Graduation Projects Unit

Graduation Project (II)

Analysis and Design of Highway

Super structure Bridge
Advisor: Dr. Bilal El Ariss

Name :
Awad Mahfoudh Ba Obaid
Hussain Mahmod Al braiki
Salim Ibrahim Ba Saeed
Salem Abdullah Fadaaq
Suhail Mohamed Al Amri

ID :
200501233
200602670
200608514
200501514
200416287

Spring Semester 2011

Outline
Introduction

Objectives
Summary of GP (1)
Background Theory
Analysis & Design
Economical , Environmental & Contemporary Issues
Conclusion

Introduction
Problem
Statemen
t

Development of Abu Dhabi has become a place full of shopping mall and
luxury building, hotels.

Development increases the population of Abu Dhabi.

Population growth causes problems in the infrastructural.

Major infrastructural problem is the traffic jam.

The bridge is constructed to link many other major roads to the City of Abu
Dhabi.

Objectives

The

main

recommend

objective
and

of

this

present

graduation

different

project

bridge

is

to

alternative

Bridges. Analysis will be conducted for the different bridge

alternatives. Then, those different bridge alternatives will
be designed according to our analysis.

Summary of GP1

Pier Caps

Literature Review

The pier cap is a structural element that transfers

the loads carried by the superstructure elements to
the substructure elements, located at the junction of
two spans.

Pier Caps

Literature Review

There are different types of pier caps, the following are the mo
common types:

Single column (Hammerhead).

Multi-column or pile bent.
Solid Wall.

The selection of the pier type depends on many factors,

such as :

1. Required load capacity.

2. Superstructure Geometry.
3. Site conditions.
4. Cost Consideration.
5. 5. Aesthetics.

Pier Cap Dead Load Analysis Process

Total

Dead

loads

coming

from

girders

have

been

considered as point loads (concentrated loads on the pier

cap).

In this case, there have been a total of 9 concentrated

loads imposed on the cap (since we have 8 girders).

Dead Load Analysis

Dead Load Analysis

Supp
ort

Load (kN)

827.6

2380.03

2023.05

2120.4

2087

2120.4

2023.05

2380.03

827.6

We will design on the Maximum Load from girder = 2380.03 kN

SAP2000 Dead Load Analysis

Next, take the maximum reactions. Then

entered as point concentrated loads

SAP2000 Dead Load Analysis

Finally, Bending moments are determined

for the maximum critical load effects

Live Load Configurations

Live Load Study Cases

According to the AASHTO standards, there are different live
load scenarios that should be studied in order to obtain the
maximum
possible
Case
(1): Onlive
theload:
middle
P = 284.7 KN
W = 345.78
KN/m

P
w

Live Load Study Cases

Case (2): Full Shift Left

Live Load Study Cases

Case (1): One on the middle
R1= 0
R2= 0
R3= 7.845 KN
R4= 838.7 KN
R5= 838.7 KN
R6= 7.845 KN
R7= 0
R8= 0

Live Load Study Cases

Case (2): Full Shift Left
R1= 1183.14 KN
R2= 1116.7 KN
R3= 1243.2 KN
R4= 1899 KN
R5= 1251.1 KN
R6= 1212.3 KN
R7= 760 KN
R8= 1636.6 KN

Live Load Cases Result

Load Cases
1
2
Max. Load
(kN)

G1

G2

1183. 111
14
6.7
0

1183. 111
14
6.7

G3

G4

G5

G6

124 189 125 121

3.2
9
1.1 2.3
7.84 838. 760.
0
5
7
1
124 189 125 121
3.2
9
1.1 2.3

G7

G8

759.7 1636
18
.6
0

759.7 1636
18
.6

Live Load
Take the maximum reaction from cases. Then entered in the
SAP2000 as concentrated load

Finally, Bending moments are determined

for the maximum critical live load effects

Ultimate Moment of Pier cap

Moment
Location

Moment form Dead Load Moment from Live Load

(KN.m)
(KN.m)

Span 1

8041.71

4109.21

Ultimate
Moment
(KN.m)
17243.255

Middle Pier

-13474.53

-7170.1

-29390.838

Span 2

8041.71

3989.76

17034.2175

Bridge
component
Design

Bridge Girder

Analysis
Data

Frame 1 Frame
2
Pier 1

Frame 3 Frame 4

Pier 2

Pier 3

Frame
5

Pier 4

Frame 6

Pier 5

Frame 7

Pier 6

Frame 8

Pier 7

Girder ultimate negative moments values:

Frame Positive Ultimate Moment
(kN.m)

Pier cap

Negative Ultimate
Moment
(kN.m)

15407.1

-19259

8723.79

-18908

11265.6

-13529

10604.7

-14976

10604.7

-13529

11265.6

-18908

Abutmen
t2

Design
Concept

Bridge Girder

Main target is to determine the location of the

neutral axis.
b

Two cases:
Case 1:

N.A.

hf

N.A falls in the flange (a hf)

Section above N.A is rectangular
AS

Design
Concept

Bridge Girder

Case 2:
N.A falls in the flange (a > hf)
Compressed concrete above N.A is NOT
b

rectangular.
Divide compressed concrete Above

hf

N.A into rectangular parts.

N.A.

AS

Design
Concept

Bridge Girder

Compare the values of Mu & Mflange if:

Mu < Mflange

a < hf

Mu > Mflange

a > hf

Where:
Mu = Moment from applied forces
Mflange = Moment carried by flange.

Design

procedure

R-Section

STEP 1: Assume bar size.

STEP 2: Assume cover.
STEP 3: Compute depth of steel reinforcement ( d ).
STEP 4: Determine ( ) from Tables or ACI Equation.
STEP 5: Ensure that min max.
STEP 6: Determine As.

Girder
Design

Calculations

Girder Design Steps:

Bottom Steel Reinforcements.
Top Steel Reinforcements.

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

h 2500 mm

fc' 35Mpa
f y 420 Mpa

bw 750mm
b 1250 mm

Cc 40 mm

hf 750 mm

d s 10 mm

Assume Bar size # 43

d b 43mm

db
2
43
Cover 40 10
71.5 mm 72mm
2
d h Cover

Cover C c d s

d 2500 72 2428mm

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

M u 15407.09 KN .m

hf

M flange (0.85 f h f b) * d
2

'
c

750

M flange (0.85 * 35 * 2500 * 1250) * 2428

M flange 5.153 X 1010 N .mm 51533.508kN.m

M u M flange a h f
Based on the above result case one procedure will be
followed.

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations
Rn

Mu
bd 2

15407.09 X 10 6
Rn
2.3231
2
0.9 * 1250 * 2428
0.85 f '
2R
C
n

1 1
f
0.85 f '
y
C

0.85 * 35
2 * 2.323

1 1
420
0.85 * 35

0.005766

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations
1.4

fy

min Greater of

'
C

1.4
0.0033
420

4 f y

min Greater of

0.85
for f C' 30MPa
1
'
'
1.06 0.007 f C for f C 30MPa

1 1.06 0.007 * 35 0.815

35
0.0035
4 * 420

min 0.0035
1.4

fy

0.85 1 f C' 600

Max (0.75)
f y 600 f y

min Greater of

f C'

4 f y

1.4
0.0033
420

min Greater of

35
0.0035
4 * 420

min 0.0035

Max (0.75)
Max 0.025

0.85 * 0.815 * 35 600

420
600 420

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

min Max
AS .b.d
AS 0.0035 * 1250 * 2428
AS 17499.523 mm 2
Number of bars

As
17499.523

12.1 bars 13 bars

cross section area of one bar
1452

So according to the area of steel obtained, we choose to take 13 ba

# 43

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

As =13 bars #43 for each meter ,

From table bmin =1174mm < bactual =1250

mm.

So, we need one layer.

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

Top
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

Girder reinforcement
Fram
e

Postive ultimate
moment
(kN.m)

Number of steel
bars

Pier
cap

Negative ultimate
moment
(kN.m)

Number of steel
bars

15407.1

13# 43

-19259

16 # 43

8723.79

7 # 43

-18908

15 # 43

11265.6

9# 43

-13529

12 # 43

10604.7

9# 43

-14976

12 # 43

10604.7

9# 43

-13529

12 # 43

11265.6

9# 43

-18908

15 # 43

8723.79

7 # 43

-19259

16 # 43

15407.1

13# 43

Girder
Shear

Reinforcement

The failure of reinforced concrete beams in shear is

quite different from their failure in bending.

Shear failure occur suddenly with little or no advance

warning.

Girder
Shear

Reinforcement

Girder
Shear

Reinforcement

Vu= 1271 KN
for shear = 0.75
We found that Vc/2 = 673.31 < Vu= 1271 KN < Vc=1346.63
KN
So we need minimum strips
We choose stirrups number 16 with max allowed spacing
Smax =smaller of: 600mm
or 0.5d=0.5 x 2428=1214mm
or
Choose Smax=600mm=60cm

Pier
caps

Dead Load Analysis Process

Total Dead loads coming from girders have been

considered as point loads (concentrated loads on the
pier cap).

In this case, there have been a total of 9 concentrated

loads imposed on the cap (since we have 8 girders).

Pier
caps
Design

Concept & theory

According to reinforcement concrete (RC)

design concept, the design of bridge pier
caps follows the rectangular section design
method which used in slab design.

Pier cap design

fc = 35 MPa
fy = 420 MPa
Cc=50 mm
db=57 mm
ds= 10 mm
According to the ACI codes:
= 0.85 (fc/ fy) x [1-(1-(2Rn / 0.85 fc)0.5]
Rn = Mu/ bd2
As=bd

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

Mu = 17243.255KN.m = 17243.255x 10 6 N.mm

Cover= Cc+db+ds= 50+57+10= 88.5 mm =90 mm
d=h-cover=2550-88.5= 2461.5 mm
Rn = 17243.255x106 / (0.9 x 1000 x 2461.5 2)= 3.166
= 0.85 (35/ 420) x [1-(1-(2x3.066 / 0.85x 35)0.5] = 0.00798

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

From ACI Table the max= 0.0216, and min 0.0035

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

since the = 0.00719 is between the extremes

max< < min , ok

( = 0.00719)

As=bd=0.00797 x 1000 x 2461.5 = 19651.67 mm2

Bottom
steel

Reinforcement Calculations

Pier cap

Steel Reinforcement

Moment
Location

Ultimate
Moment
(KN.m)

As
(mm2)

No. of bars

Span 1

17243.255
-29390.838
17034.2175

19300
34452.964
19050.328

8#57

Middle Pier
Span 2

15 #57
8#57

Pier cap

Shear Design Calculation

Negative shear

span 1

-7587.37

middle pier

-12641.7

13840

span 2

7667.12

We will design on the ultimate shear

Vu= 13840
KN

Positive shear

Pier cap

Shear Design Calculation

In our case we found that Vu Vc , so we will need stirrup

So we will use

Pier cap

Shear Design Calculation

Spacing
limit :-

Pier cap

Shear Design Calculation

Alternative design
Present the second alternative design for the
bridge, which is:
I-Section Steel girder

LTB

Lateral Torsional Buckling

Classification of LTB Cases:
(1) if Lb Lp No LTB
(2) if Lp < Lb < Lr Inelastic LTB
(3) if Lb > Lr
Elastic LTB
Where:
Lb: laterally unsupported length of the compression flange.
Lp : limit for no LTB.
Lr : limit between elastic and inelastic LTB.

Moment vs. Lb curve

Design Concept

Mu

Mp (Where = 0.9)

Mp =

Zx * f y

Zx

Mp / fy

section modulus

Zx : is the plastic

Moment on the Girder

Frame

Ultimate Moment
(kips.ft)

Ultimate Moment
(kips.ft)

11356.2

-14195

6430.12

-13937

8303.63

-9972.3

7816.53

-11038

7816.53

-11038

8303.63

-9972.3

Zx

Zx

2725.
3406
5
.9
1543.
3344.
23
9
1992.
2393.
87
3
1875.
2649
97
.2
1875.
2649.
97
2
1992.
2393.
87
3
-

Section

Girder Front View

Section

Selection of the
section

Zx= 3406.9 in3

Mu= 14195kips.ft

SAP2000

SAP2000

Ultimate Moment
Ultimate Moment
(kips-ft)

Ultimate
Moment
(kips-ft)

Zx

Zx

6272.05

8525.27

1505.29

2046.07

2734.62

6238.21

656.309

1497.17

3536.51

8382.43

848.763

2011.78

3325.38

8382.43

798.092

2011.78

3325.38

6238.21

798.092

1497.17

3536.51

8525.27

848.763

2046.07

2734.62

8525.27

656.309

2046.07

6272.05

8525.27

1505.29

2046.07

Frame

Selection of the
section

: Section
Zx= 2046.07 in3
Mu= 8525.27 kips.ft

Laterally unsupported length

of the compression flange (Lb)

Number of Segments
Section

Lp
(ft)

Lp (m)

Lr
(ft)

Lr (m)

Lb
(m)

Lb/Lp

W40x50
3.99390
16.8597
5.40824
13.1
55.3
21.6
3
2
6
4

Case (1) Lb Lp
Lateral Bracing

Lb = 24m

No LTB

Segme
nts
6

Final Section

Girder Front View

Section
W40x503

Detailed
Cost

Economical Issues

Cost of the Concrete Bridge Deck:

The volume of the deck = 840 m x 22m x 0.25m = 4620 m3

The volume of the parapets = [9.86 KN/m x (840 m x 2)] / 25 KN/m

=662.6 m3

Cost of (1 m3) of concrete = 1500 AED

The cost for deck and parapets = 4620 m3 + 662.6 m3 x 1500 AED/
m3 = 4.6 x106AED.

Economical Issues

Detailed
Cost

Cost of the Concrete Bridge Girders:

The cost of the girders =Area x Length of Girder x Cost x Number o

girder
=2.625m2 x840mx1500AED/m3 x8=3.31x106AED
Cost of the Steel Bridge Girders:

Cost of (1 ton) of steel = 8000 AED/ton

Cost of steel girders = weight of whole girders x cost of (1 ton)
steel
= 734.28 ton x 8000 = 5874240 AED

Detailed
Cost

Economical Issues

Cost of the Concrete Bridge Pier-caps:

Area of one pier cap =1000 x 2250 =2.25 x 106 mm2 =2.
Volume of one pier cap = 2.25 x 22 = 49.5 m3
Total cost of pier caps = 49.5 x 1500 x 7 = 519750 AED

Alternative
Comparison

Economical Issues

Total cost of :

(AED)

Concrete bridge superstructure

8,429,750

Steel bridge superstructure

10,993,99
0

Alternative
Comparison

Economical Issues

The initial material cost of reinforced concrete is less than

the equivalent steel required for construction.
Less long term cost of materials used for repairing or
replacing the defected parts, since concrete does not
require

high

maintenance

compared to steel.

and

protection

coatings,

Concrete
Bridge

Environmental Issues

In general, concrete bridge has lower environmental

effects than a steel bridge :

less influenced by excessive wearing from the moist

surrounding atmosphere, because of its low chemical-active
nature with moisture.

Does not require a lot of protection layers, which contain

harmful chemicals and highly toxic materials such as paints and
protection coats, which means less consumption of material
and less harming of the surrounding environment.

Steel reinforcing steel bars (rebars) used in the bridge could be

Steel
Bridge

Environmental Issues

On the other hand, the possibility of reusing and recycling the

materials is higher for the steel bridge.

This means more reducing of the waste and its negative

impact on the environment.

Social
Impact

Contemporary Issues

One of the most important issues regarding the design of the

bridge is having a positive social impact.

This is achieved by considering the appropriate bridge design.

This means fewer blockages of the bridge, more flow-ability,

and more convenience and comfort for the users.

Gant chart

Thank You For

Listening