Review Bridge Design

REVIEW REPORT OF BRIDGE STRUCTURE ON
VICO'S MAJOR GAS SUPPLY PIPELINE
Doc. No : TTE044-xxxx-xx-xx-Ax
REVIEW & REANALYSIS THE EXISTING STRUCTURAL DESIGN Job. No : TTE044
OF CONNECTING BRIDGE ON VICO'S MAJOR GAS SUPPLY PIPELINE Rev. No : Axx
Date : 26/02/2013
Reference Specs. : Bridge Engineering Specification Engineer : FS
A. GENERAL
The purpose of this report is for the reviewed engineering design for the connecting bridge structure on
Vico's major gas supply pipeline at KM 21+600 Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara.
B. REFERENCES AND CODES

- SNI (Standar Nasional Indonesia ) 03-2847-2002 & 03-1729-2002
- ACI (American Concrete Institute ) 318-05 M
- AISC-LRFD 1999 (American Institute of Steel Construction - Load Resistance Factor Design )
- SNI-T-02-2005 (Standar Nasional Indonesia ), Standard Load for Bridge Structure
- RSNI 03-1726-201x & Indonesia Earthquake Zone Map 2010
- BMS (Bridge Management System ) 1992, etc
- Braja M Das 2011, Foundation Engineering 7th Edition
C. DOCUMENT REFERENCE
- "LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO Indonesia KM 21+600
Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara "
D. MATERIAL PROPERTIES ((RECOMMENDATIONS & EXISTING))

a. Material of Concrete and Bored Pile Element
Concrete material will be using requirements for concrete exposed to underground area.
Cement = Portland Cement Type IV (ASTM 150), for use when low heat of hydration is desired
f'c = 29 MPa (Min. Compress. Strength at 28 Days and must be reached 46% of the strength in 3 days )
wc = 0.5 (Max. Water-cementious material ratio )
b. Material of Steel Rebar Element

390 MPa (Deformed Bars ) according to JIS G 3112
fy =
235 MPa (Plained Bars ) according to JIS G 3112
c. Material of Steel Profile Element

Steel element would be used ASTM A-36 or equivalent with JIS G3101 Grade SS400.
fy = 250 MPa
fu = 410 MPa
d. Material of Bolt Element

Bolt element would be using High Strength Bolt (HSB) ASTM A 325-M TYPE-I Hot Dip Galvanized
Ft = 620 MPa
Fv = 330 MPa
e. Material of Welding Rod

Welding rod material would be using E-70elektrodes
70 ksi
fu =
4,921 kg/cm2
Review of Bridge Structure Design on Vico's Major Gas Supply Pipeline Page 1 of 79
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
E. LOADING DATA (EXISTING & ADDITIONAL)
1) Dead Load
2) KEL (Knife Edge Load)
3) UDL (Uniformly Distrubuted Load)
4) Truck Load
5) Braking Force
6) Earthquake Load
7) Wind Load
F. ANALYSIS METHOD
Analysis method for this bridge structure will be using step by step method and manual calculation using
MS EXCEL for superstructure of steel elements. But especially for superstructure of concrete elements and
substructure will be using finite element method and SAP 2000/CSI Col. as the structural analysis software.
G. STRUCTURAL MODEL
Structural model of the existing bridge design shown as follows :
Longitudinal Cross Section of Bridge
Site Plan of Bridge

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
H. LOADING ANALYSIS
All of actual loads on bridge shown as follows :
H.1 Dead Load

Dead loads on bridge consists of :
- Selfweight of Concrete = 2,400 kg/m3
- Selfweight of Steel = 7,850 kg/m3
- Asphalt = 2,200 kg/m3
H.2 KEL (Knife Edge Load)

Refer to SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 6.3.2 , KEL (Knife Edge Load) shall be placed in any position along the
bridge. The KEL shall be applied perpendicular to the direction of traffic on the bridge. The value of
KEL shall be 49 kN/m
Source : SNI-T-02-2005
KEL (Knife Edge Load)
H.3 UDL (Uniformly Distrubuted Load)

The loaded length "L" is the total length of the UDL applied to the bridge. The UDL may be applied in the
broken lengths to maximize its effects on continuous bridges or unusual structure. According to SNI-T-02-
2005 sect. 6.3.1.2 actual loads caused by UDL shown as follows :
L 30 m = 9 kPa
L > 30 m = (9 x (0.5+15/L) kPa
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
UDL (Uniformly Distrubuted Load)
H.4 Truck Load

Truck Load on structure would be designed for truck specification as follows :
Truck Load 1 (Payload Capacity 30 tons)
Truck Load 2 (Payload Capacity 30 tons) Based on SNI-T-02-2005

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
All of actual loads caused by KEL and Truck Loads must be multiplied by (1+DLA (Dynamic Load Allowance ))
factor such as follows :
Source : BMS 1992

DLA (Dynamic Load Allowance)
H.5 Braking Force

B ki fforce would
Braking ld b
be governed
d ffor pier
i wallll structure
t t and
dbbridge
id b bearing
i system.
t
Source : BMS 1992

Braking Force on Bridge Structure
H.6 Earthquake Load

Earthquake load or seismic analysis on the structure would be calculated according to RSNI 1726-201x
and Indonesia Earthquake Zone Map 2010 in which the code refer to IBC 2009. Earthquake load on the
structure would be analyzed by using Response Spectrum Function and Complete Quadratic Combination
(CQC) method . Earthquake load would be governed for pier wall structure. The parameter of earthquake
load calculation RSNI 1726-201x and Indonesia Earthquake Zone Map 2010 shall be as follows :
Data Input
1. Risk Category of Structure = 2 see table 1, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 4.1.2
2. Soil Acceleration Parameter
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
SS = 0.25 g see figure 9 (map) RSNI 1726-2010
S1 = 0.15 g see figure 10 (map) RSNI 1726-2010
3. Site Classification = 5 see table 3, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 5.3
Data Output
1. Occupancy Importance (I) = 1.00 see table 2, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 4.1.2
2. Site Coefficient
Fa = 2.50 see table 4, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.2
Fv = 3.35 see table 5, RSNI 1726 sect. 6.2
So :
S MS = 0.63 g see eq. 5, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.2
S M1 = 0.50 g see eq. 6, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.2
3. Parameter Spectral Acceleration Design
S DS = 0.42 g see eq. 7, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.3
S D1 = 0.34 g see eq. 8, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.3
4. Response Spectrum Design
T0 = 0 16
0.16 s see eq. 11,
11 RSNI 1726-2010
1726 2010 sect.
t 66.4
4
TS = 0.80 s see eq. 12, RSNI 1726-2010 sect. 6.4
Response Spectrum Table & Graph

T Sa
(second) (m/s2)
0.00 0.17
0.16 0.42
0.80 0.42
1.00 0.33
1.20 0.28
1.40 0.24
1.60 0.21
1.80 0.19
2.00 0.17
2.20 0.15
2.40 0.14
2.60 0.13
2.80 0.12
3.00 0.11
3.20 0.10
3.40 0.10
3.60 0.09
3.80 0.09
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Ss Classification Map According to RSNI 1726-201x
S1 Classification Map According to RSNI 1726-201x
H.7 Wind Load

Wind pressure acting on structure would be determined based on SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 7.6.2 & SNI-T-02-
2005 sect. 7.6.4 . Wind pressure acting on superstructure would be transfered to pier wall structure.
2
- Wind pressure acting on superstructure TEW_1 = 0.0006*CW*VW *Ab
- Wind pressure acting on vehicles TEW_2 = 0.0012*CW*VW2*Ab
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Where :
CW = Friction Coeff. (1.2 for vehicles and 1.25 for Superstructure)
VW = Basic wind velocity = 30 m/s
2
Ab = Equivalent area of bridge structure/Vehicles (m )
TEW = Wind pressure (kN)
I. CHECKING THE SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN FOR STEEL ELEMENT

Checking the superstructure design for steel element shown as follows :
I.1 Slab Analysis

Design Properties :
- Width = 0.400 m
- Governed Length = 0.400 m
- Thickness of Steel = 0.014 m
- Thickness of Asphalt = 0.110 m
- Clearence Height of Rib = 0.100 m
*) Rib is used to increase inertia moment of steel slab's cross section only
*) Effective width which is governed using 45 o loading distribution caused by contact plane of wheel's truck
Cross Section of Steel Plate Which Would Be Used to Computation
a) Computation of actual loads on slab

*) Loading Factor :
u
- For dead loads (K MS) = 1.30 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 5.2)
u
- For additional dead loads (K MA) = 2.00 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 5.3)
u
- For truck loads (K TT) = 1.80 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 6.4.1)
*) Actual loads
- Dead Loads (Selfweight/Steel) = 85.72 kg/m
- Add. Dead Loads (Asphalt) = 193.60 kg/m
- Total Dead Loads = 307.25 kg/m
- Max. Truck Load 1 (8 tons for 1 wheel) = 93,600 kg/m (Contact Pressure per length )
- Max. Truck Load 2 (11.25 tons for 1 wheel) = 131,625 kg/m (Contact Pressure per length )
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) All of actual loads has been multiplied by loading factor
*) Truck load 1 is truck with payload capacity 30 tons and Truck Load 2 is truck with payload capacity 30 tons from SNI
*) Truck load 3 is truck with payload capacity 70 tons and Truck Load 4 is truck with payload capacity 20 tons
*) Especially for truck load has been multiplied too by (1 + DLA) factor
Truck Load 1, 3 & 4 Truck Load 2

Contact Plane of Wheel's Truck to Steel Slab
b) Internal Force Calculation

Internal force calculation would be assumed that the steel slab as one way slab. Governed length which
would be used to computation is unsupported length of steel slab (400 mm) .
qTr4 = 111,150.0 kg/m
Truck Load 4 ===>
qTr3 = 99,450.0 kg/m
Truck Load 3 ===>
qTr2 = 131,625.0 kg/m
Truck Load 2 ===>
qTr1 = 93,600.0 kg/m
Truck Load 1 ===>
qDL = 307.25 kg/m
Dead Load ===>

Lspan = 400.00 mm
A B
Calculation of actual maximum internal forces shown as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Bending Moment Calculation :
Max. Bending moment caused by Dead Load shown as follows :
2
(1/8)*(qDL)*(Lspan)
Mmax_DL =
6.145 kg.m
Max. Bending moment caused by Truck Load 1 shown as follows :
(1/8)*(qTr1)*(Lspan)2
Mmax_Tr1 =
1,872.0 kg.m
2
Mmax_Tr2 (1/8)*(qTr2)*(Lspan)
=
2,632.5 kg.m
Max Bending moment caused by Truck Load 3 shown as follows :

Max.
2
Mmax_Tr3 (1/8)*(qTr3)*(Lspan)
=
1,989.0 kg.m
Mmax_Tr4 (1/8)*(qTr4)*(Lspan)2
=
2,223.0 kg.m
Total actual bending moment on steel slab shown as follows :
MDL + MTr_max
Mtot =
2,638.6 kg.m ; Critical Max. Bending Moment
*) Shear Force Calculation :

Max. Shear force caused by Dead Load shown as follows :
(1/2)*(qDL)*(Lspan)
Vmax_DL =
61.451 kg
Max. Shear force caused by Truck Load 1 shown as follows :
(1/2)*(qTr1)*(Lspan)
Vmax_Tr1 =
18,720 kg
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Vmax_Tr2 =
26,325 kg
Vmax_Tr3 =
19,890 kg
Vmax_Tr4 =
22,230 kg
Total actual shear force on steel slab shown as follows :

VDL + VTr_max
Vtot =
26,386.5 kg ; Critical Max. Shear Force
c) Strength Analysis
Strength analysis of steel slab shown as follows :
*) The Strength Due to Max. Bending Moment :

Strength analysis due to bending moment would be calculated such as follows :
- Center of Gravity Calculation

Center of Gravity is began from top slab :
Ai*yi
top An
=>
0.026 m
26.00 mm
bottom = 88.00 mm
- Moment of Inertia Calculation

3 2
Ix-x (1/12)*(b)*(h) + A*dy
=
8,489,600 mm4
(1/12)*(h)*(b)3 + A*dx
2
Iy-y =
102,712,400 mm4
- Calculation Plastic and Elastic Section Modulus
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Ai*di
Plastic Section Modulus Zy =
216,832 mm3
I/ybot
Elastic Section Modulus Sy =
96,473 mm3
Analysis Method to Find Plastic Section Modulus
So, the strength of steel slab due to bending moment shown as follows :
*Zy*fy
y y ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F,, sect. F1.1
Mp =
48,787,200 N.mm
*Sy*fy ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F1.1
My =
21,706,364 N.mm
Mp 1.5*My
Mn =
32,559,545 N.mm ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F1.1
Mtot = 25,885,108 N.mm
Mn > Mtot OK
Control the strength of steel slab due to bending moment for all combination caused by truck load :
Dead + Truck Load 1

Mu =
18,424,603 N.mm
Mn = 32,559,545 N.mm
Checked = PASSED
*) Truck with payload capacity 30 tons
Dead + Truck Load 2

Mu =
25,885,108 N.mm ; (Critical Result)
Mn = 32,559,545 N.mm
Checked = PASSED
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Dead + Truck Load 3
Mu =
19,572,373 N.mm
Mn = 32,559,545 N.mm
Checked = PASSED
Dead + Truck Load 4

Mu =
21,867,913 N.mm
Mn = 32,559,545 N.mm
Checked = PASSED
*) The Strength Due to Max. Shear Force :

Strength analysis due to shear force would be calculated such as follows :
{tw*(hrib + tw)} ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F2.1

Aw = 2
3,192 mm
h/tw = 8 OK < 260
0.9*0.6*fy*Aw ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F2.2
Vn =
430,920 N
Vtot = 258,851 N
Control the strength of steel slab due to shear force for all combination caused by truck load :
Dead + Truck Load 1

Vu =
184,246 N
Vn = 430,920 N
Checked = PASSED
Dead + Truck Load 2

Vu =
258,851 N ; (Critical Result)
Vn = 430,920 N
Checked = PASSED
Dead + Truck Load 3

Vu =
195,724 N
Vn = 430,920 N
Checked = PASSED
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Dead + Truck Load 4

Vu =
218,679 N
Vn = 430,920 N
Checked = PASSED
*) Interaction Control Due to Max. Actual Forces :

The strength of steel slab due to max. Intercation forces shown as follows :
{(Mu/Mn)2 + (Vu/Vn)2}0.5 = 0.996 PASSED, < 1
Control the strength of steel slab due to all interaction forces caused by truck load :
*) Truck Load 1
{(Mu/Mn)2 + (Vu/Vn)2}0.5 = 0.709 PASSED, < 1
*) Truck Load 2
2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 0.996 PASSED, < 1
*) Truck Load 3
2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 0.753 PASSED, < 1
*) Truck Load 4
2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 0.842 PASSED, < 1
*) Note :
- All capacity check for steel slab has passed due to maximum loads caused by critical loads (truck
loads).
- Analysis results is shown that steel slab has been safed to used for truck with maximum payload is
70 tons and maximum wheels pressure are 11.25 tons per one wheel.
d) Calculate The Required Welded Thickness

- Height (d) 300 mm
- Width (b) = 14 mm
- tweld = 6 mm (welding thickness has been designed include corrosion allowance = 1 mm)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Calculation of the connection shown as follows :
d*(3b2 + d2)*tw
Ip =
6
Ip = 1.47E+07 mm4
Stress caused by shear forces :
V_max = 13,193 kg
2
Awelded = (2*dweld)*tweld = 19.45 cm
Vmax
fV = = 678.25 kg/cm2
Awelded
Stress caused by bending moments :
Mmax = 131,932
131 932 kg
kg.cm
cm
Ip
Sx = = 97.90 cm3
CoGwx
M
fvM = = 1,347.69 kg/cm2
S
Ip
Sy = = 2,097.76 cm3
CoGwy
M
fhM = = 62.89 kg/cm2
S
The strength of welded connection :

fn = x 0.6 x E70xx = 2,214.45 kg/cm2
Total working stress on connection :

ftot = (fv2 + fm2)1/2 = 1,510.0 kg/cm2 ; fn > ftot = OK
*) Note :
- From "LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO Indonesia
KM 21+600 Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", the welded thickness is 4 mm but only in design
drawing and not included in design report.
- Welded thickness must be designed by considering Minimum Effective Throat Thickness of Partial-Joint-
Penetration Groove Welds (Used for Built Up member) based on AISC LFRD Table J.2.3
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Welded Part on Steel Slab
I.2 Longitudinal Beam Design

Design Properties :
- Section Properties = WF 400.200.8.13
- Height = 400 mm
- Width = 200 mm
- Thickness of Web = 8 mm
- Thickness of Flange = 13 mm
- Distance between long. Beam = 600 mm
- Length = 5660 mm
- Weight = 66.03 kg/m
- Cross Sectional Area = 0.008412 m2
a) Computation of actual loads on long. beam

*) Loading Factor :
u
- For dead loads (K MS) = 1.30 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 5.2)
u
- For additional dead loads (K MA) = 2.00 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 5.3)
u
- For truck loads (K TT) = 1.80 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 6.4.1)
u
- For traffic loads (K TD) = 1.80 (SNI-T-02-2005 sect. 6.3)
*) Actual loads
- Dead Loads (Selfweight/Steel) = 85.84 kg/m
- Dead Load Caused by Steel Slab = 128.58 kg/m
- Add. Dead Loads (Asphalt) 290.40 kg/m
- Total Dead Loads = 555.30 kg/m
- Max. Truck Load 1 (8 tons for 1 wheel) = 18,720 kg (Contact Pressure per point )
- Max. Truck Load 2 (11.25 tons for 1 wheel) = 26,325 kg (Contact Pressure per point )
- Max. Truck Load 3 = *) Would be analyzed for special case
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
- Max. Truck Load 4 = *) Would be analyzed for special case
- KEL (Knife Edge Load) = 66.53 kg
- UDL (Uniformly Distrubuted Load) = 990.83 kg/m
*) All of actual loads has been multiplied by loading factor
*) Truck load 1 is truck with payload capacity 30 tons and Truck Load 2 is truck with payload capacity 50 tons
*) Especially for truck and KEL loads has been multiplied too by (1 + DLA) factor
*) Especially for truck load 3 would be analyzed as special case because the truck load has complex condition
b) Internal Force Calculation

Internal force calculation would be assumed that the steel longitudinal beam as simple supported beam.
Governed length which would be used to computation is critical unsupported length of steel beam (5660
mm).
*) Bending Moment Calculation :

Loading position to calculate maximum bending moment shown as follows :
qDL = 555.30 kg/m

Dead Load ===>
A Lspan = 5660.00 mm B
PKEL = 66.53 kg
P KEL
qUDL = 990.83 kg/m
UDL + KEL ===>
Distance between Wheel's Truck = 1370 mm
Truck Load 1 ===> P Tr1 P Tr1

PTr1 = 18,720.0 kg
Mmax Point
2,482 mm
*) Max. Bending Moment is located between P Tr1 and Resultant Force of 2*P Tr1 (Bending Moment Max. Maximorum)
Truck Load 2 ===> P Tr2

PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 1)
2,830 mm
Critical Distance between Wheel's Truck = 4000 mm

PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 2)
830 mm
*) Max. Bending Moment is located between P Tr2 and Resultant Force of P Tr2_tot. (Bending Moment Max. Maximorum)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013

PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 3)
4,000 mm
*) Max. Bending Moment is located between P Tr2 and Resultant Force of P Tr2_tot. (Bending Moment Max. Maximorum)
Especially for Truck Load 3 & 4, the strength of long. Beam would be analyzed by using finite element
analysis software SAP 2000. Loading condition for Truck Load 3 shown as follows :
*) Dimension unit in mm
Loading Position of Truck Load 3 (Total Loads) for Front Wheels
*) Dimension unit in mm
Loading Position of Truck Load 3 (Total Loads) for Rear Wheels
Actual loading condition caused by front/rear wheels would be positioned and analyzed by using finite
element software SAP 2000 to accelerate calculation process.
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Point Location of Mmax. Caused by Selfweight
Moving Load Caused by Truck Load 3 on 1 Long. Beam (Front Wheels)
- Max. Bending Moment (Truck Load 3 for Front Wheel in Cond.1) = 15,181.5 kg.m
- Truck Load 3 for Front Wheel would be multiplied by Safety Factor =(KuTT)*(1+DLA) = 2.34 ; DLA = 0.3
Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 1 (Front Wheels)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Moving Load Caused by Truck Load 3 on 1 Long. Beam (Rear Wheels)
- Max. Bending Moment (Truck Load 3 for Rear Wheel in Cond.1) = 55,850.8 kg.m
- Truck Load 3 for Rear Wheel would be multiplied by Safety Factor =(KuTT)*(1+DLA) = 2.34 ; DLA = 0.3
Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 1 (Rear Wheels)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Total loads caused by Truck Load 4 shown as follows :
Loading Position of Truck Load 4 per 1 Wheel
Truck Load 4 ===>

Cond.1
Critical Position of Truck Load 4 for Condition 1
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Truck Load 4 ===>

Cond.1
Max. Bending moment caused by Dead Load shown as follows :
2
Mmax_DL (1/8)*(qDL)*(Lspan)
=
2,223.7 kg.m
Max. Bending moment caused by UDL + KEL shown as follows :
Mmax_UDL + KEL (1/8)*(qUDL)*(Lspan)2 + 0.25*PKEL*(Lspan)

=
4,061.8 kg.m
RA = 16,490.80 kg
RB = 20,949.20 kg
xmax 2.482 m
VA*xmax or [VB*(Lspan - xmax)] - [PTr1*Dist. between Wheel's Truck]
Mmax_Tr1 =
40,930.2 kg.m
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Condition 1
0.25*PTr1*(Lspan)
Mmax_Tr2_Cond.1 =
37,249.9 kg.m
*) Condition 2
RA = 26,325.00 kg
RB = 26,325.00 kg
xmax 0.830 m
VA*xmax or VB*xmax
Mmax_Tr2_Cond.2 =
21,849.8 kg.m
*) Condition 3
RA = 34,045.76 kg
RB = 18,604.24 kg
xmax 4.00 m
(VA - PTr2)*xmax or VB*(Lspan - xmax)
Mmax_Tr2_Cond.2
max Tr2 Cond 2 =
30,883.0 kg.m
Front Wheel
Mmax_Tr3 (Front Wheel) = 40,080.7 kg.m
Rmax_Tr3 (Front Wheel) = 25,283.2 kg ; Max. Joint Reaction
Rear Wheel
Mmax_Tr3 (Rear Wheel) = 59,632.2 kg.m
Rmax_Tr3 (Rear Wheel) = 46,041.7 kg ; Max. Joint Reaction
Mmax_Tr4 = 24,631.4 kg.m

Rmax_Tr4 = 15,180.0 kg ; Max. Joint Reaction
Total actual bending moment on steel beam shown as follows :
Mmax_DL + Mmax_UDL + KEL

Mtot_1 =
6,285.5 kg.m
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr1
Mtot_2 =
43,153.8 kg.m
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr2
Mtot_3 =
39,473.6 kg.m
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr3
Mtot_4 =
61,855.9 kg.m
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr4
Mtot_5 =
26,855.1 kg.m
Mmax_tot = 61,855.9 kg.m ; Critical Max. Bending Moment

Where :
Mtot_1 = Max. Bending Moment caused by loading combination between Dead Load + UDL + KEL
Mtot_2 = Max. Bending Moment caused by loading combination between Dead Load + Truck 1
For critical condition, actual bending moment is assumed at same position.
*) Shear Force Calculation :

Loading position to calculate maximum shear force shown as follows :
qDL = 555.30 kg/m
Dead Load ===>

A Lspan = 5,660 mm B
PKEL = 66.53 kg
P KEL
qUDL = 990.83 kg/m
UDL + KEL ===>

PTr1 = 18,720.0 kg

PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 1)
Truck Load 2 ===> P Tr2 P

Tr2
PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 2)
830 mm
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013

PTr2 = 26,325.0 kg
(Cond. 3)
4,000 mm
Calculation of Max. Shear Force for Truck Load 3 would be added with additional consideration of
position such as follows :
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 4 (Front Wheels)
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 5 (Front Wheels)
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 5 (Rear Wheels)
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 3 for Condition 6 (Rear Wheels)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Calculation of Max. Shear Force for Truck Load 4 would be added with additional consideration of
position such as follows :
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 4 for Condition 4
Additional Critical Position of Truck Load 4 for Condition 5
Max. Shear force caused by Dead Load shown as follows :
(1/2)*(qDL)*(Lspan)
Vmax_DL =
1,571.51 kg
Max. Shear force caused by UDL + KEL shown as follows :
(1/2)*(qUDL)*(Lspan) + (PKEL)
Vmax_UDL + KEL =
2,870.56 kg
{PTr1*[Lspan + (Lspan - Dist. Between Wheel's Truck)]}/Lspan

Vmax_Tr1 =
32,908.83 kg
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Condition 1
PTr2
Vmax_Tr2.1 =
26,325.00 kg
*) Condition 2
VA = VB
Vmax_Tr2.2 =
26,325.00 kg
*) Condition 3
{PTr2*[Lspan + (Lspan - Dist. Between Wheel's Truck)]}/Lspan
Vmax_Tr2.3 =
34,045.76 kg
Front Wheel
- Max. Shear Force (Truck Load 3 for Front Wheel in Cond.1) = 17,550.9 kg
*) Truck Load 3 for Front Wheel would be multiplied by Safety Factor =(KuTT)*(1+DLA) = 2.34 ; DLA = 0.3
Rear Wheel
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Total actual shear force on steel beam shown as follows :

Vmax_DL + Vmax_UDL + KEL
Vtot_1 =
4,442.1 kg
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr1
Vtot_2 =
34,480.3 kg
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr2
Vtot_3 =
35,617.3 kg
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr3
Vtot_4 =
52,096.3 kg
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr4
Vtot_5 =
21,620.7 kg
Vmax_tot = 52,096.3 kg ; Critical Max. Shear Force

Where :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Vtot_1 = Max. Shear Force caused by loading combination between Dead Load + UDL + KEL
Vtot_2 = Max. Shear Force caused by loading combination between Dead Load + Truck 1
c) Classification of Cross Sectional Steel Beam

Longtudinal beam would be analyzed as combined profile with steel slab. Classification of cross sectional
steel beam shown as follows :
Cross Section of Longitudinal Beam
= b/2tf = 7.69
Flanges Slenderness p = 10.75 ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Table B 5.1
= b/2tf < p compact section
h/tw = 50.00
Web Slenderness p = 106.35 ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Table B 5.1
h/tw < p compact section
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
- Center of Gravity Calculation (After Combined)

Center of Gravity is began from top slab :
Ai*yi
An
top =>
0.131 m
131.27 mm
bottom = 282.73 mm
- Moment of Inertia Calculation (After Combined)

3 2
(1/12)*(b)*(h) + A*dy
Ix-x =
379,585,525 mm4
3 2
(1/12)*(h)*(b) + A*dx
Iy-y =
92,056,041 mm4
- Calculation Plastic and Elastic Section Modulus

Ai*di
Plastic Section Modulus Zy =
2,110,779 mm3
I/ybot
Elastic Section Modulus Sy =
1,342,577 mm3
Analysis Method to Find Plastic Section Modulus
d) Strength and Service Ability Analysis

Strength and service ability analysis for longitudinal beam shown as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) The Strength Due to Max. Bending Moment :
So, the strength of steel beam due to bending moment shown as follows :
*Zy*fy ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F1.1

Mp =
527,694,746 N.mm
*Sy*fy ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F1.1
My =
335,644,208 N.mm
Mn = 503,466,312 N.mm ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F1.1
Mtot = 606,806,162 N.mm
Mn < Mtot NOT OK
The strength of steel beam due to bending moment in each combination shown as follows :
Mmax_DL + Mmax_UDL + KEL

Mtot_1 =
6,285.5 kg.m
Mn = 51,321.7 kg.m
Mn > Mtot_1
tot 1 PASSED
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr1
Mtot_2 =
43,153.8 kg.m
Mn = 51,321.7 kg.m
Mn > Mtot_2 PASSED
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr2
Mtot_3 =
39,473.6 kg.m
Mn = 51,321.7 kg.m
Mn > Mtot_3 PASSED
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr3
Mtot_4 =
61,855.9 kg.m
Mn = 51,321.7 kg.m
Mn < Mtot_4 FAILED !!!
Mmax_DL + Mmax_Tr4
Mtot_5 =
26,855.1 kg.m
Mn = 51,321.7 kg.m
Mn > Mtot_5 PASSED
*) The Strength Due to Max. Shear Force :

Strength analysis due to shear force would be calculated such as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
{tw_beam*(hbeam + tslab)} ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F2.1

Aw = 2
3,312 mm
h/tw = 52 OK < 260
0.9*0.6*fy*Aw ; AISC-LRFD 1999 Ch. F, sect. F2.2
Vn =
447,120 N
Vtot = 511,065 N
Vn < Vtot NOT OK
The strength of steel beam due to shear force in each combination shown as follows :
Vmax_DL + Vmax_UDL + KEL

Vtot_1 =
4,442.1 kg
Vn = 45,578.0 kg
Vn > Vtot_1 PASSED
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr1
Vtot_2 =
34,480.3 kg
Vn = 45,578.0 kg
Vn > Vtot_2 PASSED
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr2
Vtot_3 =
35,617.3 kg
Vn = 45,578.0 kg
Vn > Vtot_3 PASSED
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr3
Vtot_4 =
52,096.3 kg
Vn = 45,578.0 kg
Vn < Vtot_4 FAILED !!!
Vmax_DL + Vmax_Tr4
Vtot_5 =
21,620.7 kg
Vn = 45,578.0 kg
Vn > Vtot_5 PASSED
*) Interaction Control Due to Max. Actual Forces :

The strength of steel beam due to Intercation forces shown as follows :
2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 1.66 NOT OK, > 1
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
The strength of steel beam due to shear force in each combination shown as follows :
- Dead Load + UDL + KEL

2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 0.16 PASSED, < 1
- Dead Load + Truck Load 1 (Truck with Payload 30 tons)

2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 1.13 FAILED !!!, > 1

2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 1.10 FAILED !!!, > 1

2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 1.66 FAILED !!!, > 1

2 2 0.5
{(Mu/Mn) + (Vu/Vn) } = 0.71 PASSED, < 1
*) Deflection Check/Serviceability Analysis :

Deflection analysis would be done for all condition of loading combination (unfactored loads).
- Dead Load + UDL + KEL

qDL = 310.14 kg/m
Dead Load ===>

A Lspan = 5,660 mm B
PKEL = 26.40 kg
P KEL
qUDL = 550.46 kg/m
UDL + KEL ===>

Cond. 1
PKEL = 26.40 kg
P KEL
qUDL = 550.46 kg/m
UDL + KEL ===>

Cond. 2
- Max. deflection (Umax) for loading comb. between Dead Load + UDL + KEL = 1.589 mm
- Allowable deflection (Uallow.) according to BMS 1992 sect. 6.2.2.3.1 = (L/800) = 7.075 mm
Umax < Uallow. OK
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
- Dead Load + Truck Load 1

Cond. 1 ===> P Tr1 P Tr1

PTr1 = 8,000.0 kg
Mmax Point
2,482 mm
Cond. 2 ===> P Tr1 P Tr1

PTr1 = 8,000.0 kg
*) Max. Bending Moment is located between P Tr1 and Resultant Force of 2*P Tr1 (Bending Moment Max. Maximorum)
- Max. deflection (Umax) for loading comb. between Dead Load + Truck Load 1 = 8.011 mm
Umax > Uallow. NOT OK

PTr2 = 11,250.0 kg
(Cond. 1)
2,830 mm

PTr2 = 11,250.0 kg
(Cond. 2)
830 mm

PTr2 = 11,250.0 kg
(Cond. 3)
4,000 mm

PTr2 = 11,250.0 kg
(Cond. 4)
Umax < Uallow. OK
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Maximum deflection of long. Beam under unfactored loads of Dead Load + Truck Load 3 shown as follows :
Front Wheel Position :

Rear Wheel Position :


Umax < Uallow.
allow OK
*) Note :
- All capacity check for steel long. beam shown that the long.beam has not passed due to maximum
loads caused by critical loads (truck loads) but only passed for truck load with max. payload cap.
is 20 tons.
- Analysis results is shown that steel longitudinal beam has not passed due to max. deflection.caused
by max. Loads except loading combinations between Dead Load, UDL + KEL, Truck load 2 and 4.
J. SUPERSTRUCTURE ANALYSIS FOR CONCRETE ELEMENTS & BEARING SYSTEM

Superstructure analysis for concrete elements and bearing system consists of Bearing system design of
steel beam and Pierwall (Combined with Concrete Slab). Superstructure analysis for concrete elements
of the bridge shown as follows :
J.1 Bearing System Analysis

Refer to "LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO Indonesia
KM 21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", bearing system only used to support shear force.
Maximum shear force on bearing system of the bridge taken from maximum actual braking force based
on BMS 1992
Max. Braking Force/Wheel = 62.5 kN (Braking force is assumed contact with 4 wheels)
Max. Braking Force*Factor Load = 125 kN
According to BMS 1992 sect. 2.3.7 , braking foce shall not be applied without the associated vertical traffic
loads. In the case where vertical traffic loads relieve the effects of the braking force (such as in overturning
stability of an abutment, the ultimate load factor of 0.4 may be applied to the effects of the vertical traffic
loads
Actual braking force on bearing system = 75 kN
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Shear bearing strength of anchor bolts of the bridge shown as follows :
Specification :
- Anchor Bolt Diameter = 19 mm
- Anchor Bolt Yield Strength = 240 MPa (Specified yield strength is JIS G3112 - 1995)
Pnv_1 = As .n . fy. ; = 0.6 (reduction factor for shear strength of anchor bolts )
Pnv_1 = 81,656.28 N ; for standard holes/fixed bearing
Pnv_1 = 81.66 kN ; for 2 anchor bolts
Checked => Pnv_1 > Braking Force PASSED, Damper System is not needed
Pnv_2 = As .n . fy. ; = 0.6 (reduction factor for shear strength of anchor bolts )
Pnv_2 = 48,993.77 N ; reduced 40% for long slotted holes/move/roller bearing
Pnv_2 = 48.99 kN ; for 2 anchor bolts
Checked => Pnv_2 < Braking Force FAILED !!!, Damper System is needed
Concrete Breakout strength of anchor in shear :

Avc
Vcbg = * ec,V
ec V ed,V
ed V c,V
c VVb
Avco
Vcb = 59,093 N
ec,V = 0.91
ed,V = 1.00 ; same distance of anchor bolts
c,V = 1.20 ; no supplementary reinforcements
Vb = 0.7(e/do) do f'c Ca1

0.2 1/2 1/2 1.5
60,335 N
Avc = 252,914 mm2
Avco = 211,901 mm2
Ca1 = 217 mm
e'V = 31.5 mm
Vcbg = < 75,000 N
Vcbg = < Vu FAILED !!! < Vu, Lateral bearing system is needed
Where :
Avc = The projected area of the failure surface on the side of the concrete member
Avco = The projected area for a single anchor in a deep member
Ca1 = Distance from the center of an anchor
e'V = Distance between resultant shear load on an anchor group
Vcbg = Nominal concrete breakout strength in shear
ec,V = The modification factor for anchor groups based on on eccentricity
ed,V = The modification factor for anchor groups based on proximity to edges of concrete member
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
c,V = The modification factor for anchor groups based on presence or absence of cracks in concrete
e = 2*d0 for torque-controlled expansion anchors with a distance sleeve separated from expansion sleeve
*) Note
Detail hole dimension using
standard nominal hole
dimension for standard and
long slotted hole according to
AISC-LRFD 1999 Table J 3.3M
Source : LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO KM 21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kukar
Existing Bearing System Design of The Bridge
J.2 Punching Shear Analysis on Concrete Slab

Punching shear analysis on concrete slab caused by truck loads in factored load based on ACI 318-05 M
sect. 11.12.2.1 shown as follows :
a) Punching Shear Caused by Truck Load with Payload 30 tons
b0 = 2*(b0 + a0) = 3,600.00 mm

0.5
Vct1 = *(0.17)*(1+2/)*(f'c) *b0*deff = 3,315,107 N
Vct2 = 0.5
*(0.083)*[(s*deff/b0)+2]*(f'c) *b0*deff = 2,306,358 N
Vct3 = *0.33*f'c*b0*deff = 10,335,600 N
Pmax_truck_1 < Vc_min OK, Not Required Punching Shear Reinf.
Where :
= punching shear reduction factor = 0.75
= 0.85
s = 20 for outside area
b0 = circumference of punching shear area
deff = effective depth of punching shear area
Vcp = minimum punching shear strength of slab = 235.10 tons
Pmax_truck_1 = maximum axial force on slab = 18.72 tons
*) Punching shear is determined from the surface of concrete slab
*) The thickness of concrete slab is 500 mm
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
b) Punching Shear Caused by Truck Load with Payload 30 tons Based on SNI-T-02-2005
b0 = 2*(b0 + a0) = 3,400.00 mm
0.5
Vct1 = *(0.17)*(1+2/)*(f'c) *b0*deff = 3,130,935 N
Vct2 = *(0.083)*[(s*deff/b0)+2]*(f'c)0.5*b0*deff = 1,984,541 N
Vct3 = *0.33*f'c*b0*deff = 9,761,400 N
Where :
= 0.85
c) Punching Shear Caused by Truck Load with Payload 70 tons

b0 = 2*(b0 + a0) = 3,600.00 mm
0.5
Vct1 = *(0.17)*(1+2/)*(f'c) *b0*deff = 3,315,107 N
Vct2 = 0.5
*(0.083)*[(s*deff/b0)+2]*(f'c) *b0*deff = 2,038,177 N
Vct3 = *0.33*f'c*b0*deff = 10,335,600 N
Where :
= 0.85
d) Punching Shear Caused by Truck Load with Payload 20 tons

b0 = 2*(b0 + a0) = 3,400.00 mm
0.5
Vct1 = *(0.17)*(1+2/)*(f'c) *b0*deff = 3,130,935 N
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Vct2 = *(0.083)*[(s*deff/b0)+2]*(f'c)0.5*b0*deff = 1,984,541 N
Vct3 = *0.33*f'c*b0*deff = 9,761,400 N
Where :
= 0.85
Concrete slab with thickness 500 mm has been allowed and safe due to punching shear caused by
truck loads
loads.
Contact Punching Shear of Truck's Wheel on Concrete Slab
J.3 Pierwall Analysis

Pierwall structure would be modeled with concrete slab. Transfer load from longitudinal beam to pierwall
structure shown as follows :
J.3.1 Loading Analysis

- Dead Loads consists of Steel Plate + Long. Beam + Asphalt (Acting on Console)
a) Middle Part = 5,107.41 kg/point location
b) Edge Part = 7,071.80 kg/point location
- Dead Loads (Acting on Slab)

a) Middle Part = 1,306.80 kg/m
b) Edge Part = 943.80 kg/m
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Dead Loads Acting on Pierwall (Acting on Console & Slab)
- UDL + KEL Loads (Acting on Console)

a) Middle Part = 2,528.73 kg/point location
b) Edge Part = 1,826.31 kg/point location
*) Taken from maximum base reactions caused by UDL + KEL Loads
- UDL + KEL Loads (Acting on Slab)

a) Middle Part
- Dist.Load (UDL) = 2,477.06 kg/m
- Point Load (KEL) = 13,486.24 kg/point location
b) Edge Part =
- Dist.Load (UDL) = 1,788.99 kg/m
- Point Load (KEL) = 9,740.06 kg/point location
UDL + KEL Loads Acting on Pierwall (On Slab & Console)

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
- Truck Loads (Acting on Console)

a) Truck Loads 1 = 32,908.83 kg/point location
b) Truck Loads 2 = 34,045.76 kg/point location
c) Truck Loads 3 = 50,524.78 kg/point location
d) Truck Loads 4 = 20,049.17 kg/point location
*) Taken from maximum base reactions caused by truck loads
Truck 30 tons Truck 30 tons BMS
Truck 70 tons Truck 20 tons
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
- Truck Loads (Acting on Slab)
*) Would be modeled automatically in SAP 2000 such as follows :
*) Concrete wall and slab of pierwall structure is designed by using frame elements with constraint body
*) Soil effects such as point of fixity has not considered for this analysis
Pierwall Structure of The Bridge in SAP 2000 (Height = 5 m)
Truck's Lane on Pierwall Design
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
-) Wind Loads (Acting on Pierwall)

a) Wind pressure acting on structure
0.0006*CW*VW2*Ab
TEW_1.Y =
12.32 kN
2
TEW_1.X 0.0006*CW*VW *Ab
=
29.08 kN
b) Wind pressure acting on vehicles

2
0.0012*CW*VW *Ab
TEW_2.Y =
80.15 kN
Transfer load from wind acting on vehicle shown as follows :

TEW' {(0.5*h)/x}*TEW/Lwheels
=
33.43 kN/m
Where :
CW = Friction Coeff. (1.2 for vehicles and 1.25 for Superstructure)
VW = Basic wind velocity = 30 m/s
2
Ab = Equivalent area of bridge structure/Vehicles (m )
TEW = Wind pressure (kN)
h = Average height of vehicles
x = Width of vehicle
Wind X Wind Y
Wind Pressure Acting on Structure
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Transfer Load from Wind Pressure Acting on Vehicles
-) Braking Force (Acting on Pierwall)

Maximum actual braking force acting on pierwall structure will be using maximum braking force per 2.75 m
of lane's width (Factored Load = 2) according to BMS 1992 sect. 2.3.7
Braking Force to Consider Overturning Braking Force to Consider Torsional Effect

Braking Force on Pierwall Structure
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
-) Earthquake Load/Seismic Analysis
Seismic analysis would be determined automatically using finite element software SAP 2000. The
calculation of earthquake load will be using response spectrum function. Scale factor to calculate
base shear calculation based on BMS 1992 sect. 2.4.7.1 shown as follows :
Lateral Strong axis = 100%*9.81 m/s2*I*S ; where : I = 1, S = 0.775

Lateral Weak axis = 30%*9.81 m/s2*I*S ; where : I = 1, S = 0.775
Participate at vertical axis = 20%*9.81 m/s2*I*S ; where : I = 1, S = 0.775
% of Seismic mass for dead load = 100%
*) Structural type factor based on BMS 1992 Table 2.14
*) Mass participation for earthquake analysis only for dead load to analyzed stability of pierwall according to BMS 1992
sect. 2.4.7.1
-) Loading Combinations
Loading combination to analyze the bridge structure will be using BMS and AASHTO recommendations
such as follows :
1 . 1 DL + 1 TR1 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
2 . 1 DL + 1 TR2 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
3 . 1 DL + 1 TR3 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
4 . 1 DL + 1 TR4 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
}
Truck Loads acting on Slab and UDL + KEL
acting on Console
5 . 1 DL + 1 TR1 + 1 (UDL + KEL)

6 . 1 DL + 1 TR2 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
7 . 1 DL + 1 TR3 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
8 . 1 DL + 1 TR4 + 1 (UDL + KEL)
}
Truck Loads acting on Console and UDL + KEL
acting on Slab
9 . 1 DL + 1 W
10 . 1 DL + 1 TR1 + 1 (UDL + KEL) + 1 WV + 0.3 W + 1 BF Truck Loads acting
11 . 1 DL + 1 TR2 + 1 (UDL + KEL) + 1 WV + 0.3 W + 1 BF
}
on Slab and UDL +
KEL acting on
Console
14 . 1 DL + 1 TR1 + 1 (UDL + KEL) + 1 WV + 0.3 W + 1 BF Truck Loads acting
}
on Console and UDL
+ KEL acting on
Slab
18 . 1 DL + 1 EQ
*) There are 84 total loading combinations which is used to analyze the behaviour of bridge structure in SAP 2000
Where :
D = Dead Load
TR = Truck Load
UDL = Uniform Distributed Load (Traffic Load)
KEL = Knife Edge Load (Traffic Load)
WV = Wind Pressure Acting on Vehicle
W = Wind Pressure Acting on Structure
BF = Braking Force
EQ = Earthquake Load
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
J.3.2 Structural Analysis

Refer to loading analysis, consideration of loading positions and loading combinations, analysis result of
structural analysis of pierwall structure shown as follows :
a. Reinforcement Analysis for Concrete Slab

Analysis for the maximum working force :
- Length = 5000 mm
- Concrete Strength = 29 MPa
- Yield Strength of Rebar Spec. = 390 MPa (Deformed Bars )
b= 2700 mm
- Cross sectional dimension =
h= 400 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 340.5 mm
- dy = 321.5 mm
- Concrete Cover at bottom side = 50 mm ; SNI 2847 sect. 9.7 (Exposed to weather)
- Concrete Cover at top side = 50 mm ; SNI 2847 sect. 9.7 (Exposed to weather)
- Rebar Dimension = 19 mm
- Mn = Mu/ ; = 0.8 (reduction factor for flexural strength )

- max = 0.75balance
- min = 1.4/fy
- req. = (1/m)*[1-(1-(2*Rn*m)/fy)0.5]
- balance = (0.85*f'c*1/fy)*(600/(600+fy))
-m = fy/(0.85*f'c)
2
- Rn = Mn/(b*d )
- Checked = min > req. > max
*) Calculation of flexural reinforcement based on maximum force

The calculation of flexural reinforcement for concrete slab shown as follows :
Mn
Rn m req. min max balance used
N.mm
762,859,951 2.73 15.82 0.0074 0.0018 0.024 0.033 0.0074
As Min. Number Max.Distance (mm)

2 Rebars Installed
mm of Rebars between bars
6,465 23 117 D19-110
*) Max. working force caused by loading combination between 1 D + 1 TR 3 ON SLAB + 1 UDL & KEL ON CONSOLE
*) Computation of additional rebars (shrinkage reinforcements) based on maximum force

The calculation based on ACI 318-05 sect. 7.12.2.1 such as follows :
As = min*b*d ; = 0.0014
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
1,215 mm2
nbars = 4.29
nbars 5.00
Bars Installed = D19-220
Analysis for the existing concrete slab (Designed by using Truck Load 2) :
- Length = 5000 mm
b= 2700 mm
h= 400 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 343.5 mm
- dy = 330.5 mm
- Concrete Cover at top side = 50 mm ; SNI 2847 sect
sect. 9
9.7
7 (Exposed to weather)
*) Calculation of flexural reinforcement based on existing design

Mn
N.mm
473,765,649 1.61 15.82 0.0043 0.0018 0.024 0.033 0.0043
As Min. Number Max.Distance (mm)

2 Rebars Installed
mm of Rebars between bars
3,804 29 94 D13-90
*) Computation of additional rebars (shrinkage reinforcements) based on existing design

As = min*b*d ; = 0.0014
1,249 mm2
nbars = 9.41
nbars 10.00
Refer to "LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO Indonesia KM
21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", design flexural reinforcements for slab using the
numbers of flexural reinforcements close to analysis result. The conclusion is flexural rebars which is
installed has been allowed due to maximum existing loads !!!
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
b. Reinforcement Analysis for Pierwall
Analysis for flexural rebars caused by maximum working force :
- Length = 12000 mm
b= 2700 mm
h= 500 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 442 mm
- dy = 426 mm
16 mm ; flexural rebars
- Rebar Dimension =
13 mm ; shear rebars
Maximum Actual Working Forces on Pierwall Structure

P V2 V3 T M2 M3
N N N N-mm
N mm N-mm
N mm N-mm
921,190 88,112 120,418 18,730,273 301,044,159 220,537,010
Refer to SNI 2847-2002 , calculation for flexural reinforcement of concrete wall structure shown as
follows :
min = 0.0025 ; SNI sect. 23.6.2.1
smax = 450 mm
Asmin = 1,437.75 mm2
n_barsmin. = 8 D-16 per 1 layer due to bending moment
= 17,800,876 N ; SNI sect. 12.3.5.2
Pcr.
= 17,801 kN
n_barsinstalled = 13 D-16 per 1 layer due to bending moment
The existing flexural rebars of pierwall structure would be checked due to maximum axial - bending
moments interaction using CSI Column software such as follows :
Cross Sectional Model of Pierwall Structure using Minimum Area of Rebars (D16-200)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Includes magnification factor

Load Point on Pierwall Structure
*) Unit Dimension in kN/m 2

Elastic Stress Distribution on Concrete Element
*) Unit Dimension in kN/m 2

Actual Stress on Rebars
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Analysis Result (Considering The Pierwall Structure as Sway Frame)

P Mux Muy Capacity
Load Definition Remarks
kN kN.m kN.m Ratio
MAX. LOADS 921.2 325.9 246.2 0.57 PASSED
Analysis Result (Considering The Pierwall Structure as Non - Sway Frame)

P Mux Muy Capacity
Load Definition Remarks
kN kN.m kN.m Ratio
MAX. LOADS 921.2 306.6 220.8 0.54 PASSED
*) The calculation is considered as sway frame.
Position of Maximum Working Forces on P-M Intercation Diagram
Analysis result shown that the existing flexural rebars of pierwall structure has been allowed due to
maximum interaction forces caused by bending moment and axial loads.
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Analysis for shear rebars caused by maximum working force :

Vc1_min due to V2 = 2,903,936 N ; SNI sect. 13.10.6
Vc2_min due to V3 = 17,900,789 N ; SNI sect. 13.10.6
Vc1_min > V2max. PASSED
Vc2_min > V3max. PASSED
*) Without computation about rebars participation of concrete element due to shear force, the pierwall structure has
been safed due to maximum loads.
Analysis result is shown that the pierwall structure has been allowed due to maximum forces/loads
(includes maximum truck loads), so analysis for maximum existing load would be skipped !!!
c. Reinforcement Analysis for Sloof Beam

Analysis for flexural rebars caused by maximum working force :
Maximum Actual Working Forces on Sloof Beam

V2 M3
Load Definition
N N-mm
N
MAX. LOADS 41,989.48 18,895,267

- Length = 2700 mm
b= 1200 mm
h= 1000 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 940.5 mm
- dy = 921.5 mm
= 19 mm
- Rebar Dimension
= 13 mm
Mn
N.mm
23,619,084 0.02 15.82 0.0001 0.0036 0.024 0.033 0.0036
As Min. Number
2 Rebars Installed
mm of Rebars
3,970 14 14-D19
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Try to analyze the flexural rebars of Sloof Beam as doubly reinforced beam :
2
- A's = 1,134.1 mm
2
- As = 1,417.6 mm
Assumed that all the steel yields :

f's = fy and fs = fy
Therefore :
As2 = A's = 1,134.1 mm2
As1 = As - As2 = 283.5 mm2
For concrete steel couple :

(As - A's)*fy
a = = 3.74 mm
0.85*f*b
a
c = = 4.40 mm
1
Check assumption for yielding of both the compressive and tensile steels :
0.003*(c - d')
's = = 0.051
c
0.003*(d - c)
s = = 0.626
c
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
fy
y = = 0.0020
Es
y < 's or s
So, the assumptions are valid. So, the bars which is installed have been suitable with condition 1
The practical moment capacity is evaluated as follows :
Mu = 23,619,084 N.mm ; Caused by Maximum Truck Loads (70 tons payload cap.)
Mn.1 = 101,689,297 N.mm
Mn.2 = 372,862,971 N.mm
Mn.tot = 474,552,268 N.mm
Mn.tot > Mu OK
*) Check ducktility requirement = installed = 0.0013
min = 0.0036
max = 0.024
Requirement = min < installed < max must be increased
*) Computation of additional rebars (shrinkage reinforcements) based on existing design

As = min*b*d ; = 0.0018 for deformed bars
1,990 mm2
nbars = 7.02
nbars 8.00
Bars Installed = 8 - D19

Shear strength of the concrete pile cap would be determined according to SNI 2847-2002 sect.13 such
as follows :
0.5
- Shear Stength of Concrete : Vc = (1/6)*(f'c) *(bw)*(d) = 992,486 N
- Shear Stength of Rebars : Vs = (Av)*(fy)*(d)/(s) = 477,020 N
0.5
- Max. Shear Stength of Rebars : Vs_max = (2/3)*(f'c) *(bw)*(d) = 3,969,943 N
- Total Shear Strength of Pile Cap : Vn = Vc + Vs = 1,469,506 N
- Actual Maximum Shear Force : Vu/ = 69,982 N
Vn > Vu/ OK
Vc + Vs_max > Vu/ OK, not required to change the dimension
Bars Installed = D13 - 200
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
According to SNI 2847-2002 sect.12.6.7 , skin reinforcement per milimeters on each side of beam shall
be less than :
153.58 mm
Ssk 300.00 mm
773.95 mm
Ssk req. = 250.00 mm
So, skin reinforcement of beam would be installed every 150 mm of beam's height on each side
throughout the half of beam's depth effective.
Note :
*) Actual bars installed for flexural bars are 5 - D19 (This is not considering Minimum required of flexural
rebars for concrete element !!! )
*) Bars installed for shear rebars has been allowed due to maximum loads (the same numbers with re-
analysis result )
*) The number of skin reinforcements has been appropriate with SNI 2847-2002, but we don't know about
the distance between skin rebars because there is not in design drawing .
d. Reinforcement Analysis for Corbel Beam

d
From analysis result, concrete corbel beam would be designed according to ACI 318-05 sect. 11.9 using
maximum working forces such as follows :
- Length = 400 mm
b= 2700 mm
h= 600 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 542 mm
- dy = 526 mm
= 16 mm for main rebars/framing bars
- Rebar Dimension
= 10 mm for closed stirrups
Maximum Working Forces on Corbel Beam

P Shear Bending Moment
N N N
194,103 517,609 221,136,385
Maximum Working Forces on Corbel Beam Caused by Max. Loads Based on Existing Design
P Shear Bending Moment
N N N
130,795 348,787 149,008,176
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Tension rebars would be determined such as follows :

An req. = 585.53 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.3.4
n_bars req. = 3 - D16
Flexural reinforcement or main rebars calculation on concrete corbel beam on pierwall would be calculated
such as follows :
= 1,761 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.3.3
Af
= 9 - D16
= 3,160 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.7.4.1
Avf
= 16 - D16
As_req.1 = 12 - D16 or installed => D16 200
As_req.2 = 14 - D16 or installed => D16 190
min = 0.04(f'c/fy) = 0.0030 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.5
As_min.
= 4,224 mm2
= 22 - D16
22 - D16
Bars_installed =
D16 120
*) Refer to ACI 318-05 sect 11.9.5, the primary rebars of corbel beam must be installed larger than min.rebars
which is required !!!
Total rebars area for closed stirrups would be calculated such as follows :
Ah.req.1
= 1,053 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.3.5
= 14 - D10
Ah.req.2
= 881 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.3.5
= 12 - D10
Ah.min = 1,810.50 mm2 ; ACI 318-05 sect.11.9.4
Ah.installed 12 - D10 ; *) 2 legs in 2/3*d per position of long.beam
=
Distribution of Corbel Beam Reinforcements

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Note :
*) Refer to "LAPORAN AKHIR, Desain Jembatan Akses Batubara di Jalur Pipa Gas VICO Indonesia
KM 21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", calculation of primary rebars for corbel element
is not considering minimum area of rebars (ductility requirement for concrete element )
*) Suggested to change the dimension of closed stirrups to optimize its numbers for example D13 for
closed stirrups
Analysis result is shown that the corbel element only using minimum rebars area which is required for
truck load with max. Payload capacity 70 tons, so analysis for maximum existing load would be skipped !!!
K. SUBSTRUCTURE ANALYSIS
Substructure analysis for the bridge consists of Nominal strength analysis of Bored Pile and abutment
stability analysis.
K.1 Bored Pile Analysis for Pierwall

Bored pile of pierwall structure could be analyzed as single pile because the distance between pile is
smaller than 3*ODpile (1800 mm ; ODpile = 600 mm). Actual maximum force on 1 pile shown as follows :
Analysis Result of Maximum Reaction Force on Pile Foundation of Pierwall Structure

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 Lat. Force Lat. Bend. Moment
Kgf Kgf Kgf Kgf-m Kgf-m Kgf-m Kgf Kgf-m
8,984.89 12,279.18 93,935.20 83,440.95 22,488.52 6,655.48 15,215 86,418.32
Analysis of bearing capacity of soil shown as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
CPT Data for DCPT No.1

- Co = 1.02
- C1 = 0.08
d Cn JHL Tw fs qc FR
2 2 2 2
m kg/cm MPa kg/cm kg/cm kg/cm kg/cm Bars %
0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.2 3 0.3 1 6 0.24 3.06 3.00 7.84
0.4 10 1 2 16 0.48 10.20 10.00 4.71
0.6 10 1 3 20 0.80 10.20 10.00 7.84
0.8 18 1.8 4 25 0.56 18.36 18.01 3.05
1 18 1.8 5 30 0.96 18.36 18.01 5.23
1.2 18 1.8 7 30 0.96 18.36 18.01 5.23
1.4 18 1.8 10 28 0.80 18.36 18.01 4.36
1.6 18 1.8 11 28 0.80 18.36 18.01 4.36
18
1.8 16 16
1.6 14 29 1 04
1.04 16 32
16.32 16 00
16.00 6 37
6.37
2 16 1.6 15 29 1.04 16.32 16.00 6.37
2.2 16 1.6 16 28 0.96 16.32 16.00 5.88
2.4 16 1.6 18 25 0.72 16.32 16.00 4.41
2.6 16 1.6 20 25 0.72 16.32 16.00 4.41
2.8 16 1.6 21 26 0.80 16.32 16.00 4.90
3 16 1.6 24 26 0.80 16.32 16.00 4.90
3.2 16 1.6 25 26 0.80 16.32 16.00 4.90
3.4 16 1.6 26 25 0.72 16.32 16.00 4.41
3.6 16 1.6 28 25 0.72 16.32 16.00 4.41
3.8 17 1.7 30 26 0.72 17.34 17.00 4.15
4 17 1.7 31 26 0.72 17.34 17.00 4.15
4.2 17 1.7 33 26 0.72 17.34 17.00 4.15
4.4 14 1.4 34 24 0.80 14.28 14.00 5.60
4.6 14 1.4 35 24 0.80 14.28 14.00 5.60
4.8 16 1.6 37 26 0.80 16.32 16.00 4.90
5 16 1.6 39 27 0.88 16.32 16.00 5.39
5.2 16 1.6 40 25 0.72 16.32 16.00 4.41
5.4 13 1.3 42 24 0.88 13.26 13.00 6.64
5.6 13 1.3 44 24 0.88 13.26 13.00 6.64
5.8 10 1 45 19 0.72 10.20 10.00 7.06
6 10 1 46 15 0.40 10.20 10.00 3.92
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
6.2 10 1 47 14 0.32 10.20 10.00 3.14
6.4 13 1.3 48 21 0.64 13.26 13.00 4.83
6.6 16 1.6 50 26 0.80 16.32 16.00 4.90
6.8 20 2 52 32 0.96 20.40 20.01 4.71
7 23 2.3 54 35 0.96 23.46 23.01 4.09
7.2 23 2.3 55 33 0.80 23.46 23.01 3.41
7.4 25 2.5 57 37 0.96 25.50 25.01 3.76
7.6 25 2.5 58 37 0.96 25.50 25.01 3.76
7.8 27 2.7 60 39 0.96 27.54 27.01 3.49
8 30 3 64 48 1.44 30.60 30.01 4.71
8.2 34 3.4 65 48 1.12 34.68 34.01 3.23
8.4 38 3.8 68 54 1.28 38.76 38.01 3.30
8.6 45 4.5 70 60 1.20 45.90 45.01 2.61
8.8 53 5.3 74 70 1.36 54.06 53.01 2.52
9 65 6.5 76 85 1.60 66.30 65.02 2.41
9.2 60 6 80 85 2.00 61.20 60.02 3.27
9.4 70 7 84 90 1.60 71.40 70.02 2.24
9.6 80 8 88 110 2.40 81.60 80.02 2.94
9.8 95 9.5 94 120 2.00 96.90 95.03 2.06
10 110 11 99 145 2.80 112.20 110.03 2.50
10.2 105 10.5 103 130 2.00 107.10 105.03 1.87
10.4 115 11.5 106 145 2.40 117.30 115.03 2.05
10.6 125 12.5 112.5 160 2.80 127.50 125.03 2.20
10.8 140 14 118 175 2.80 142.80 140.04 1.96
11 155 15.5 124 185 2.40 158.10 155.04 1.52
11.2 145 14.5 128 180 2.80 147.90 145.04 1.89
11.4 160 16 134 190 2.40 163.20 160.04 1.47
11.6 175 17.5 137.5 205 2.40 178.50 175.05 1.34
11.8 180 18 149 215 2.80 183.60 180.05 1.53
12 180 18 152 230 4.00 183.60 180.05 2.18
Dimension properties of bored pile shown as follows :

- Outside Diameter (OD) = 0.6 m
2
- Cross Sectional Area of Pile (Ap) = 0.28 m
- Perimeter of Pile (Pp) = 1.88 m
Soil classification shown as follows :

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Soil Classification Analysis

d Qc Qs FR
Soil Classification
m kg/cm2 Bars kg/cm2 Bars %
0m-1m 9.83 9.64 0.51 0.50 Soft Clays 5.15%
1m-2m 17.33 17.00 0.93 0.92 Medium Stiff Clays 5.38%
3m-4m 16.33 16.02 0.75 0.73 Silty Clays 4.57%
4m-5m 15.67 15.36 0.79 0.77 Silty Clays 5.02%
5m-6m 13.00 12.75 0.75 0.73 Silty Clays 5.74%
6m-7m 15.33 15.04 0.68 0.67 Silty Clays 4.43%
8m-9m 44.17 43.31 1.33 1.31 Stiff Clays 3.02%
9 m - 10 m 80.00 78.45 2.07 2.03 Dense Sands 2.58%
10 m - 11 m 125.00 122.58 2.53 2.48 Dense Sands 2.03%
11 m - 12 m 165.83 162.63 2.80 2.75 Coarse Sands 1.69%
Soil Classification Based on Local Friction and Cone Resistance (Sanglerat, 1972)
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Correlation between CPT and SPT

d sat Cu
Soil Classification qc/N N 3 3
m Deg. kN/m kN/m kN/m2
0m-1m Soft Clays 0.2 4.9 24.92 18.0 28.0 3.3
1 m - 2 m Medium Stiff Clays 0.3 5.8 25.75 18.0 28.0 3.9
3m-4m Silty Clays 0.2 8.2 27.78 18.0 28.0 5.4
4m-5m Silty Clays 0.2 7.8 27.52 18.0 28.0 5.2
5m-6m Silty Clays 0.2 6.5 26.40 18.0 28.0 4.3
6m-7m Silty Clays 0.2 7.7 27.38 18.0 28.0 5.1
8m-9m Stiff Clays 0.3 14.7 32.16 18.0 28.0 9.8
9 m - 10 m Dense Sands 0.4 20.0 35.00 20.0 30.0 0.0
10 m - 11 m Dense Sands 0.4 31.3 40.00 20.0 30.0 0.0
11 m - 12 m Coarse Sands 0.6 27.6 38.51 23.0 33.0 0.0
*) Note : To find critical bearing of soil, N value using smaller value and to find critical lateral pressure of soil, using
the larger value
value.
qc - N Correlation
Source : Herman Wahyudi, 1999

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Source : (Soil Mechanics, William T., Whitman, Robert V., 1962)

Correlation between N Value and Weight of Soil
Bearing capacity of bored pile shown as follows :
a) Bearing Capacity due to Axial Load Based on Soil Investigation

Bearing capacity analysis of 1 bored pile on soil will be using Schmertmann & Nottingham Method (1975) :
Qult_nett. = (Qc + Qs - Wp_tot.)/SF

Where :
Qc = Average value of Cone Penetration as long as 10*D to above and 4*D to below of point of pile
Qs = Average value of Local Friction as long as 10*D to above and 4*D to below of point of pile
W p_tot. = Total selfweigth of pile foundation
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Analysis result of pile bearing capacity on soil shown as follows :
Bearing Capacity of Bored Pile on Soil

d Qc Qs Wp_tot.
2 2
m kg/cm Bars kg/cm Bars kg
0m-1m 9.83 9.64 0.51 0.50 8,143.01
1m-2m 17.33 17.00 0.93 0.92 8,143.01
2m-3m 16.00 15.69 0.84 0.82 8,143.01
3m-4m 16.33 16.02 0.75 0.73 8,143.01
4m-5m 15.67 15.36 0.79 0.77 8,143.01
5m-6m 13.00 12.75 0.75 0.73 8,143.01
6m-7m 15.33 15.04 0.68 0.67 8,143.01
7m-8m 25.50 25.01 1.01 0.99 8,143.01
8m-9m 44.17 43.31 1.33 1.31 8,143.01
9 m - 10 m 80.00 78.45 2.07 2.03 8,143.01
10 m - 11 m 125.00 122.58 2.53 2.48 8,143.01
11 m - 12 m 165.83 162.63 2.80 2.75 8,143.01
*)) Red word is average bearing depth of bored pile
Qc = 107,403 kg ; SF = 2 (Coduto, 2001 )
Qs = 458.6 kg ; SF = 3 (Coduto, 2001 )
Qu_nett. = 99,718.78 kg
Qmax_act. = 93,935.20 kg
Qu_nett. > Qmax_act. OK
*) Design bearing capacity for compression pile is allowed to use safety factor (SF) = 1.5 - 2 (Min. SF for
Compression Pile)
*) Min. Design bearing capacity for tension/friction pile = 3
b) Bearing Capacity due to Axial Load Based on Strength of Material

Bearing capacity analysis of bored pile based on strength of material :
2
Cross sectional area A = / 4 * D = 0.283 m2
Weight of bored pile W p = A * L * wc = 81.43 kN
Compression strength of concrete bored pile f c' = 29,000 kPa
Nominal bearing capacity of bored pile,
Pn = 0.30 * fc' * A - 1.2 * W p = 2362 kN
Strength reduction factor = 0.60
Nominal strength due to axial force 1,417.3 kN
* Pn =
141,729 kg
Pn > Qmax_act. OK
Minimum area longitudinal reinforcement for vertical concrete element shown as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
0.01*Ag ; ACI 21.4.3.1

Ast = 2,827.43 mm2
10 - D19
Minimum volumetric ratio of spiral or circular hoop reinforcement shown as follows :
0.12*f'c/fyt ; ACI 21.4.4.1

s_min.1 =
0.009
0.45*((Ag/Ach) - 1)*(f'c/fyt) ; ACI 10.9.3

s_min.2 =
0.026
[4*As*(Dc - db)]/[(s*Dc2)]
s_req. =
0.023
The spacing of transversal rebars = D16-75
c) Settlement Analysis
Settlement analysis would be done by using Vesic Method . The calculation shown as follows :
Settlement due to shortening of a pile shown as follows :
(Qactual max. + s*Qs)*(L/Ap*Ec)

Ssh =
3.106 mm
Where :
0.67 for triangular distribution of shaft friction starting from zero friction at pile head to
s =
a max. value at pile tip
Qmax_act. = point load transmitted to the pile tip in the working stress range
Qs = shaft friction load transmitted by the pile in the working stress range
Ec = Elasticity Modulus of Concrete
L = Length of pile = Embedded length
Settlement of the pile tip caused by load transmitted at the pile tip shown as follows :
Cp*Qmax_act.
Sc = D*(Qc/Ap)
37.09 mm
Where :
Cp = Empirical coefficient depending on soil type and construction method ; Cp = 0.18
D = Pile diameter
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Typical Value of Empirical Coefficient (Cp)
Source : "Deep Foundation" Bridge Engineering Handbook by Nan Deng & Youzhi Ma, 2000
Settlement of the pile tip caused by load transmitted along the pile shaft shown as follows :
Cs*Qs
Ss = h*(Qc/Ap)
0.01 mm
Where :
Cs = (0 93 (0 16*D/B))*Cp
(0.93+(0.16*D/B))*C
h = Embedded length
Total settlement shown as follows :
Ssh + Sc + Ss
Stot =
40.21 mm
Stot < Sallowed = 50 mm OK
K.2 Abutment Analysis

Abutment analysis will be using soil properties data from DCPT No. 1. Summary of maximum reaction of
bridge superstructure shown as follows :
- Dead Loads + UDL + KEL

Ra = 84,399 kg
- Dead Loads + Truck Load 1

Ra = 161,494 kg

Ra = 166,042 kg

Ra = 231,958 kg
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013

Ra = 110,055 kg
Abutment would be determined as 2 dimension structure. Determination of active soil pressure shown
as follows :
From analysis of soil properties, soil layer would be divided to 2 layers with data properties such as follows :
Soil Properties Data to Determined Active Earth Pressure

d sat
Layer h 3 3
m Deg. kN/m kN/m Deg. Deg. Deg.
1 0.32 0-9 27.25 18.0 28.0 13.63 0.00 0.00
2 0.32 9 - 10 37.84 21.0 31.0 18.92 0.00 0.00
Active soil pressure coefficient would be calculated by using the following equation :
Mononobe-Okabe develop the basis of a pseudo static analysis of seismic earth pressure coefficient on
wall structure, and the method would be applied for abutment structure such as follows :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Analysis result of active soil pressure calculation shown as follows :
Analysis Result of Soil Pressure Calculation

q Ka* Kae*
Layer Kh Kv Ka Kae
deg. t/m 2
t/m 2
t/m2
1 0.40 0.20 26.83 0.420 1.3 1.2 0.77 2.32
2 0.40 0.20 26.83 0.273 0.7 1.2 0.59 1.52
Total Soil Pressure Acting on Abutment

h h'*Ka* q*Ka
Layer
m t/m t/m
1 9.25 6.05
2 18.51 6.05
3 27.76 6.05 Governed Pressure
4 37.01 6.05 for Abutment Analysis
Layer 1
5 46.26 6.05
6 55.52 6.05
7 64.77 6.05
8 74.02 6.05
9 81.04 3.94
10 88.06 3.94
Layer 2
11 95.09 3.94
12 102.11 3.94
Total Soil Pressure Caused by Earthquake Acting on Abutment

h h'*Kae* q*Kae
Layer
m t/m t/m
1 27.80 18.18
2 55.60 18.18
3 83.39 18.18 Governed Pressure
4 111.19 18.18 for Abutment Analysis
Layer 1
5 138.99 18.18
6 166.79 18.18
7 194.58 18.18
8 222.38 18.18
9 240.56 10.19
10 258.75 10.19
Layer 2
11 276.93 10.19
12 295.11 10.19
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Summary of actual working forces on abutment structure shown as follows :
Actual Pressure on Abutment
Calculation of actual overturning moment on abutment structure shown as follows :
Actual Overturning Moment on Abutment Structure

h' Pa Pae qa qae Ma Mae
m t t t t t.m t.m
6 28 83 36 109 164 494
Calculation of actual moment resistance on abutment structure shown as follows :
Actual Resultant of Overturning Moment on Abutment Structure

Load. eo Ra MR MR_tot.
Comb. m t t.m t.m
DL + UDL + KEL 0.65 84 55 422
DL + Truck 1 0.65 161 105 473
DL + Truck 2 0.65 166 108 475
DL + Truck 3 0.65 232 151 518
DL + Truck 4 0.65 110 72 439
Selfweight 1.654 222 368 -
> Ma Piles are not Required

Conclusion ==> MR_tot.
< Mae Piles are Required !!
Piles configuration shown as follows :

TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Note :
1. Abutment and Wingwall as one 1 structure
2. Pile analysis will be using maximum actual force (includes temporary loads)
3. There are 4 piles on base of abutment, so for critical analysis the piles would be analyzed as piles group
4. Piles group analysis will be using maximum actual soil pressure
x y x2 y2
No. Pile
m m m m
1 1.13 8.79 1.29 77.33
2 2.41 7.52 5.79 56.57
3 0.99 6.67 0.97 44.53
4 1.51 5.40 2.29 29.16
5 0.29 5.40 0.08 29.16
6 1.51 2.70 2.29 7.29
7 0.29 2.70 0.08 7.29
8 1.51 0.00 2.29 0.00
9 0.29 0.00 0.08 0.00
10 1.51 2.70 2.29 7.29
11 0.29 2.70 0.08 7.29
12 1.51 2.70 2.29 7.29
13 0.99 6.67 0.97 44.53
14 0.29 5.40 0.08 29.16
15 1.13 8.79 1.29 77.33
16 2.41 7.52 5.79 56.57
27.98 480.79
Pile Configuration and Position on Abutment Structure
Actual loading distribution on pile head shown as follows :

a) Axial Load Distribution
Minimum and maximum actual axial load on 1 pile shown as follows :
- DL + UDL + KEL + Soil Pressure
Pu_max = Pu / n + MR* xmax / x2 + MR* ymax / y2 = 24.35 t
2 2
Pu_min = Pu / n + MR* xmin / x + MR* ymin / y = 17.61 t
- Dead Loads + Truck Load 1 + Soil Pressure

2 2
Pu_max = Pu / n + MR* xmax / x + MR* ymax / y = 34.54 t
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
2 2

2 2
2 2

2 2
2 2

2 2
2 2
b) Lateral Load Distribution

Actual lateral load on 1 pile shown as follows :
hu = Pmax_soil/npiles = 12.03 t ; (Caused by active soil pressure on abutment)
c) Residual Overturning Moment Distribution

MuR = MR/npiles = 1.52 t.m ; (Caused by active soil pressure on abutment)
Bearing capacity of bored pile shown as follows :
a) Bearing Capacity due to Axial Load Based on Soil Bearing Capacity

Bearing capacity analysis of 1 bored pile on soil based on Schmertmann & Nottingham Method (1975) :
Qc = 107,403 kg ; SF = 2 (Coduto, 2001 )
Qs = 459 kg ; SF = 3 (Coduto, 2001 )
Qu_nett. = 99,719 kg
1 - {(arc tan (*S))/90o}*(2 - (1/m) - (1/n)) ; Pile Group efficiency
Ce =
0.977
Qu_nett. = 97.39 t
Qmax_act. = 46.14 t
Qu_nett. > Qmax_act. OK
b) Bearing Capacity due to Axial Load Based on Strength of Material

Nominal strength due to axial force = 1,417.3 kN
* Pn =
141.73 t
Qmax_act. 46.14 t
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Pn > Qmax_act. OK
c) Bearing Capacity due to Lateral Load

Calculation of point of fixity of bored pile shown as follows :
T = (E*I/nh)1/5
2.92 m
Zf = 1.8*T
6.00 m
Where :
E = Elasticity Modulus = 23,500,000 kN/m2
I = Moment of Inertia = 0.0064 m4
nh = 700 kN/m3 (soft normally-consolidated clays 350 - 700 kN/m 3 )
T = Stiffness factor (m)
Zf = Point of fixity (m)
Point of Fixity on Pile
Bearing capacity of bored pile due to lateral load using Empirical Method shown as follows :
- Pile Embedment (La) = 0.25 m

- Internal friction of soil () = 27.25 deg.
- Pile Penetration on soil (L) = 12 m
- Point of fixity (Ld) = 6.00 m
- = 18.0 kN/m3
- Kp = 0.363
Passive pressure coefficient given by the following equation (Okabe & Mononobe Eq.) :
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Calculation of passive pressure coefficient on bored pile shown as follows :
h h'*Kp* q*Kp ptot F e M

m kN/m 2
kN/m 2
kN/m 2
kN m kN.m
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
0.25 1.63 0.04 2.10 25 6.067 150
1 6.53 0.04 8.22 388 5.511 2,137
2 13.07 0.04 16.39 1,546 4.644 7,178
3 19.60 0.04 24.56 3,474 3.667 12,739
4 26.13 0.04 32.72 6,172 2.676 16,518
5 32.67 0.04 40.89 3,988 1.681 6,703
6 39.20 0.04 49.06 2,313 0.579 1,339
= 17,906 = 46,765
- L2 = 2.61 m
-H = 10,554 kN
- npile = 16
-h = 659.64 kN
219.88 kN
- hallowed =
21.99 t ; SF = 3
- hu 12.03 t
hallowed > hu OK
Internal Force Caused by Passive Soil Pressure on Pile
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
d) Bearing Capacity due to Residual Overturning Moment

Bearing capacity of bored pile due to residual overturning moment using Empirical Method shown as
follows :
- Pu allowed = 97.39 t
-Z = 12.25 m
- f'c = 29 MPa
- Ec = 25310.27 MPa
4
- Ic = 6.36E+09 mm
- kL = 4.2 N/mm3
-K = 85.75 N/mm3
- = 3.58E-04 /mm
= 901 mm
-e
= 0.90 m
- Mallowed = 87.72 t.m
- Mu_max = 1.52 t.m
Mallowed > Mu_max OK
e) Settlement Analysis
The group pile settlement is related to the cone penetration resistance by the formula :
Source : Braja M Das, Principles of Foundation Engineering 7th Edition

Where :
q = Total maximum actual load on Pile
qc = Average cone penetration resistance within the seat of settlement.
Bg = Min. width of the group pile section
I = influence factor = 1 - L/8*Bg 0.5
L = Length of Embedment of piles
- Settlement caused by Dead Loads + UDL + KEL

Sg(e) = 21.90 mm OK, < 50 mm
- Settlement caused by Dead Loads + Truck Load 1

Sg(e) = 41.90 mm OK, < 50 mm

Sg(e) = 43.08 mm OK, < 50 mm
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
Sg(e) = 60.18 mm NOT OK > 50 mm

Sg(e) = 28.55 mm OK, < 50 mm
f) Reinforcement Analysis for Bored Pile

Concrete Material Property Data :
Concrete Strength = 29 MPa
3
Weight per Unit Volume = 2400 kg/m
Modulus of Elasticity = 25310.27 MPa
Ultimate Strain = 0.003
Poisson Ratio = 0.3
Modulus of Shear = 9734.720998 MPa
Beta 1 = 0.85
Reinforcement Property Data
Reinforced Yield Stress = 390 MPa
M d l off El
Modulus Elasticity
i i = 200000 MPa
MP
Section Data
Diameter = 600 mm
Concrete Cover = 75 mm
Flexural Reinforcement design = 10 - D19 with confinement D16-75
Note : Combination between maximum force has passed for intercation capacity check
Intercation Diagram of Bored Pile
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
g) Check Embedment of Bored Pile for Abutment Structure

The strength of pile embedment due to lateral force shown as follows :
The Strength of Pile Embedment Due to Lateral Force
-a = 6,000 mm
- Le = 250 mm
- 1 = 0.85
-c = 75 mm
-b = 600 mm
- b' = 6,250 mm
162,142 N
- Vu =
162.14 t
- hu = 12.03 t
Vu > hu OK
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
The strength of pile embedment due to bending moment shown as follows :
The Strength of Pile Embedment Due to Bending Moment
-a = 106 mm
- Le = 250 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- fcr = 3.77 MPa
-D = 600 mm
-z = 125 mm
30,039,122 N.mm
- Mu =
3.06 t.m
Actual Pile Embedment on Abutment Structure
Analysis result shown that pile embedment must be added until 50 mm from due to lateral and bending
moment on pile head.
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
h) Reinforcement Analysis for Abutment

*) Flexural Reinforcement for base footing of abutment structure will be using the following equation :
- Mn = Mu/ ; = 0.8 (reduction factor for flexural strength )
- max = 0.75balance
- min = 1.4/fy
- req. = (1/m)*[1-(1-(2*Rn*m)/fy)0.5]
- balance = (0.85*f'c*1/fy)*(600/(600+fy))
-m = fy/(0.85*f'c)
2
- Rn = Mn/(b*d )
- Checked = min > req. > max
Data properties shown as follows :

b= 1,000 mm
h= 600 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 497 mm
- dy = 506 mm
- Concrete Cover at bottom side = 75 mm
- Concrete Cover at top side = 75 mm
The calculation shown as follows :
Mn
N.mm
37,548,903 0.15 15.82 0.0004 0.0036 0.024 0.033 0.0036
As Min. Number Number Min. Bars Max.Distance (mm)

2 Rebars Installed
mm of Rebars of Layer per Layer between bars
1,782 6 1 6 129 D19-100
Calculation of shrinkage rebars shown as follows :

As = min*b*d ; =0.0014
695 mm2
nbars = 3.46
nbars 4.00
TTE044 Rev : XX
REVIEW & REANALYSIS THE EXISTING STRUCTURAL DESIGN TTE044
Job. No :
OF CONNECTING BRIDGE ON VICO'S MAJOR GAS SUPPLY PIPELINE Axx
Rev. No :
26/02/2013
Date :
Reference Specs. : Bridge Engineering Specification FS
Engineer :
KM 21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", flexural rebars installed for base slab of abutment
Rebars Installed for Base of Abutment Structure
*) Flexural Reinforcement for Concrete Wall of abutment structure will be using the following equation :
Data properties shown as follows :

b= 22,816 mm
h= 600 mm
- 1 = 0.85
- dx = 497 mm
- dy = 506 mm
- Concrete Cover at bottom side = 75 mm
- Concrete Cover at top side = 75 mm
The calculation shown as follows :
Mn
N.mm
6,356,088,425 1.13 15.82 0.0030 0.0036 0.024 0.033 0.0036
As Min. Number Number Min. Bars Max.Distance (mm)

2 Rebars Installed
mm of Rebars of Layer per Layer between bars
40,665 143 1 144 158 D19-100
KM 21+600, Marangkayu, Kab. Kutai Kertanegara", flexural rebars installed for concrete wall of abutment
TTE044 Rev : XX
Date : 26/02/2013
*) Note : Effect of axial force for flexural rebars calculation would be skipped considering to analyze critical condition
caused by lateral force
Rebars Installed for Concrete Wall of Abutment Structure

Vc_min = 4,022,981 N ; SNI sect. 13.10.6
Vc_min > V2max. PASSED
*) Without computation about rebars participation of concrete element due to shear force, the concrete wall of abutment
structure has been safed due to maximum loads.
TTE044 Rev : XX

Review Bridge Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Bridge Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Bridge Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REVIEW REPORT OF BRIDGE STRUCTURE ON

VICO'S MAJOR GAS SUPPLY PIPELINE

B. REFERENCES AND CODES

D. MATERIAL PROPERTIES ((RECOMMENDATIONS & EXISTING))

b. Material of Steel Rebar Element

c. Material of Steel Profile Element

d. Material of Bolt Element

e. Material of Welding Rod

Longitudinal Cross Section of Bridge

Site Plan of Bridge

H.1 Dead Load

H.2 KEL (Knife Edge Load)

H.3 UDL (Uniformly Distrubuted Load)

H.4 Truck Load

Truck Load 1 (Payload Capacity 30 tons)

Truck Load 2 (Payload Capacity 30 tons) Based on SNI-T-02-2005

Truck Load 3 (Payload Capacity 70 tons)

Truck Load 4 (Payload Capacity 20 tons)

Source : BMS 1992

H.5 Braking Force

Source : BMS 1992

H.6 Earthquake Load

Response Spectrum Table & Graph

Ss Classification Map According to RSNI 1726-201x

S1 Classification Map According to RSNI 1726-201x

H.7 Wind Load

I. CHECKING THE SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN FOR STEEL ELEMENT

I.1 Slab Analysis

a) Computation of actual loads on slab

Truck Load 1, 3 & 4 Truck Load 2

b) Internal Force Calculation

qTr4 = 111,150.0 kg/m

Truck Load 4 ===>

qTr3 = 99,450.0 kg/m

Truck Load 3 ===>

qTr2 = 131,625.0 kg/m

Truck Load 2 ===>

qTr1 = 93,600.0 kg/m

Truck Load 1 ===>

qDL = 307.25 kg/m

Dead Load ===>

Max. Bending moment caused by Truck Load 1 shown as follows :

Max. Bending moment caused by Truck Load 2 shown as follows :

Max Bending moment caused by Truck Load 3 shown as follows :

Max. Bending moment caused by Truck Load 4 shown as follows :

Total actual bending moment on steel slab shown as follows :

*) Shear Force Calculation :

Max. Shear force caused by Truck Load 1 shown as follows :

Max. Shear force caused by Truck Load 2 shown as follows :

Max. Shear force caused by Truck Load 3 shown as follows :

Max. Shear force caused by Truck Load 4 shown as follows :

Total actual shear force on steel slab shown as follows :

*) The Strength Due to Max. Bending Moment :

- Center of Gravity Calculation

- Moment of Inertia Calculation

- Calculation Plastic and Elastic Section Modulus

Analysis Method to Find Plastic Section Modulus

Dead + Truck Load 1

Dead + Truck Load 2

Mmax_UDL + KEL (1/8)(qUDL)(Lspan)2 + 0.25PKEL(Lspan)