See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303812432

International Bridge Design Standards and Approaches

Presentation · March 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2155.7368

CITATIONS READS

0 1,895

1 author:

Naveed Anwar
Asian Institute of Technology
145 PUBLICATIONS   69 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Seismic Performance Evaluation of High-rise Buildings with RC Flag Wall Systems View project

Post-earthquake Reconstruction Strategy and Design of Schools in Nepal. A project funded by the Asian Development Bank. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Naveed Anwar on 06 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Topic 4
Day 2
International Bridge Design
Standards and Approaches
Naveed Anwar

Dr. Naveed Anwar

• Origins of the Code
• Intent of the Code
• Explicit
• Implicit
• Spirit of the Code
• Letter of the Code

2
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Structural Design

“Structural Design is the process of proportioning the structure to safely

resist the applied forces in the most cost effective and friendly manner”

A systematic investigation of the stability,

strength and rigidity of structures

Where Safety is a prime concern

3 3
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Ensuring Safety through Factor of Safety!

Capacity > Demand

𝐶 𝑪
=𝐷 = 𝑭𝒐𝑺 𝐶 = 𝐷 𝑥 𝐹𝑜𝑆
𝐹𝑜𝑆 𝑫

𝐶
= 𝐷 𝑥 𝐹𝑜𝑆2
𝐹𝑜𝑆1

4
Dr. Naveed Anwar 4
 Capacity side: :Working Stress Design

Stress
𝐶 fy
=𝐷
𝐹𝑜𝑆
0.5fy
Unused Strength and Ductility

Strain
5
Dr. Naveed Anwar 5
 Capacity Side > “Real Behavior”

6 6
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Ultimate Strength Design

• The Strain becomes the primary concern,

• Full “Strengths” of the materials at “ultimate”
strains are utilized with appropriate “other”
factors
fs NA
CL
1 n 
N z  1     x, y  dx dy ...   Ai i ( x, y ) ...
1 fc
y
  1 x y  2 i 1  c

1 1 n  h

M x   2     x, y  dx dy . y ...   Ai i ( x, y ) yi ...

f1
or
f2 sf
  1 x y  2 i 1 e

s l
fn es
Str Stee
or
es f nd Horizontal
s
1 1 n  es
Str crete
a

M y  3     x, y  dx dy . x ...   Ai i ( x, y ) xi ... co

n
R/F

  1 x y  2 i 1 ain
 Str

7
Dr. Naveed Anwar 7
 Considering Interaction of Actions

Nz The realization that “Envelop

Results” can not be used for design

• Shear-Torsion Interaction

• Shear – Flexure interaction

• Torsion-Flexure Interaction

My • Shear-Torsion-Flexure Interaction
Mx

8
Dr. Naveed Anwar 8
 The Strut and Tie Approaches – Post Crack
Strength

A Real Truss

An RC Beam and “Hidden” Truss

9
Dr. Naveed Anwar 9
 The Strut and Tie Approaches

• Extensively used for

• “D” regions of all members
• Shear Design
• Torsion Design

• “Deep” Beams
• Brackets
• Corbels
• Joints
• Pipecaps
• Shear walls
• Transfer girders
• …
10
Dr. Naveed Anwar
Approach 3 - Limit State Design
• Limit State Design concept is an advancement over both Working
Stress and Ultimate Strength design approaches.
• Attempts to ensures safety at ultimate loads and serviceability at
working loads.
• The basic idea involves the identification of all potential modes of
failure (i.e. identify significant limit states and determination of
acceptable levels of safety against occurrence of each limit state.
• This philosophy uses more than one safety factors attempting to
provide adequate safety

11
Dr. Naveed Anwar
11
 Limit State Design

Types of Limit State Description

Ultimate Limit states • Loss of equilibrium
• Rupture
• Progressive Collapse
• Formation of plastic mechanism
• Instability
• Fatigue
Serviceability limit states • Excessive deflections
• Excessive crack width
• Undesirable Vibration
Special limit states Due to abnormal conditions and abnormal loading such as
• Damage or collapse in extreme earthquakes
• Structural effects of fire, explosion
• Corrosion or deterioration

12
Dr. Naveed Anwar
12
 Partial Factors of Safety

Characteristic value of Design member

Design Strength
material basic strength capacity
Ym Yb
Material safety Member Factor Structure Verification
Factor Factor
Yi
Characteristic value of Design member
Design load
Load capacity
Yf Ya
Load Factor Structural Analysis
Factor

The value of Safety Factor tells how much confidence

we have on our knowledge.

13
Dr. Naveed Anwar 13
 Eurocode - ULS

14
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Euro Code - SLS

15
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Improving Factors of Safety

Factors Example
Structure Level Importance Factors (1.0 to 1.5)
Structure type “R” factors

Member Level Over strength Factors

Action Level Different “fi” factors for flexure, shear, …
Material Level Different gamma factors for concrete and steel

Load Factors Different for different loads, based on probability of

variance

Load Combination Factors Deferent for various probability of simultaneous

occurrence

16
Dr. Naveed Anwar 16
 The Development and Role of
Building Codes

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 The First Building Code: Code of Hammurabi

• The earliest known written building code was

the Babylonian law of ancient Mesopotamia

• Also known as the code of King Hammurabi

(who ruled Babylon from 1792 BC to 1750 BC).

• Found in 1901 in Khuzestan, Iran

• Contains detailed accounts of laws pertaining

to builders as well as construction conflicts.

18
Dr. Naveed Anwar 18
 Code of Hammurabi
Clause 229:

If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it

properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner,
then that builder shall be put to death.

19
Dr. Naveed Anwar 19
 Ancient Building Code: Laws of Moses

“In case you build a new

house, you must also make
a parapet for your roof, that
you may not place bloodguilt
upon your house because
someone falling might fall
from it”.

- The Bible, Book of Deuteronomy,

Chapter 22, Verse 8 20
Dr. Naveed Anwar 20
 The Modern Codes

Extremely Detailed
prescriptions and
(ACI 318 – 11) equations using
seemingly
arbitrary, rounded
limits with implicit
meaning

(IS 456-2000)

21
Dr. Naveed Anwar 21
Are All Codes Correct ?
• If they differ, can all of them be correct ?

• Did we inform the structures to follow which code when earthquake

or ship strikes ?

• Codes change every 3 or years, should be upgrade our structures

every 3 or 5 years to conform ?

22
Dr. Naveed Anwar
2
Prescriptive Codes – A Shelter
• Public:
• Is my structure safe ?

• Structural Engineer:
• Not sure, but I did follow the “Code”

As long as engineers follow the code,

they can be sheltered by its
provisions
23
Dr. Naveed Anwar
23
 Newer Design Approaches
Primarily geared towards Earthquakes and Extreme Events

Dr. Naveed Anwar

Design for Seismic Resistance and Extreme Events

• Force/stress based design

• Assume reduced forces, limit the stresses
• Displacement based design
• Allow force D/C to exceed, as long as displacements can be limited
• Capacity based design
• Put “fuses” in the structure limit the force capacity, hence the demand
• Energy based design
• Total energy input is collectively resisted by kinetic energy, the elastic strain
energy and energy dissipated through plastic deformations and damping

25
Dr. Naveed Anwar
2
 Progression of Seismic Resistance Design

V Elastic Forces
V reduced for
Design by R

Lack of Knowledge on
Earthquake Demand and
Building Capacity

Linear Elastic
Vdes Building Response Vdes Inelastic
Response

Yield Max
Historical Approach:
Earthquake forces proportional to
building mass (Vdes = 5 - 10% of Wt), Traditional Codes:
Elastic earthquake forces reduced for
linear design (Vdes = Vmax /R)
26
Dr. Naveed Anwar 26
Performance Based Design (PBD)
• Explicitly link the performance with earthquake hazard

• Why it was needed?

• Traditional codes not suitable/adequate

• Explicit verification not specified or required in most codes

• Public does not care about the code, or theories or procedures, they care
about “safety” and ‘performance”

27
Dr. Naveed Anwar 27
Prescriptive Vs Performance
Approach Procdure Outcome
Prescriptive Specify “what, and how Implicit Expectation
(emphasis on to do”
procedures)
Make Concrete: 1:2:4 (a strength of 21 MPA is
expected)
Performance Based What ever it takes Explicit Performance
Approach
(emphasis on KPI)
(within certain bounds) Concrete less than 21 MPA is
rejected

28
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Define Performance Levels

Restaurant Restaurant t
ran
st au
Re

Operational (O) Life Safety (LS) Collapse Prevention

Immediate Occupancy
(IO) (CP)

Ref: FEMA 451 B

29
Dr. Naveed Anwar 29
 Link the Damage to Performance Levels

sta
Re nt
ura

Resta
urant
Loading Severity

Consequences

Resta
Hazard

urant

Vulnerability Structural Displacement

30
Dr. Naveed Anwar 30
 Link Performance other Indicators

Restaurant Restaurant nt
ura
sta
Re

Operational (O) Immediate Occupancy (IO) Life Safety (LS) Collapse Prevention (CP)

0% Damage or Loss 99 %

Lowest Casualties Highest

Lowest Downtime for Rehab Highest
Lowest Rehab Cost to Restore after event Highest

Highest Retrofit Cost to Minimize Consequences Lowest

Ref: FEMA 451 B

31
Dr. Naveed Anwar 31
Demand to Capacity Ratio – An Important indicator

• This could apply to

• Forces, actions (Moment, shear, etc)
• Ductility
• Deformations (drift, deflection)

• Indicates the “safety”, “acceptability” as well as “efficiency” of design

D/C > 1 <Not acceptable, in many cases)

D<C < 1 <Acceptable in most cases
D/C =1 <Ideal design, not practical>
0.5 < D/C < 0.9 <Efficient design>

32
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Consequence Based Engineering

• It is not enough to say “Cracking and non-structural damge is

acceptable, as long as structure does not collapse”
• A natural extension of the performance-based design approach
• Structural consequences can be defined in terms of repair costs,
casualties and loss of use duration (dollars, deaths and downtime)
(Porter, 2003).
• Other types of consequences which result from the inherent function
of a structure, are addressed using importance factors for various
occupancy categories in design codes (Yuxian 2013).

33
Dr. Naveed Anwar 33
Consequence Based Engineering
• “Structural consequence and non-structural effects” determined
entirely from the analysis of structural member as well as overall
system behavior.
• The consequence-based structural design approach proceeds through
the analysis of expected system consequences, irrespective of the
event triggering these consequences.
• This philosophy requires the structural members to be designed for
variable reliability levels, depending upon their contribution in
causing adverse system consequences.

34
Dr. Naveed Anwar 34
 Comparing Codes

Dr. Naveed Anwar

Codes
• Most modern international codes, if used and applied consistently
will yield nearly similar structural performance expectations
• For bridge design codes consideration should be given to
• Local loading and traffic patterns
• Local materials
• Local construction practices
• Local regulations and controls

36
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Code Comparison

 Material Properties (AASHTO LRFD, BS and EN Standards)

 Load Combinations (AASHTO LRFD, BS and EN Standards)

 Load Factors (AASHTO LRFD, BS and EN Standards)

 Flexural Design Based on AASHTO LRFD Standards

 Flexural Design Based on British Standards

 Flexural Design Based on European Standards

37
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Presentation Contents

 Shear and Torsion Design based on AASHTO LRFD Standards

 Shear and Torsion Design based on British Standards

 Shear and Torsion Design based on European Standards

 Seismic Design of Bridges based on AASHTO LRFD Standards

 Seismic Design of Bridges based on European Standards

38
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 A Sample Code Comparisons
Footing design AASHTO Code Chinese Code
Dimensions (5×6)m, thickness = 1.5m (5×6)m, thickness = 1.5m
4-bored piles with Dia. = 1m, 4-bored piles with Dia. =1m, with
Number of piles with depth = 62.7m depth = 62.7m
25 bars #9 (2.8cm) in the bottom mats Number of bars = 29 bars (2.8cm) in
each direction in the bottom mats

Pile cap design

21 bars #9 (2.8cm) in the top Number of bars = 25 bars (2.8cm) in
mats each direction in the top mats

16 bars #8 (2.5cm) in the bottom Number of bars = 20 bars (2.5cm) in

each direction in the bottom
Pile design
24 bars #8 (2.5cm) in the top Number of bars = 29 bars (2.8cm) in
each direction in the top
Design of Substructure Bridge with Different Codes and Analysis the Data for Settlement and Bearing Capacity Manually and by Using
Plaxiz 3D Program of Finite Elements
Posted in Project Reports, Research Papers
39
Dr. Naveed Anwar
From 1 April 2010 the UK design standard for concrete bridges is BS EN 1992-2
(aka Eurocode 2, part 2),

BS Standard Title Superseded By Euro

BS 5400-1:1988 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. General statement EN 1990, EN 1991
BS 5400-2: 2006 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Specification for loads EN 1990, EN 1991
BS 5400-3:2000 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Code of practice for design of steel bridges EN 1993
BS 5400-4: 1990 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Code of practice for design of concrete bridges EN 1992
BS 5400-5:2005 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Code of practice for design of composite bridges EN 1994
BS 5400-6: 1999 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Specification for materials and workmanship, EN 1090-2
steel
BS 5400-7:1978 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Specification for EN 1992
materials and workmanship, concrete, reinforcement and prestressing tendons
BS 5400-8: 1978 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Recommendations EN 1992
for materials and workmanship, concrete, reinforcement and prestressing tendons
BS 5400-9.1 and 9.2 Bearings not affected
BS 5400-10C: 1999 teel, concrete and composite bridges. Charts for classification of details for fatigue not affected

40
Dr. Naveed Anwar CE 72.32 - Design of Tall Buildings, Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Material Properties

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Compressive Strength based on AASHTO LRFD

Class Applicability Compressive Strength

A All Elements of Structure 4.0
A(AE) 4.0
B Footings, Pedestals, Massive Pier 2.4
B(AE) Shafts, and Gravity Walls 2.4
C Reinforced Railings less than 4.0 in. 4.0
C(AE) thick, Steel Grid Floors 4.0
P Pre-Stressed Concrete Members As Specified
P(HPC) As Specified
S Cofferdams -

42
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Concrete Strength based on BS Codes

Design Stress-Strain Curve for Normal Weight Concrete

43
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Concrete Strength based on EN Codes

 The strength classes (C) in this code are denoted by the characteristic
cylinder strength determined at 28 days.

 The value of the design compressive strength is defined as

fc = α𝑐𝑐𝑓𝑐𝑘/γ𝑐

 The value of the design tensile strength is defined as

ft = α𝑐𝑐𝑓𝑐𝑘 /γ𝑐
Where;
α = coefficient of taking long term effects ; γ = partial safety factor

44
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Modulus of Elasticity

AASHTO LRFD British Standards

Where;

K1= correction factor for source

of aggregate to be taken as 1.0
unless determined by physical
test.

wc =unit weight of concrete

fci=Specified Compressive
Strength 45
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

AASHTO LRFD

 Normal weight concrete 6.0 × 10–6/°F

 Lightweight concrete 5.0 × 10–6/°F

British Standards

 Normal weight concrete 12.0 × 10–6/°F

 Lightweight concrete 7.0 × 10–6/°F

46
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Creep
Based on AASHTO LRFD creep coefficient may be taken as:

Where;

Ks = 1.45 – 0.13 (V/S) > 1

Khc = 1.56 – 0.008 H
Kf = 5/ (1 + fci)
Ktd = t/ (61 – 4 fci + t)
H = Relative humidity
t = Maturity of concrete
fci = Specified Compressive Strength
V/S = Volume to Surface Ratio
47
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Creep

Based on British Standards creep coefficient may be taken as:

ψ = (𝑓𝑐/E28) * kL KM kC kE Kj
Where;

E28 = secant modulus of elasticity of the concrete at the age

of 28 days
kL = depends on the environmental conditions
KM = depends on the hardening (maturity) of the
concrete
kC = depends on the composition of the concrete
kE = depends on the effective thickness of the member
Kj = defines the development of the time-dependent
deformation with time
48
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Creep

Based on European Standards creep coefficient may be taken as:

Where;

kϬ = Stress-Strain ratio
t0 = age of concrete

49
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Creep

US

BS ψ = (𝑓𝑐/E28) * kL KM kC kE Kj

EU

50
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shrinkage
 Based on AASHTO LRFD the strain due to shrinkage, εsh, at time, t,
may be taken as:

Where;

Ks = 1.45 – 0.13 (V/S) > 1

Khs = 2.00 – 0.014 H
Kf = 5/ (1 + fci)
Ktd = t/ (61 – 4 fci + t)
H = Relative humidity
t = Maturity of concrete
fci = Specified Compressive Strength
V/S = Volume to Surface Ratio
51
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shrinkage

 Based on British Standards the strain due to shrinkage, εss for RC

sections at time, t, may be taken as:

Where;

εsh = Shrinkage of plain concrete

ρ = Area of steel relative to concrete
K = Factor taken as 25 for internal exposure and 15 for
external exposure

52
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shrinkage

 Based on European Standards the strain due to drying shrinkage,

εcs at any time can be taken as:

53
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shrinkage

US

BS

EU

54
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Loads Patterns

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 General

 In all international codes, loads are categorized into

two categories.

 Permanent Load: Dead Load, Superimposed Dead

Loads, Load due to material infill

 Transient Load: All other loads except permanent

loads

56
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Patterns (AASHTO LRFD)
Load Patterns for Permanent Loads

57
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Patterns(AASHTO LRFD)
Load Patterns for Transient Loads

58
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Patterns (EUROPEAN)

Load Patterns for Permanent Loads

59
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Patterns (EUROPEAN)
Load Patterns for Transient Loads

60
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Patterns (EUROPEAN)

Load Patterns for Transient Loads

61
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Loads Combinations

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Load Combination

 AASHTO LRFD specifies load combinations for strength,

fatigue, service and extreme limits states.

 British standards specifies load combinations for

different bridges and for service and ultimate limit
states.

 European codes specifies load combination rules for

different types of bridges (Road bridge, foot bridge,
railway bridge) and for service and ultimate limit states
only.

63
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations for Strength Limit State
(AASHTO LRFD)

Strength I Basic load combination relating to the normal vehicular

use of the bridge without wind.

Strength II Load combination relating to the use of the bridge by

Owner-specified special design vehicles, evaluation
permit vehicles, or both without wind

Strength III Load combination relating to the bridge exposed to

wind velocity exceeding 55 mph

Strength IV Load combination relating to very high dead load to live

load force effect ratios

Strength V Load combination relating to normal vehicular use of

the bridge with wind of 55 mph velocity
64
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations Extreme Event Limit State
(AASHTO LRFD)

Extreme Event I Load combination relating to the use of the

bridge by Owner-specified special design
vehicles, evaluation permit vehicles, or both
without wind

Extreme Event II Load combination relating to ice load, collision

by vessels and vehicles, check floods, and
certain hydraulic events with a reduced live
load other than that which is part of the
vehicular collision load,

65
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations for Service Limit State
(AASHTO LRFD)

Service I Load combination relating to the normal operational

use of the bridge with a 55 mph wind and all loads
taken at their nominal values. Also related to deflection
control in buried metal structures, tunnel liner plate,
and thermoplastic pipe, to control crack width in
reinforced concrete structures, and for transverse
analysis relating to tension in concrete segmental
girders. This load combination should also be used for
the investigation of slope stability.

Service II Load combination intended to control yielding of steel

structures and slip of slip-critical connections due to
vehicular live load

66
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations for Service and Fatigue Limit
State (AASHTO LRFD)

Service III Load combination for longitudinal analysis relating to

tension in prestressed concrete superstructures with
the objective of crack control and to principal tension in
the webs of segmental concrete Girders.

Service IV Load combination relating only to tension in

prestressed concrete columns with the objective of
crack control.

Fatigue I Fatigue and fracture load combination related to infinite

load induced fatigue life.

Fatigue II Fatigue and fracture load combination related to finite

load induced fatigue life.
67
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations for Service and Ultimate Limit
State (British Standards)

Combination 1: For highway and foot/cycle track bridges, the loads to

be considered are the permanent loads, together with
the appropriate primary live loads, and, for railway
bridges, the permanent loads, together with the
appropriate primary and secondary live loads.

Combination 2: For all bridges, the loads to be considered are the loads
in combination 1, together with those due to wind, and,
where erection is being considered, temporary erection
loads.

Combination 3: For all bridges, the loads to be considered are the loads
in combination 1, together with those arising from
restraint due to the effects of temperature range and
difference, and, where erection is being considered,
temporary erection loads 68
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations for Service and Ultimate Limit
State (British Standards)

Combination 4 Combination 4 does not apply to railway bridges except

for vehicle collision loading on bridge supports. For
highway bridges, the loads to be considered are the
permanent loads and the secondary live loads, together
with the appropriate primary live loads associated with
them. Secondary live loads shall be considered
separately and are not required to be combined. Each
shall be taken with its appropriate associated primary
live load.

Combination 5 For all bridges, the loads to be considered are the

permanent loads, together with the loads due to friction
at bearings

69
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Models (European Standards)

Load Model 1 Load Model 2

A double-axle load (called A single-axle load is applied

the Tandem System) is anywhere on the
applied in each traffic lane in carriageway
conjunction with a
uniformly distributed load

70
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Models (European Standards)

Load Model 3

If the structure is to be
designed for abnormal load
then vehicles from Load
Model 3 will need to be
considered.
Load Model 4

A uniformly distributed load

of 5kN/m2 used to represent
crowd loading and may be
applied to both road bridges
and footway/cycleway
bridges 71
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (European Standards)

Combination Group 1 (gr1a)

Load Model 1 is combined with footway loading. The footway loading is

reduced to 3kN/m2
Combination Group 1 (gr1b)

This consists of the 400kN axle shown in Load Model 2 and is not
combined with any other load model

Combination Group 2 (gr2)

The 'Frequent' value of Load Model 1 is combined with Braking &

Acceleration Forces and Centrifugal &Transverse Forces

72
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (European Standards)

Combination Group 3 (gr3)

This consists of Load Model 4 and is applied to the footways only; it is not
combined with any other load model. The UDL may be applied to one or both of
the footways so as to achieve the worst load effect.

Combination Group 4 (gr4)

This consists of Load Model 4 and is applied to the footways, carriageways and
central reserve; it is not combined with any other load model.

Combination Group 5 (gr5)

The 'Frequent' value of Load Model 1 (LM1) is combined with Load Model 3
(LM3).

Combination Group 6 (gr6)

Load Model 3 is combined with Braking and Acceleration Forces and Centrifugal
and Transverse Forces
73
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (AASHTO LRFD)

74
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (British Standards)

Load Combination for Ultimate Limit State

75
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (British Standards)

Load Combination for Service Limit State

76
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (European Standards)

77
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (European Standards)

78
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Combinations (European Standards)

79
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Loads Factors (AASHTO
LRFD, BS & EN Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Load Factors for Permanent Loads
(AASHTO LRFD)

81
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Factors for Permanent Loads due to
Superimposed Deformations (AASHTO LRFD)

82
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Factors (British Standards)

83
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Factors (British Standards)

84
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Factors (European Standards)

85
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Load Factors (European Standards)

86
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexure Design
(AASHTO LRFD)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Design Process

 The natural relationship between concrete stress and strain may be

considered satisfied by an equivalent rectangular concrete
compressive stress block of 0.85f ′c over a zone bounded by the edges
of the cross-section and a straight line located parallel to the neutral
axis at the distance a = β1c from the extreme compression fiber.

 The distance c shall be measured perpendicular to the neutral axis.

β1 = 0.85 for concrete strengths not exceeding 4.0 ksi.

 For concrete strengths exceeding 4.0 ksi, β1 shall be reduced at a rate

of 0.05 for each 1.0 ksi of strength in excess of 4.0 ksi, except that β1
shall not be taken to be less than 0.65.

88
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance

 Factored Flexural Resistance , Mr = ϕ Mn

Mn = Nominal Resistance
Φ = Resistance Factor

 For rectangular and flanged sections:

 For rectangular sections Mn can be computed by necessary

approximations as specified by the standards and codes.

89
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Minimum Reinforcement Criteria

fr = Modulus of rupture of concrete specified

fcpe = Compressive stress in concrete due to effective prestress forces only

Mdnc = Total unfactored dead load moment

Sc = Section modulus for the extreme fiber of the composite section where
tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads

Snc = Section modulus for the extreme fiber of the monolithic or

noncomposite section where tensile stress is caused by externally
applied loads
90
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Crack Control Criteria

The provisions specified herein shall apply to the reinforcement of all

concrete components, except that of deck slabs design.

Spacing
,

Class 1 exposure condition applies when cracks can be tolerated due

to reduced concerns of appearance and/or corrosion. Class 2
exposure condition applies to transverse design of segmental
concrete box girders for any loads applied prior to attaining full
nominal concrete strength and when there is increased concern of
appearance and/or corrosion.
91
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexure Design
(British Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Design Process

 Rectangular stress block of maximum depth of 0.5 d and uniform

compression stress of 0.4 fcu is assumed to evaluate moments.

Stresses in Concrete in Stresses in Reinforcements in

Compression with m = 1.5 m = 1.15
93
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance

 Ultimate resistance of rectangular sections

As = Area of Tension Reinforcement As. = Area of Compression Reinforcement

d = width of sections; d. = effective depth to tension reinforcement
b = width of sections z = lever arm

 Ultimate resistance of flanged sections

94
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Minimum Reinforcement Criteria

 Minimum area of tension reinforcement > 0.15 % of bad

(grade 460)

 Minimum area of tension reinforcement > 0.25 % of bad

(grade 250)

 For columns cross-sectional area of longitudinal bars

should not be less than 1 % of the total area.

 For Walls, vertical reinforcement should be more than

0.4 % of gross sectional area of concrete.
95
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Crack Control Criteria

 Maximum spacing should not be greater than 300 mm .

 For solid rectangular sections, design crack width at surface should

be calculated as

 For flanges in overall tension including tensile zone of box beams

and voided slabs, the design crack width at surface is calculated as
Design Crack Width = 3 acr X .m

 Spacing of transverse bars in slab with circular voids should not be

twice the minimum flange thickness.

96
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexure Design
(European Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Design Process

 Rectangular design stress strain relationship to determine stress

λ = 0.8 for fck < 50 Mpa ; η = 1.0 for fck < 50 Mpa
λ = 0.8 - (fck – 50)/400 for 50<fck< 90 Mpa ; η = 1.0-(fck–50)/200 for 50<fck< 90 Mpa

98
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Process

Calculation of Stresses

Stress-Strain Diagram Stress-Strain Diagram

for Reinforcing Steel for for Prestressing Steel
Tension & Compression

99
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance

 Verification of the load capacity using reduced area of pre-stress

following steps mentioned below:

 Calculate the applied bending moment due to the frequent

combination of actions.

 Determine the reduced area of prestress that results in the

tensile stress reaching fctm at the extreme tension fibre when
the section is subject to the bending moment calculated.

 Using this reduced area of prestress, calculate the ultimate

flexural capacity. It should be ensured that this exceeds the
bending moment due to the frequent combination

100
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance

 Providing minimum reinforcing steel area calculated

from the equation:

𝑀 𝑟𝑒𝑝
As(min) = 𝑧𝑓
𝑦

 Agreeing an appropriate inspection regime with the

relevant National Authority on the basis of satisfactory
evidence

101
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear & Torsion Design
(AASHTO LRFD)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Factored Torsional and Shear Resistance

 Factored torsional resistance shall be taken as

Tr = ϕ Tn
 Factored shear resistance shall be taken as
Vr = ϕ Vn
Where;

Tn = nominal torsional resistance

Vn = nominal torsional resistance
φ = resistance factor specified

103
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear Stress on Concrete

where:
φ = resistance factor for shear specified in
bv = effective web width
dv = effective shear depth; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of
0.9 de or 0.72h (in.)

104
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Torsional Effects

For normal weight concrete, torsional effects shall be investigated

where

where:
Tu = factored torsional moment
Tcr = torsional cracking moment
Acp = total area enclosed by outside perimeter of concrete cross-section
pc = the length of the outside perimeter of the concrete section
fpc = compressive stress in concrete after prestress losses have occurred
φ = resistance factor
105
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Factored Shear Force

Factored Shear Force, Vu

For Solid Sections:

For Box Sections:

Where:
ph = Perimeter of the centerline of the closed transverse torsion
reinforcement
Tu = Factored torsional moment

106
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Transverse Reinforcements

Except for slabs, footings, and culverts, transverse reinforcement shall

be provided either consideration of torsion is required or where:

Where;

Vu = factored shear force (kip)

Vc = nominal shear resistance of the concrete (kip)
Vp = component of prestressing force in direction of the shear force
φ = resistance factor

107
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Minimum Transverse Reinforcements

Minimum Transverse Reinforcement is calculated as

where:
Av = Area of a transverse reinforcement within distance s
bv = Width of web adjusted for the presence of ducts
s = Spacing of transverse reinforcement
fy = Yield strength of transverse reinforcement

For segmental post-tensioned concrete box girder minimum transverse

reinforcement is given by

108
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Spacing of Transverse Reinforcements

 The spacing of the transverse reinforcement shall not exceed the

maximum permitted spacing, smax, determined as:

 If vu < 0.125 f ′c, then: smax = 0.8dv ≤ 24.0 in.

 If vu ≥ 0.125 f ′c, then: 0.4 12.0 Smax = dv ≤ 12.0 in.

where:
vu = the shear stress calculated
dv = effective shear depth

 For segmental post-tensioned concrete box girder bridges,

spacing of closed stirrups or closed ties required to resist shear
effects due to torsional moments shall not exceed one-half of the
shortest dimension of the crosssection, nor 12.0 in.

109
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design and Detailing Requirements

 The design yield strength of nonprestressed transverse reinforcement shall

be taken equal to the specified yield strength when the latter does not exceed
60.0 ksi.

 For nonprestressed transverse reinforcement with yield strength in excess of

60.0 ksi, the design yield strength shall be taken as the stress corresponding
to a strain of 0.0035, but not to exceed 75.0 ksi.

 The design yield strength of prestressed transverse reinforcement shall be

taken as the effective stress, after allowance for all prestress losses, plus 60.0
ksi, but not greater than fpy When welded wire reinforcement is used as
transverse reinforcement, it shall be anchored at both ends in

 Components of inclined flexural compression and/or flexural tension in

variable depth members shall be considered when calculating shear
resistance
110
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear & Torsion Design
(British Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Shear Resistance and Reinforcement

The shear stress, ʋ at any cross section should be calculated from

V
ʋ=
bd
N
Incase ʋ exceeds 0.75 fc or 4.75 shear reinforcement is provided.
mm2

Value of ʋ Area of Vertical Shear

Reinforcement
ʋ = ʋc Asv = 0.4 bsv 0.87f𝑦𝑣
ʋ > ʋc Asv = bsv (ʋ + 0.4 − 𝑠ʋ ) 0.87f
c 𝑦𝑣

Where;

112
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Enhancement of Shear Strength

 At any cross section additional longitudinal reinforcement, Asa is

required in the tensile zone.

 An enhancement of shear strength may be allowed for sections

within a distance av < 2d from the face of a support, front edge of a
rigid bearing or center line of a flexible bearing.

 This enhancement should take the form of an increase in the

allowable shear stress and under such cases the main reinforcement
at the section considered should continue to the support and be
provided with an anchorage equivalent to 20 times the bar size
113
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Torsional Shear Stress and Reinforcement

Box Sections Rectangular Sections

Torsional shear stress Torsional shear stress

Torsion Reinforcement Criteria Torsion Reinforcement Criteria

114
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Longitudinal Shear

The longitudinal shear force, V1 per unit

length of a composite member, whether
simply supported or continuous, should
be calculated at the interface of the
precast unit and the in situ concrete and
at any vertical planes which may be
critical in longitudinal shear

V1 should not exceed lesser of the

following: Potential Shear Planes

115
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Minimum Transverse Reinforcement Criteria

 The amount of transverse reinforcement should exceed

lesser of the following:

 In the bottom, or predominantly tensile, flange

either 1 500 mm2/m or 1 % of the minimum flange
section.

 In the top, or predominantly compressive, flange

either 1 000 mm2/m or 0.7 % of the minimum
flange section

116
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Detailing Requirements

 Care should be taken in detailing to prevent diagonal compressive

forces in adjacent faces of beam spalling.

 Longitudinal reinforcements should be positioned uniformly such

that there is bar at each corner of the links.

 In detailing the longitudinal reinforcement to cater for torsional

stresses account may be taken of those areas of the cross section
subjected to simultaneous flexural compressive stresses, and a
lesser amount of reinforcement provided.

 In the case of beams, the depth of the compression zone used to

calculate the area of section subject to flexural compression should
be taken as twice the cover to the closed links.

117
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear & Torsion Design
(European Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Design Shear Resistance

Shear resistance is taken smaller of the following

Asw
V Rds = z fywd cot θ
s

V Rdmax = αcwbwzv1fcd/(Cot θ + tan θ)

Where;

αcw = coefficient taking account of stress state.

Asw = Cross-sectional area of shear reinforcement
fywd = Design Yield Strength
v1 = Strength Reduction Factors

119
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Shear Resistance

 Recommended values of v1

V1 = 0.6 fck < 60 Mpa

V1 = 0.9- fck /200 > 0.5 fck < 60 Mpa

 Recommended values of αcw

αcw = 1 + σcp/ fcd 0 < σcp < 0.25 fcd

αcw = 1.25 0.25 fcd < σcp < 0.50 fcd

αcw = 2.5(1 - σcp/ fcd ) 0.50 fcd < σcp < 1.00 fcd
σcp = Mean Compressive Stress
120
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Shear Resistance

 Maximum effective cross-sectional area of shear reinforcement

Asw is given by

 Area of Shear Reinforcement is evaluated from the following

equation:

121
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Shear Resistance

 For straight tendons, a high level of prestress ({σcp / fcd > 0,5) and
thin webs, if the tension and the compression chords are able to
carry the whole prestressing force and blocks are provided at the
extremity of beams to disperse the prestressing force it may be
assumed that the prestressing force is distributed between the
chords. Hence, the compression field due to shear only should be
considered in the web (αcw= 1).

122
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Shear Resistance

 For bonded prestressing, located within the tensile chord, the

resisting effect of prestressing may be taken into account for
carrying the total longitudinal tensile force.

 In the case of inclined bonded prestressing tendons in combination

with other longitudinal reinforcement/tendons the shear strength
may be evaluated, by a simplification, superimposing two different
truss models with different geometry and weighted mean value
between θ1 and θ2 may be used for concrete stress field verification.

123
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design Shear Resistance

In the case of segmental construction

with precast elements and no bonded
prestressing in the tension chord, the
effect of opening of the joint should be
considered. The force in the tension
chord should be assumed to remain
unchanged after the joints have
opened. In consequence, as the applied
load increases and the joints open the
concrete stress field inclination within
the web increases. The shear capacity
can be evaluated by

Asw
V Rds = z fywd cot θ
s

124
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear between Web and Flanges

The longitudinal shear stress, VEd at the junction between one side of a
flange and the web is determined by the change of the normal
(longitudinal) force in the part of the 'flange considered, according to:

VEd = ΔFd /(hf . Δx)

125
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Design for Torsion

The effects of torsion and shear for both hollow and solid members may
be superimposed, assuming the same value for the strut inclination θ.

126
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Longitudinal Reinforcement for Torsion Design

 The required area of the longitudinal reinforcement for torsion ΣAsl

may be calculated as:

 In compressive chords, the longitudinal reinforcement may be

reduced in proportion to the available compressive force.

 In tensile chords the longitudinal reinforcement for torsion should

be added to the other reinforcement.

 The longitudinal reinforcement should generally be distributed

over the length of side. but for smaller sections it may be
concentrated at the ends of this length
127
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Max. Resistance to Torsion and Shear

 Solid Sections
TEd /TRdmax + VEd /Vrdmax <1.0

TEd = Design Torsional Moment

VEd = Design Transverse Force

Vrdmax = Max. Design Shear Resistance

TRdmax = Design Torsional Resistance=2 vαcwfcdAktefi Sin θ Cos θ

 Box Sections

Each wall should be designed separately for combined effects of shear and
torsion. The ultimate limit state for concrete should be checked with reference
to the design shear resistance, Vrdmax
128
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Seismic Design
(AASHTO LRFD)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Seismic Design
Flowchart
(AASHTO LRFD)

130
Dr. Naveed Anwar CE 72.32 - Design of Tall Buildings, Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Seismic Hazard

 The seismic hazard at a bridge site shall be characterized by the

acceleration response spectrum for the site and the site factors for
the relevant site class.

 The acceleration spectrum shall be determined using either the

General Procedure specified the Site Specific Procedure.

 The General Procedure shall use the peak ground acceleration

coefficient (PGA) and the short- and long period spectral
acceleration coefficients.

 The site-specific probabilistic ground-motion analysis should be

performed to generate a uniform-hazard acceleration response
spectrum considering a seven percent probability of exceedance in
75 yr for spectral values over the entire period range of interest.
131
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Site Classification

132
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Site Factors and Spectral Acceleration Coefficients

Values of Site Factor at Zero- Values of Site Factor for long Period
Period on Acceleration Spectrum Range of Acceleration Spectrum

133
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Seismic Performance Zones

Each bridge shall be assigned to one of the four seismic zones using the
value of SD1 calculated from the expression:

SD1 = Fv S1

134
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Response Modification Factors

Response Modification Factors—Substructures

Response Modification Factors—Connections

135
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Earthquake Analysis for Bridges

Minimum analysis Requirements for Multispan Bridges

* No Seismic Analysis Required

SM Single Mode Elastic Method
UL Ultimate Load Elastic Method
MM Multimode Elastic Method
TH Time History Method

136
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Single Mode Method

 The single-mode method of spectral analysis shall be based on the

fundamental mode of vibration in either the longitudinal or
transverse direction.

 For regular bridges, the fundamental modes of vibration in the

horizontal plane coincide with the longitudinal and transverse
axes of the bridge structure.

 This mode shape may be found by applying a uniform horizontal

load to the structure and calculating the corresponding deformed
shape.

 The natural period may be calculated by equating the maximum

potential and kinetic energies associated with the fundamental
mode shape.
137
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Single Mode Method

Calculate the static displacements vs(x) due to an assumed uniform loading

po

Calculate factors α, β, and γ as:

α = ʃ vs(x) dx
β = ʃ w(x) dx
γ = ʃ w (x) vs2dx

Calculate time period of bridge as:

Calculate the equivalent static earthquake loading pe(x)

138
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Uniform Load Method

 The uniform load method shall be based on the

fundamental mode of vibration in either the
longitudinal or transverse direction of the base
structure.

 The period of this mode of vibration shall be taken as

that of an equivalent single mass-spring oscillator.

 The stiffness of this equivalent spring shall be

calculated using the maximum displacement that
occurs when an arbitrary uniform lateral load is
applied to the bridge
139
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Uniform Load Method

Calculate the static displacements vs(x) due to an assumed uniform

loading po

Calculate the bridge lateral stiffness, K, and total weight, W, from the
following expressions

Calculate the period of the bridge, Tm, using the expression

Calculate the equivalent static earthquake loading pe from the

expression

140
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Multimode Method

 The multimode spectral analysis method shall be used for bridges

in which coupling occurs in more than one of the three coordinate
directions within each mode of vibration.

 As a minimum, linear dynamic analysis using a three-dimensional

model shall be used to represent the structure.

 The number of modes included in the analysis should be at least

three times the number of spans in the model.

 The member forces and displacements may be estimated by

combining the respective response quantities (moment, force,
displacement, or relative displacement) from the individual modes
by the Complete Quadratic Combination (CQC) method

141
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Time History Analysis

 Developed time histories shall have characteristics that are

representative of the seismic environment of the site and the local
site conditions

 Where recorded time histories are used, they shall be scaled to the
approximate level of the design response spectrum in the period
range of significance.

 Each time history shall be modified to be response-spectrum

compatible using the time-domain procedure.

 At least three response-spectrum-compatible time histories shall

be used for each component of motion in representing the design
earthquake (ground motions having seven percent probability of
exceedance in 75 yr).
142
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Time History Analysis

 All three orthogonal components (x, y, and z) of design motion

shall be input simultaneously when conducting a nonlinear time-
history analysis.

 The design actions shall be taken as the maximum response

calculated for the three ground motions in each principal
direction.

 If a minimum of seven time histories are used for each component

of motion, the design actions may be taken as the mean response
calculated for each principa l direction.

143
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Determine Design Displacements

P-Δ Requirements

The displacement of any column or pier in the longitudinal or transverse

direction shall satisfy:
Δ Pu = 0.25 ϕMn
Where,
Δ = Rd Δe

If T< 1.25Ts then Rd = (1-1/R)*1.25Ts/T + 1/R

If T> 1.25Ts then Rd = 1.0
Δ = displacement of the point of contraflexure in the column
Δe = displacement calculated from elastic seismic analysis
T = period of fundamental mode of vibration
TS = corner period Pu = axial load
φ = flexural resistance factor for column specified 144
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Seismic Design
(European Standards)

Dr. Naveed Anwar

 Design Requirements

No-Collapse • Flexural Yielding of Specific

(Ultimate Limit Sections are Allowed
State)
• No damage to Brick Damage

Minimisation
of damage • Minor Damage to Secondary
(serviceability Components
limit state)

146
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Intended Behaviour

The bridge shall be designed so that its behaviour under the design
seismic action is either ductile, or limited ductile/essentially elastic,
depending on the seismicity of the site.

Q = Behaviour Factor
IE = Ideal Elastic
E = Essentially Elastic
LD = Limited Ductile
D = Ductile

147
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Seismic Analysis Methods

Linear Dynamic Fundamental Mode

Analysis Analysis

Non-Linear
Alternative Linear
Dynamic Time
Methods
History Analysis

Pushover Analysis

148
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Linear Dynamic Analysis (Response Spectrum
Analysis)

 The Response Spectrum Analysis is an elastic calculation of the peak

dynamic responses of all significant modes of the structure, using
the ordinates of the site dependent design spectrum.

 The overall response is obtained by statistical combination of the

maximum modal contributions. Such an analysis may be applied in
all cases in which a linear analysis is allowed.

 The earthquake action effects shall be determined from an

appropriate discrete linear model (Full Dynamic Model), idealised in
accordance with the laws of mechanics and the principles of
structural analysis, and compatible with an associated idealisation of
the seismc action. In general this model is a space model.

149
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Fundamental Model Method (FMM)

Fundamental mode method, equivalent static seismic forces are derived

from the inertia forces corresponding to the fundamental mode and
natural period of the structure in the direction under consideration, using
the relevant ordinate of the site dependent design spectrum

Rigid Deck
Model

Flexible
Individual
Deck
Pier Model
Model
150
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Rigid Deck Model

This model is only be applied, when deformation of the deck within a

horizontal plane is negligible compared to the horizontal displacements of
the pier tops under seismic action.

The earthquake effects shall be determined by applying a horizontal

equivalent static force at the deck given by the expression

F= MSDT

M = Total effective mass of structure

SD = Spectral Acceleration
T = Fundamental Time Period

151
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexible Deck Model

The fundamental period of the structure in the horizontal direction

considered, may be estimated via the Rayleigh quotient, using a
generalised single-degree-of-freedom system:

The earthquake effects shall be determined by applying horizontal forces

Fi at all nodal points given by:

152
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Individual Pier Model

In some cases the seismic action in the transverse direction of the bridge
is resisted mainly by the piers, without significant interaction between
adjacent piers. In such cases the seismic action effects acting in the i-th
pier may be approximated by applying on it an equivalent static force as:

Fi= MiSDiTi

Where;

153
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Alternative Linear Method

Time series analysis is an alternative linear method

, the design Seismic action shall be taken as the
average of the extreme response computed for each
accelerogram in a set of time-histories considered.

154
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis

 The time dependent response of the structure shall be obtained through

direct numerical integration of its non-linear differential equations of
motion.

 The seismic input shall consist of ground motion time-histories

 The effects of gravity loads and of the other quasi-pern1anent actions in the
seismic design situation, as well as second order effects, shall be taken into
account.

 This method can be used only in combination with a standard response

spectrum analysis to provide insight into the post -elastic response and
comparison between required and available local ductility den1ands.

 Generally, the results of the non-linear analysis shall not be used to relax
requirements resulting from the response spectrum analysis
155
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Pushover Analysis

 Pushover analysis is a static non-linear analysis of the

structure under constant vertical (gravity) loads and
monotonically increased horizontal loads, representing the
effect of a horizontal Seismic component. Second order effects
shall be accounted for.

 The horizontal loads are increased until a target displacement

is reached at a reference point.

 The method may be applied to the entire bridge structure or

to individual components

156
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Pushover Analysis

 The main objectives of the analysis are:

 The estimation of the sequence and the final pattern

of plastic hinge formulation;

 The estimation of the redistribution of forces

following the formulation of plastic hinges.

 The assessment of the force-displacement curve of

the structure (capacity curve) and of the deformation
demands of the plastic hinges up to the target
displacement.
157
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Capacity Design Approach

 For structures designed for ductile behaviour, capacity design

effects Fc (Vc, Mc, Nc) shall be calculated by analysing the
intended plastic mechanism under:

 The non-seismic actions in the design seismic situation

and

 The level of seismic action in the direction under

consideration at which all intended flexural hinges have
developed bending moments equal to an upper fractile of
their flexural resistance, called the over strength moment,
Mo.

158
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Capacity Design Approach

 The over strength moment of a section shall be calculated as:

Mo = γo MRD
Where;
Yo is the overstrength factor;
MRD is the design flexural strength of the section.

 The value of the overstrength factor should reflect the variability of

material strength properties, and the ratio of the ultimate strength
to the yield strength.

Yo = 1.35 for concrete members

Yo = 1.25 for steel members

159
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Capacity Design Approach

 In the case of reinforced concrete sections with special confining

reinforcement and with the value of the normalized axial force
exceeding 0.1, the value of the overstrength factor shall be
multiplied by 1 + 2 (ηk – 0.1)2

Where;
ηk = NED / (Ac fck)

 Within the length of members that develop plastic hinge(s), the

capacity design bending moment Mc at the vicinity of the hinge shall
not be assumed to be greater than the relevant design flexural
resistance MRD of the nearest hinge

160
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Capacity Design Approach

Capacity design moments Mc within the length of member containing

plastic hinges

161
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance Criteria

Structures of Limited Ductile Behaviour

For flexural resistance of sections the following condition

shall be satisfied

Ed < Rd
Ed is the design action effect in the seismic design

Rd is the design flexural resistance of the section

162
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Flexural Resistance Criteria

Structures of Ductile Behaviour

 For flexural resistance of sections of plastic hinges the following

condition shall be satisfied
Med < MRd

MEd is the design value of the moment

MRd is the design flexural resistance of the section

 For flexural resistance of sections outside regions of plastic hinges

the following condition shall be satisfied
Mc < MRd

163
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Vertical Shear Resistance

Verification of joints adjacent to plastic hinges

Any joint between a vertical ductile pier and the deck or a foundation
adjacent to a plastic hinge in the pier, shall be designed in shear to resist
the capacity design effects of the plastic hinge in the relevant direction.

The design vertical shear of the joint, Vjz, shall be assumed as:

Vjz = γo TRC – VB1C

TRC = Resultant force of the tensile reinforcement of the pier

VB1C = shear force of beam adjacent to tensile face of column

164
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Horizontal Design Shear

The design horizontal shear of the joint Vjx may be calculated as

165
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Shear Verification

The shear verification should be carried out at the centre of the

joint, and the influence of following axial forces may be taken
into account in addition to vertical and horizontal shear.

Vertical axial joint force Njz =

166
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Joint Verification

For the joint verification the following average nominal stresses

are used:

Shear stresses =

Axial Forces =

167
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Reinforcement Arrangement

 Vertical stirrups should enclose the longitudinal "beam"

reinforcement at the face opposite to the pier. Horizontal stirrups
should enclose the pier vertical reinforcement, as well as "beam"
horizontal bars anchored into the joint. Continuation of pier
stirrups/hoops into the joint is recommended

 Up to 50% of the total amount of vertical stirrups required in the

joint may be U bars, enclosing the longitudinal "beam" reinforcement
at the face opposite to the column

 50 % of the bars of the top and bottom longitudinal reinforcement of

the "beams", when continuous through the joint body and adequately
anchored beyond it, may be taken into account for covering the
required horizontal joint reinforcement area Asx.

168
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Reinforcement Arrangement

169
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Reinforcement Arrangement

 The longitudinal (vertical) pier reinforcement should reach as far as

possible into the "beam", ending just before the reinforcement layers
of the "beam" at the face opposite to the pier-"beam" interface. In the
direction of flexure of the plastic hinge, the bars of both tensile
regions of the pier should be anchored by a rectangular hook
directed towards the centre of the pier.

 Vertical stirrups of amount ρiz > ρmin, acceptable from the

constructability point of view, may be placed within the joint body.

 The horizontal reinforcement within the joint body may be reduced

by ΔAsz < ΔAsx, provided that the ratio of the horizontal
reinforcement remaining within the joint body satisfies expression

170
Dr. Naveed Anwar
 Deck Verification

 It shall be verified that no significant yielding occurs in the deck. This

verification shall be carried out

 for bridges of limited ductile behaviour, under the most adverse

design action effect
 for bridges of ductile behaviour, under the capacity design
effects

 When the horizontal component of the seismic action in the

transverse direction of the bridge is considered, yielding of the deck
for flexure within a horizontal plane is considered to be significant if
the reinforcement of the top slab of the deck yields up to a distance
from its edge equal to 10 % of the top slab width, or up to the
junction of the top slab with a web, whichever is closer to the edge of
the top slab
171
Dr. Naveed Anwar
View publication stats