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

net/publication/341135377

Design of a Prestressed Bridge - Final Year Project

Thesis · May 2018

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12044.67200

CITATIONS READS
0 6,114

1 author:

Hamid Eldarwich
Princeton University
8 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hamid Eldarwich on 04 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Lebanese American University

School of Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

CIE 499 – Capstone Design Project

Design of System Interchange and a Bridge

Advisor: Caesar Abi Shdid, PhD, P.E., S.E.

Prepared by: Hamid S. El-Darwich

Team Members:

Hamid El Darwich – Structural

Yendy Naimeh – Management

Hadi Hadid – Geotechnical

Dina Nassar - Transportation

Contents
Project Introduction: 4

Limit States: 6

Main Loads used in Design 6

Design Approach: 10

Design Components: 11

Slab Design: 12

Concrete Barrier Design: 24

Overhang Design: 28

Girder Design: 31

Elastomeric Pads: 48

Diaphragm Design: 49

Appendix 50

References: 53

Commentary 54

Lessons Learned: 54

Tables and Figures

FIGURE 1 SATELLITE VIEW OF THE INTERCHANGE ......................................................................................................................4

FIGURE 2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN ..............................................................................................................................................4
FIGURE 3 DESIGN VEHICLES OF HL93 .....................................................................................................................................8
FIGURE 4 TYPE VI AASHTO GIRDER ....................................................................................................................................10
FIGURE 5 BRIDGE PRE-SLAB-DESIGN LAYOUT ........................................................................................................................11
FIGURE 6 DESIGN COMPONENTS .........................................................................................................................................11
FIGURE 7 FIRST THICKNESS ASSUMPTION LAYOUT...................................................................................................................12
FIGURE 8 DEAD LOADING MOMENT DIAGRAM .......................................................................................................................14
FIGURE 9 DEAD LOADING SHEAR DIAGRAM ...........................................................................................................................14
FIGURE 10 HS20 WHEELS SPACING.....................................................................................................................................15
FIGURE 11 LOAD AXLE PLACEMENT FOR MAXIMUM NEGATIVE MOMENT ................................................................................15
FIGURE 12 MOMENT ENVELOPE ONE LOADED LANE ...............................................................................................................17
FIGURE 13 POSITIVE MOMENT ONE LOADED LANE .................................................................................................................17
FIGURE 14 POSITIVE MOMENT ONE LOADED LANE (ADJUSTED) ................................................................................................17
FIGURE 15 TWO LANES LOADED..........................................................................................................................................17
FIGURE 16 MOMENT ENVELOPE TWO LOADED LANES .............................................................................................................17
FIGURE 17 POSITIVE MOMENT TWO LOADED LANE ................................................................................................................18

2
FIGURE 18 POSITIVE MOMENT TWO LOADED LANE (ADJUSTED) ...............................................................................................18
FIGURE 19 NEGATIVE MOMENT IN INTERIOR SPAN .................................................................................................................18
FIGURE 20 NEGATIVE MOMENT FOR INTERIOR SPAN (ADJUSTED)..............................................................................................18
FIGURE 21 FORCE EFFECTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................19
FIGURE 22 SLAB REINFORCEMENT SECTION A-A ....................................................................................................................24
FIGURE 23 BARRIER AND VEHICLE ON BRIDGE ........................................................................................................................24
FIGURE 24 CONCRETE BARRIER RESISTING TRUCK COLLISION DURING TESTING.............................................................................25
FIGURE 25 CONCRETE BARRIER DETAILING ............................................................................................................................25
FIGURE 26 DESIGN FORCES FOR TRAFFIC RAILINGS .................................................................................................................26
FIGURE 27 BARRIER ACTING AS CANTILEVER BEAM .................................................................................................................27
FIGURE 28 OVERHANG DESIGN SECTION ...............................................................................................................................28
FIGURE 29 OVERHANG DESIGN CASE 3.................................................................................................................................29
FIGURE 30 OVERHANG AND PARAPET DESIGN........................................................................................................................31
FIGURE 31 AASHTO TYPE 6 GIRDER ...................................................................................................................................32
FIGURE 32 GIRDER SECTION PROPERTIES ..............................................................................................................................32
FIGURE 33 COMPOSITE SECTION DRAWING ...........................................................................................................................33
FIGURE 34 TRUCK PLACEMENT ON BRIDGE ............................................................................................................................35
FIGURE 35 TRUCK AXLES PLACEMENT ..................................................................................................................................35
FIGURE 36 DESIGN TANDEM PLACEMENT .............................................................................................................................35
FIGURE 37 DESIGN TANDEM LOADS .....................................................................................................................................35
FIGURE 38 DESIGN LANE LOAD POSITION..............................................................................................................................36
FIGURE 39 STRANDS PLACEMENT ........................................................................................................................................38
FIGURE 40 REINFORCEMENT ARRANGEMENT .........................................................................................................................39
FIGURE 41 ECCENTRICITY DESIGN ........................................................................................................................................40
FIGURE 42 GIRDER REINFORCEMENT ....................................................................................................................................43
FIGURE 43 HS20 POSITION FOR SHEAR ................................................................................................................................44
FIGURE 44 DESIGN TANDEM POSITION FOR SHEAR .................................................................................................................44
FIGURE 45 GIRDER REINFORCEMENT ....................................................................................................................................46
FIGURE 46 PRESTRESSED GIRDER IN REAL LIFE .......................................................................................................................46
FIGURE 47 ELASTOMERIC PADS IN REAL LIFE .........................................................................................................................48
FIGURE 48 ELASTOMERIC PADS PROPERTIES ..........................................................................................................................48
FIGURE 49 UNIT WEIGHTS AASHTO 3.5.1-1 .......................................................................................................................51
FIGURE 50 SPAN A DEAD LOADING DIAGRAMS ......................................................................................................................51
FIGURE 51 SPAN B DEAD LOADING DIAGRAMS ......................................................................................................................51
FIGURE 52 SPAN C DEAD LOADING DIAGRAMS ......................................................................................................................52
FIGURE 53 MOVING LOAD VEHICLE DEFINITION .....................................................................................................................52

TABLE 1 RESISTANCE FACTORS ..............................................................................................................................................8

TABLE 3 DYNAMIC LOAD ALLOWANCE (AASHTO TABLE 3.6.2.1-1) ...........................................................................................9
TABLE 4 SLAB ROADWAY PRELIMINARY ROADWAY SKETCH.......................................................................................................16
TABLE 5 OVERHANG NEGATIVE LIVE MOMENT.......................................................................................................................16
TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF FACTORED MOMENTS ........................................................................................................................20
TABLE 7 LOAD COMBINATIONS AND LOAD FACTORS ................................................................................................................50
TABLE 8 LOAD FACTORS FOR PERMANENT LOADS ...................................................................................................................50

3
Project Introduction:
Our transportation teammate, Ms Dina Nassar, went on site and discussed the importance of
redesigning the Nahr Ibrahim Interchange (34°04’06.10’’ N, 35°38’38.37 E); the interchange suffers from
several safety issues and random traffic crossings. We have studied whether to rebuild the interchange in
the same location (figure below) or to relocate it. The decision was to move it towards Beirut to avoid
rerouting and constructability issues; this is because the freeway under the bridge serves as the main link
between Beirut and Tripoli, the biggest two cities in Lebanon.

Figure 1 Satellite View of the Interchange

The figure below shows the geometric design of the interchange supplied by our transportation
engineer; the final design has three traffic lanes, sidewalks, shoulders, and other bridge furniture to add up
to total 56 ft. bridge width with a total 138 ft. in length.

Figure 2 Geometric Design

4
 What is girder bridge:

A girder bridge is built of girders placed on bridge abutments and foundation piers. Bridge deck is
built on top of the girders to carry traffic.

Design Method:

The design of the bridge elements calculations is based on Load and Resistance Factor (LRFD)
methodology. The main aim of LRFD is to proportion structures so that all limit states, the summation of
factored loads (also multiplied by load modifiers) are less than the factored resistance of the structure. The
limit states identified by the AASHTO LRDF specifications include service, strength, fatigue and fracture,
and extreme events [1].

The LRFD’s, reliability-based methodology, can be summarized in the following equation

(AASHTO 1.3.2)

∑ 𝑛𝑖 𝛾𝑖 𝑄𝑖 ≤ ∅𝑅𝑛

Where:
𝑛𝑖 : 𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦, 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑦, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛. It has a
value of 1.0 for typical bridges with typical properties (AASHTO 1.3)

𝛾𝑖 : 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟, 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠.

𝑄𝑖 : 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡 (𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑜𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟, 𝑒𝑡𝑐. )

∅: 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟, 𝑎 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒.

𝑅𝑛 : 𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑒𝑛𝑡.

5
Limit States:
AASHTO LRFD specifies twelve limit states; each of the limit state focuses on either strength,
service, fatigue, or extreme events. The following limit states will be used to design our bridge (AASHTO
2.5.2):

- Strength I: basic load combination related to normal vehicular use of the bridge without wind. Note
that limit states containing wind loads will not be used for two main reasons: the height of bridge
is less than 35 ft., and the wind speed in Lebanon is extremely low compared to the base design
speed of 100 mph.
- Extreme Event I: load combinations that include earthquake; this will be used in case we have
bridge piers.
- Extreme Event II: load combinations that include ice load (not applicable) or collisions by vessels
and vehicles. This limit state will be used for designing the part of the bridge subjected to vehicular
collision.

Other combinations, limit states, do not apply for several reasons: wind loading does not apply so
we exclude the combinations that are controlled the wind loading; the dead load is not very high
compared to live load. Finally, the service limit states produce less factored loads in our design, but we
need to design for worst case, so the service limit state is not taken into consideration. However, the
service limit states (without wind loading) can be used for deflection control calculations.

Main Loads used in Design

The load combinations that shall be used in bridge design are taken from Table 3.4.1-1 of the
AASHTO LRFD Specification. The limits states, load factors, and combinations are found in AASHTO
LRFD Bridge Design Specification, Section 3. There are two main types of loads that will be used in the
design of our bridge:

A) Permanent Loads: loads and forced that are, or assumed to be, either constant upon completion
of construction or varying only over a long-time interval. The following are the major
permanent loads
- Dead Load: consist of the weights of all permanent portions of an entire structure and
include weights of any expected future additions. Provisions are to be made in the design
calculations to add 30 psf for the future wearing surface. In addition, the weight of the
concrete barrier wall can be distributed equally among all girders. In our design, the dead
load has two components: DC (dead load of structural components and non-structural
attachments), and DW (dead load of wearing surface and utilities).

B) Transient Loads: loads and forced that can vary over a short time interval relative to the lifetime
of the structure. The following transient loads will be considered in the design:
- Vehicular Live Load (LL)with its dynamic load allowance, AASHTO LRFD specifies
criteria or applying this load based on standard vehicle (TL) and lane loads (LN). The
application of this loading will be discussed in the next section.
- Vehicular collision load (CT): this will used in design of parapet and overhang.

6
 - Earthquake loading (EQ): used mainly for pier design. The design to survive earthquake
forced shall be in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Section 3.1. The seismic parameters
can be determined based on location using software developed by U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS).
- Wind loading (WL and WS): it depends on wind velocity and pressure on the bridge
components. The base design velocity is usually 100 mph which is adjusted based on the
elevation of the bridge. However, as mentioned earlier, this loading will not be
incorporated in our design.

Strength Limit States for Superstructure Design:

Each limit state has a set of loads to be considered in the design. Each type of load is assigned a
load factor, or/and other load modifiers. The load combination and modifiers can be extracted from the
tables in AASHTO Section 3.4 (see Appendix A). Also, AASHTO LRFD in Section 3 specified that
“designer may determine that not all of the loads in each load combination apply to the situation under
investigation.” Hence, each imposed displacement or load is studied with regard to its effect on our specific
bridge. For example, the force effect due to temperature gradient is set to zero in the strength limit state;
this is a common practice as specified by AASHTO Section 3.12 unless project-specific basis dictates
otherwise.

Also, note that our bridge has a simply supported span, hence it is enough for us to take the
maximum permanent load factors because the uplift does not exist at the bearing pads. However, in
investigating the uplift, we cannot directly use the maximum load factors because some permanent loads
might reduce the uplift, so we need to study different load factors combinations if we have a continuous
span.

Based on the combinations and load factors to be considered from AASHTO, the load effect Q, is
given in the following equations in relation to various limit states (Kim, 2013):

Strength I: Q = 1.25DC + 1.50DW + 1.75LL; LL= TL + LN

Service I : Q = 1.00DC + 1.00DW + 1.00 LL

7
Resistance Factors, Φ, for Strength Limits:

Resistance Factors for strength limit states are given for various structural categories in AASHTO.
The following are the resistance factors that apply to our design:

Flexure and Tension in reinforced concrete 0.90

AASHTO
Flexure and Tension in prestressed concrete 1.00 5.5.4.2
Shear in Concrete 0.90
Table 1 Resistance Factors

Design Live Load HL-93:

HL-93 is a notional live load where H represents the HS truck, L the lane load, and 93 the year in
which the design live load HL-93 was adopted. According to AASHTO 3.6.1.2, the design live load
consists of a combination:

- Design truck (HS-20) or design tandem (a pair of 25 kips axles 4 ft. apart),
- Design lane load of 0.64 kip-ft uniformly distributed in the longitudinal direction.
Transversely the design lane load is distributed over a 10 ft. width within a 12 ft. design
lane. Note that the design lane load is not subjected to dynamic allowance.

For both design truck and design tandem loads, the transverse spacing of wheels is taken as 6.0
feet. The figure below shows the different components of the HL93:

Figure 3 Design Vehicles of HL93

Multiple Presence Factors, m:

Design trucks will be present in adjacent lanes on roadways with multiple design lanes. Because it
is unlikely that three of more adjacent lanes will be loaded simultaneously with trucks, adjustments in
design loads are necessary. However, note that these factors have been implicitly included in the
approximate equations for distribution factors and should be removed for fatigue investigations (AASHTO
3.6.1.1.2).

8
Dynamic Load Allowance, IM:

The dynamic load allowance, IM, is applied only to the design truck load. Or tandem, not to the
design lane load. The static effects of the design truck or tandem shall be increased for dynamic load
allowance. The table below indicates the dynamic load allowance for different components under different
limit states:

Dynamic Load Allowance, IM (%)

Deck Joint – All Limit States 75
All other Components – Fatigue and Fracture 15
All other components – All other limit states 33
Table 2 Dynamic Load Allowance (AASHTO Table 3.6.2.1-1)

Calculating the Moment per Beam:

Since we have multiple design lanes, the placement of the design vehicle (tandem or truck) with
the design lane has many combinations. The placement that produces the maximum effect, moment or
shear, on the beam can be estimated by modeling the cross-section of the bridge with girders layout and
moving the loads until we achieve maximum loading on one of the girders. This method is time-consuming.

Instead, AASHTO LRDF specifies a standard method to calculate the live load moments and shears
for beams or girders. The live load moment and shear for beams are determined by applying the lane fraction
(distribution factor) in AASHTO Article 4.6.2.2.2 to the moment and shear due to the loads assumed to
occupy a 10 feet transversely within a design lane (Kim, 2013).

Hence, to calculate the un-factored live load moments per beam with distribution factors DFM, and
Dynamic Allowance IM, we can use the following formula:

𝑀𝑇𝐿 = (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘 𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒)(𝐷𝐹𝑀)(1 + 𝐼𝑀)

𝑀𝑇𝐿𝑁 = (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑘 𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒)(𝐷𝐹𝑀)

Note that the dynamic effect does not apply to the lane load

9
Design Approach:
After qualitatively comparing the different alternatives of the system (RC, Steel, or Pre-Stressed
Concrete), we have decided to choose Prestressed-Girders system. The following reasons are what have
driven the design system:

- I have more skills in designing Prestressed Concrete or RC Concrete, which gives me the
ability to do more maneuvers and shorten the design time.
- In addition, Brown (2016), in ‘Design of Reinforced Concrete’ mention the following
advantages of Pre-Stressed Concrete over other types of systems (RC or/and Steel): Entire
section is used to resist the loads, support long spans, Crack-free underworking loads,
Better protection against corrosion, Require less maintenance than other systems and
Lowest fire-cost solution.

The total bridge length is138 feet, and the total width is 44 feet. We aim to design the bridge as
one-span Bridge to:

- Avoid the risk of instability due to seismic loads; two-or more span bridges have piers
which is greatly subjected to seismic loads. This is why AASHTO Section 4.7.4.2 specifies
no seismic analysis is needed for single-span bridges regardless of the seismic zone.
However, the abutments shall be designed for minimum force requirements as per
AASHTO Article 3.10.9; this will be a geotechnical concern.
- Avoid excessive interruptions on the freeway; if we have two-or more span bridge, the pier
foundation need to be construction in the median of the freeway which will result in
blockage of some lanes. This decision has been reached by coordination with our
construction teammate.

Since the span is 138 feet, we need to start by a practical iteration to reach the required type of
AASHTO girder. AASHTO has 6 different types of pre-stressed girders. We will start by a safe
assumption which is assuming Type 6 Girder. Note that Type 5 and Type 6 girders are close to each other
regarding the gross area of the girder; however, Type 6 Girder has bigger depth which could aid us in the
moment resistance. Hence, if we design the girder as Type 6 and we find that it is an over-design, then we
can try AASHTO Type 4 Girder Directly. The following is a diagram showing the dimensions of Type 6
Girder:

Figure 4 Type VI AASHTO Girder

10
 As per project procedure, the center-to-center spacing between is the girder ranges from 3 feet to 6
feet. We will start by assuming 6 feet spacing; this means that 9 girders will be used to support the bridge
based on the layout. The following figure shows the relevant dimensions:

Figure 5 Bridge Pre-Slab-Design Layout

Finally, the following table summarizes the current parameters of our bridge:

Bridge Parameters
Span 138 feet
Total Width 56 feet
st
Girders Type AASHTO Type 5 or 6 1 trial
Number of Girders 9 1st trial
Girders Spacing 6 1st trial

Design Components:
This figure summarizes visually the components we will be responsible to design:

Figure 6 Design Components

11
Slab Design:
The slab of the deck will be designed as one-way solid slab; the bridge width represents the total
span of the slab. We will be using the approximate method of analysis of AASHTO Art. 4.6.2.1, and we
will use some steps given by Kim (2013) “Simplified LRFD Bridge Design” .The following are the design
specifications we chose based on AASHTO requirements and local availability:

Parameters and Specifications

Overall Width of bridge 56 ft
Roadway Width 52 ft
Assumed Slab Thickness 9 in
Concrete Compressive Strength, f’c 6 ksi
Yield Strength of Steel, Fy 60 ksi
Girders Spacing 6 ft
Future Wearing Surface of 3’’ Weight 0.03 k/ft
Area of Curb + Parapet Assumed 3.37 ft2
Concrete Self-Weight 150 lb/ft3

The self-weight of concrete can be determined by AASHTO Section 3.5, for f’c between 5 ksi and
15 ksi, the unit weight is calculated as 0.14 + 0.001f’c. Hence, for f’c of 6, the unit weight is 146 lb/ft3 or
150 lb/ft3 approximately. Also, AASHTO Section 9 recommends a minimum value of f’c of 4.5 ksi to
ensure reduced permeability of concrete. The future wearing surface is given as a recommended value by
the NMDOT [2].

Step 1: Determine the minimum thickness of the slab.

The depth of concrete deck should not be less than 7.0 inches (AASHTO 9.7). The assumed slab
thickness is 9 inches. The future wearing surface is 3 inches. The following figure shows the assumed deck
thickness with the parapet.

Figure 7 First Thickness Assumption Layout

12
Step 2: Determine Dead Loads, w

The following dead loads are determined for a 1.0 feet wide transverse (as per AASHTO
equivalent strip method). For a 9.0 in thick slab, including cantilever, the dead load is:

𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 1 𝑓𝑡
𝑤𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑏 = (0.150 3
) (9.0 𝑖𝑛) ( ) = 0.113 𝑘𝑖𝑝/𝑓𝑡2
𝑓𝑡 12 𝑖𝑛

The dead load for the future wearing surface,𝑊𝑤𝑠 , is given as 0.03 kips/ft2. We have assumed that
parapet and curb area is 3.37 ft2 which is a conservative assumption (Kim, 2013). The dead load for the
curb and parapet in each side is:

𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 𝑘𝑖𝑝
𝑤𝐶&𝑃 = (0.150 3
) (3.37 𝑓𝑡 2 ) = 0.506 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑛
𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑡

Step 3: Find Dead Load Force Effects:

- Approximate design analysis as specified in AASHTO 4.6.2.1 is permitted and shall be

used because we have a solid slab.
- According to AASHTO 4.6.2.1.1, the extreme positive moment in any deck panel between
girders shall be applied to all positive moment regions. Similarly, the extreme negative
moment over any girder shall be taken to apply to all negative moment regions (see
Commentary Section A at end of report).
- According to AASHTO 4.6.2.1.6, the strips shall be treated as continuous beams with span
lengths equal to center-to-center distance between girders. For purpose of determining
force effects in the strip, the supporting components (i.e., girders) shall be assumed to be
infinitely rigid. The strips could be analyzed by classical beam theory.

For the analysis of the slab for dead loads, the resultant reactions and moments can be calculated
using the moment distribution method, influence line design aids, or a structural analysis program – SAP
2000 V15.0 – was used to model and analyze the continuous slab. Each of the loading calculated earlier
will be multiplied by the width of strip which is 1feet.The loadings and results are summarized below:

A) Deck Slab Self-Weight: it’s modelled as uniform loading over the entire 56 ft. span.

B) Wearing Surface: extends aver the total bridge span minus the parapet and curb (56 ft. – 4ft. =
52 ft.).

13
 C) Parapet and Curb Weight: assign it as a concentrated loading over the center of gravity of the
parapet (which is around 0.66 ft. from the exterior edge):

The following diagrams visualize the moments and shear due to the dead load combination (Slab
Weight + Wearing Surface + Parapet & Curb):

A B C

Figure 8 Dead loading Moment Diagram

A B C

Figure 9 Dead Loading Shear Diagram

Based on the diagrams, we can notice that the maximum dead load effect exist in spans A – the
overhang -, B, and C. Hence, we can tabulate the following results for our three spans:

Span M+ (max) [k-ft] Dis. To M+(max) [ft.] M- (max) [k-ft] Dis. To M-(max) [ft.] Vmax [k] Vmax Location
A 0 0 -2.7614 4 1.058 Right End
B 0 0 -2.7614 0 -0.897 Left end
C 0.42 2.01 -0.5291 6 0.525 Right end

*Note that all distance are measured from the left end of each span. Also, each of the resulting
diagrams can be found in Appendix D.

Step 4: Find the Live Load Force Effects:

Where the approximate strip method is used to analyze decks with the slab primarily in the
transverse direction, only the axles of the design truck shall be applied to the deck slab (AASHTO
3.6.1.3.3). Also, the wheel loads on the axle are equal and transversely spaced 6.0 ft. apart. The following
figure shows the spacing along with the design truck:

14
 Figure 10 HS20 Wheels Spacing

The design truck shall be positioned transversely to find the extreme force effects such that the
center of any wheel load is not closed than 1.0 ft. from the face of the curb for the design of the deck
overhang and 2.0 ft. from the edge of the design lane for the design of all other components (AASHTO
3.6.1.3.1).

Then we find the distance from the wheel load to the point of support, X, where S is the spacing of
supporting components using the figure below. The force effects are calculated conservatively using
concentrated wheel loads (AASHTO 4.6.2.1.6).

Figure 11 Load Axle Placement for Maximum Negative Moment

According to AASHTO Art. 3.6.1.1.1, the number of design lanes, NL, is the integer portion of the
ratio of the clear roadway width (ft), W, and the width of the design traffic lane (12 ft.). On each side, the
parapet and curb are 2 feet (given by our transportation teammate; but, it can be adjusted later). Hence, for
our bridge, the number of design lanes is given by:

𝑤 52 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡
𝑁𝐿 = = = 4.33 (4 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑠)
𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡
12.0 12
𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒

15
 Table 3 Slab Roadway Preliminary Roadway Sketch

The multiple presence factor, m, is 1.2 for one loaded lane, 1.0 for two loaded lanes, and 0.85 for
three loaded lanes, and 0.65 for more than three loaded lanes (AASHTO Table 3.6.1.1.2-1). The live loads
are applied to the deck to find the resulting reactions and moments at the point of interests.

The critical placement of single wheel load is at X = 12’’ as shown in a previous diagram. AASHTO
Table 4.6.2.1.3-1 (Appendix E) provides equations to calculate the equivalent strip width of slab to be
analyzed in live loading resistance. According to AASHTO 4.6.2.1.3, the total load on one traffic lane shall
be divided by the calculated strip width in order to get the load per unit width. Hence, the equivalent width
of a transverse strip for the overhang is given by:

12𝑖𝑛
45.0 + 10.0𝑋 = 45.0 + 10.0 ∗ ( ) = 55′′ = 4.58 ′
12𝑖𝑛

The multiple presence factor, m, is 1.2 for one loaded lane causing the maximum moment.
Therefore, the negative live load moment for overhang:

(𝑚)(𝑀 −) (1.2)(16.0𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠)(1.0𝑓𝑡) 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠. 𝑓𝑡

𝑀−= =− = −4.19
𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑝 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 4.58 𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑡. 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ

Table 4 Overhang Negative Live Moment

Now we need to find the maximum positive moment in the first interior span. For this analysis,
both single and double lane and double lane loadings need to be investigated. According to AASHTO
Table 4.6.2.1.3-1, for both cases, the equivalent strip for the positive moment is given by:

26.0 + 6.6𝑆 = 26.0 + (6.6)(6𝑓𝑡) = 65.6′′ = 5.47′

The axle of HS20 is modelled as a moving load on SAP2000 over the bridge width; see Appendix
F for Axle Definition. We have performed the analysis according to AASHTO requirements for one loaded
lane, and then we have extracted the moment and shear envelope:

16
 Figure 12 Moment Envelope One Loaded Lane

The following table shows the maximum positive moment with its location:

Span M+ (max) [k-width of strip) Distance to M+(max) [ft.]

B 16.94 2.4
Figure 13 Positive Moment One Loaded Lane

The previous value must be further adjusted to account for the strip width and the multiple presence
factor, m, of 1.2. The maximum positive live load moment in the first interior span is:

(𝑚)(𝑀+) (1.2)(16.94 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡)

𝑀′+ = = = 3.72 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ
𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑝 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 5.47 𝑓𝑡

Span M’+ (max) [k-ft] Distance to M+(max) [ft.]

B 3.72 2.4
Figure 14 Positive Moment One Loaded Lane (Adjusted)

If the loadings were placed in the second interior span I, they would decrease the effects of the first
truck loading in the first interior span. Hence, we need to skip one span and place the second loading in the
third interior span (D). The following diagram illustrates this placement:

Figure 15 Two Lanes Loaded

These loadings can be again simulated on SAP2000 to get the maximum positive in the interior
girder. The following diagram shows the moment envelope for two loaded lanes:

Figure 16 Moment Envelope Two Loaded Lanes

17
 The following table shows the maximum positive moment with its location:

Span M+ (max) [k-Width of Strip] Distance to M+(max) [ft.]

B 20.28 2.4
Figure 17 Positive Moment Two Loaded Lane

Modifying the previous value for strip width and multiple presence factor of value equals to 1.0:

(𝑚)(𝑀+) (1.0)(20.28 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡)

𝑀′+ = = = 3.71 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ
𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑝 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 5.47 𝑓𝑡

Span M’+ (max) [k-ft] Distance to M+(max) [ft.]

B 3.71 2.4
Figure 18 Positive Moment Two Loaded Lane (Adjusted)

Thus, the single lane loaded case governs, and the moment effect decreases in the first interior
span with increased lane loading cases. Therefore, as scenario of three loaded lanes does not need to be
considered for the maximum positive live load moment in the first interior span.

Now, we need to determine the negative live load moment in the first interior span. The same
approach is followed as previous; suitable path is selected for the moving vehicle and the moments envelope
is determined.

As per AASHTO Table 4.6.2.1.3-1, the equivalent strip for the negative moment is given by:

48.0 + 3.0𝑆 = 48.0 + (3.0)(6) = 66′′ = 5.5′

Using structural analysis program, SAP2000, the maximum negative live moment at the first span
is governed by the one loaded lane case. The value of this moment and its location is tabulated:

Span M- (max) [k-Width of Strip] Distance to M-(max) [ft.]

B -15.61 6
Figure 19 Negative Moment in Interior Span

The adjusted value for one loaded lane case and strip width is calculated by:

(𝑚)(𝑀−) (1.2)(−15.61 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡)

𝑀′− = = = −3.4 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ
𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑝 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 5.5 𝑓𝑡

Span M’+ (max) [k-ft] Distance to M+(max) [ft.]

B -3.4 0
Figure 20 Negative Moment for Interior Span (Adjusted)

18
 Finally, we can tabulate the force effects on the overhang and on the interior span:

Force Effects on Overhang:

M- (max) [k-ft] Due to DW -0.17
M- (max) [k-ft] Due to DC -2.59
M- (max) [k-ft] Due to LL -4.19
Force Effects on Interior Span:
Negative Moments
M- (max) [k-ft] Due to DW -0.09
M- (max) [k-ft] Due to DC -0.44
M- (max) [k-ft] Due to LL -3.4
Positive Moments
M+ (max) [k-ft] Due to DW 0.05
M+ (max) [k-ft] Due to DC 0.38
M+ (max) [k-ft] Due to LL 3.71
Figure 21 Force Effects Summary

*Note that DW represents the wearing surface, and DC represents the other permanent loads. We
have separated them in here because each one of them is factored by a different value.

**In superimposing the loads, we have assumed the maximum moments of different loads coincide
on the same point. See Commentary B for more explanations.

Step 5: Perform the Strength I Limit State Analysis

Each deck component and connection shall satisfy the main design equation presented earlier:

∑ 𝑛𝑖 𝛾𝑖 𝑄𝑖 ≤ ∅𝑅𝑛

The load modifiers were determined to be 1.0 for a typical bridge, and the maximum value of load
factor for permanent loads shall be considered because the force effects are additive; the minimum value
should be selected in case the force effect subtracts from the dominant force effects. Also, the dynamic load
allowance, IM, is 33% for live-load force effect.

For the strength I Limit State, the reaction and moments are,

𝑄 = ∑ 𝑛𝑖 𝛾𝑖 𝑄𝑖 = (1.0)(1.25)𝐷𝐶 + (1.00)(1.5)𝐷𝑊 + (1.00(1.75)(𝐿𝐿 + 𝐼𝑀)

Hence, the maximum extreme negative, M-:

𝑀−= (1.25)(−2.59) + (1.5)(−0.17) + (1.75)(−4.19)(1.33) = −13.24 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

The maximum extreme positive moment, M+:

19
 𝑀+= (1.25)(0.38) + (1.5)(0.05) + (1.75)(3.71)(1.33) = 9.19 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

Maximum Factored Negative Moment, M- -13.24 k-ft

Maximum Factored Positive Moment, M+ 9.19 k-ft
Table 5 Summary of Factored Moments

Step 6: Design for Moment

The compressive strength of the concrete at 28 days, f’c, is 6 kips/in2. The specified minimum yield
point of steel, Fy, is 60 kips/in2. For protection purpose, we will be using non-epoxy coated main
reinforcement (less expensive), but with more cover.

The maximum spacing of primary reinforcement for slabs is 1.5 times the thickness of the member
or 18.0 in. By using slab thickness of 9’’, the maximum spacing of reinforcement becomes (AASHTO Art.
5.10.3.2):

𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 = (1.5)(9) = 13.5′′ < 18′′ [𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠]

The required concrete cover is 2.5’’ for the unprotected main reinforcement for deck surfaces
subject to wear and 1.0’’ for the bottom of cast-in-place slabs (AASHTO 5.12.3-1). For practicality, we
will use 2.5’’ for both top and bottom covers. Note that if epoxy-coated bars are used, 1.0’’ is required for
covers for top and bottom.

Assuming no.5 steel rebar,

𝑑𝑏 = 0.625′′

𝐴𝑏 = 0.31 𝑖𝑛2

Since the bars will change their effective depth along the span of the slab, the controlling moment
– negative moment in this case- will be used in the slab design. The distance from the extreme compression
fiber to the centroid of the reinforcing bars is:

0.625
𝑑 = 9 − 2.5 − = 6.19′′
2

The depth of Whitney’s block is calculated as:

𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝐴𝑠 (60 𝑘𝑠𝑖)
𝑎= = = 0.98𝐴𝑠
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝑏 (0.85)(6 𝑘𝑠𝑖)(12′′ )

The factored resistance, Mn, is:

𝑎
𝑀𝑟 = ∅𝑀𝑛 = ∅𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 (𝑑 − )
2

Where:

∅ = resistance factored = 0.9 for flexure in reinforced concrete (AASHTO 5.7.3.2)

20
 𝑀𝑛 = nominal resistance

We set the factored resistance to be equal to the factored moment. Since, the negative moment
exceeds the positive moment in this case, the negative moment shall be the controlling one:

𝑀𝑢 = 𝑀𝑟

ft − kips in 0.98𝐴𝑠
(13.24 ) (12 ) = 0.9𝐴𝑠 (60 𝑘𝑠𝑖) (6.19′′ − )
ft 𝑖𝑛 2

The minimum area of steel needed is:

𝐴𝑠 = 0.49 𝑖𝑛2 /𝑓𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑏 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ

After iterations and checking against both minimum reinforcement and moment resistance, we
choose No.5 bars spars spaced at 6.5 inches, so the provided area of steel is:

12 𝑖𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 12 𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑛2 𝑖𝑛2

𝐴𝑠 = 𝐴𝑏 ( ) = 0.31 𝑖𝑛2 ( ) = 0.57 > 0.49 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑
𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 6.5 𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑡

Check the moment capacity:

𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 (0.57 𝑖𝑛2 )(60 𝑘𝑠𝑖)

𝑎= = = 0.56′′
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝑏 (0.85)(6 𝑘𝑠𝑖)(12′′ )

Confirm that the factored moment capacity is equal or greater than the factored moment:

𝑎 0.56 1
𝑀𝑟 = ∅𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 (𝑑 − ) = 0.9(0.57)(60) (6.19 − ) ( ) = 15.2 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 > 13.24 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑
2 2 12

We need now to check for the minimum steel reinforcement. The minimum steel for flexural
components is satisfied if a factored flexural resistance (Mr) is at least equal to the lesser of 1.2 times the
cracking moment, Mcr, and 1.33 times the factored moment required by applicable strength load
combination (AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2).

Where slabs are designed for a non-composite section to resist all loads, the cracking moment is:

𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 𝑆𝑛𝑐 𝑓𝑟

Where,

Snc = section modulus of the non-composite section.

Fr = modulus of rupture

For normal weight concrete, the modulus of rupture of concrete is (AASHTO 5.4.2.6):

𝑓𝑟 = 0.37√𝑓′𝑐 = 0.37 √6 𝑘𝑖𝑝/𝑖𝑛2 = 0.91 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠/𝑖𝑛2

21
 The section modulus for the extreme fiber of the non-composite section where tensile stress is
caused by external loads:

1 1
𝑆𝑛𝑐 = (𝑏)(𝑑) = (12)(9)2 = 162 𝑖𝑛3
6 6

The cracking moment is then:

𝑘𝑖𝑝
𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 𝑆𝑛𝑐 𝑓𝑟 = (162 𝑖𝑛3 ) (0.91 ) = 147.4 𝑘𝑖𝑝 − 𝑖𝑛
𝑖𝑛2

The required two values for comparison for minimum reinforcement:

1𝑓𝑡.
1.2𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 1.2(147.4 𝑘𝑖𝑝 − 𝑖𝑛) ( ) = 14.74 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
12 𝑖𝑛.

1.3𝑀𝑢 = 1.3(13.24𝑘 − 𝑖𝑛 ) = 17.21 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

Hence the cracking 1.2 times the cracking moment control, and we have:

𝑀𝑟 = 15.2 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 > 1.2𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 14.74 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

Reinforcement transverse to the main steel reinforcement (which is perpendicular to the traffic) is
placed in the bottom of all slabs. The amount of shall be a percentage of the main reinforcement required
as determined in the following formula. For primary reinforcement perpendicular to traffic, Se, is the
effective span length; the following must be true (AASHTO 9.7.3.2):

220
≤ 67%
√𝑆𝑒

According to AASHTO 9.7.2.3, for slabs supported on steel or concrete girders, Se is the distance
between flange tips, plus the flange overhang, taken as the distance from the extreme flange tip to the face
of the web, disregarding any fillet:

62′′
𝑆𝑒 = = 5.2 𝑓𝑡.
12
Reinforcement shall be placed in the secondary direction in the bottom of the slab as a percentage
of the primary reinforcement perpendicular to the traffic:

220 220
= = 96.5% > 67% [No Good]
√𝑆𝑒 √5.2

Therefore, use 67%:

𝐴𝑠 = 0.67𝐴𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛 = 0.67(0.57𝑖𝑛2 ) = 0.38 𝑖𝑛2

For longitudinal bottom bars, use No.5 (Ab = 0.31 in2) at 9.5 in:

22
 12 𝑖𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 12 𝑖𝑛2
𝐴𝑠 = 𝐴𝑏 ( ) = 0.31 𝑖𝑛2 ( ) = 0.39
𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 9.5 𝑓𝑡

According to AASHTO 9.7, in our case, the Temperature & Shrinkage Reinforcement is provided
at the top only in the direction parallel to the traffic:

1.30𝑏ℎ
𝐴𝑠,𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝 ≥
2(𝑏 + ℎ)𝑓𝑦

Where,

b= the least width of component section (12 in)

h= least thickness of component section (9 in)

fy= specified yield strength of reinforcing bars < 75 kip/in2

1.30(12′′ )(9′′ )
𝐴𝑠,𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝 ≥ = 0.056 𝑖𝑛2 /𝑓𝑡
2(12′′ + 9′′ )(60 𝑘𝑠𝑖)

𝑖𝑛2
0.11 ≤ 𝐴𝑠,𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝 ≤ 0.60, 𝑠𝑜 𝑢𝑠𝑒 #3 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑠 (𝐴𝑏 = 0.11 )
𝑓𝑡

The primary and secondary reinforcement already selected provide more than this amount.
However, for members greater than 6.0 inches thickness the shrinkage and temperature reinforcement is to
be distributed equally on both faces. The maximum spacing of this reinforcement is 3.0 times the slab
thickness or 18 in. For the top face longitudinal bars, the area of the temperature reinforcement, As,temp,
is 0.11 in2/ft. Use No.4 bars at 18 in, providing As=0.13 in2/ft.

For primary reinforcement, use No.5 bars at 6.5 in. For longitudinal bottom bars, use No. 5 at 8 in.
For longitudinal top bars, Use No.4 at 18 in. The following Drawings illustrate the slab structural design:

23
 Figure 22 Slab Reinforcement Section A-A

Concrete Barrier Design:

The primary purpose of traffic barrier shall be to contain vehicles on the bridge. Vehicles traffic
barriers shall be shown to be structurally and geometrically crashworthy (AASHTO 13.7.1.1). The barriers
are mainly designed to contain and redirect the vehicles, and hence to protect the occupant of a vehicle in
collision with the barrier, and to protect people and property underneath the bridge.

Figure 23 Barrier and Vehicle on Bridge

Since the selection of barrier type depends on the severity of crashes, AASHTO LRFD specifies
Test Level (TL-) Selection criteria. There are 6 different levels specified in the code – with TL-1 resulting
in the least number and severity of crashes, and TL-6 to the most severe probable crashes.

24
 Figure 24 Concrete Barrier Resisting Truck Collision during Testing

Our transportation engineer has informed us that there is significant number of trucks passing on
the bridge; Hence, TL-4 shall be selected conservatively. TL-4 is taken to be generally accepted for the
majority of high speed highways, freeways, expressways, and interstate highways with a mixture of trucks
and heavy vehicles. Also, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has continuously been using
TL-4 on Bridges [5].

In general, the vertical reinforcement in the barrier act to resist the crash force; the crash resistance
is also achieved from the horizontal reinforcement. The MnDOT recommends Type F Barrier with: height
of 32’’, vertical reinforcement of #4 @ 8’’, and horizontal reinforcement of 8 #4 to resist the applied forces
due to TL-4. The following detailing shows the detailing for this barrier, and the checks will be given next:

Figure 25 Concrete Barrier Detailing

For Each Testing Level, we have design requirements that are given in AASHTO Section 13.2,
these requirements include transverse impact force Ft, Longitudinal impact force Fl, minimum H height of
the barrier, etc. In designing the barrier, the resistance Rw should be greater than the transverse impact
force. The following table shows the design forces for barriers that will be used to determine reinforcement:

25
 Figure 26 Design Forces for Traffic Railings

According to AASHTO 13.3, the Yield Point Analysis can be used to determine the railing
resistance. The nominal railing resistance to transverse load, Rw, is determined using the following
equation:

2 𝑀𝑐 𝐿2𝑐
𝑅𝑤 = ( )(8𝑀𝑏 + 8𝑀𝑤 + )
2𝐿𝑐 − 𝐿𝑡 𝐻

Where:

𝐿𝑐 : 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛(𝑓𝑡)

𝐿𝑡 : 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝐹𝑡 (𝑓𝑡)

𝑀𝑏 : 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 (𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡)

𝑀𝑤 : 𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠 (𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡)

𝑀𝑐 : 𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑠 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑔𝑒 (𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡/𝑓𝑡)

𝐻: ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 (𝑓𝑡. )

The critical length of yield line failure pattern, Lc, can be determined using the following equation:

𝐿𝑡 𝐿𝑡 2 𝑀𝑏 + 𝑀𝑤
√
𝐿𝑐 = + ( ) + 𝐻( )
2 2 𝑀𝑐

Determining resistance around vertical axis, Mw:

The concrete barrier is consired as a cantiliver beam; since the barrier has variable thickness over
its height, the weight average of thicknesses (h = 13.75’’) is used. Since Mw is the resistance about the
vertical axis, the horizontal rebars in the exterior parapet shall be used to determine it. The following
information and parameters shall be used:

- On the exterior face, we have 4 #4 rebars, hence the area of steel (As) is 0.79 in2
- The Width of the beam considered in this calculation is the height of the barrier (32’’)
- The effective depth is given by: d= 13.75’’ – cover-1/2db = 13.25-2.5’’-0.25’’= 10.5’’
- Hence the resistance can be calculated by:

26
 𝑎 1 0.79 ∗ 60
𝑀𝑤 = ∅𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 (𝑑 − ) = 0.9(0.79)(60) (10.5 − ( )) /12 = 36.8 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
2 2 0.85 ∗ 6 ∗ 32

Determining resistance around horizontal axis, Mc:

The barrier is consdiered as a cantiliver beam, and the rebars placed vertically shall be used to
determine the resistance around the horizontal axis. The following illustration clarifies this idea:

Figure 27 Barrier acting as Cantilever Beam

- The width of the strip of the beam is taken as 1 ft., hence the reinforcement area is :
12′′
𝐴𝑠 = ′′ (0.2 𝑖𝑛2 ) = 0.3 𝑖𝑛2
8
- The average depth of the beam was calculated earlier as 13.75’’.
- The Moment capacity is then calculated as:
1 0.6 ∗ 60
𝑀𝑐 = 0.9(0.3)(60)(10.5 − ( ))/12 = 13.78𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
2 0.85 ∗ 6 ∗ 12
- The critical length of yield line failure pattern (length of barrier which the impact affects
and yields) is given by Lc:

𝐿𝑡 𝐿𝑡 2 𝑀𝑏 + 𝑀𝑤 3.5 3.5 2 0 + 36.8

𝐿𝑐 = + √( ) + 𝐻( )= + √( ) + 2.67( ) = 4.94 𝑓𝑡.
2 2 𝑀𝑐 2 2 13.78

- Finally, the resistance against transverse force is calculated as:

2 13.79 ∗ 4.942
𝑅𝑤 = ( ) (8 ∗ 0 + 8 ∗ 36.8 + ) = 134 𝑘 > 𝐹𝑡 = 54 𝑘
2 ∗ 4.94 − 3.5 2.67

Hence, the barrier we provided earlier meets AASHTO design requirements, so the barrier will
resist crashes with forces specified by the code. Note that the design procedure is adopted from the Colorado
Department of Transportation [6].

27
Overhang Design:
The overhang is designed so that in parapet fails first in case of extreme events; this is intuitive
because the parapet repair is easier and cheaper than overhang repair. According to AASHTO 13.4, the
overhang shall be designed for the three separate design cases:

1) Horizontal Forces from vehicle collision load (Extreme Event II Limit State).
2) Vertical Forces from vehicle collision Load (Extreme Event II Limit State)
3) Vertical Dead and Live Load at the overhang section (Strength I Limit State).

A) Case 1: Extreme Event II Limit State:

The following drawing shows the parameters to be used in the design:

Figure 28 Overhang Design Section

- Distance from Centerline of Exterior Girder to Design Section = 14’’ < 15’’
- Distance from Edge of Deck to Design Section (k) = 2.81’
- Distance from Barrier Face to Design Section (X) = 1.17’
- Depth of section under consideration (hdesign) = 8’’
- Overhang thickness (conservative) = 9’’

- Now, we need to determine the bending moments and dead load o structural components
and non-structural attachments:

Barrier: 𝑀𝐷𝐶−𝐵𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑟 = 𝑊𝐵𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑟 (𝑘 − 𝑋𝐶.𝐺 ) = 0.51(2.81 − 0.66) = 1.1 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

𝐾2 9 2.812
Deck: 𝑀𝐷𝐶−𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑘 = 𝑊𝐶 ∗ 𝑡 ∗ = 0.15 ( ) ( ) = 0.44 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
2 12 2

- Determine bending moments from wearing surface and utilities:

𝑥2 1.172
Wearing Surface: 𝑀𝐷𝑊−𝑊𝑆 = 𝑊𝐶 ∗ 𝑡𝑊𝑆 ∗ = 0.145(3) ( ) = 0.3 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
2 2

- As per AASHTO 13.4.2, the live load collision moment is taken to equal the flexural
capacity of the barrier:

28
 𝑀𝐶𝑇 = 𝑀𝐶 = 13.78 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
- The design factored moment (Extreme Event II):
𝑀𝑢1 = 1.0𝑀𝐷𝐶 + 1.0𝑀𝐷𝑊 + 1.0𝑀𝐶𝑇 = 1.54 + 0.3 + 13.78 = 15.62 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

- Finally, according to AASHTO 13.4.1, the design axial tensile load can be calculated as
follows:
𝑅𝑤 134
𝑇= = = 13.04 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
𝐿𝑐 + 2𝐻 4.94 + 2(2.67)

B) Case 2: Extreme Event II Limit State (Vertical Forces):

Based on common practice, the of vertical forces from vehicle collision never controls the
overhang design.

C) Case 3: Dead and Live Loads at Strength Limit State:

The overhang is designed to resist gravity forces from the dead load of structural
components and attachments to the cantilever, as well as a concentrated live load positioned
12’’ from the face of the barrier. This case rarely controls the design, except for decks with
widely spaced girders that allow the use of wider overhangs.
For decks with overhangs not exceeding 6’ (our case) measured from centerline of the
exterior girder to the face of the barrier, the outside row of wheel loads may be replaced with
a uniformly distributed line load of 1.0klf intensity per AASHTO 3.6.1.3.4.
The following diagram illustrates the parameters that shall be calculated for this design
case:

Figure 29 Overhang Design Case 3

29
 - Distance from Centerline of Exterior Girder to Design Section = 14’’ < 15’’
- Distance from Edge of Deck to Design Section (k) = 2.81’
- Distance from Barrier Face to Design Section (X) = 1.17’
- Depth of section under consideration (hdesign) = 8’’
- Overhang thickness (conservative) = 9’’
20
- Distance from LL Application to design section (Z) = 2.81 − 12 − 1 = 0.14 𝑓𝑡
- Live Load Multiple Presence Factor (m) = 1.2
- Dynamic Load Allowance (IM) = 33%

- The bending moment from dead loads (equal to the loads calculated for design case 1):

𝑀𝐷𝐶−𝐵𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑟 = 1.1 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

𝑀𝐷𝐶−𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑘 = 0.44 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

𝑀𝐷𝑊−𝑊𝑆 = 0.3 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

- The bending moment from live load is calculated as:

𝑘
𝑀𝐿𝐿 = 1.0 ∗ 0.14 𝑓𝑡 = 0.14 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
𝑓𝑡
- The design factored moment (Strength I):
𝑀𝑢3 = 1.25𝑀𝐷𝐶 + 1.5𝑀𝐷𝑊 + 1.75𝑚(𝐼𝑀 + 𝑀𝑙𝐿 )
= 1.25(1.1 + 0.44) + 1.5(0.3) + 1.75(1.2)(1.33)(0.14) = 2.77 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
- The design factored moment for case 1 exceeds that of case 3, hence the Case 1 controls
the design.

Finding the Required Reinforcement:

- The top transverse reinforcement provided earlier for the deck (the bottom reinforcement
becomes on the top in the overhang) is #4 @ 18’’.
12
- Area of steel per design strip 𝐴𝑠 = 0.2 18 = 0.57 𝑖𝑛2 /𝑓𝑡
0.625
- Effective Depth of section 𝑑 = 9 − 2 − 2
= 6.7′′
- Maximum allowable tension in reinforcement: 𝑇𝑠 = 34.2 𝑘
0.57∗60
- Depth of equivalent stress block 𝑎 = = 0.56′′
0.85∗6∗12
- The factored flexural resistance is:

1.0 0.56 9 0.56

∅𝐸𝐸 𝑀𝑛 = (34.2 (6.7 − ) − 13.04 ( − )) = 13.7 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 < 15.62 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
12 2 2 2

- The factored moment exceeds the reduced resistance, try #5 @ 5.5’’, we find:
∅𝐸𝐸 𝑀𝑛 = 17.01 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 > 15.62 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡, 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑
- Hence the required reinforcement in the overhang is #5 @ 5.5’’:

30
 Figure 30 Overhang and Parapet Design

Girder Design:
We have nine girders – simply supported – supporting a three traffic lanes slab. We have chosen
the one-span simply supported condition for the following reasons:

- The girders can be placed in one step: the nine girders will be pre-tensioned and transported
to site by trucks. If we have two spans, we will need more cycles to transport the girders.
- The 138 feet span is feasible to be constructed as one-span, so there is no need to divide
the bridge into two spans.
- One span bridge eliminates the need to construct piers. This has the following
consequences: eliminate the need to design a pier (shorten design time), reduce the quantity
of concrete being poured, and will also eliminate the need to block some lanes in case of
piers formwork construction in the middle of the freeway.

As mentioned earlier, the girders spacing is 6 feet, and the total bridge width is 56 feet. Also, the
type of girder that will be used is AASHTO Type 6 Prestressed Girder. Girders Type 1,2,3, and 4 do not
usually span more than 110 feet according to a research done by Florida Department of Transportation.
Hence, we can use either Type 5 or Type 6 Girders. However, we have directly assumed Type 6 because:

- Type 6 Girder has greater depth which offers greater moment resistance due to the larger
possible eccentricity; in another word, the prestressing cables can be placed further to the
bottom which increases the moment arm and hence increases the moment capacity of the
girder.
- Type 5 and Type 6 Girders almost have the same cross section area. This means that the
difference in the quantity of concrete being poured is insignificant, so using Type 6 Girder
is an economical option.

For Designing the girder, the Strength I Load Combination shall be used.

Step 1: Determine Section Properties

The following shows the drawing of the Type 6 Girder with its dimensions:

31
 Figure 31 AASHTO Type 6 Girder

The following table summarizes the section properties:

Designation AASHTO Type 6 Units

Area Ac 1085 in2
Moment of Inertia Ige 733320 in4
Top Section Modulus St 20587 in3
Bottom Section Modulus Sb 20157 in3
Bottom Flange Width b2 28 in
Bottom Flange Average Thickness t2 13 in
Total Depth h 72 in
Web Width bw 8 in
Centroid to Top Ct 35.62 in
Centroid to Bottom Cb 36.38 in
Radius of Gyration r2 676 in2
Self-Weight 1130 lb/ft
Figure 32 Girder Section Properties

Now determine the properties of the composite section:

Note that for the slab and girders we are using the same strength of concrete, hence the modulus of
elasticity of the girder is equal to the modulus of elasticity of the slab, so the modular ratio is:

𝑘 1.5
𝐸𝑐𝑔 (33000) (0.15 ) √6 𝑘𝑠𝑖 4700 𝑘𝑠𝑖
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑛= = = =1
𝐸𝑐𝑠 𝑘 1.5 4700 𝑘𝑠𝑖
(33000) (0.15 3 ) √6 𝑘𝑠𝑖
𝑓𝑡

The effective flange width is:

𝑙
= 414′′
𝑏𝑒 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 { 4
𝑆 = 72′′ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠
16ℎ𝑓 + 𝑏𝑤 = 120′′

32
 The slab weight Is carried by girders before hardening of concrete, so we have an un-shored
construction. The following table summarizes the composite section along with the basic section properties:

Basic Composite Units

Ag 1085 Ac 1796 in2
Yt 35.62 Y’t 31.32 in2
Yb 36.38 Y’b 49.68 in2
Ig 733320 Ic 1437163 in4
Snct 20587 Stc 45886 in3
Sncb 20157 Sbc 28928 in3

Figure 33 Composite Section Drawing

Step 2: Determine Allowable Stresses:

Based on AASHTO Section 5, the allowable stresses are:

- At Transfer of Prestressing Forces:

Extreme Fiber in Compression … … … … … … … … − 0.6𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 = −2.7𝑘𝑠𝑖

Extreme Fiber in Tension Except at Ends … … … … … … … … 3√𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 = 0.20 𝑘𝑠𝑖

33
 Extreme Fiber in Tension at ends of SS Members … … … … … … … … 6√𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 = 0.40 𝑘𝑠𝑖

- At Service Loads:

Extreme Fiber in Compression … … … … … … … … − 0.6𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 = −0.36𝑘𝑠𝑖

Extreme Fiber in Tension at ends of SS Members … … … … … … … … 6√𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 = 0.46 𝑘𝑠𝑖

• Note that we are using f’c of 6 ksi, and f’ci of 4.5 ksi.

Step 3: Determine the factored maximum moment:

Use AASHTO HL-93 Live Load model to find the unfactored moment and shear due to live load.
For all components excluding the deck joints and fatigue, the dynamic load allowance, IM, is 33%.

The beam spacing(S) is 6 ft, and the bridge span(L) is 138 ft. Now, we need to calculate the
distribution factor for moments, DFMsi, for interior beams with one lane loaded (AASHTO 4.6.2.2.2b-1).
Note that the multiple presence factor, m, is already included in the approximate equations for live load
distribution factor. For cross-section type k (precast concrete I or Bulb-Tee Sections), the following
parameters can be approximated:
0.1
𝑘𝑔
( ) = 1.09
12𝐿𝑡𝑠3
0.1
𝑆 0.4 𝑆 0.3 𝑘𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑀𝑠𝑖 = (0.06 + ( ) ( ) ( ) ) = 0.363
14 𝐿 12𝐿𝑡𝑠3

Calculate the distribution factor for moments, DFMmi, for interior beams with two lanes loaded:
0.1
𝑆 0.6 𝑆 0.2 𝑘𝑔
𝐷𝐹𝑀𝑚𝑖 = (0.075 + ( ) ( ) ( ) ) = 0.517 [Controls]
9.5 𝐿 12𝐿𝑡𝑠3

Calculate the moments due to the live loading (see Commentary C); this maximum moment occurs
when:

- Middle axle of HS20 is on the midspan of the bridge.

- One of the 25-kips axle is on the midspan of the bridge.

In this way, the moment produced at the midspan will be superimposed with maximum moment
produced from the uniform lane load. The following drawings show the loading pattern to produce the
maximum moment at midspan:

- For HS-20 Truck:

34
 Figure 34 Truck Placement on Bridge

Figure 35 Truck Axles Placement

- For Design Tandem:

Figure 36 Design Tandem Placement

Figure 37 Design Tandem Loads

35
 Figure 38 Design Lane Load Position

Using Statics, we can calculate the moments produced by the above loads:

- The maximum moment at midspan due to HL-93 is:

𝑀𝑡𝑟 = 2203.7 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
- The maximum moment at midspan due to HL-93 is:
𝑀𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 = 1675 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
- The maximum moment at midspan due to Lane Load:
𝑀𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 = 1523.5𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

Therefore, the moment resulting from the HS20 is the controlling value. Now, we need to
incorporate the moments and dynamic impact factors:

- The maximum live load plus impact moment per girder is defined by the following
equation:

𝐼𝑀
𝑀𝐿𝐿+𝐼𝑀 = 𝐷𝐹𝑀𝑚𝑖 ((𝑀𝑡𝑟 𝑜𝑟 𝑀𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 ) (1 + ) + 𝑀𝑙𝑛 ) =
100

= (0.517)((2203.7)(1 + 0.33) + 1523.5) = 2303 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

Find the moment due to DC, MDC. This moment is composed of three components that are due to:
girder, slab, and due to the barrier.

- The moment due to the beam weight is:

𝑤𝐿2 1.13 ∗ 1382
𝑀𝑔 = = = 2690 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
8 8
- Moment due to barrier:
2 𝑘
𝑤 = ( 3.37 𝑓𝑡 2 ) (0.15 3 ) = 0.14 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
7 𝑓𝑡
2
𝑤𝐿 0.14 ∗ 1382
𝑀𝐵 = = = 333.3 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
8 8
- Moment due to slab weight:
1′ 𝑘
𝑤 = (9′′ ) ( ′′ ) (0.15 3 ) (6′ ) = 0.675 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
12 𝑓𝑡

𝑤𝐿2 0.675 ∗ 1382

𝑀𝐷 = = = 1607 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
8 8

36
 - The total moment due to DC is:
𝑀𝐷𝐶 = 𝑀𝑔 + 𝑀𝐵 + 𝑀𝐷 = 4630 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

- Moment due to the future wearing surface:

3 𝑖𝑛 𝑘 𝑘
𝑊𝐷𝑊 = ( ) (0.14 3 ) (6 𝑓𝑡) = 0.21
𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑡 𝑓𝑡
12
𝑓𝑡

𝑘 2 2
𝑤𝐿2 (0.21 𝑓𝑡) (138 𝑓𝑡 )
𝑀𝐷𝑊 = = = 500 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡
8 8

- The unfactored moment per girder can be tabulated as follows:

Load Type Moment (k-ft)

DC 4630
DW 500
LL+IM 2303
- The factored moment for Strength I Limit State:

𝑀𝑢 = 1.25(4630 𝑘. 𝑓𝑡) + 1.5(500 𝑘. 𝑓𝑡) + 1.75(2303𝑘. 𝑓𝑡) = 10567.75 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

This value will be used to check for the maximum capacity.

Step 4: Determine Required Prestressing Forces and Strands:

We will be using Prestressing Strands Grade 270 Stress-relieved ½’’ 7-Wire Strands. The area of
prestressing wires in each strand is 0.152 in2. Assume 20% prestress losses. We have the following:

𝑓𝑝𝑦 = 0.85𝑓𝑝𝑢 = 0.85(270 𝑘𝑠𝑖) = 229.5 𝑘𝑠𝑖

0.85𝑓𝑝𝑦 = 189 𝑘𝑠𝑖 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠

𝑓𝑝𝑖 = {
0.74𝑓𝑝𝑢 = 199 𝑘𝑠𝑖

In the girder we have a rectangular section that can accommodate, assuming 1.5’’ cover from both
sides, the following number of strands:

- Vertically = 4 Strands
- Horizontally = 17 Strands

37
 We are working in this rectangular section to maximize the moment that can be supplied by the
strands; however, the strands can be placed at above the section into the web until we reach the centroid of
the section. The following diagram shows the maximum number of strands in the rectangular section:

Figure 39 Strands Placement

Assume that e=32’’:

@Transfer:

𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 𝑀𝑔 −𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 (32) 2690 ∗ 12

𝐵𝐹𝐶: − − + ≥ 𝜎𝑐𝑖 → − + ≥ −2.7 → 𝐹𝑖 ≤ 1714 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑏 𝑆𝑏 1085 20157 20157

𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 𝑀𝑔 −𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 (32) 2690 ∗ 12

𝑇𝐹𝑇: − + + ≥ 𝜎𝑐𝑖 → + − ≤ +0.2 → 𝐹𝑖 ≤ 2791 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑡 𝑆𝑡 1085 20587 20587

Hence, the prestressing force should be less than 1714 kips.

@Service:

𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 𝑀𝑔 + 𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝐿 + 𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑏
𝐵𝐹𝑇: − 𝜇 −𝜇 + + ≤ 𝜎𝑡 ⇒
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑏 𝑆𝑏 𝑆𝑏𝑐

−0.8 ∗ 𝐹𝑖 0.8 ∗ 𝐹𝑖 (32) 4297 ∗ 12 3136.3 ∗ 12

− + + ≤ 0.46 → 𝐹𝑖 ≥ 1693.3 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠
1085 20157 20157 28928
𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 𝑀𝑔 + 𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝐿 + 𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑏
𝑇𝐹𝐶: − 𝜇 +𝜇 − − ≥ 𝜎𝑐 ⇒
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑡 𝑆𝑡 𝑆𝑡𝑐

−0.8 ∗ 𝐹𝑖 0.8 ∗ 𝐹𝑖 (32) 4794 ∗ 12 3136.3 ∗ 12

+ − − ≥ −3.6 → 𝐹𝑖 ≥ 28.81𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
1085 20587 20587 45886

38
Hence, the prestressing force is bounded between the following values:

1693.3 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 ≤ 𝐹𝑖 ≤ 1714 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

𝐹𝑖 = (189 𝑘𝑠𝑖)(0.153 𝑖𝑛2 )(𝑛)

58.56 ≤ 𝑛 ≤ 59.3

Try 59 Strands, create an arrangement to keep the eccentricity reduced so that we stay within
acceptable stresses, so use 4 layers arranged like the following:

Figure 40 Reinforcement Arrangement

The prestressing forces and eccentricity are:

𝑒 = 32.34′

𝐹𝑖 = (189 𝑘𝑠𝑖)(0.153 𝑖𝑛2 )(59) = 1706.103 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

This force and eccentricity meets the allowable stresses criteria provided earlier. Note that this
eccentricity is also flexible and can be even reduced more without compromising on the allowable stresses
criteria. Now check stresses at ends:

𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 −1706.103 1706.103(32.34)
@𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑓𝑒𝑟, 𝑇𝐹𝑇: − + =→ + = 1.107 > 0.4 𝑘𝑠𝑖 𝑁. 𝐺
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑡 1085 20587

39
 Hence, we need to add end block to reduce the stresses due to the moment of prestressing forces,
the dimensions of the end block are 72’’ by 42’’, check again for stresses at ends:

𝐹𝑖 𝐹𝑖 𝑒 −1706.103 1706.103(31.96)
@𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑓𝑒𝑟, 𝑇𝐹𝑇: − + =→ + = 0.94 > 0.4 𝑘𝑠𝑖 𝑁. 𝐺
𝐴𝑐 𝑆𝑡 3024 36288

Hence, the option of end block does not work alone; so, we need to use the parabolic arrangement
of prestressing bars, find eccentricity at ends to meet the criteria:

1) Parabolic without end block:

−1706.103 1706.103 ∗ 𝑒
+ = 0.4 → 𝑒 = 23.8′′
1085 20587

2) Parabolic with end block:

1706.103 1706.103 ∗ 𝑒
− + = 0.4 → 𝑒 = 20.5′′
3024 36288

Since we are reducing the eccentricity as we move towards the end, the optimal design is to use the
parabolic option without the end block. The following diagram shows the eccentricity along the span of the
bridge:

Figure 41 Eccentricity Design

40
Step 5: Determine Moment Capacity (Strength I LS):

We will be using the direct strain compatibility approach (theoretical equation) along with
mathematical models provided by Manegoto and Pinto to determine the prestressing forces, fps, that can be
achieved before failure of the girder.

- Direct Strain Equation (only tendons exist):

𝑓𝑝𝑒 (189𝑘𝑠𝑖)(0.8)
𝜀𝑝𝑒 = = = 5.214 ∗ 10−3
𝐸𝑐 29000 𝑘𝑠𝑖

1 𝐹𝑒 𝐹𝑒 𝑒 2 1 0.8(1706.103) 0.8(1706.103)(32.34)2
𝜀𝑐𝑒 = |− − |= |− − | = 6.82 ∗ 10−4
𝐸𝑐 𝐴𝐶 𝐼 4700𝑘𝑠𝑖 1085 733320

0.85𝑓 ′ 𝑐 𝑏𝛽 𝜀𝑐𝑢 𝑑𝑝
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = ( )( )=
𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝜀𝑝𝑠 − 𝜀𝑝𝑒 − 𝜀𝑐𝑒 + 𝜀𝑐𝑢

0.85 ∗ 6 ∗ 42 ∗ 0.75 0.003 ∗ 67.97

𝑓𝑝𝑠 = ( )( ) … . (1)
9.027 𝜀𝑝𝑠 − 5.214 ∗ 10−3 − 6.82 ∗ 10−4 + 0.003

- Mathematical Model by Pinto:

1 − 0.01174
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = (27890)𝜀𝑝𝑠 0.01174 + 1/7.344
… . (2)
27890 ∗ 𝜀𝑝𝑠 7.344
(1 + ( ) )
( 1.0618 ∗ 243.5 )

- Equate equation (1) and (2), we get:

𝜀𝑝𝑠 = 0.01682

𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 268.3 𝑘𝑠𝑖 > 𝑓𝑦 → 𝑈𝑠𝑒𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 = 243.5 𝑘𝑠𝑖

- Alternatively, we can use the approximate method of ACI (with no additional

reinforcement case):

𝛾𝑝 𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑢
𝑓𝑝𝑠 = 𝑓𝑝𝑢 (1 − ( ∗ ′ )) = 241.7 𝑘𝑠𝑖
𝛽1 𝑑𝑝 ∗ 𝑏 𝑓 𝑐

- Both methods provide almost the same answer.

41
 - Now can calculate the ultimate moment capacity of the girder:

𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 9.027 ∗ 243.5

𝑎= = = 10.26′′ > ℎ𝑓 = 7′′ → 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑒 𝑇 − 𝐵𝑒𝑎𝑚
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝑏 0.85 ∗ 6 ∗ 42

𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 − 0.85𝑓 ′ 𝑐 (𝑏 − 𝑏𝑤 )ℎ𝑓

𝑎= = 24.12′′ < 𝐶𝑡 𝑂𝐾
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑤

1 𝑎 − ℎ𝑓
𝑀𝑛 = 𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 (𝑑𝑝 − 𝑎) + 0.85𝑓 ′ 𝑐 (𝑏 − 𝑏𝑤 )ℎ𝑓 ( )=
2 2

1 24.12 − 7
9.027(243.5) (67.97 − 24.12) + 0.85(6)(42 − 8)(7) ( ) = 124312.71 𝑘 − 𝑖𝑛
2 2

𝜙𝑀𝑛 = 9323.5 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 < 𝑀𝑢 𝑁𝑜𝑡 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑

- Proposed Solution:

If we add more tendons then the reduced moment capacity will exceed the ultimate moment;
however, passing the Strength I Limit State is not sufficient because the girders will fail under working
stresses check (it barely passed with 59 tendons and e =32.34’’). Therefore, we should neither alter the
eccentricity nor the number of strands.

In calculating the ultimate moment, the depth of uniform block should not exceed the distance from
neutral axis to the top of the girder. By noting that, we suggest adding regular reinforcing bars to the girder
and keeping the uniform block depth within the acceptable limit. Hence, if we set “a” equal to “ct”, we get
As equal to 7.82 in^2.

In addition, since we need to utilize the space left in the girder, we will use the largest possible bars
available in the market which are #11. After trails, we shall use 4 #11 bars (see final drawing); using ACI
approximate method, we found that fps stayed almost the same at 238 ksi which means the accurate one is
closer to 243 ksi. This will result in the following,

𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝐴𝑠 = 6 𝑖𝑛2

𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑑 = 10′′

𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑠 = 72 − 10 = 62′′

𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑏𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑘 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ 𝑎 = 32.95′′ → 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑒 𝑇 − 𝐵𝑒𝑎𝑚

𝜙𝑀𝑛 = 1240 ∗ 0.9 = 10833 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡 > 𝑀𝑢 = 10567 𝑘 − 𝑓𝑡

- Note that we placed the bars above the tendons so that we keep the same prestressed
tendons eccentricity.

42
 Figure 42 Girder Reinforcement

Step 6: Design for Shear:

A) Determine dead load effects:

- Beam weight is: 𝑤𝑔 = 1.13 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
- Barrier weight is: 𝑤𝑏 = 0.14 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
- Slab weight is: 𝑤𝑠 = 0.675 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
- Wearing surface is: 𝑤𝑑𝑤 = 0.21 𝑘/𝑓𝑡
𝑘
𝑤𝐷𝐶,𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 ∗ 𝐿 (1.945 𝑓𝑡) (138𝑓𝑡)
𝑉𝐷𝐶 = = = 134.21𝑘
2 2

𝑘
𝑤𝐷𝑊 ∗ 𝐿 (0.21 𝑓𝑡) (138𝑓𝑡)
𝑉𝐷𝑊 = = = 14.49 𝑘
2 2
B) Determine Live Load Effects:
- Based on AASHTO 4.6.2.2.3, the Live Load distribution factor for shear for beams are as
follows:
o One Design Lane Loaded:
𝑆 6
𝐷𝐹𝑉𝑠𝑖 = 0.36 + = 0.36 + = 0.6
25 𝑓𝑡 25
o Two or more Design Lanes Loaded:
𝑆 𝑆 2 6 6 2
𝐷𝐹𝑉𝑠𝑖 = 0.2 + −( ) = 0.2 + + ( ) = 0.73
12 𝑓𝑡 35𝑓𝑡 12 35

- The case of two or more design lanes loaded controls, hence DFV=0.73.

43
- The following arrangement is followed to produce the maximum shear (see commentary
3 to know why Barre’s theory is not followed here):

Figure 43 HS20 Position for Shear

Figure 44 Design Tandem Position for Shear

- Hence, HS20 controls the design, with Vtr = 67.13 k per design lane.
- Add dynamic effects of 33%, we get Vtr=89.28 k per design lane.
- The shear at support due to design lane load is Vln=44.16 k
- Hence, the total unfactored shear per lane is:

𝑉𝐿𝐿+𝐼𝑀 = 𝑉𝑡𝑟 + 𝑉𝑙𝑛 = 133.44 𝑘

- The total unfactored live load shear per girder is:

44
 𝑉𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑉𝐿𝐿+𝐼𝑀 (𝐷𝐹𝑉) = 0.73(133.44) = 97.41 𝑘
- Therefore, the factored shear for Strength I Limit State is:

𝑉𝑢 = 1.25𝑉𝐷𝐶 + 1.5𝑉𝐷𝑊 + 1.75𝑉𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 1.25(134.21) + 1.5(14.49) + 1.75(97.41)

𝑉𝑢 = 360 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠

- For simplicity, shear forces at end supports will be considered. Use Approximate method
of ACI to determine shear capacity:
o Check conditions:

𝑓𝑝𝑠 > 0.4𝑓𝑝𝑢 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑

700𝑉𝑢 𝑑
𝑉𝑐 = (0.6√𝑓 ′ 𝑐 + ) 𝑏𝑤 𝑑
𝑀𝑢

700(360)(67.97)
𝑉𝑐 = (0.6√6000 + ) (8)(67.97) = 99 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
10567 ∗ 12

2√𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑 = 84 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 < 𝑉𝑐 = 99 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 < 5√𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑 = 210.6 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠 𝑂𝐾

- Try Single Loop of #4 Bars for transverse reinforcement:

𝐴𝑣 = 2𝐴𝑏 = 0.4 𝑖𝑛2 /𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑢𝑝
- The required spacing of bars is:
𝜙𝐴𝑣 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 0.75(0.4)(60)(67.97)
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑞 = = = 4.3′′ > 𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 4′′ 𝑂𝐾
𝑉𝑢 − 𝜙𝑉𝑐 360 − 99(0.75)
- Hence, the required steel shear resistance is:
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 = 381 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
- Calculate the maximum spacing provided:

3
ℎ = 27′′
8
𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 24′′
𝐴𝑣 𝑓𝑦
= 60′′
{50𝑏𝑤

- Hence, provide #4 Stirrups at 4 inches spacing. The following drawing summarizes the
whole reinforcement for the girder:

45
 Figure 45 Girder Reinforcement

** It’s normal practice to provide shears studs imbedded 5’’

Figure 46 Prestressed Girder in Real Life

46
Step 7: Calculate actual losses:

- We have two types of prestress losses:

o Instantaneous: Elastic Shortening, Friction Losses, and Anchorage Take up.
o Time Dependent: creep, and shrinkage, and relaxation of prestressing tendons.
- In our case, we have used prestressed pretensioned cables, so we don’t have friction
losses nor anchorage take up.
- To calculate the elastic shortening losses, ES, we can use the ACI formula:

𝐸𝑃𝑆 𝐹𝑗 𝐹𝑗 𝑒 2 𝑀𝑔 𝑒 29000 1706 1706 ∗ 32.342 32280

∆𝑓𝑝(𝐸𝑆) = (− − + )= (− − + )
𝐸𝐶𝐼 𝐴𝑐 𝐼 𝐼 4700 1085 733320 733320
∆𝑓𝑝(𝐸𝑆) = 24.4 𝑘𝑠𝑖
- AASHTO Section 5.9.5.3 provides an approximate equation to calculate the time
dependent losses (creep, relaxation, and shrinkage):

𝑓𝑝𝑖 𝐴𝑝𝑠
∆𝑓𝑝(𝐿𝑇) = 10 ∗ 𝛾 𝛾 + 12𝛾ℎ 𝛾𝑠𝑡 + ∆𝑓𝑝(𝑅)
𝐴𝑔 ℎ 𝑠𝑡

𝛾ℎ = 1.7 − 0.01𝐻

5
𝛾𝑠𝑡 =
(1 + 𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 )

∆𝑓𝑝(𝑅) = 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑥. 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = 2.4 → 10 𝑘𝑠𝑖 = 6.2 𝑘𝑠𝑖 (𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒)

- The gammas are correction factors for humidity and strength of concrete at time of
prestress transfer. Assuming 70% humidity:
𝛾ℎ = 1.7 − 0.01𝐻 = 0.37
5
𝛾𝑠𝑡 = = 0.91
(1 + 𝑓 ′ 𝑐𝑖 )

(189)
∆𝑓𝑝(𝐿𝑇) = 10 ∗ 0.37 ∗ 0.91 + 12 ∗ 0.37 ∗ 0.91 + 10 = 14.63 𝑘𝑠𝑖
1085

∆𝑓𝑝(𝐿𝑇) = 10.83 𝑘𝑠𝑖

- Hence, the total losses:

∆𝑓𝑝 = ∆𝑓𝑝(𝐿𝑇) + ∆𝑓𝑝(𝐸𝑆) = 10.83 + 24.4 = 35.23 𝑘𝑠𝑖
- Percentage losses of prestress:
∆𝑓𝑝
%𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = = 18.64% < 20% 𝐺𝑜𝑜𝑑
𝑓𝑖

47
Elastomeric Pads:
Under each girder we shall provide a Plain Elastomeric Pad (PEP). The pads are used to distribute
the superstructure loads to the sub-structure and allow the superstructure to undergo necessary movements
in irregular environment conditions without creating any harmful stresses that might compromise the
structural integrity of the bridge [7].

Figure 47 Elastomeric Pads in Real Life

- The following summarizes the properties specified for the PEP:

Pad Length, L 15 inches

Pad Width, w 30 inches
Elastomeric Thickness, tp 0.75 inches
Elastomeric Hardness 60 Durometer
Elastomer Shear Modulus (G) 0.16 ksi
**WisDOT Recommendations
Figure 48 Elastomeric Pads Properties

- AASHTO Section 14.7.6.3 requires check for shear deformation under thermal effects;
however, we do not have much variable temperature, so there is no need for this check
(initially we neglected the temperature gradient in the girder design).
- Calculate shape factor S for the pad (will be used next):
𝐿𝑊
𝑆= = 6.67
2𝑡𝑝(𝐿 + 𝑊)
- As per AASHTO 14.7.6, Check the compressive stress at service limit state:
𝐿𝐿 + 𝐷𝐿 246.12 𝑘𝑖𝑝𝑠
𝜕𝑠 = = = 0.55 𝑘𝑠𝑖
𝐿∗𝑊 15 ∗ 30
0.8 𝑘𝑠𝑖
𝜕𝑠 = 0.55 < { 𝑂𝐾
𝐺 ∗ 𝑆 = 1.1 𝑘𝑠𝑖
- As per AASHTO 14.7.6, for stability, the total thickness of the rectangular pad must not
exceed one-third of pad length or one-third of pad width:
𝑤
= 10′′
3
𝑡𝑝 = 0.75′′ < { 𝐿 𝑂𝐾
= 5′′
3
- Use PEP 30x15x3/4 meets AASHTO Criteria for this girder.

48
Diaphragm Design:
- AASHTO Section 5 and 6 specifies requirements for diaphragm design; the diaphragm is
simply a transverse member between the girders that resist lateral loads.
- In our case, we do not need a diaphragm as per AASHTO specifications because:
o We do not have significant wind loading (height of bridge is less than 40 ft).
o The bridge is straight; in curved bridges, braking effects from trucks might cause
transverse forces on the girders which necessitates the use of diaphragm, which is
not the case here.

49
 Appendix
A) Load Combinations and Load Factors:

Table 6 Load Combinations and Load Factors

B) Load Factors for Permanent loads, γp

Table 7 Load Factors for Permanent Loads

50
C) Self-Weight of Materials according to AASHTO:

Figure 49 Unit Weights AASHTO 3.5.1-1

D) Dead Loading Effects on Spans A, B, and C:

Span A:

Figure 50 Span A Dead Loading Diagrams

Span B:

Figure 51 Span B Dead Loading Diagrams

51
 Span C:

Figure 52 Span C Dead Loading Diagrams

E) Equivalent Strip Width:

Table 8 Equivalent Strips

F) Definition of HS20 Axle for Transverse Placement:

Figure 53 Moving Load Vehicle Definition

52
 References:
[1] NMDOT. (n.d.). NMDOT Bridge Procedure and Design Guide. Retrieved February 19, 2018, from
http://dot.state.nm.us/content/dam/nmdot/Bridge/BRIDGE_PROCEDURES_AND_DESIGN_GUIDE.pdf

[2] AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. (2010). Washington, DC: American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials.

[3] Kim, J., Kim, R., & Eberle, J. (2013). LRFD Method of Bridge Design. Simplified LRFD Bridge
Design,1-16. Doi:10.1201/b14743-2

[4] FDOT. (2013). Short-Medium Span Bridge Beams. Retrieved February 28, 2018, from
http://www.fdot.gov

[5] MnDOT. (n.d.). Barrier, Parapet, and Railings. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/

[6] CDOT. (n.d.). Design Examples. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from www.codot.gov/library

[7] Agata. (2018, March 15). The Elastomeric Bearing Pad and Its Role in Bridge Design. Retrieved from
https://www.simscale.com/

[8] McCormac, J. C., & Brown, R. H. (2016). Design of reinforced concrete. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

53
 Commentary

A- This assumption is extremely conservative. However, construction wise, it’s easier to use one
type of bars over the slab span instead of changing their sizes according to the moments. Hence,
this major assumption in structural design could be economical at the end.

B- We have assumed that the maximum force effects of different types of loads (DC, and LL) coincide
on the same point. Although not true, this assumption is extremely conservative; in any case, we
expect the reinforcement to be minimal even with this assumption. However, more optimal and
economical design, each point along the bridge should be investigated for the force effect, then the
loads are factored accordingly; the point with maximum factored load effects is the one which
should be considered in the design.

C- The maximum moment occurs under one of the loads when that load is as far from one support as
the center of gravity of all the moving loads on the beam is from the other support. This condition
occurs when the center span is midway between the center of gravity of the moving loads and the
nearest concentrated load where the maximum moment occurs. Because the maximum moments
for uniform loads such as the lane loads and dead loads occur at midspan, the maximum design
truck or tandem moment is generally used with the HL-93 center axle at midspan.

Lessons Learned:
- Self-Management
- Know how to read and apply codes
- Be able to update design after changes
- Coordination and solving conflicts in the team instead of blaming each other’s.

54

View publication stats