(Ebook) Bridge Engineering: Substructure Design by W.F. Chen, Lian Duan ISBN 9780849316814, 0849316812
(Ebook) Bridge Engineering: Substructure Design by W.F. Chen, Lian Duan ISBN 9780849316814, 0849316812
ebooknice.com
ebooknice.com
ebooknice.com
ebooknice.com
(Ebook) Earthquake engineering for structural design by
W.F. Chen, E.M. Lui ISBN 9780849372346, 0849372348
https://ebooknice.com/product/earthquake-engineering-for-structural-
design-1185832
ebooknice.com
ebooknice.com
https://ebooknice.com/product/principles-of-structural-design-1955672
ebooknice.com
https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-
math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-s-sat-ii-success-1722018
ebooknice.com
ebooknice.com
Bridge engineering substructure design 1st Edition W.F.
Chen Digital Instant Download
Author(s): W.F. Chen, Lian Duan
ISBN(s): 9780849316814, 0849316812
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 8.42 MB
Year: 2003
Language: english
BRIDGE
ENGINEERING
Substructure Design
EDITED BY
Wai-Fah Chen
Lian Duan
CRC PR E S S
Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C.
The material in this book was first published in The Bridge Engineering Handbook, CRC Press, 2000.
This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reprinted material is quoted with
permission, and sources are indicated. A wide variety of references are listed. Reasonable efforts have been made to publish
reliable data and information, but the authors and the publisher cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials
or for the consequences of their use.
Neither this book nor any part may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without prior
permission in writing from the publisher.
All rights reserved. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the personal or internal use of specific
clients, may be granted by CRC Press LLC, provided that $1.50 per page photocopied is paid directly to Copyright Clearance
Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA The fee code for users of the Transactional Reporting Service is
ISBN 0-8493-1681-2/02/$0.00+$1.50. The fee is subject to change without notice. For organizations that have been granted
a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.
The consent of CRC Press LLC does not extend to copying for general distribution, for promotion, for creating new works,
or for resale. Specific permission must be obtained in writing from CRC Press LLC for such copying.
Direct all inquiries to CRC Press LLC, 2000 N.W. Corporate Blvd., Boca Raton, Florida 33431.
Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation, without intent to infringe.
Foreword
Among all engineering subjects, bridge engineering is probably the most difficult on which to compose
a handbook because it encompasses various fields of arts and sciences. It not only requires knowledge
and experience in bridge design and construction, but often involves social, economic, and political
activities. Hence, I wish to congratulate the editors and authors for having conceived this thick volume
and devoted the time and energy to complete it in such short order. Not only is it the first handbook of
bridge engineering as far as I know, but it contains a wealth of information not previously available to
bridge engineers. It embraces almost all facets of bridge engineering except the rudimentary analyses and
actual field construction of bridge structures, members, and foundations. Of course, bridge engineering
is such an immense subject that engineers will always have to go beyond a handbook for additional
information and guidance.
I may be somewhat biased in commenting on the background of the two editors, who both came from
China, a country rich in the pioneering and design of ancient bridges and just beginning to catch up
with the modern world in the science and technology of bridge engineering. It is particularly to the
editors’ credit to have convinced and gathered so many internationally recognized bridge engineers to
contribute chapters. At the same time, younger engineers have introduced new design and construction
techniques into the treatise.
This Handbook is divided into four volumes, namely:
Superstructure Design
Substructure Design
Seismic Design
Construction and Maintenance
There are 67 chapters, beginning with bridge concepts and aesthestics, two areas only recently emphasized
by bridge engineers. Some unusual features, such as rehabilitation, retrofit, and maintenance of bridges,
are presented in great detail. The section devoted to seismic design includes soil-foundation-structure
interaction. Another section describes and compares bridge engineering practices around the world. I am
sure that these special areas will be brought up to date as the future of bridge engineering develops.
May I advise each bridge engineer to have a desk copy of this volume with which to survey and examine
both the breadth and depth of bridge engineering.
T.Y. Lin
Professor Emeritus, University of California at Berkeley
Chairman, Lin Tung-Yen China, Inc.
Preface
The Bridge Engineering Handbook is a unique, comprehensive, and the state-of-the-art reference work
and resource book covering the major areas of bridge engineering with the theme “bridge to the 21st
century.” It has been written with practicing bridge and structural engineers in mind. The ideal readers
will be M.S.-level structural and bridge engineers with a need for a single reference source to keep abreast
of new developments and the state-of-the-practice, as well as to review standard practices.
The areas of bridge engineering include planning, analysis and design, construction, maintenance, and
rehabilitation. To provide engineers a well-organized and user-friendly, easy to follow resource, the
Handbook is divided into four volumes: I, Superstructure Design II, Substructure Design III, Seismic
Design, and IV, Construction and Maintenance.
Volume II: Substructure Design addresses the various substructure components: bearings, piers and
columns, towers, abutments and retaining structures, geotechnical considerations, footing and founda-
tions, vessel collisions, and bridge hydraulics.
The Handbook stresses professional applications and practical solutions. Emphasis has been placed
on ready-to-use materials. It contains many formulas and tables that give immediate answers to questions
arising from practical work. It describes the basic concepts and assumptions omitting the derivations of
formulas and theories. It covers traditional and new, innovative practices. An overview of the structure,
organization, and content of the book can be seen by examining the table of contents presented at the
beginning of the book while an in-depth view of a particular subject can be seen by examining the
individual table of contents preceding each chapter. References at the end of each chapter can be consulted
for more detailed studies.
The chapters have been written by many internationally known authors from different countries
covering bridge engineering practices and research and development in North America, Europe, and the
Pacific Rim. This Handbook may provide a glimpse of a rapid global economy trend in recent years
toward international outsourcing of practice and competition in all dimensions of engineering. In general,
the Handbook is aimed toward the needs of practicing engineers, but materials may be reorganized to
accommodate undergraduate and graduate level bridge courses. The book may also be used as a survey
of the practice of bridge engineering around the world.
The authors acknowledge with thanks the comments, suggestions, and recommendations during the
development of the Handbook, by Fritz Leonhardt, Professor Emeritus, Stuttgart University, Germany;
Shouji Toma, Professor, Horrai-Gakuen University, Japan; Gerard F. Fox, Consulting Engineer; Jackson
L. Kurkee, Consulting Engineer; Michael J. Abrahams, Senior Vice President; Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade
& Douglas, Inc.; Ben C. Gerwick Jr., Professor Emeritus, University of California at Berkeley; Gregory F.
Fenves, Professor, University of California at Berkeley; John M. Kulicki, President and Chief Engineer,
Modjeski and Masters; James Chai, Supervising Transportation Engineer, California Department of
Transportation; Jinron Wang, Senior Bridge Engineer, California Department of Transportation; and
David W. Liu, Principal, Imbsen & Associates, Inc.
Wai-Fah Chen
Lian Duan
Editors
Contributors
Contents
xiv
1
Bearings
1.1 Introduction
Bearings are structural devices positioned between the bridge superstructure and the substructure.
Their principal functions are as follows:
1. To transmit loads from the superstructure to the substructure, and
2. To accommodate relative movements between the superstructure and the substructure.
The forces applied to a bridge bearing mainly include superstructure self-weight, traffic loads, wind
loads, and earthquake loads.
Movements in bearings include translations and rotations. Creep, shrinkage, and temperature
effects are the most common causes of the translational movements, which can occur in both
transverse and longitudinal directions. Traffic loading, construction tolerances, and uneven settle-
ment of the foundation are the common causes of the rotations.
Usually a bearing is connected to the superstructure through the use of a steel sole plate and rests
on the substructure through a steel masonry plate. The sole plate distributes the concentrated
bearing reactions to the superstructure. The masonry plate distributes the reactions to the substruc-
ture. The connections between the sole plate and the superstructure, for steel girders, are by bolting
or welding. For concrete girders, the sole plate is embedded into the concrete with anchor studs.
The masonry plate is typically connected to the substructure with anchor bolts.
0-8493-1681-2/03/$0.00+$1.50
© 2003 by CRC Press LLC 1-1
Bearings 1-3
FIGURE 1.1 Typical rocker (a), pin (b), and roller bearings (c).
FIGURE 1.2 Elastomeric bearings. (a) Steel-reinforced elastomeric pad; (b) elastomeric pad with PTFE slider.
Like rocker and pin bearings, roller bearings are also susceptible to corrosion and deterioration.
Regular inspection and maintenance are essential.
Plain elastomeric pads are the weakest and most flexible because they are only restrained from
bulging by friction forces alone. They are typically used in short- to medium-span bridges, where
bearing stress is low. Fiberglass-reinforced elastomeric pads consist of alternate layers of elastomer
and fiberglass reinforcement. Fiberglass inhibits the lateral deformation of the pads under compres-
sive loads so that larger load capacity can be achieved. Cotton-reinforced pads are elastomeric pads
reinforced with closely spaced layers of cotton duck. They display high compressive stiffness and
strength but have very limited rotational capacities. The thin layers also lead to high shear stiffness,
which results in large forces in the bridge. So sometimes they are combined with a PTFE slider on
top of the pad to accommodate translations (Figure 1.2b). Steel-reinforced elastomeric pads are
constructed by vulcanizing elastomer to thin steel plates. They have the highest load capacity among
the different types of elastomeric pads, which is only limited by the manufacturer’s ability to
vulcanize a large volume of elastomer uniformly.
All above-mentioned pads except steel-reinforced pads can be produced in a large sheet and cut
to size for any particular application. Steel-reinforced pads, however, have to be custom-made for
each application due to the edge cover requirement for the protection of the steel from corrosion.
The steel-reinforced pads are the most expensive while the cost of the plain elastomeric pads is the
lowest.
Elastomeric bearings are generally considered the preferred type of bearings because they are low
cost and almost maintenance free. In addition, elastomeric bearings are extremely forgiving of loads
and movements exceeding the design values.
Bearings 1-5
FIGURE 1.3 Typical spherical (a), pot (b), and disk (c) bearings
Bearings 1-7
1. Temperature Movement
From Art. 5.4.2.2, for normal density concrete, the thermal coefficient a is
a = 10.8 ¥ 10 –6/˚C
2. Girder Shortenings
D PT = 21 mm and D SH = 2 mm
3. Bearing Thickness
h rt = total elastomer thickness
h ri = thickness of ith elastomeric layer
n = number of interior layers of elastomeric layer
D S = bearing maximum longitudinal movement = g · ( D TEMP + D PT + D SH)
D S = 1.2 ¥ (9 mm + 21 mm + 2 mm) = 38.4 mm
h rt = bearing thickness ≥ 2D S (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.4-1)
h rt = 2 ¥ (38.4 mm) = 76.8
Try hrt = 120 mm, hri = 20 mm and n = 5
Bearings 1-9
4. Bearing Size
L = length of bearing
W = width of bearing
LW
S i = shape factor of thickness layer of the bearing =
2hri ( L + W )
For a bearing subject to shear deformation, the compressive stresses should satisfy:
sS = average compressive stress due to the total load £ 1.66GS £ 11 (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.2-1)
sL = average compressive stress due to the live load £ 0.66 GS (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.2-1)
R 1.66GLW
s s = --------- = -----------------------------
LW 2h ri ( L + W )
S=
LW
=
(300 mm) (460 mm) = 4.54
2hri ( L + W ) 2(20 mm) (300 mm + 460 mm)
RL ( 200,000 N ) - = 1.6 MPa
s L = --------
- = -------------------------------------------------
LW ( 300 mm ) ( 460 mm ) OK
£ 0.66 GS = 0.66 ( 1.0 MPa ) ( 4.54 ) = 3.0 MPa
e i = 0.062
d =
Âe h i ri (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.3-1)
= 6 ( 0.062 ) ( 20 mm ) = 7.44 mm
q capacity = 2d ( 7.44 mm )
------ = 2----------------------------- = 0.05 rad < q design = 0.025 rad OK
L 300 mm
2
Ê q designˆ Ê L ˆ
s s,uplift = 1.0GS Á ------------
-˜ Á -----˜
Ë n ¯ Ë h ri¯ OK
0.025 300 2
= 1.0 ( 1.2 ) ( 4.54 ) Ê -------------ˆ Ê ---------ˆ = 6.13 MPa < s s = 6.59 MPa
Ë 5 ¯ Ë 20 ¯
2
Ê Ê q designˆ Ê L ˆ ˆ˜
s s,shear Á
= 1.875GS 1 – 0.20 Á -------------˜ Á -----˜
Á Ë n ¯ Ë h ri¯ ˜¯
Ë
OK
2
Ê Ê 0.025ˆ Ê 300ˆ ˆ
= 1.875 ( 1.0 ) ( 4.54 ) Á 1 – 0.20 Á -------------˜ Á ---------˜ ˜ = 6.60 MPa > s = 6.59 MPa
s
Á Ë 5 ¯ Ë 20 ¯ ˜
Ë ¯
8. Bearing Stability
Bearings shall be designed to prevent instability at the service limit state load combinations.
The average compressive stress on the bearing is limited to half the predicted buckling stress.
For this example, the bridge deck, if free to translate horizontally, the average compressive
stress due to dead and live load, ss, must satisfy:
G
ss £ (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.6-1)
2 A- B
where
h
1.92 -----rt-
L
A = ------------------------------ (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.6-3)
2.0 L
S 1 + ------------ -
W
( 120 mm )
1.92 -------------------------
( 300 mm )
= -------------------------------------------------------------- = 0.11
2.0 ( 300 mm )
( 4.54 ) 1 + --------------------------------
( 460 mm )
Bearings 1-11
2.67
B=
L
S( S + 2.0) 1 +
4.0W
(AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.6-4)
2.67
= = 0.08
(4.54) (4.54 + 2.0) 1 +
(300 mm)
4.0 ( 460 mm)
G ( 1.0 MPa )
- = 6.87 > s s
----------------- = --------------------------------------- OK
2A – B 2 ( 0.11 ) – ( 0.08 )
3h max s s
h s ≥ -----------------
- (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.7-1)
Fy
2h max s L
h s ≥ ------------------
- (AASHTO Eq. 14.7.5.3.7-2)
ÄF y
References
1. AASHTO, LRFD Br idge Design Specifications, American Association of State Highway and Trans-
portation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1994.
2. AASHTO, Standar d Specifications for the Design of Highway Bridges, 16th ed. American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1996.
3. Stanton, J. F., Roeder, C. W., and Campbell, T. I., High Load Multi-Rotational Bridge Bearings,
NCHRP Report 10-20A, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington,
D.C., 1993.
4. Caltrans, Memo to Designers, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, 1994.
5. AISI, Steel bridge bearing selection and design guide, Highway Structures Design Handbook, Vol.
II, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1996, chap. 4.
2.1 Introduction
Piers provide vertical supports for spans at intermediate points and perform two main functions:
transferring superstructure vertical loads to the foundations and resisting horizontal forces acting
on the bridge. Although piers are traditionally designed to resist vertical loads, it is becoming more
and more common to design piers to resist high lateral loads caused by seismic events. Even in
some low seismic areas, designers are paying more attention to the ductility aspect of the design.
Piers are predominantly constructed using reinforced concrete. Steel, to a lesser degree, is also used
for piers. Steel tubes filled with concrete (composite) columns have gained more attention recently.
This chapter deals only with piers or columns for conventional bridges, such as grade separations,
overcrossings, overheads, underpasses, and simple river crossings. Reinforced concrete columns will
be discussed in detail while steel and composite columns will be briefly discussed. Substructures
for arch, suspension, segmental, cable-stayed, and movable bridges are excluded from this chapter.
Chapter 3 discusses the substructures for some of these special types of bridges.
2.2.1 General
Pier is usually used as a general term for any type of substructure located between horizontal spans and
foundations. However, from time to time, it is also used particularly for a solid wall in order to
distinguish it from columns or bents. From a structural point of view, a column is a member that resists
the lateral force mainly by flexure action whereas a pier is a member that resists the lateral force mainly
by a shear mechanism. A pier that consists of multiple columns is often called a bent.
There are several ways of defining pier types. One is by its structural connectivity to the super-
structure: monolithic or cantilevered. Another is by its sectional shape: solid or hollow; round,
octagonal, hexagonal, or rectangular. It can also be distinguished by its framing configuration: single
or multiple column bent; hammerhead or pier wall.
0-8493-1681-2/03/$0.00+$1.50
© 2003 by CRC Press LLC 2-1
FIGURE 2.1 Typical cross-section shapes of piers for overcrossings or viaducts on land.
FIGURE 2.2 Typical cross-section shapes of piers for river and waterway crossings.
FIGURE 2.4 Typical pier types and configurations for river and waterway crossings.
Hammerhead piers, as shown in Figure 2.3b, are often found in urban areas where space limitation
is a concern. They are used to support steel girder or precast prestressed concrete superstructures.
They are aesthetically appealing. They generally occupy less space, thereby providing more room
for the traffic underneath. Standards for the use of hammerhead piers are often maintained by
individual transportation departments.
A column bent pier consists of a cap beam and supporting columns forming a frame. Column
bent piers, as shown in Figure 2.3c and Figure 2.5, can either be used to support a steel girder
superstructure or be used as an integral pier where the cast-in-place construction technique is used.
The columns can be either circular or rectangular in cross section. They are by far the most popular
forms of piers in the modern highway system.
A pile extension pier consists of a drilled shaft as the foundation and the circular column extended
from the shaft to form the substructure. An obvious advantage of this type of pier is that it occupies
a minimal amount of space. Widening an existing bridge in some instances may require pile
extensions because limited space precludes the use of other types of foundations.
Selections of proper pier type depend upon many factors. First of all, it depends upon the type
of superstructure. For example, steel girder superstructures are normally supported by cantilevered
piers, whereas the cast-in-place concrete superstructures are normally supported by monolithic
bents. Second, it depends upon whether the bridges are over a waterway or not. Pier walls are
preferred on river crossings, where debris is a concern and hydraulics dictates it. Multiple pile
extension bents are commonly used on slab bridges. Last, the height of piers also dictates the type
selection of piers. The taller piers often require hollow cross sections in order to reduce the weight
of the substructure. This then reduces the load demands on the costly foundations. Table 2.1
summarizes the general type selection guidelines for different types of bridges.
Steel Superstructure
Over water Tall piers Pier walls or hammerheads (T-piers) (Figures 2.3a and b); hollow cross sections for most cases;
cantilevered; could use combined hammerheads with pier wall base and step tapered shaft
Short piers Pier walls or hammerheads (T-piers) (Figures 2.3a and b); solid cross sections; cantilevered
On land Tall piers Hammerheads (T-piers) and possibly rigid frames (multiple column bents)(Figures 2.3b and c);
hollow cross sections for single shaft and solid cross sections for rigid frames; cantilevered
Short piers Hammerheads and rigid frames (Figures 2.3b and c); solid cross sections; cantilevered
The effect of temperature changes and shrinkage of the superstructure needs to be considered
when the superstructure is rigidly connected with the supports. Where expansion bearings are used,
forces caused by temperature changes are limited to the frictional resistance of bearings.
In the following, two load cases, live loads and thermal forces, will be discussed in detail because
they are two of the most common loads on the piers, but are often applied incorrectly.
The design traffic lanes and the live load within the lanes should be arranged to produce beam
reactions that result in maximum loads on the piers. AASHTO LRFD Section 3.6.1.1.2 provides
load reduction factors due to multiple loaded lanes.
Live-load reactions will be increased due to impact effect. AASHTO LRFD [1] refers to this as
the dynamic load allowance, IM. and is listed here as in Table 2.2.
Example 2.1
A 225.55-m (740-foot)-long and 23.77-m (78-foot) wide concrete box-girder superstructure is
supported by five two-column bents. The size of the column is 1.52 m (5 ft) in diameter and the
heights vary between 10.67 m (35 ft) and 12.80 m (42 ft). Other assumptions are listed in the
calculations. The calculation is done through a table. Please refer Figure 2.7 for the calculation for
determining the point of no movement.
2.4.1 Overview
Like the design of any structural component, the design of a pier or column is performed to fulfill
strength and serviceability requirements. A pier should be designed to withstand the overturning,
sliding forces applied from superstructure as well as the forces applied to substructures. It also needs
to be designed so that during an extreme event it will prevent the collapse of the structure but may
sustain some damage.
A pier as a structure component is subjected to combined forces of axial, bending, and shear.
For a pier, the bending strength is dependent upon the axial force. In the plastic hinge zone of a
pier, the shear strength is also influenced by bending. To complicate the behavior even more, the
bending moment will be magnified by the axial force due to the P-Δ effect.
In current design practice, the bridge designers are becoming increasingly aware of the adverse
effects of earthquake. Therefore, ductility consideration has become a very important factor for
bridge design. Failure due to scouring is also a common cause of failure of bridges. In order to
prevent this type of failure, the bridge designers need to work closely with the hydraulic engineers
to determine adequate depths for the piers and provide proper protection measures.
KLu ⎛ 12 M1b ⎞
< 34 − ⎜ ⎟ (2.1)
r ⎝ M2 b ⎠
where
M1b = smaller end moment on compression member — positive if member is bent in single cur-
vature, negative if member is bent in double curvature
M2b = larger end moment on compression member — always positive
For an unbraced compression member, the effects of slenderness can be ignored as long as the
following condition is met (AASHTO LRFD 5.7.4.3):
KLu
< 22 (2.2)
r
If the slenderness ratio exceeds the above-specified limits, the effects can be approximated through
the use of the moment magnification method. If the slenderness ratio KLu/r exceeds 100, however,
a more-detailed second-order nonlinear analysis will be required. Any detailed analysis should
consider the influence of axial loads and variable moment of inertia on member stiffness and forces,
and the effects of the duration of the loads.
Mc = δ b M2 b + δ s M 2 s (2.3)
where
M2b = moment on compression member due to factored gravity loads that result in no appreciable
side sway calculated by conventional first-order elastic frame analysis, always positive
M2s = moment on compression member due to lateral or gravity loads that result in side sway, Δ,
greater than Lu/1500, calculated by conventional first-order elastic frame analysis, always
positive
The moment magnification factors are defined as follows:
Cm
δb = ≥ 1.0 (2.4)
P
1− u
φPc
1
δs = ≥ 1.0 (2.5)
∑ Pu
1−
φ ∑ Pc
where
Pu = factored axial load
Pc = Euler buckling load, which is determined as follows:
π 2 EI
Pc = (2.6)
( KLu )
2
Cm, a factor which relates the actual moment diagram to an equivalent uniform moment diagram,
is typically taken as 1.0. However, in the case where the member is braced against side sway and
without transverse loads between supports, it may be taken by the following expression:
⎛M ⎞
Cm = 0.60 + 0.40 ⎜ 1b ⎟ (2.7)
⎝ M2 b ⎠
The value resulting from Eq. (2.7), however, is not to be less than 0.40.
To compute the flexural rigidity EI for concrete columns, AASHTO offers two possible solutions,
with the first being:
Ec Ig
+ Es Is
EI = 5 (2.8)
1 + βd
Ec Ig
EI = 2.5 (2.9)
1 + βd
where Ec is the elastic modulus of concrete, Ig is the gross moment inertia, Es is the elastic modules
of reinforcement, Is is the moment inertia of reinforcement about centroidal axis, and β is the
ratio of maximum dead-load moment to maximum total-load moment and is always positive. It
is an approximation of the effects of creep, so that when larger moments are induced by loads
sustained over a long period of time, the creep deformation and associated curvature will also
be increased.
• Pure Compression:
The factored axial resistance for pure compression, φPn, may be computed by:
For members with spiral reinforcement:
[ ( )
Pr = φPn = φ0.85Po = φ0.85 0.85 fc′ Ag − Ast + Ast fy ] (2.10)
[ ( )
Pr = φPn = φ0.80 Po = φ0.80 0.85 fc′ Ag − Ast + Ast fy ] (2.11)
For design, pure compression strength is a hypothetical condition since almost always there will be
moments present due to various reasons. For this reason, AASHTO LRFD 5.7.4.4 limits the nominal
axial load resistance of compression members to 85 and 80% of the axial resistance at zero eccen-
tricity, Po, for spiral and tied columns, respectively.
• Pure Flexure:
The section in this case is only subjected to bending moment and without any axial force. The
factored flexural resistance, Mr, may be computed by
⎡ ⎛ f ⎞⎤
Mr = φMn = φ ⎢ As fy d ⎜1 − 0.6ρ y ⎟ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ fc′⎠ ⎥⎦
(2.12)
⎡ a ⎤
= φ ⎢ As fy ⎛ d − ⎞ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ 2⎠⎦
where
As fy
a=
0.85 fc′b
[
Pr = φPb = φ 0.85 fc′bab + As′ fs′− As fy ] (2.13)
and
[
Mr = φMb = φ 0.85 fc′bab (d − d ′′ − ab 2) + As′ fs′ ( d − d ′ − d ′′) + As fy d ′′ ] (2.14)
where
⎛ 600 ⎞
ab = ⎜ ⎟ β1d
⎝ 600 + fy ⎠
and
⎡ ⎛ d′ ⎞ ⎛ fy ⎞ ⎤
fs′ = 600 ⎢1 − ⎜ 600 + ⎟⎥ ≤ f
⎣ ⎝d⎠ ⎝ 600 ⎠ ⎦ y
where fy is in MPa.
Biaxial Bending
AASHTO LRFD 5.7.4.5 stipulates that the design strength of noncircular members subjected to
biaxial bending may be computed, in lieu of a general section analysis based on stress and strain
compatibility, by one of the following approximate expressions:
1 1 1 1
= + − (2.15)
Prxy Prx Pry Po
Mux Muy
+ ≤1 (2.16)
Mrx Mry
Alternatively, the equations recommended by ATC-32 [5] can be used with acceptable accuracy.
The recommendations are listed as follows.
Except for the end regions of ductile columns, the nominal shear strength provided by concrete,
Vc, for members subjected to flexure and axial compression should be computed by
⎛ N ⎞
( )
Vc = 0.165 ⎜1 + (3.45) 10 −6 u ⎟ fc′Ae (MPa ) (2.17)
⎝ Ag ⎠
⎛ N ⎞
( )
Vc = 0.165 ⎜1 + (1.38) 10 −5 u ⎟ fc′Ae (MPa ) (2.18)
⎝ Ag ⎠
⎛ N ⎞
( )
Vc = 0.165 ⎜ 0.5 + (6.9) 10 −6 u ⎟ fc′Ae (MPa ) (2.19)
⎝ Ag ⎠
⎛ N ⎞
( )
Vc = 0.165 ⎜1 + (1.38) 10 −5 u ⎟ fc′Ae (MPa ) (2.18)
⎝ Ag ⎠
Av fyh d
Vs = (MPa ) (2.20)
s
π Ah fyh D′
Vs = (2.21)
2 s
for spirally reinforced circular sections. In these equations, Av is the total area of shear reinforcement
parallel to the applied shear force, Ah is the area of a single hoop, fyh is the yield stress of horizontal
reinforcement, D′ is the diameter of a circular hoop, and s is the spacing of horizontal reinforcement.
⎛A ⎞ f′
ρs = 0.45 ⎜ g − 1⎟ c (2.22)
⎝ c ⎠ fyh
A
The transverse reinforcement for confinement at the plastic hinges shall be determined as follows:
fc′ ⎛ 1.25Pu ⎞
ρs = 0.16 ⎜ 0.5 + (2.23)
fy ⎝ Ag fc′ ⎟⎠
for which
⎛ 1.25Pu ⎞
⎜ 0.5 + A f ′ ⎟ ≥ 1.0
⎝ g c ⎠
The total cross-sectional area (Ash) of rectangular hoop (stirrup) reinforcement for a rectangular
column shall be either
fc′ ⎛ Ag ⎞
Ash = 0.30 ahc −1 (2.24)
fyh ⎜⎝ Ac ⎟⎠
or,
fc′ ⎛ 1.25Pu ⎞
Ash = 0.12 ahc ⎜ 0.5 + (2.25)
fy ⎝ Ag fc′ ⎟⎠
whichever is greater,
where
a = vertical spacing of hoops (stirrups) with a maximum of 100 mm (mm)
Ac = area of column core measured to the outside of the transverse spiral reinforcement (mm2)
Ag = gross area of column (mm2)
Ash = total cross-sectional area of hoop (stirrup) reinforcement (mm2)
f c′ = specified compressive strength of concrete (Pa)
fyh = yield strength of hoop or spiral reinforcement (Pa)
hc = core dimension of tied column in the direction under consideration (mm)
ρs = ratio of volume of spiral reinforcement to total volume of concrete core (out-to-out of spiral)
Pu = factored axial load (MN)
Section Properties
In which:
Ky = K x = 2.10
Axial
Load P (k) Moment Magnification Cracked Transformed Section Critical Buckling Load
Group Case Trans. Magy Long Magx Comb. Mag E*Iy (k-ft2) E*Ix (k-ft2) Trans. Pcy (k) Long Pcx (k) P(k)
The calculations for Loading Group III and Case 2 will be demonstrated in the following:
Bending in the longitudinal direction: Mx
βD = 0.75 when checking columns for maximum moment or maximum eccentricities and associated
axial load. βd in Eq. (2.8) = max dead-load moment, MDL/max total moment, Mt.
1 1
δs = = = 1.344
∑ Pu 1305
1− 1−
φ ∑ Pc 0.75 × 6793
The magnified factored moment = 1.344 × 1.3 × 1151 = 2011 k-ft (2728 kN·m)
Notes:
1. Applied factored moments are magnified for slenderness in accordance with AASHTO LRFD.
2. The seismic forces are reduced by the load reduction factor R = 5.0.
L = 27.00 ft, f ′ = 4.00 ksi, Fy = 60.0 ksi, Ast = 26.00 in.2
c
The analysis results with the comparison of applied moments to capacities are summarized in
Table 2.6.
Column lateral reinforcement is calculated for two cases: (1) for applied shear and (2) for
confinement. Typically, the confinement requirement governs. Apply Eq. 2.22 or Eq. 2.23 to calculate
the confinement reinforcement. For seismic analysis, the unreduced seismic shear forces should be
compared with the shear forces due to plastic hinging of columns. The smaller should be used. The
plastic hinging analysis procedure is discussed elsewhere in this handbook and will not be repeated
here.
The lateral reinforcement for both columns are shown as follows.
For left column:
Vu = 148 kips (659 kN) (shear due to plastic hinging governs)
φVn = 167 kips (743 kN) ∴ No lateral reinforcement is required for shear.
Reinforcement for confinement = ρs = 0.0057 ∴ Provide #4 at 3 in. (#15 at 76 mm)
For right column:
Vu = 180 kips (801 kN) (shear due to plastic hinging governs)
φVn = 167 kips (734 kN)
φVs = 13 kips (58 kN) (does not govern)
Reinforcement for confinement =ρs = 0.00623 ∴ Provide #4 at 2.9 in. (#15 at 74 mm)
Summary of design:
4 ft (1.22 m) diameter of column with 26-#9 (26-#30) for main reinforcement and #4 at 2.9 in.
(#15 at 74 mm) for spiral confinement.
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
ebooknice.com