N /mm
N /mm2
(ii)SIDL
a) Wearing coat (80 mm) = -1.84 kN/m 2
b) Weight of kerb = -7.8 kN/m 2
c) Weight of crash barrier = -14.86 kN/m2
d) Pedestrian load = -3.889 kN/m 2
6.5.2 Sectional properties of longitudinal and transverse members:
98
Table 6.36: B.M due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at mid span
Load type
BENDING MOMENT(kN-m)
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
327
983
690
Mmax = (Dead load +SIDL) B.M +max. of (class A or 70R Tracked or 70R Wheeled)B.M
99
=243+282+1081
=1606 kN-m
Design of section:
Effective depth d =
Ast =
M
stJd
M
Qb
1606106
1.4801000
= 1041mm.
160610
2000.8891041
= 8676 mm2
Provide 12 # of 32
ASt provided =9650 mm2
Effective depth provided= 1140 mm.
Stress check:
Calculation of neutral axis
Bf *Df*(hc-Df) +Bw*(hc-Df)*(hc -
Df
2 )
hc = 273
=m*Ast*(d-hc) mm
fc =
f st
m
hc
* dhc
200
= 10
273
* 1516273
2
2
f c = 6.29 N /mm < cbc 10 N /mm
0.5b(kd ) cbc
A st
fst =
fst =
141 N / mm
< st
0.5100027310
9650
(200
N /mm2 )
Table 6.38: S.F due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at mid span
Load type
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
107
341
240
=54+92+375 = 521KN
Check for shear stress
v
Vu
bwd
1.28 N /mm2
>
<
512 103
3501140
c max
0.589 N /mm2
2.2 N /mm
Vs =Vu A sw
V ss
= std
27610 200
2001140
=242 mm2
Table 6.40: B.M due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at quarter span
Load type
BENDING MOMENT(kN-m)
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
253
785
553
Effective depth d =
Ast =
M
stJd
M
Qb
1259106
1.4801000
1259106
2000.8891140
= 6211 mm
102
= 922 mm.
Provide 8 # of 36
ASt provided =8143 mm2
Effective depth provided= 1140 mm.
Stress check:
Calculation of neutral axis
Bf *Df*(hc-Df) +Bw*(hc-Df)*(hc -
Df
2 )
hc = 204
=m*Ast*(d-hc) mm
fc =
f st
m
hc
* dhc
200
= 10
204
* 1140204
2
2
f c = 4.35 N /mm < cbc 10 N /mm
fst =
fst =
0.5b(kd ) cbc
A st
2
125 N / mm
< st
0.5100020410
8143
(200
N /mm2 )
DEAD LOAD
SIDL
109
104
Table 6.42: S.F due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at quarter span
Load type
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
119
344
253
109+104+378 = 591KN
Vu
= bwd
1.48 N /mm2
>
<
591 10
= 3501140
c max
0.589 N /mm2
2.2 N /mm
A sw
355103150
2001140
=253mm2
104
(ii)SIDL
a) Wearing coat (80 mm) = -1.84 kN/m 2
b) Weight of kerb = -7.8 kN/m 2
c) Weight of crash barrier = -14.86 kN/m2
d) Pedestrian load = -3.889 kN/m 2
LOAD COMBINATION =1.35*(DL) +1.75 *(SIDL)+1.5*(LIVE LOAD)
6.6.2 Sectional properties of longitudinal and transverse members:
105
Table 6.44: B.M due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at mid span
Load type
BENDING MOMENT(kN-m)
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
491
1470
938
Mmax = (Dead load +SIDL) B.M +max. of (class A or 70R Tracked or 70R Wheeled)B.M
106
=327+494+1617
=2438 kN-m
Design of section:
Step1: Assume neutral axis lies in the flange
x
d
=1.2 -
x
d
=1.2 -
x
d
=0.07
1.22
1.22
6.68M u
F ckbf d
6.682438106
2
3027501100
x = 77 mm <Df
mm2
Provide 8 # of 32
Ast provided =6433 mm2
Effective depth provided= 1156 mm
Check for deflection and cracking:
1) Deflection:
107
L
D
(i)
=20*0.8*1=16
L
10000
=
D
1156
Provided
=8.65<16 ok
span
800
10000
800
=12.5mm.
2) Cracking:
Wk=
Sr,max * (sm-cm)
Sr,max = 1.3 *(d-x)
=1.3*(1156-899) =257 mm
Wk
Table 6.46: S.F due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at mid span
Load type
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
132
511
360
108
ck
cp
Table 6.48: B.M due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at quarter span
Load type
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
BENDING MOMENT(kN-m)
379
993
722
Mmax = (DEAD LOAD +SIDL) B.M +Max. OF (CLASS A OR 70RTRACKED OR 70R WHEELED) BM
= 244+277+1092
109
=1613 kN-m
Design of section:
Step1: Assume neutral axis lies in the flange
x
d
x
d
=1.2 -
=1.2 -
1.22
1.22
6.68M u
F ckbf d
6.681613106
2
3027501150
x = 48 mm <Df
1613106
Ast = 0.87415(11500.4277)
Ast = 3954 mm2
Provide 4 # of 36
Ast provided =4071 mm2
Effective depth provided= 1156 mm
110
Table 6.50: S.F due to Live load for external longitudinal girder at quarter span
Load type
CLASS A
70R TRACKED
70 R WHEELED
178
517
381
=109+183+568= 860KN
Shear reinforcement:
3) The design shear resistance VRd.c >VEd.
4) The design shear resistance of the member without shear reinforcement VRd.c is given by:
V = [0.12*K*(80*p *f ) 0.33+0.15* ] *b *d
Rd.c
ck
cp
VRd.s=
A sw
s
* *
f ywd
For 4 legged 10 @150 mm c/c spacing shear capacity carrying of a section =723 kN
Deck slab
IRC 21
DEAD LOAD MOMENTS:
111
K=
s h ort span
long span
u
B
v
L
=1,
2.5
2.5
=1
=1
m2=0.037
0.35
2
2
2.5
] = 9.14 kN
=0.4,
=
v
L
2.5
2.5 .
=1
=1
112
m1=0.037
m2=0.037
= 203 kN
Shear force
Dispersion in the direction of span =0.84+2*(0.08+0.25)=1.5 m
Shear max at 0.75 m
Effective width of slab = k*x*( 1-
x
l
) +bw
=2.988 m
350
Load per metre = 2.998
=116.28
Shear force = 75 kN
Design bending moments are given by:
MB= 1.66 +8.63 = 10.29 kN-m
113
Spacing =
78.51000
285
10.2910
2000.9200
=285 mm2
=275 mm.
Spacing =
78.51000
285
10.29106
2000.9200
=275 mm.
=0.42
IRC 112
Deck slab
114
= 285 mm2
=
v
L
=1,
2.5
2.5
=1
=1
m2=0.037
0.35
2
] = 13.15 kN
2
2.5
s h ort span
long span
2.5
2.5 .
=1
115
u
B
v
L
=0.4,
=1
m2=0.037
= 304 kN
Shear force
Dispersion in the direction of span =0.84+2*(0.08+0.25)=1.5 m
Shear max at 0.75 m
Effective width of slab = k*x*( 1-
x
l
) +bw
=2.998m
Load per metre =
3501.5
2.998
=175 kN
116
Spacing =
78.51000
265
15.2810
0.87415200(10.420.48)
= 265 mm2
= 296 mm.
Spacing =
78.51000
265
15.28106
0.87415200(10.420.48)
= 265 mm2
=296 mm.
117
VRd.c = [0.12*K*(80*p1*fck)0.33+0.15*
] *bw*d
VRd.c = [0.12*2*(80*0.36*30)0.33 + 0.15* 3.49 ] *1000*200
cp
VRd.c = 551 kN
Therefore the slab is safe against shear stresses.
DISCUSSIONS:
WSM
BM in kNm 150
LSM
100
50
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
span in metres
Fig.6.37
118
4.5
BM in kNm 300
LSM
200
100
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
span in metres
Fig.6.38
BM in kNm
1000
WSM
800
LSM
600
400
200
0
span in metres
Fig.6.39
119
SF in kN
WSM
80
LSM
60
40
20
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
Length in metres
Fig.6.40
SF in kN 100
LSM
50
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
Length in metres
Fig.6.41
120
4.5
SF in kN 300
LSM
200
100
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
Length in metres
Fig.6.42
The bending moments due to dead load for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.37.
The bending moments due to SIDL for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.38
The bending moments due to dead load for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.39
The shear force due to dead load for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.40
The shear force due to SIDL for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.41
The shear force due to live load for LSM and WSM are shown graphically in Fig 6.42
The comparison of volume of concrete and area of steel are tabulated below:
Table 52: Comparison between two methods at mid span and quarter span
WSM
LSM
1.035*106
6
1.035* 10
9,650
8,143
6,433
4,071
121
As it very visible from above comparison that LSM has found out to be more economical of the
two methods. It means we can design the structure more economically by adopting ultimate
strength design method rather than the WSM.
The savings in concrete is zero, since we have adopted section for both LSM and WSM.
But at mid span the steel difference is quite noticeable compared to WSM, LSM is about 33%
more economic i.e., it consumes less steel than WSM.
However at quarter span the difference is quite noticeable, LSM is about 50% more economic
than WSM.
The main fundamental difference for working stress approach and limit state approach is that, in
working stress approach service loads are used in the whole design and the strength of material is
not utilized in the full extent, since stresses acting on structural members are calculated based on
elastic method and they are designed not to exceed certain allowable values. In fact, the whole
structure during the lifespan may only experience loading stresses far below the ultimate state.
For limit state approach, for each material and load, a partial safety factor is assigned
individually depending on the material properties and load properties. Therefore, each element of
load and material properties is accurately assessed resulting in a more refined and accurate
analysis of the structure. In this connection, the material strength can be utilized to its maximum
value during its lifespan and loads can be assessed with reasonable probability of occurrence.
This is the reason for LSM to be more economical than WSM.
In the deck slab, the area of steel in LSM and WSM are found to be same, though the area of
concrete is same for LSM and WSM, since the loads are multiplied by a partial safety factor in
LSM there is no significant change in area of steel. In case of slab the savings of materials in
slabs is almost nill.
But for Shear force reinforcement there is not much of change observed in both deck slab and in
girder. The reinforcement is almost same since the sections taken in LSM .
The reinforcement details of end longitudinal girder at mid and quarter span designed as per
IRC: 21-2000 and IRC: 112-2011 is shown below.
122
Fig.6.43: Reinforcement Detail in End Longitudinal Girder at mid span (IRC: 21-2000)
Fig.6.44 Reinforcement Detail in End Longitudinal Girder at mid span (IRC: 21-2000)
123
Fig 6.45 Reinforcement Detail in End Longitudinal Girder at mid span (IRC: 112-2011)
Fig 46: Reinforcement Detail in End Longitudinal Girder at mid span (IRC: 112-2011)
124