Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dimensions
Thickness = 8.0 in.
(LRFD 9.7.11 & 13.7.3.1.2)
Cover
= 2.0 in. (Top)
(LRFD 5.12.3) = 1.0 in. (Bottom)
Future Wearing Surface Allowance: FWS = 30 psf
Figure 1: Cross section of bridge showing girder layout, barriers, and 8 in. thick deck.
The LRFD Specifications contain provisions for designing the deck of a multi-girder bridge by using
either refined or approximate methods. Refined methods consist of modeling the deck and girders using
finite element techniques. General guidance is provided by the specifications to assist in formulating a
suitable model. Most of the detail, however, is left up to the engineer. Due to the complexities involved
in creating and validating the results of a finite element model, in practice, it is more likely that one of the
approximate methods will be used. In this case, two procedures are given in the specifications: the
empirical method and the strip method. Both methods will be demonstrated in this design example.
Design of the overhang is discussed briefly, but calculations are not presented.
7-1
Ratio of effective length to design depth does not exceed 18.0 and is not less than 6.0
Length of overhang is at least 5.0 times the slab depth, or 3.0 times the slab depth and a
structurally continuous barrier is made composite with the slab
Assuming all of the above criteria are met, the following amount of reinforcement must be provided:
Bottom Layer, each way:
Each mat of steel must be placed as close to the outside surface as permitted by cover and spacing.
Spacing of reinforcement must not exceed 18 in. The outermost layer of reinforcement must be placed
in the direction of the effective length. Reinforcing steel must at least Grade 60.
If skew exceeds 25, the specified quantity of reinforcement must be doubled in the end zones of the
deck (LRFD 9.7.2.5). The end zone is taken as the longitudinal distance equal to the effective length of
the slab.
7-2
The loads transmitted to the bridge deck during vehicular collision with the railing system are
determined.
Designs factored moments are then determined using the appropriate load factors for
different limit states.
The reinforcement is designed to resist the applied loads using conventional principles of
reinforced concrete design.
Generally, the LRFD Specifications require that four limit states be investigated in the design of a
structure or structural component: service, fatigue and fracture, strength, and extreme event. With
regard to the design of a reinforced concrete deck, the following limit states are pertinent:
Service Limit States
(LRFD 9.5.2)
(LRFD 9.5.3)
(LRFD 9.5.4)
Deck may be analyzed as elastic and shall be designed to satisfy provisions of Section 5.
Extreme Event Limit State
(LRFD 9.5.5)
Decks shall be designed for force effects transmitted by traffic and combination railings as specified in
Section 13.
3.1 Analysis
3.1.1 Dead Load Moments:
7-3
Dead loads represent a small fraction of the deck loads. Use of a simplified approach to determine the
deck dead load effects is quite appropriate. Traditionally, dead load positive and negative moments in
the deck, except for the overhang, for a unit width strip of the deck are calculated using the following
approach:
wl 2
M=
c
where:
M = dead load positive or negative moment in the deck for a unit width strip (k-ft/ft)
w = dead load per unit area of the deck (ksf)
l = girder spacing = 9 ft.
c = constant, typically taken as 10 or 12. We will use c = 10 for this example.
Self weight of the deck = 8(150)/12 = 100 psf = 0.1 ksf
Unfactored self weight positive or negative moment = M DL =
0 .1 x 9 2
= 0.81 kip ft . / ft .
10
0.03 x 9 2
= 0.24 kip ft . / ft .
10
neg
M LLI
= 3.71kip - ft . / ft .
7-4
3.2 Design
Figure 2: Longitudinal cross section of deck. Transverse mats are the upper-most and lower-most mats.
3.2.1 Negative Moments:
3.2.1.1 Strength Limit State
Mneg = -7.87 kip-ft. / ft.
Try #5 bars at 10 in. spacing
As f y
a
d
b
2
M n =
where:
= 0.90 for extreme event limit state - flexure of reinforced concrete members
a=
As f y
0.85 fc' b
a=
(0.372)(60 )
= 0.547 in.
(0.85)(4)(12)
M n =
( 0.90 )( 0.372 )( 60 )
0.547
) = 8.23 kip - ft./ft.
( 5.19
(12 )
2
Provided moment capacity: Mn = 8.29 kip-ft. / ft. > Mneg = 7.87 kip-ft. / ft.
3.2.1.2 Service Limit State
3.2.1.2.1 Calculate Maximum Spacing of Tension Reinforcement
7-5
O.K.
The provisions of AASHTO LRFD Article 5.7.3.4 regarding the maximum spacing of tension
reinforcement apply if the tension in the cross-section exceeds 80 percent of the modulus of rupture, f r,
at Service I Limit Sate.
fr = 0.24 fc' = 0.24 4 = 0.48 ksi
(LRFD 5.4.2.6)
bd 2 (12 )( 8 ) 2
=
= 128 in 3
6
6
4.76 * 12
= 0.45 ksi > 0.38 ksi
128
Therefore, the maximum spacing, s, of the tension reinforcement should satisfy the following:
700 e
2d c
s fs
where:
e = 0.75 , for Class 2 exposure condition (increased concern of appearance and/or corrosion)
dc = concrete cover measured from extreme tension fiber to center of extreme flexural reinforcement =
2.5 (clear cover) + 0.625 (diameter of No. 5 bar)/2 = 2.81 in.
f s = tensile stress in steel reinforcement (ksi)
h = overall thickness (in) = 8 in.
s = 1 +
dc
2.81
=1 +
= 1.77
0 .7 ( h - d c )
0.7 ( 8 - 2.81 )
7-6
Figure 3 depicts the slab cross-section and the resulting stresses, strains, and forces acting on the
section using the elastic theory.
1kd
3 s
c
kd s
fc
C
ds
Neutral
Axis
jds = (1 - k )d s
3
s
Elevation
Section
Strain
fs
Stress
T
Resultant
Forces
fs =
M
As jd s
where:
M = -4.76 kip-ft./ft.
As = No. 5 at 10 o.c. = 0.31/10*12 = 0.372 in. 2/ ft.
ds = 8 2.5 0.625/2 = 5.19 in.
j =1
k
3
k = 2 n + ( n )
- n
As
bd
0.372
= 0.00597
(12 )( 5.19 )
n = modular ratio = Es / Ec
E c = 33 ,000 w 1c.5
(LRFD 5.7.1)
7-7
k = ( 2 )( 0.00597 )( 8 ) + [ ( 0.00597 )( 8 )]
( 0.00597 )( 8 ) = 0.265
j = 1 - 0.265/3 = 0.912
Ms = 4.76 kip-ft./ft.
fs =
( 4.76 * 12 )
= 32.4 ksi
( 0.372 )( 0.912 )( 5.19 )
Therefore,
700 e
s fs
2d c =
700 * 0.75
1.77 * 32.4
( 0.465 )( 60 )
= 0.684 in.
( 0.85 )( 4 )(12 )
( 0.90 )( 0.465 )( 60 )
6.69
(12 )
0.684
= 13.3 kip-ft. / ft.
2
Provided moment capacity: Mn = 13.3 kip-ft. / ft. > Mu = 12.38 kip-ft. / ft.
3.2.2.2 Check crack control requirements:
O.K.
(LRFD 5.7.3.4)
(LRFD 5.4.2.6)
7-8
bd 2 (12 )( 8 ) 2
=
= 128 in 3
6
6
7.34 * 12
= 0.69 ksi > 0.38 ksi
128
Therefore, the maximum spacing, s, of the tension reinforcement should satisfy the following:
700 e
2d c
s f s
where:
e = 0.75 , for Class 2 exposure condition (increased concern of appearance and/or corrosion)
dc = concrete cover measured from extreme tension fiber to center of extreme flexural reinforcement =
1.0 (clear cover) + 0.625 (diameter of No. 5 bar)/2 = 1.313 in.
f s = tensile stress in steel reinforcement (ksi)
= 31 ksi (see section 3.2.1.2.1 for the calculation procedure)
h = overall thickness (in) = 8 in.
s = 1 +
dc
1.313
=1 +
= 1.28
0. 7 ( h - d c )
0.7 ( 8 - 1.313 )
Therefore,
700 e
s fs
2d c =
700 * 0.75
1.28 * 31
Therefore, for positive moments: Use #5 bars @ 8 in. spacing (As prov'd = 0.465 in.2 / ft.)
3.2.2.3 Distribution Reinforcement
Reinforcement must be placed in the secondary direction in the bottom of the slab as a percentage of the
primary reinforcement for positive moment. For primary reinforcement that is perpendicular to traffic,
the required percentage is:
220
67%
S
(LRFD 9.7.3.2)
where S = distance between flange tips, plus flange overhang, taken as distance from the extreme
flange tip to the face of the web, disregarding any fillets.
(LRFD 9.7.2.3)
= 108 - 6 = 102 in. = 8.5 ft.
Thus, the required percentage is:
220
8. 5
7-9
(LRFD 5.10.8.2-1)
As 0.11 [8.0(12.0)] / 60 = 0.176 in. 2 / ft. - Use #4 @ 13.5 in. (As prov'd = 0.178 in.2 / ft.)
3.2.3 Summary and Comparison of Reinforcement Requirements:
Total reinforcement per square foot of deck, as computed above:
Empirical method
2[0.276 + 0.185]
Traditional method
4. Overhang Design
Bridge barriers are designed for resisting accidental impact of a standard Test Vehicle. LRFD Article
13.7.2 specifies various levels of Test Vehicles for different applications. For the majority of applications
on high speed highways, the Test Vehicle, TL-4 is specified.
Barriers are designed by the yield line theory which assumes development of nominal moment strength
of the barrier wall in the transverse and/or longitudinal direction. Article A13.3.1 provides equations for
calculating the critical barrier wall length over which the yield line mechanism occurs, L c and the nominal
barrier resistance to transverse loads, R w, for two cases: (a) impact within a barrier wall segment and (b)
impact at end of barrier wall segment or at a joint.
For sustaining the assumed yield line mechanism and containing the damage due to accidental vehicle
impact in the barrier, the deck overhang must be designed to resist the loads caused by the Test Vehicle
impact (Rw Ft ). LRFD Table A13.2.1-1 specifies the barrier design forces due to Test Vehicle, TL-4:
Design Forces and Designations
Ft Transverse Force
FL Longitudinal Force
Fv Vertical Force Down
Lt and LL
Lv
He min (Height of impact above deck)
H Minimum Height of Barrier
54 KIP
18 KIP
18 KIP
3.5 FT
18 FT
32 IN
32 IN
7-10
Figure 5: Case 1 Yield line mechanism for impact within barrier wall segment
Figure 6: Case 2 Yield line mechanism for impact at end of barrier wall segment or at a joint
4.1 Design Cases:
Bridge deck overhangs are designed for the effects of three separate load cases.
(LRFD A13.4.1)
Design Case 1: Dead loads and the transverse and longitudinal forces specified in LRFD Article A13.2.
Load factor, load and resistance factors = 1.0. extreme event limit state.
Design Case 2: Dead loads and the vertical forces specified in LRFD Article A13.2 Load factor, load and
resistance factors = 1.0. extreme event limit state. Typically does not govern for
concrete barriers.
Design Case 3: Strength I Limit State: 1.25DC + 1.5 DW + 1.75 (LL+IM).
For Design Case 3, the live load consists of a design truck axel with the wheel closest to
the barrier located at a distance 1.0 ft. from the face of the barrier. The multiple
presence factor, m = 1.2, of LRFD Article 3.6.1.1.2 applies.
For deck overhangs not exceeding 6.0 ft., LRFD Article 3.6.1.3.4 allows the use of a
uniform live load. Fro structurally continuous barriers, a uniform live load of 1.0 KLF
7-11
intensity is applied at a distance of 1.0 FT. from the face of the barrier. For structurally
discontinuous barriers, the design truck axle load should be used.
For decks spanning transversely across multiple girders, the effective deck width is
taken as specified in LRFD Article 4.6.2.1.3 and the deck is analyzed as a continuous
beam supported by the girders to calculate the design moments along the entire width of
the bridge. This design case typically only governs for widely spaced girders,
approximately 12 FT. or more, which allow the use of wider overhangs.
This example will focus on design case 1.
The flexural resistance of the deck, Ms, acting concurrently with a tensile force T = F t should exceed the
factored moments caused by dead loads and a concentrated moment equal to the flexural resistance, M c,
of the parapet at its base applied at the edge of the deck. This is to allow the assumed yield line failure
mechanism to develop in the barrier.
(LRFD A13.4.2)
The deck design moment, M s, is distributed over a distance L c whereas the axial tension, T, is distributed
over a distance Lc+2H and Lc+H for the yield line cases 1 and 2 respectively.
4.2 Strength of Barrier:
The standard IDOT (Illinois Department of Transportation) F-Shape concrete barrier is used for this
example. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 depict the barrier geometry and reinforcement.
LRFD A13.3.1 provides equations for calculating the nominal resistance of a barrier wall, R w. For brevity,
detailed calculations for Rw which involve calculation of the nominal flexural resistance of the barrier wall
about the horizontal and the vertical axes, M c and Mw, are omitted. The Rw for the barrier is equal to 61.6
kip (governed by yield line case 2) which is greater than F t = 54 kip. OK
7-12
7-13
a
h
a
h a
Mn = C d + P d = T d P
2
2
2
2 2
T+
P
P
h
M
Strains
Stresses
C
Forces
Where,
C = Total compressive force
a = depth of the Whitney stress block
T = Tensile force in the flexural tension reinforcement = C + P
The reinforcement provided in the top of the slab is No. 4 bars spaced 13.0 in. o.c. (Empirical Method),
As = 0.185 in.2 / ft.
T = 0.185x60 = 11.1 kip / ft.
C = 11.1 - 6.94 = 4.16 kip / ft.
a = 4.16/(0.85x12x4) = 0.10 in.
c = a/0.85 = 0.10/0.85 = 0.12 in.
de = 8 2.5 0.5/2 = 5.25 in.
0.10
8 0.10
M n = 11.1 5.25
6.94
= 30.3 kip in. / ft . = 2.53 kip ft . / ft .
2
2
2
Mn = 2.53 < M = 14.30 kip-ft. / ft. NG
Provide additional No. 7 at 13 in. o.c. (alternating with No. 4 at 13 o.c.) in the overhang portion of the
deck.
As = (0.20+0.60)/13*(12) = 0.74 in. 2 / ft.
T = 0.74x60 = 44.4 kip / ft.
C = 44.4 - 6.94 = 37.46 kip / ft.
a = 37.46/(0.85x12x4) = 0.92 in.
c = a/0.85 = 0.92/0.85 = 1.08 in.
de = 8 2.5 0.875/2 = 5.06 in.
0.92
8 0.92
M n = 44.4 5.06
6.94
= 179.7 kip in. / ft . = 15.0 kip ft . / ft .
2
2
2
Mn = 15.0 > M = 14.30 kip-ft. / ft. OK
Check the maximum reinforcement requirement of LRFD 5.7.3.3.1.
c/de = 1.08/5.06 = 0.21 < 0.42 OK
7-14
One option to reduce the amount of steel would be to thicken the deck in the overhang region. Several
additional sections should then be checked to determine where the additional steel in the overhang zone
can be stopped.
At the inside face of the barrier, the impact forces are distributed over a distance L c for the transverse
bending moment and Lc+2H or Lc+H for axial force. This effective width increases at sections away from
the impact location. It may be reasonable to assume a dispersion of 30 to 45 degrees to calculate the
increased effective width of the deck.
7-15