that the class of the bridge is
class .So we can take Q3=900KN
The centrifugal force 𝑸𝟒 acts at the finished carriageway level,
perpendicularly to the axis of the carriageway.
EN1991-2 states that, unless otherwise specified, Q4 should
be considered as a point load at any deck cross section.
The characteristic value of Q4, including dynamic
magnification, depends on the horizontal radius 𝑅 [𝑚] of the
carriageway centerline and on the total maximum weight of the
vertical concentrated loads of the tandem systems of the main
loading system Qv, Qv = Σi 2 ∙ Qik, and it is given by the
expressions in the following table:

In our design, we assume that the horizontal is R such that 1500≥R that
correspond to Q4=0 (data give by the previous table)
7.2 Shrinkage and creep
According to [EC4 5.4.2.2], the effects of creep may be taken into
account by using modular ratios 𝑛𝐿 for the concrete. The modular ratios
depending on the type of loading (subscript L) are given by:
For the computation of the e the creep coefficient φ(∞,t0), we assume or
compute the following data’s
 Relative humidity: we assume RH=80%
 Section of the slab without predalle: the total width of our
bridge is 9.4m and the thickness of the slab without predalle
is 0.3m, so this section is Ac=0.3m*9.4m=2.82m2
 Perimeter of the concrete section exposed to the air: the total
width of our bridge is 9.4m and the thickness of the slab with
predalle is 0.3m, the shape is rectangular, so this perimeter is
u=(9.4+0.3)*2=19.4m
 Fictitious dimension of the element:h0= 2Ac/
u=2.82/19.4=290mm
 Reference zero time: we assume t0=7days
The interpolation of the value is given by NTC08, See the
following tables

With the analysis (at 7days) of these table

With interpolation the creep coefficient of our design is
( . . )∗( )
φ(∞,t0)= + 2.7 = 𝟐. 𝟓𝟖

We obtain the following modular ratios and elastic modules of

concrete:

Load duration Modular ratio n Elastic modulus of

concrete
Short term loading 𝑛0 = 5.58 𝐸𝑐0 = 35781𝑀𝑃𝑎
Long term loading 𝑛∞ = 19.95 𝐸𝑐∞ = 1022𝑀𝑃𝑎

The total shrinkage strain is composed of two components,

the drying shrinkage strain and the autogenous shrinkage
strain. The drying shrinkage strain develops slowly, since it is
a function of the migration of the water through the hardened
concrete. The autogenous shrinkage strain develops during
hardening of the concrete: the major part therefore develops
in the early day after casting. Autogenous shrinkage is a
linear function of the concrete strength. It should be
considered specifically when new concrete is cast against
hardened concrete.

Hence the values of the total shrinkage strain 𝜀𝑐𝑠 follow from
The value of the total shrinkage is given by the following formula
In our RH=80%, the concrete class C40/50 , so with the 𝜀𝑐𝑑0=0.30
With a linear Interpolation : we have :
( . . )∗( )
Kh = +0.85=0.81

𝜀𝑑𝑐∞ = 𝜀𝑐𝑑0 × 𝑘ℎ=0.240.81=0.1910-3

𝜀𝑐𝑎∞ = −2.5 × (𝐹𝑐𝑘 − 10) × 10−6=-2.5*(40-10)* 10−6=-7,5*10-5
𝜀𝑐s∞=0.19*10-3+(-3.75*10-5)=0.2399
So the shrinkage that we are going to take into account is
𝑹 = 𝜺𝒄𝒅∞ × 𝑨𝒄 × 𝑬𝒄∞=0.19*10-3*2.35*1000000*36000=16074KN

The compressive force which is the force taken by each girder is

= =28037KN

In addition to the compressive force 𝑅/𝑛 (𝑛 = 2, 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓

the beam will be also subjected to a moment due to the
eccentricity between the center of gravity of the slab and the
center of gravity of the mixed section

Concrète =2150mm=2.15m
Yid=1360mm=1.36m
The eccentricity is e= Yconcrete- Yid=2.15-1.36=0.79m

The moment is :M= e=8037KN0.79=6349.23KNm

7.3 Thermal effect

We make the following assumptions (for the coefficient of linear
expansion refer to [NTC08] 11.2.10.5 or [EC1] Annex C): Coefficient of
linear expansion: 𝛼 = 1.2 × 10−5 /°𝐶 In this design example, we have
considered differential thermal variation between steels beams and
concrete slab of 10°C. Then the effect of this differential temperature is
taken into account by means of the following equivalent static loads:
𝑻𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇 = 𝜶 × ∆𝑻 × 𝑨𝒄 × 𝑬𝒄m=1.2 × 10−5*10*2.35*36000*106=10152KN

= =5076KN

Yconcrete =2150mm=2.15m
Yid=1767mm=1.767m
The eccentricity is e=2.15-1.767=0.383m

The moment is :M= e=50760.383=1944.108kNm

 Static load equivalent to the positive thermal variation: tension in

the composite section
 Static load equivalent to the negative thermal variation:
compression in the composite section

For structure we take an uniform thermal variation: ∆T = ±25° C

The resulting deformation of the bridge is:
. ∆𝐿 = 𝛼 × ∆𝑇 × 𝐿𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 =1.2*10-5:*25*180=5.4cm , it is necessary to
use thermal joints
7.4 Wind action
Wind actions and effects on a bridge are usually applied to both deck
and piers. Moreover, the following cases should be handled
 Bridge during its service life, without traffic (phase 1 unloaded)
 • Bridge during its service life, with traffic (phase 1 loaded)
 • Bridge under construction (phase 0)
In our design, we consider a wind action transversal to the deck a
wind action transversal to the deck a wind action transversal to the
deck
We assume the following data
 Reference velocity: 𝑉𝑏 = 25𝑚/𝑠
 Air density: 𝜌 = 1.25𝐾𝑔. 𝑚−3
 Altitude of the bridge: 𝑧 = 8𝑚
 Dynamic coefficient: 𝐶𝑑 = 1.6
 Exposure class: II, then 𝐾𝑟 = 0.19, 𝑧0 = 0.05, 𝐾𝑙 = 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑧𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 4(
using the following table)
So we can compute the following parameter:
 Average speed wind at altitude z: 𝑉𝑚 = 𝑉𝑏 × 𝐾𝑟 × ln ( 𝑧
/𝑧0 ) = 24.11𝑚/
 Turbulence intensity: 𝐼𝑣 = 𝐾𝑙/ ln(𝑧/ 𝑧0 ) = 0.2
 Dynamic pressure: 𝑞 = 0.5 × 𝜌 × 𝑉𝑚 2 × (1 + 7 × 𝐼𝑣 ) =
0.871𝐾𝑁/𝑚²
For our design the distance center /center of girder is
d=6m, the height of girder is h=2m, the ratio = =3.
With the following linear graph we can make a linear
interpolation in the objective to compute the reduction
coefficient 𝜇

We obtain 𝜇=0.417 approximately

Figure which illustrate the phase 0, phase 1 -loaded, phase 1-unloades

are following
 Phase 0
 Phase 1-loaded

 Phase1-unloaded

The crosspieces of our bridge are subject to the transverse

action of the wind
The presentation of these actions is illustrated by the
following figure
(the distance between two crosspieces is s= 3.5m)

Note that: 𝑽𝒊 = 𝒒𝒗,𝒊 × 𝑯i : it is a linear load

The concentered load is given by the formula : 𝑽𝒕𝒊 = 𝑽𝒊 × s
where s is the distance between two crosspieces . see the
following figure
The torsional force on the lateral is given by the formulas

Calculations of phase 0, phase 1-loaded and phase1-

unloaded are reported in following tables :

8 .GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SECTION

8.1 Collaborating width of the slab
According to [EC4-2] 5.4.1.2 and [NTTC08] 4.3.2.3, the effective width of
the concrete slab in a given cross-section of one of the main girders is
the sum of 3 terms:
𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝑏0 + 𝑏𝑒1 + 𝑏𝑒2 and 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝑏0 + 𝛽1𝑏𝑒1 + 𝛽2𝑏𝑒2 in the end support.
Different parameters are indicated in the following figure

Where 𝑏𝑒𝑖 = min ( ; 𝑏𝑖) and 𝛽2 = (0.55 + 0.025 )≤1

In the following figure ,we can see the definition of equivalent length Le

Cross sections( SA1,SC1,SA2,SC2,SA3)along the girder are indicated

in the following figure
We summarize calculation of the effective width of the slab at different
section in followings
section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
span length L1(m) 40 40 40
span length L2(m) 50 50 50
span lenth L3(m) 50
Equivalent Le (m) 34 34 22,5 35 25
semi interaxis of beams b1 (m) 3 3 3 3 3
side overhang b2(m) 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5
b0(m) 0 0 0 0 0
be1(m) 3 3 3 3 3
be2(m) 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5
β1 0,83
β2 0,79
beff(m) 5,28 6,5 6,5 6,5 6,5

8.1 Characteristics of the mixed section

The 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑓 values found are used to calculate the geometric
characteristics of the sections of the deck in the various phases. In
particular, reference is made to the following formulations.
Characteristics of different cross section are summarized in the following
table :
 For sections SA1

 Sections, SC1,SC2,SA2 and SA3 : results are the
same because beff is the same
9 LOADS COMBINATIONS
The load combinations are defined in Eurocode 0 to ensure the safety. In
particular we must satisfy the Ultimate Limit States, including the
verification of fatigue, and the Serviceable Limit States through the check
of concrete fissuring and deformation. According to [EC0: 6.4.3-
Combination of actions], the following combinations are defined:

To determine the value of the traffic loads, the following combinations

have to be considered [EC1-2]
With reference to the Italian National Annex the coefficient for ULS
combinations are:

The coefficients 𝜓0𝑖 , 𝜓1𝑖 , 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝜓2𝑖 are tabled in EN-1991-2, tab. 4.4, or
according to the National Codes. Here the coefficient provided by
[NTC08] Tab. 5.1 VI, are adopted:
9.1 Calculation models
In order to take account of the different modular ratios in the calculation
of composite sections for different load conditions three structural models
are defined:
 Model A
Model A is used to design the steel girders at phase 0 (construction
phase, transient design situation). Here, the concrete has just been
poured and has not yet acquired its characteristic strength. It is
subdivided into model A1 and A2. A1 is used to design the steel girder
and A2 is used to design the wind brace. Here, only the girder self-
weight, the slab self-weight and the resultant wind action acts on the
structural steel girder.
 Model B
Model B is used to design the composite beam (steel girder and concrete
slab) at phase 1(short term), when the bridge has just been constructed
and the concrete slab now acts as a structural element. Here, the
composite beam is designed without consideration of shrinkage effects.
The loads acting on our composite beam here are girder self-weight, slab
self-weight, non-structural permanent loads, thermal actions, wind
actions and traffic loads.
 Model C
In Model C, we want to study the behavior of the composite beam (steel
girder and concrete slab) at long term (phase 2). The concrete
characteristics have changed and the composite beam is designed
considering the Model B loads and the long-term effects of shrinkage
9.2 Ultimate limit state combinations
In addition to what has already been expressed previously regarding the
combination coefficients of the various Limit States, the Italian Standard
indicates which combinations are to be considered for the actions due to
traffic. In this design example, action groups 1 and 2a are considered.
However, given that the actions due to braking are far lower than those
of shrinkage and temperature, the calculation for group2a is omitted. The
final stress are calculated by adding the stresses resulting from the
combinations considered step by step. The table below shows the
combination coefficients for the ULS.

In this design example, we will consider the 16 combinations below, with

each combination take the maximum solicitations (moment and shear) in
the considered section
k

9.3 Diagrams of solicitations

According to UNI EN 1991, the following actions should be considered
on bridges:
• Self weight and imposed loads
• Wind actions
• Thermal actions
• Actions during execution
• Accidental actions
• Traffic loads
There are also other actions, such as fire and snow loads, which are
usually irrelevant.
Additional actions are foreseen in other Eurocodes, namely:
• Concrete creep and shrinkage (EN 1992)
• Settlements and earth pressures (EN 1997)
• Seismic actions (EN 1998
The norm of design of each part of the bridge is indicated by the
following figure
The modeling and the calculation are done using SAP200 software. Here
we will bounce diagrams of bending moments, axial force and shear
taking into account different cases: steel self-weight, slab self-weight,
nonstructural permanent load, traffic load, wind and temperature. We will
bounce maximum solicitation at section: SA1, SC1, SA2, SC2 and SA3
 Case of steel self-weight
N diagram

T diagram

M diagram

Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 1044.27 -1904.19 989.47 -1978
T(KN) -139.95 0 235.19 0 235.12
N(KN) 0 0 0 0 0

 Slab self-weight:
N diagram

T diagram
M diagram

Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 4198.09 -7655.1 3977.78 -7951.84
T(KN) -552.62 0 945.38 0 948.33
N(KN) 0 0 0 0 0

 Non-structural permanent loads

N diagram

T diagram
M diagram

Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 2344.02 -4274.27 2221.01 -4439.95
T(KN) -314.14 0 527.86 0 529.86
N(KN) 0 0 0 0 0

Traffic loads
 Case of distributed load
T diagram

M diagram
Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 3103.47 -5659.09 2940.6 -5878.45
T(KN) -415.92 0 698.88 0 701.14
N(KN) 0 0 0 0 0
 Case of concentrated loads
The eccentricities of concentrated load is :
. .
e1= -(1.2+ )=1.75m
. .
e2= -(1.2+ +3.5)=-1.75m
The moment is :M=1.75*600-1.75*400=350KNm
T diagram

M diagram
Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 3105.69 -5663.15 2942.71 -5882.67
T(KN) -52.23 0 87.77 0 88.05
N(KN) 0 0 0 0 0

 Temperature
N diagram

Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3

M(KNm) 0 0 0 0 0
T(KN) 0 0 0 0 0
N(KN) -2712.53 -2712.53 -2712.53 -2712.53 -2712.53

 Shrinkage
All solicitations are equal to zero ,due the the chosen supports ( at
our nodes)

 Wind effect
 Phase 0
T diagram
M diagram

Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 18.93 -34.52 17.94 -35.86
T(KN) -2.54 0 4.26 0 4.28
N(KN) -0 0 0 0 0

 Phase 1 loaded
T diagram

M diagram
Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 229.84 -419.1 217.78 -435.35
T(KN) -30.8 0 51.76 0 51.92
N(KN) -0 0 0 0 0

 Phase 1 unloaded
T diagram

M diagram

Table
Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3
M(KNm) 0 45.08 -82.2 42.78 -85.38
T(KN) -6.04 0 10.15 0 10.18
N(KN) -0 0 0 0 0

10 . STRESS VERIFICATION
10.1 Classification of the cross section
The choice of the methods of analysis for frame systems depend on the
type of cross section of the structural elements and, in particular, on the
geometrical characteristics of the elements. For large ratios local
buckling phenomena (limiting the full development of the capacity of
cross section in plastic range) may occur. In this context, Eurocode 3
classifies steel cross sections, according to dimensional ratios 𝑏/𝑡, in 4
classes: 
1 st class: cross sections able to fully develop its own plastic moment
and with rotational capacity required for plastic analysis. 
2 nd class: cross sections able to fully develop its own plastic moment,
but with low rotational capacity. 
3 rd class: cross sections in which compressed fibers can reach yield
stress (elastic moment is reached), but local buckling does not allows the
development of the plastic moment. 
4 th class: cross sections for which it is necessary to take account the
effects of local buckling to obtain their resisting moment (which is smaller
than the elastic moment).
Table for cross section classification by Eurocode 3 are reported below
10.2 Stress verification on mains girders
Calculation of geometrical characteristics of the mix section
hconcrete(mm) 300
top flange width (mm) 800
top flange thickness(mm) 40
top flange center of gravity (mm) 1980
heigth of web(mm) 1920
thickness of web (mm) 20
web center of gravity (mm) 1000
bottom flange width(mm) 1000
bottom flange thickness(mm) 40
bottom flange center of gravity(mm) 20
hsteel(mm) 2000
Yc(mm) 2150
Ys(mm) 929
Es(Mpa) 210000
Ec(Mpa) 36000
n 5,8
ninf 13,5
As(mm2) 110400
Ac(mm2) 1410000
2
Ai(mm ) 214844,4
htot(mm) 2300

yi(mm) 559,2
Js(mm4) 1,76268E+17
Jc(mm4) 21150000000
Ji(mm4) 1,76268E+17
𝜎cr(Mpa) 2,96
Er∞ 0,00019
Nc(N) 4167333,33

Phase 0
load N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,41877E-05 -2,10315E-05
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 0 0
wind 0 17,94 0 1,5 0 26,91 0 0 0
total 0 2638,958 0 -5,41877E-05 -2,10315E-05
1 verified verified

Phase 1 loaded
load N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 0,9 0 196,002 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,35 0 3972,659 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 1 1,35 0 3969 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 13051,46 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified
load N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0,54 0 1589,063 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 2 1,0125 0 2976,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 9806,281 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

load N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 3 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 5240,468 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

load N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 0,9 0 196,002 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,35 0 3972,659 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 5 1,35 0 3969 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 13051,46 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

C N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 0,9 0 196,002 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,5 0 4414,065 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 4 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,0125 0 1726,313 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 1,35 -3661,875 0 0 1,70E+01 1,70E+01 1,51875 -0,0013
total -3661,875 10536,03 0 1,70E+01 1,70E+01 10,63120 -0,0013
Decision verified verified verified verified

C N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 6 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 5240,468 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 0,9 0 196,002 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0,54 0 1589,063 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 7 1,0125 0 2976,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 1,5 -4068,75 0 0 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 1,51875 -0,0015
total -4068,75 9675,613 0 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 10,63120 -0,0015
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 0,9 0 196,002 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,35 0 3972,659 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 8 1,35 0 3969 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 12123,83 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 9 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 8879,928 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 10 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 4312,835 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 11 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 8879,928 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 13 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 8879,928 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 217,78 0 1,5 0 326,67 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 14 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 4312,835 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

Phase 1 unloaded
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 0,9 0 0,36432 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,35 0 3972,659 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 1 1,35 0 3969 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 12855,82 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 1,5 0 0,6072 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 2 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 9481,499 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 1,5 0 0,6072 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 3 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 4914,405 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 1,5 0 0,6072 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 6 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 9481,499 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1,35 0 1276,263 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 0,9 0 0,36432 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 7 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1,35 0 2301,75 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 1,5 -4068,75 0 0 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 1,51875 -0,0015
total -4068,75 9481,256 0 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 10,63120 -0,0015
Decision verified verified verified verified
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 0,9 0 0,36432 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,35 0 3972,659 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 8 1,35 0 3969 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 11928,19 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 1,5 0 0,6072 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 1,0125 0 2979,494 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 9 0,54 0 1587,6 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 8553,866 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 989,47 0 1,35 0 1335,785 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 945,38 0 1 0 945,38 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 0,4048 0 1,5 0 0,6072 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 2942,7 0 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 2940 0 10 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 1705 0 1 0 1705 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,25 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,25 3986,772 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

10.2.1 Calculation of stresses in section SA3

The following table show the stress result calculation at different phase,
with the verification of stress in steel. Note:
The system of unit is (KN) for shear and normal force, (KNm) for the
moment and (MPa) for the stresses in all the table
 Phase 0
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -4440 529,86 1 1,5 0 -6659,93 794,79 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
total 0 -20065,2 2392,448 -1,63E-04 -6,31E-05 4,55623 0,0000
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1 0 -7951,84 948,33 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -4440 529,86 2 1,5 0 -6659,93 794,79 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
total 0 -17282,1 2060,532 -1,63E-04 -6,31E-05 4,55623 0,0000
Decision verified verified verified verified

 Phase 1 unloaded
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -435,35 51,92 0,9 0 -391,815 46,728 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,35 0 -7941,6 118,8675 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 1 1,35 0 -7935,98 946,539 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -25079,3 2709,792 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -435,35 51,92 1,5 0 -653,025 77,88 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,0125 0 -5956,2 89,15063 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 2 0,54 0 -3174,39 378,6156 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -18593,5 2143,304 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -435,35 51,92 1,5 0 -653,025 77,88 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,0125 0 -5956,2 89,15063 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 6 0,54 0 -3174,39 378,6156 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -18593,5 2143,304 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -435,35 51,92 1,5 0 -653,025 77,88 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 7 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -9462,91 1675,538 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

 Phase 1 unloaded
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -85,92 10,18 0,9 0 -77,328 9,162 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,35 0 -7941,6 118,8675 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 1 1,35 0 -7935,98 946,539 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -24764,8 2672,226 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified
² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)
steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -85,92 10,18 1,5 0 -128,88 15,27 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,0125 0 -5956,2 89,15063 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 2 0,54 0 -3174,39 378,6156 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -18069,4 2080,694 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -85,92 10,18 1,5 0 -128,88 15,27 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 3 0 0 0 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -8938,76 1612,928 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -85,92 10,18 0,9 0 -77,328 9,162 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,0125 0 -5956,2 89,15063 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 4 0,54 0 -3174,39 378,6156 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 1,5 -4068,795 0 0 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 1,51875 -0,0015
total -4068,795 -18017,8 2074,586 1,89E+01 1,89E+01 10,63120 -0,0015
Decision verified verified verified verified

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

steel weight 0 -1978 235,12 1,35 0 -2670,3 317,412 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
slab weight 0 -7951,8 948,33 1,35 0 -10735 1280,246 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
wind 0 -85,92 10,18 0,9 0 -77,328 9,162 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load concentred 0 -5882,7 88,05 1,35 0 -7941,6 118,8675 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
traffic load distributed 0 -5878,5 701,14 5 1,35 0 -7935,98 946,539 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
g2 0 3404 0 1,35 0 4595,4 0 -5,42E-05 -2,10E-05 1,51874 0
temperature -2712,5 0 0 0,9 -2441,277 0 0 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 1,51875 -0,0009
total -2441,277 -24764,8 2672,226 1,14E+01 1,14E+01 10,63120 -0,0009
Decision verified verified verified verified

We have other combinations , so we some of them

10.3 Shear verification on main girder
With the analysis of the previous load combination, the maximum shear
force Vedmax=2710KN

The shear strength is equal to:

Vpl, rd>Vedmax, so the shear verification is satisfied.

11 DESIGN AND VERIFICATIONS OF THE STUDS

According to the NTC 2018 (Italian standard), the shear strength of the
stud connector, welded automatically, with normal welding collar, placed
in a solid concrete slab, can be assumed to be equal to the lower of the
following values:
We chose the followings characteristics of studs’=20mm,
height=200mm, ultimate strength stress:450n/mm2,
= = 𝟏𝟎 > 𝟒 so, we can take α=1

, ∗ ∗ ∗ . ∗ ∗ , ∗
Prd1= = =90,43KN
ϒ ∗ ,

, ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ , ∗ ∗ √ ∗
Prd2= = =111,36KN
ϒ ,

Prd=min(Prd1;Prd2)=90,43KN , with the application of safety factors (1,5 at

ULS and 1,5 for dynamic load at SLS) , we have finally
,
Prd= =40,19KN
, ∗ ,

The maximum shear force at the support is Tedmax=2710KN, in the order

to take into account the safety condition, we increase the solicitation to
20%

so, we have Tedmax=2710*1,2=3252KNKN.

For the span, we assume that the value of the shear force is the mean,
we can take

Tspan= = 𝟏𝟔𝟐𝟔𝑲𝑵
∗
we know that τb= , but S= (Yc-Yi) =384,74*106mm3

Part of the girder Value of τb(KN/m)

Support 710

Span 355

The formula of the number of studs is: Nstuds= , we summarize the

results in the following table
Part of the girder Number of studs per
meter
Support 18/m
Span 10/m

The distribution of this studs is showed by the following figure

Distribution of studs at the support

Distribution of studs on span

12 DESIGN AND VERIFICATION OF THE SLAB

12.1 Geometrics characteristics and loads analysis
The concretes slab it consists of predalle slabs. Generally, these
products are made up of a concrete base of variable thickness, in this
design example, equal to 5 cm stiffened by a complex of reinforcements
made up of electro welded nets. The additional static calculation bars are
inserted onsite before casting. Considered a commercial catalog, the
slabs having the following characteristics are chosen

Calculations of different loads applied on the slab are summarized in the

following table
Load G2 Second permanents loads Results in KN/m
3
Road pavement G2pav 0,17m*7m*20KN/m 23,8
3
Lateral curbs G2curb 0,25m*1m*25KN/m 6,25
Lateral paraquet G2par 0,5KN/m 0,5
Concret veill G2vei l 1KN/m 1

The self-weight of the slab is: Gslab=0.3125=7,5KN/m

The scheme of the load distribution on the slab is the following
The traffic loads considered are those refer to load diagrams 1 and 2, as
shown below

The concentrated loads in question spread at an angle of 45° to half the

thickness of the slab, as shown in the following diagram:

In this case, we have 𝑎 = 0.17𝑚 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ℎ = 0.3𝑚 from which, for the load
patterns considered, the dimensions of the load at half the thickness of
the slab are obtained:

 Scheme1: 1.04𝑚 × 1.04𝑚

 Scheme2: 0.99𝑚 × 1.24𝑚

The following loads values result, distributed on the dimensions just

found:

 Scheme 1:

 Scheme 2:
Load arrangement considered aim to maximize the stress parameters in
lateral support and in span, as shown below:

 position 1: it shows the maximum lateral action on the

figure 1

Figure 2

supports
 Loads Evaluation (KN/m)
Lateral side 𝑞3 2.5𝐾𝑁. 𝑚−2 × 1𝑚 = 2.5
Lane 1 distributed 𝑞1 9𝐾𝑁. 𝑚−2 × 3𝑚 = 27
Lane 2 distributed 𝑞2 2.5𝐾𝑁. 𝑚−2 × 3𝑚 = 7,5
Lane 1 concentrated 𝑄1 138,7KN/m2
Lane 2 concentrated 𝑄2 92,5KN/m2

12.2 Characteristics of the calculation model and result

With the sap2000 software, we brought out the 3D view of the slab of the
bridge
 :3D view of the slab with the mesh

Our slab is being full, we are going to design it as a beam with 30cm of
width and 100cm of height ,resting on two supports provided with two
bracket .this is the reason we are going to use formulas of the
mechanical scheme
In our case a=1,7m, l=6m and P depend to the case of the load
combination. The different loads combinations are:
 Ultimate limit state= 1.35𝐺1 + 1.35𝐺2 + 1.35𝑄 + 1.35𝑞 =162,22KN/m

 Serviceability limit state rare combination: P=𝐺1 + 𝐺2 + 0.75𝑄 + 0.4𝑞

=93,85KN/m
 Serviceability limit state frequent combination= 𝐺1 + 𝐺2 + 0.75𝑄 +
0.4𝑞 =93,85KN/m
 Serviceability limit state quasi permanent load: P=𝐺1 + 𝐺2 + 0 × 𝑄 +
0 × 𝑞 =79,05KN/m
𝑄 represent the tandem load and 𝑞 the distributed load:
The results are summarized in the following tables
combination P(KN/m) Mmax+(KN/m) Mmax-(KN/m) VA=VB(KN) Tmax-(KN) Tmax+(KN)
ULS 162,22 495,5821 -234,41 1524,868 -1249,094 1249,094
SLS rare combination 93,85 286,71175 -135,61 882,19 -722,645 722,645
SLS frequent combination 93,85 286,71175 -135,61 882,19 -722,645 722,645
SLS quasi permanent combination 79,05 241,49775 -114,23 743,07 -608,685 608,685
12.3 Ultimate limit state design
It is a verification of shear and bending moment
12.3.1 Ultimate limit state design
Here we report the classical hypothesis of calculation:
 Plane section remains plane
 Perfect bond between reinforcement steel and concrete (no slip)
 Concrete reacts only in compression (tensile strength of concrete is
neglected)
 Concrete stress-strain relation obeys to a parabolic rectangular
diagram
 Steel stress-strain relation obeys the traditional diagram
Rectangular section at ultimate limit state is show in the figure below:

The limit resisting moment of the section is calculated using this

formulation:
𝑴𝒓𝒅,𝒍𝒊𝒎 = 𝜷𝟏𝑭𝒄𝒅𝒃𝒙(𝒅 − 𝜷𝟐𝒙). Values of 𝛽1 and 𝛽2 are given in the table
below

For the slab the grade of the concrete, we choose: C40/50

Fck=40, then fcd= =26,67MPa

The geometrical characteristics of the slab section are :

We assume the concrete cover c=30mm, h=300mm,b=1000mm and
d=h-c=300-30=270mm,
X=0,6*d=0,6*270=162mm, with the calculation we obtain
Mrd,lim=703,66KNm
The maximum bending moment at the span is Med=495,58KNm ,
Med+<Mrd,lim so the bending moment is verified . the cross section of
reinforcement in tension is given by:
As= =4699mm2 , we adopt 19φ18 ( spacing =33mm)and for the
, ∗ ∗
top reinforcement of the span we adopt 50% of 19φ18 , equivalent to
8φ18( spacing=113mm) ,we are sure that the structure will resist). At the
support the maximum bending moment is Med-=-234,41KNm, the cross
section of reinforcement is :
As=2222,7mm2 , we adopt 9φ18(spacing=98mm) for the bottom
reinforcement at support we can always adopt 50% of 9φ18
corresponding to 5φ18 (spacing=213mm ,this adoption of 50% , it is
because we are sure that we are in a safety condition). The cross
section of the slab with the repartition of reinforcement is the following

Cross section of the slab with the reinforcement

12.3.2 . Shear design

The shear capacity of the concrete can be estimated as follows:
The coefficients in the above formulas have been calibrated with
experimental results and represent the main resisting contributions
described before in beams without web reinforcement

(  beam action,  dowel action and 

aggregate interlock)

In this design example, we get , then the

verification of shear is satisfied without insert specific reinforcement.

12.4 Serviceability limit state check

The serviceability limit states (SLS) are the states beyond which
requirements for the correct exercise and use of the structure are not
satisfied. They model the behavior of the structure under working loads
instead of ultimate (collapse) loads (ULS). The most common SLS are:

 Stress Limit State: High compression stresses in the concrete

can lead to micro cracking and durability problems. High
stresses in the reinforcement can imply high cracks widths and
durability problems (STRESS LIMITATION).
 Cracking Limit State: Cracks with widths that can compromise
the use of the structure (CRACK CONTROL)
 Deformation Limit state: High displacement, deformations
can produce damage in non-structural elements and affect the
comfort of the occupants (DEFLECTION CONTROL).
12.4.1 Stress limitation
The following limitations must be respected:
𝜎𝑐 ≤ 0.6𝑓𝑐𝑘 for the characteristic combination
𝜎𝑐 ≤ 0.45𝑓𝑐𝑘 for the quasi permanent combination
𝜎𝑠 ≤ 0.8𝑓𝑦𝑘 for the characteristic combination
The formulation use to calculate the stress in concrete and steel are the
following:

• The position of the neutral axis: with 𝑛 the

homogenization
coefficient at long term assume to be equal to 15.

• Moment of inertia of the homogenized section:

The stress in concrete is and the stress in steel is
With the calculations we obtain:
 𝜎𝑐,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 24𝑀𝑃𝑎 for the characteristic combination

 𝜎𝑐,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 18𝑀𝑃𝑎 for the quasi permanent combination

 𝜎𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 400𝑀𝑃𝑎 for the characteristic combination

We summarize our results in the following table:

section combination Med(KNm) As(mm2) x(mm) J(mm4) σc(Mpa) σs(Mpa) observation
SLS rare 135,61 1285,865999 84,5750985 665551589 17,23266731 566,721002 not verified
support SLS quasi permanent 114,23 1083,138951 78,81812098 595909995 15,10864733 549,714879 not verified
SLS rare 286,71 2718,609547 113,1158725 1007947009 32,17575083 669,384122 not verified
span SLS quasi permanent 241,5 2289,924333 106,1083585 926379658 27,66162701 640,879219 not verified
The stress is not satisfied, we can increase the value of Fyk in
other to solve this situation
12.4.2 Cracking verification
EC2 gives simplified methods for crack control; maximum bar diameters
and bar spacing are given in the table below.

In this case, the class can be considered to be in ordinary class of

exposition (X0, XC1, XC2, XC3, XF1) then the crack width must be
limited to 𝒘𝟐 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝒎𝒎 for the quasi permanent combination and 𝒘𝟑 = 𝟎.
𝟒𝒎𝒎 for the frequent combination.

The acting stresses are the following

Then we get this limitation

𝜙𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥
SLS frequent 20 286mm
Support SLS quite 20 286mmm
permanent
SLS frequent 20 84mm
Span SLS quite 20 112mm
permanent
The verification is satisfied for the diameter bar in all the case.

13 DESIGN AND VERIFICATIONS OF THE PIER

13.1 Geometry of the pier
The static verification of the central pier (in section SA3) is shown below.

The geometry of this pier is presented by the following figures

View of the pier

Cross section of the pier

13.2 Actions on the pier

The actions that act on the central pier being verified, In particular, from
these the constraint reactions will be obtained in the two supports which,
changed in the direction, will constitute the normal force on the pier. The
combination of the loads at the ULS considered is that which takes into
account the traffic load as prevalent on the other accidental loads; this
load will be arranged so as to maximize the stresses at the central pier.

 Self-weight of the pier:

part area (m2) depth(m) volume (m3) density (KN/m3) ULS factor weigth(KN)
capbeam 25 2 50 25 1,35 1687,5
pier 34 2 68 25 1,35 2295
support 16 2 32 25 1,35 1080
total 5062,5
 Imposed load by the girder on the pier
The influence length of the girder on the central pier is :
L=40/2+50/2=45m
The concentrated load by the girder to the pier is
Ngird= (0.8*0,04+1,92*0.02+1*0.04) *78.5*45+45*(7.5+71.55+37)
=5612,36KN,
with the application of the ULS factor, we obtain
Nugir=1,35*5612,36=7576,52KN

So, the total axial force applied on the central is

Nu=7576,52*2+5062,5=20215,43KN and
The eccentricity of the axial forced is
e=max{e0;20mm;0,05h}=0,05*10000=500mm=0,5m
The moment is Mu=Nu*e=20215,43*0,5=101017,72KNm
13.3 M_N interaction diagram of the pier
The condition in which 𝑀𝑅𝑑 > 𝑀𝐸𝑑 must be respected. The column
strength interaction diagram is a curve of plot points in which each point
has two ordinates. The first ordinate is bending moment strength and the
second is the corresponding axial force. Both ordinates are linked with
eccentricity. The shape of curve, or the strength interaction diagram can
be defined by finding the ordinates of selected given points.
The column is reinforced with longitudinal bar 𝜙20 with spacing of 20𝑐𝑚
constant in each line of the reinforcement, as shown below:
The M-N interaction diagram of our pier is the following
:

25000,00

20000,00

15000,00

10000,00

5000,00

0,00
-20000,00 -10000,00 0,00 10000,00 20000,00 30000,00 40000,00 50000,00 60000,00 70000,00 80000,00

-5000,00

-10000,00

-15000,00

-20000,00

-25000,00 Nrd (KN )

The verification is satisfied because the point (with black color) of
coordinate ((Nu=20215,43KN, Mu=101017,72KNm) is situated in the
diagram., so

14 CONCLUSION
In short ,it was a question for us to design a composite bridge .The
calculations and the execution plans were presented We also have
toward the verifications of calculations made using Eurocode standards
.Regarding the type of foundation ,it is proposed according to the
bearing capacity of the soil ,if the soil has poor bearing ,we can use the
piles for our bridge .

15 SOME DEFINITIONS
Abutment: A retaining wall supporting the ends of a bridge or viaduct.
Anchor Span: Located at the outermost end, it counterbalances the arm
of a span extending in the opposite direction from a major point of
support. Often attached to an abutment.

Anchorage Block: Located at the outermost ends, the part of a

suspension bridge to which the cables are attached. Similar in location to
an abutment of a beam bridge.

Approach: The part of the bridge that carries traffic from the land to the
main parts of the bridge.

Approach Span: The span or spans connecting the abutment with the
main span or spans.
Bascule Bridge: From the French word for "see-saw," a bascule bridge
features a movable span (leaf) that rotates on a horizontal hinged axis
(trunnion) to raise one end vertically. A large counterweight is used to
offset the weight of the raised leaf. May have a single raising leaf or two
that meet in the center when closed.

Bearing: A device at the ends of beams that is placed on top of a pier or

abutment. The ends of the beam rest on the bearing.
Bent: Part of a bridge substructure. A rigid frame commonly made of
reinforced concrete or steel that supports a vertical load and is placed
transverse to the length of a structure. Bents are commonly used to
support beams and girders. An end bent is the supporting frame forming
part of an abutment.

Cable: Part of a suspension bridge extending from an anchorage over

the tops of the towers and down to the opposite anchorage. Suspenders
or hangers are attached along its length to support the deck.

Caisson: "Caisson" is the French word for "box." A caisson is a huge

box made of steel reinforced and waterproof concrete with an open
central core. At the base of the caisson is its "cutting edge" of plate steel.
In a suspension bridge the caisson becomes the foundation, the pier,
supporting for the bridge's towers.

Cantilever: A structural member that projects beyond a supporting

column or wall and is counterbalanced and/or supported at only one end.

Cast-in-Place: Concrete poured within formwork on site to create a

structural element in its final position.

Catenary: Curve formed by a rope or chain hanging freely between two

supports. The curved cables or chains used to support suspension
bridges may be referred to as catenaries.

Catwalks: Temporary foot bridges, used by bridge workers to spin the

main cables (several feet above each catwalk), and to attach the
suspender cables that connect the main cables to the deck.

Centering: Temporary structure or falsework supporting an arch during

construction.
Chord: Either of the two principal members of a truss extending from end
to end, connected by web members.
Crown: On road surfaces, where the center is the highest point and the
surface slopes downward in opposite directions, assisting in drainage.
Also, a point at the top of an arch.

Culvert: A drain, pipe or channel that allows water to pass under a road,
railroad or embankment.

Damping: The action of reducing the vibration of an object. This tends to

return the vibrating object to its original position.

Deck: The roadway portion of a bridge, including shoulders. Most bridge

decks are constructed as reinforced concrete slabs, but timber decks are
still seen in rural areas and open-grid steel decks are used in some
movable bridge designs.

Deck Bridge: A bridge in which the supporting members are all beneath
the roadway.
Diaphragm: Bracing that spans between the main beams or girders of a
bridge or viaduct and assists in the distribution of loads.

Expansion Joint: A meeting point between two parts of a structure that

is designed to allow for movement of the parts due to thermal or moisture
factors while protecting the parts from damage. Commonly visible on a
bridge deck as a hinged or movable connection.

Joint: A device connecting two or more adjacent parts of a structure. A

roller joint allows adjacent parts to move controllably past one another. A
rigid joint prevents adjacent parts from moving or rotating past one
another.

Parapet: A low wall along the outside edge of a bridge deck used to
protect vehicles and pedestrians.
Pier: A vertical structure that supports the ends of a multi-span
superstructure at a location between abutments. Also see column and
pile.

Skew: When the superstructure is not perpendicular to the substructure,

a skew angle is created. The skew angle is the acute angle between the
alignment of the superstructure and the alignment of the substructure.

Span: The horizontal space between two supports of a structure. Also

refers to the structure itself. May be used as a noun or a verb. The clear
span is the space between the inside surfaces of piers or other vertical
supports. The effective span is the distance between the centers of two
supports.

Manual Weichai WD 615.46 - Euro II
100% (15)
Manual Weichai WD 615.46 - Euro II
62 pages
Plasticity Analysis
No ratings yet
Plasticity Analysis
136 pages
Star2: Statics of Beam Structures 2 Order Theory
No ratings yet
Star2: Statics of Beam Structures 2 Order Theory
55 pages
Car Trouble Shooting
No ratings yet
Car Trouble Shooting
8 pages
HD612 90003 Drifter
100% (1)
HD612 90003 Drifter
14 pages
The Influence of The Span-To-Depth Ratio in Designing Concrete Bridges
No ratings yet
The Influence of The Span-To-Depth Ratio in Designing Concrete Bridges
231 pages
Jennifer Dietrich MSC DissertationAnalysis and Design of PDF
No ratings yet
Jennifer Dietrich MSC DissertationAnalysis and Design of PDF
238 pages
Tesi
No ratings yet
Tesi
159 pages
He Development of Submerged Floating Tunnels As An Innovative Solution For Waterway Crossings
No ratings yet
He Development of Submerged Floating Tunnels As An Innovative Solution For Waterway Crossings
316 pages
268798
No ratings yet
268798
150 pages
Thesis CE
No ratings yet
Thesis CE
273 pages
Seismic Fragility and Retrofitting For A PDF
No ratings yet
Seismic Fragility and Retrofitting For A PDF
200 pages
Evaluation of The Seismic Performance of A ThirtyStory RC Building
No ratings yet
Evaluation of The Seismic Performance of A ThirtyStory RC Building
272 pages
D. Marriot - The Development of High-Performance Post-Tensioned Rocking Systems For The Seismic Design of Structures
No ratings yet
D. Marriot - The Development of High-Performance Post-Tensioned Rocking Systems For The Seismic Design of Structures
556 pages
Modeling Concrete
No ratings yet
Modeling Concrete
105 pages
Critical Evaluation of Torsional Provision in Is 1893 2002
No ratings yet
Critical Evaluation of Torsional Provision in Is 1893 2002
167 pages
Crack Width Control M.J.a.M. Bruurs Master Thesis
No ratings yet
Crack Width Control M.J.a.M. Bruurs Master Thesis
259 pages
Effect of Bolted Joint Preload On Structural Damping: Scholar Commons
No ratings yet
Effect of Bolted Joint Preload On Structural Damping: Scholar Commons
160 pages
Modelling Structures: 5.1 What Is A Good FEA Model?
No ratings yet
Modelling Structures: 5.1 What Is A Good FEA Model?
29 pages
Godawari Concrete Block Structural Report
No ratings yet
Godawari Concrete Block Structural Report
36 pages
Parke, G. A. R. - Harding, J. E. - Ryall, M. J - Bridge Management 3 - Inspection, Maintenance, Assessment, and Repair-E & FN Spon (1996)
No ratings yet
Parke, G. A. R. - Harding, J. E. - Ryall, M. J - Bridge Management 3 - Inspection, Maintenance, Assessment, and Repair-E & FN Spon (1996)
888 pages
07 Desroches
No ratings yet
07 Desroches
108 pages
No 070
No ratings yet
No 070
353 pages
Experimental Behavior of Full-Scale Exterior Beam-Column Space Joints Retrofitted by Ferrocement Layers Under Cyclic Loading
No ratings yet
Experimental Behavior of Full-Scale Exterior Beam-Column Space Joints Retrofitted by Ferrocement Layers Under Cyclic Loading
18 pages
Heggade, V. N. (2020). “Conceiving of extradosed bridges”
No ratings yet
Heggade, V. N. (2020). “Conceiving of extradosed bridges”
14 pages
Dynamic Analysis of Soil-Steel Railway Bridge Plaxis 2004
No ratings yet
Dynamic Analysis of Soil-Steel Railway Bridge Plaxis 2004
137 pages
Efficient Assumption of Design Variables For Stress Ribbon Footbridges
No ratings yet
Efficient Assumption of Design Variables For Stress Ribbon Footbridges
11 pages
Web 5133
No ratings yet
Web 5133
118 pages
Seismic Retrofitting
No ratings yet
Seismic Retrofitting
240 pages
Seismic Behaviour and Analysis of Continuous Reinforced Concrete Bridges
No ratings yet
Seismic Behaviour and Analysis of Continuous Reinforced Concrete Bridges
356 pages
Alizadeh, Saeid - Final PHD Thesis
100% (1)
Alizadeh, Saeid - Final PHD Thesis
701 pages
TR132 Gupta
No ratings yet
TR132 Gupta
379 pages
Experimental Testing of Pile-to-Cap Connections For Embedded Pipe Piles
No ratings yet
Experimental Testing of Pile-to-Cap Connections For Embedded Pipe Piles
9 pages
Wiecon Precast Bridges 2024 r2
No ratings yet
Wiecon Precast Bridges 2024 r2
38 pages
FR - 567 Development of Guidelines For Transportation of Long Prestressed Concrete Girders
No ratings yet
FR - 567 Development of Guidelines For Transportation of Long Prestressed Concrete Girders
294 pages
Seismic Behaviour of Rectangular R/C Bridge Columns Under Bidirectional Earthquake Components
No ratings yet
Seismic Behaviour of Rectangular R/C Bridge Columns Under Bidirectional Earthquake Components
10 pages
Stay Cable
No ratings yet
Stay Cable
12 pages
Cascara S
No ratings yet
Cascara S
24 pages
Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge
No ratings yet
Modelling and Vibration Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge
11 pages
State-of-the-Art of Integral Abutment Bridges: Design and Practice
No ratings yet
State-of-the-Art of Integral Abutment Bridges: Design and Practice
10 pages
2C_2_Chung
No ratings yet
2C_2_Chung
25 pages
CD003 Pap031
No ratings yet
CD003 Pap031
9 pages
Study of Long Span Bridge Design Based On Long Term Maintenance in Developing Countries
No ratings yet
Study of Long Span Bridge Design Based On Long Term Maintenance in Developing Countries
165 pages
Seismic Behavior of Precast Piers On High Speed Railway Bridges
No ratings yet
Seismic Behavior of Precast Piers On High Speed Railway Bridges
361 pages
Site Specific Non-Linear Ground Response Analysis and Soil Structure Interaction Study of Newly Constructed Dharahara Tower by Santosh Katuwal
No ratings yet
Site Specific Non-Linear Ground Response Analysis and Soil Structure Interaction Study of Newly Constructed Dharahara Tower by Santosh Katuwal
119 pages
Change in Conventional Design of Structure Due
No ratings yet
Change in Conventional Design of Structure Due
103 pages
1 - Geosynthetics - Geosystems - Pilarczyk Final With Cover Page v2
No ratings yet
1 - Geosynthetics - Geosystems - Pilarczyk Final With Cover Page v2
22 pages
Computational Simulations of The Cable-Stayed Brid
No ratings yet
Computational Simulations of The Cable-Stayed Brid
8 pages
Design of RC Bridge Columns For Near Fault Earthquakes SeyedCCEERReport13-13
No ratings yet
Design of RC Bridge Columns For Near Fault Earthquakes SeyedCCEERReport13-13
393 pages
Vibration Serviceability Limit State of Pedestrian
No ratings yet
Vibration Serviceability Limit State of Pedestrian
8 pages
Elshenawy Elaraby
No ratings yet
Elshenawy Elaraby
189 pages
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation of Axially Loaded Steel Built-Up Laced Members
No ratings yet
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation of Axially Loaded Steel Built-Up Laced Members
327 pages
Proceeding of 13th Nordic Steel 2015 Construction Conference PDF
No ratings yet
Proceeding of 13th Nordic Steel 2015 Construction Conference PDF
254 pages
Effects Delta
No ratings yet
Effects Delta
22 pages
Deflection Continuous Beams 21
No ratings yet
Deflection Continuous Beams 21
118 pages
Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant: Basement Plan - Pile Superimposed
No ratings yet
Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant: Basement Plan - Pile Superimposed
3 pages
Segmental Overview Soule 2022.02.23
No ratings yet
Segmental Overview Soule 2022.02.23
83 pages
Economic and Durable Design of Composite
No ratings yet
Economic and Durable Design of Composite
143 pages
Active Hybrid and Semi-Active Structural Control
No ratings yet
Active Hybrid and Semi-Active Structural Control
148 pages
HAR1902
No ratings yet
HAR1902
152 pages
Structural Engineering Documents
From Everand
Structural Engineering Documents
Jorge de Brito
No ratings yet
A Catalogue of Details on Pre-Contract Schedules: Surgical Eye Centre of Excellence - Kath
From Everand
A Catalogue of Details on Pre-Contract Schedules: Surgical Eye Centre of Excellence - Kath
Edward Ayebeng Botchway
No ratings yet
Signature Redacted
No ratings yet
Signature Redacted
60 pages
EroSolve-Wet-Steam HP Bypass Brochure APAC EN R6
No ratings yet
EroSolve-Wet-Steam HP Bypass Brochure APAC EN R6
2 pages
ETE -Structural system
No ratings yet
ETE -Structural system
3 pages
Blackmer-System-One-OM-Manual
No ratings yet
Blackmer-System-One-OM-Manual
57 pages
T Iit-Jee: Physics
No ratings yet
T Iit-Jee: Physics
4 pages
In LBM: Tutorial #1 1
No ratings yet
In LBM: Tutorial #1 1
4 pages
Calculating Friction Loss: Standard: NFPA 1002, Standard On Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional
No ratings yet
Calculating Friction Loss: Standard: NFPA 1002, Standard On Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional
3 pages
5 Chapter7tolerancing
No ratings yet
5 Chapter7tolerancing
99 pages
3 - Lobe Bearing - Main PDF
No ratings yet
3 - Lobe Bearing - Main PDF
23 pages
Fluid Mechanics
No ratings yet
Fluid Mechanics
10 pages
4.4 Roof Beams4
No ratings yet
4.4 Roof Beams4
1 page
LPT - Question and Answer
No ratings yet
LPT - Question and Answer
3 pages
Thermo Training Handout Public PDF
No ratings yet
Thermo Training Handout Public PDF
81 pages
Dosatron - Comparativo Sistema de Dosagem
No ratings yet
Dosatron - Comparativo Sistema de Dosagem
37 pages
TAILSTOCK
100% (1)
TAILSTOCK
6 pages
Project Master Schedule.1
No ratings yet
Project Master Schedule.1
3 pages
Mech Tutorial 1
No ratings yet
Mech Tutorial 1
2 pages
Projeto FPFcontencao 2
No ratings yet
Projeto FPFcontencao 2
19 pages
URS Solid Fired Boiler
No ratings yet
URS Solid Fired Boiler
35 pages
BVA P Series Manual P240L
No ratings yet
BVA P Series Manual P240L
8 pages
ME Structures Theory Elasticity Plasticity
No ratings yet
ME Structures Theory Elasticity Plasticity
3 pages
Hitachi ZX850
No ratings yet
Hitachi ZX850
11 pages
Collection
100% (1)
Collection
8 pages
Signs of Transmission Problems in Your Car: Check Engine Light Stays On
No ratings yet
Signs of Transmission Problems in Your Car: Check Engine Light Stays On
1 page
Motor MCR 15207-R
100% (1)
Motor MCR 15207-R
24 pages
CHAPTER 7-Consolidation New
No ratings yet
CHAPTER 7-Consolidation New
22 pages
Wurth Wit Pe 500
No ratings yet
Wurth Wit Pe 500
1 page
T65J T85J Maintenance Manual - 240206 - 183239
No ratings yet
T65J T85J Maintenance Manual - 240206 - 183239
55 pages

Design of A Composite Bridge by BOUDIAF DJASSE

Uploaded by

Design of A Composite Bridge by BOUDIAF DJASSE

Uploaded by

UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA

NATIONAL ADVANCED SCHOOL

Cycle: MEng 5, civil engineering

Worked Project: Design of a

I wanted to address my sincere thanks to all those who helped me to

Presentation of the obstacle

Top view of the bridge

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STRUCTURE OF A BRIDGE

5 PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE DECK

The main girder depth H is : H== max ( ( )0.45;0.4+ )=max(1.64;1.83)

So we can take H=2m

The bottom flange width is : Binf=(0.25+ + )*(0.92+ )=0.888m , we

The transversal section has been diaphragm to deal with possible

Distribution of the self-weight of the slab applied on the structure

7.1 Self-weight of non-structural elements G2

We have this following mechanical scheme

Case load value of the load (KN/m) α1 Load applied on girder1(KN/m)

This load applied on the girder is illustrated by the following mechanical

 Maximum bending moment on span 1 (section SC1

 Maximum shear in SC1

 Maximum moment in SA2

 Maximum moment in SC2

 Maximum shear in SC2

 Maximum moment in SA3

 Maximum shear in SA3

The braking or acceleration force, denoted by 𝑄3, should be taken as

With the analysis (at 7days) of these table

We obtain the following modular ratios and elastic modules of

Load duration Modular ratio n Elastic modulus of

The total shrinkage strain is composed of two components,

𝜀𝑑𝑐∞ = 𝜀𝑐𝑑0 × 𝑘ℎ=0.24*0.81=0.19*10-3

The compressive force which is the force taken by each girder is

In addition to the compressive force 𝑅/𝑛 (𝑛 = 2, 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓

The moment is :M= *e=8037KN*0.79=6349.23KNm

7.3 Thermal effect

The moment is :M= *e=5076*0.383=1944.108kNm

 Static load equivalent to the positive thermal variation: tension in

For structure we take an uniform thermal variation: ∆T = ±25° C

We obtain 𝜇=0.417 approximately

Figure which illustrate the phase 0, phase 1 -loaded, phase 1-unloades

The crosspieces of our bridge are subject to the transverse

Note that: 𝑽𝒊 = 𝒒𝒗,𝒊 × 𝑯i : it is a linear load

Calculations of phase 0, phase 1-loaded and phase1-

8 .GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SECTION

Where 𝑏𝑒𝑖 = min ( ; 𝑏𝑖) and 𝛽2 = (0.55 + 0.025 )≤1

Cross sections( SA1,SC1,SA2,SC2,SA3)along the girder are indicated

8.1 Characteristics of the mixed section

To determine the value of the traffic loads, the following combinations

In this design example, we will consider the 16 combinations below, with

9.3 Diagrams of solicitations

 Non-structural permanent loads

Section SA1 SC1 SA2 SC2 SA3

C N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

C N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

10.2.1 Calculation of stresses in section SA3

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

² N(KN) M(KNm) T(KN) COMB FACTOR N M T 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑓,s(Mpa) 𝜎𝑠𝑢𝑝,c(Mpa) 𝜎inf,c(Mpa)

𝜀𝑑𝑐∞ = 𝜀𝑐𝑑0 × 𝑘ℎ=0.240.81=0.1910-3

The moment is :M= e=8037KN0.79=6349.23KNm

The moment is :M= e=50760.383=1944.108kNm

The self-weight of the slab is: Gslab=0.3125=7,5KN/m