International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 8, Issue 6, June 2017, pp. 234240, Article ID: IJCIET_08_06_027

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=6
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

PARAMETRIC STUDY ON T-BEAM BRIDGE

Anushia K Ajay
PG Student, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal University,
Manipal, Karnataka, India

Asha U Rao
Associate Professor (Sr. Scale), Manipal Institute of Technology,
Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka, India

N.A. Premanand Shenoy

Roy and Shenoy, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

ABSTRACT
The infrastructure available in a country judges the development of that country.
Highway which allows the flow of human beings and material is a major part of
infrastructure. Tee-beam bridges forms the major proportion of bridges constructed
on the highways. IRC codes are developed and reused from time to time based on the
research work carried out all over the world. IRC 112-2011 replaces two codes of
practice IRC 21-2000 and IRC 18-2000. Also IRC 112-2011 introduces limit state
method of design of RCC bridges. Single span two lane bridge is subjected to IRC
class AA tracked loading by varying the span is analyzed using software VB6.0. In
this study parametric studies are conducted on various bridge super structural
elements. The study is mainly focused on the economical depth of a longitudinal
girder for different span. Nomograms are also developed which can be used as a
handy tool in the design of T- Beam Bridge.
Key words: T beam bridge, IRC 112:2011, economical depth, nomograms etc.
Cite this Article: Anushia K Ajay, Asha U Rao and N.A. Premanand Shenoy.
Parametric Study on T-Beam Bridge. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 8(6), 2017, pp. 225233.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=5

1. INTRODUCTION
A bridge is a structure which is built over an obstacle and hence providing a passage without
obstructing the way beneath. The passage may be for a railway, a road, a pipeline or a canal.
The physical obstacle can be a road, railway, river, body of water or a valley. The T-beam
Bridge is best suited when the span range is between 10 to 25 m. T-beam are so called
because the longitudinal girders and deck slabs are cast monolithically to form a T shaped
structure. The Superstructure consists of longitudinal girder, cross girder, deck slab,
cantilever portion, footpath handrails and wearing coat.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 234 editor@iaeme.com

 Parametric Study on T-Beam Bridge

2. METHODOLOGY
In this study, the varying span of Tee Beam Bridge subjected to the IRC Class AA Tracked
loading. Parametric studies are conducted by varying the span, grade of concrete, thickness of
deck slab and depth of longitudinal girder. The analysis and parametric study is performed by
using the software VB 6.0.

Bridge Data Table

Table 1 List of parameter

Span (m) 12,14,16,18,20,22,24

Carriage width (m) 7.5

Longitudinal girder spacing (m) 2.5

Thickness of slab (m) .15 - .3

Thickness of wearing coat 80mm

IRC load Class AA tracked

Loading System
Dead Load
The dead load carried by a girder or member shall consist of the portion of the weight of the
superstructure which is supported wholly or in part by the girder or member including its own
weight

Live Load
Live loads on bridges are mainly vehicular load .IRC class AA tracked load is considered in
this study.

Figure 1 IRC Class AA Tracked Vehicle

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 235 editor@iaeme.com

 Anushia K Ajay, Asha U Rao and N.A. Premanand Shenoy

Calculation of live load can be done using the following methods

Courbons Method
This is the simplest method and hence it is very popular. It is one of the preliminary type of
rational analysis with computational simplicity for the calculation live load distribution in
bridge decks. This method put forwards an equation which gives the reaction factor for each
longitudinal girder. The expression is as follows
1

Where,
P = total live load
e = eccentricity of the live load (or c.g.of loads in case of multiple loads),
x= distance of girder under consideration from the central axis of the bridge
n = number of longitudinal girders

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

400000
sp12
350000
sp14
y = -46.431x3 + 2863.8x2 - 54313x + 623175 sp16
300000
sp18
y = -39.549x3 + 2437.7x2 - 46029x + 525352 sp20
250000
sp22
y = -32.093x3 + 1985x2 - 37425x + 429299
sp24
cost

200000
y = -25.871x3 + 1604.7x2 - 30141x + 347335 Poly. (sp14)
Poly. (sp16)
150000 y = -20.334x3 + 1265.3x2 - 23656x + 273550
Poly. (sp18)
y = -15.432x3 + 965.52x2 - 17953x + 209609 Poly. (sp20)
100000
y = -11.258x3 + 708.32x2 - 13066x + 153720 Poly. (sp22)
Poly. (sp24)
50000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
l/d

Figure 2 Variation of cost of girder with l/d ratio for different span
The figure shows the variation in cost with l/d ratio for different spans. In this study
bridges with span ranging from 12m to 24m are selected. Loading is IRC class AA tracked
and grade of steel is Fe 415.It can be seen that cost decrease as l/d ratio increases up to a
certain l/d ratio then it starts increasing. There is a point for each span curve at which the cost
is minimum and it can be called as optimum l/d ratio .From this graph optimum l/d ratio for
different spans can be obtained.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 236 editor@iaeme.com

 Parametric Study on T-Beam Bridge

opt l/d VS span

15
14.5
14
opt l/d 13.5
13 opt l/d
12.5
12
10 15 20 25
span

Figure 3 Variation of cost of girder with optimum l/d ratio

The grade of concrete is M30 is kept constant for all span. A second order polynomial
equation is obtained from the curve, which can be considered as a generalized equation for
finding optimum l/d ratio of longitudinal bridge girder spanning in between 10 m to 25m for
particular grade of concrete.
16.5

16 opt l/d(M30)
opt l/d(M35)
y = -0.0049x2 + 0.2817x + 12.317
15.5 opt l/d(M40)
opt l/d

y = -0.0047x2 + 0.2743x + 12.089 opt l/d(M45)

15
opt l/d(M50)

14.5 y = -0.0049x2 + 0.2771x + 11.772 Poly. (opt l/d(M30))

Poly. (opt l/d(M35))
14 y = -0.0045x2 + 0.2584x + 11.611
Poly. (opt l/d(M40))
y = -0.0045x2 + 0.2576x + 11.26
Poly. (opt l/d(M45))
13.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Poly. (opt l/d(M50))
span(m)

Figure 4 Variation of opt. l/d ratio with span for different concrete grade

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 237 editor@iaeme.com

 Anushia K Ajay, Asha U Rao and N.A. Premanand Shenoy

25

20

Deflection(mm)
15
l/d13
l/d14
10
l/d15

0
12 14 16 18
Span(m)

Figure 5 Variation of deflection with span with different l/d ratio

Since the optimum l/d ratio for different spans are coming within the range of 13 to 15,
these l/d ratios are chosen to check the deflection criteria. From the figure 4.3 it is clear that
l/d ratio 15 is not satisfying the permissible deflection criteria (span/800).whereas l/d ratio 13
is uneconomical. So it can be concluded that preferable l/d ratio for longitudinal girder is 14.
125000

120000

115000
cost

110000

105000

100000

95000
M25 M30 M35 M40 M45 M50 M55 M60
Grade

Figure 6 Variation of girder cost with grade of concrete

Figure 5.4 shows the variation in cost of longitudinal girder when different grades of
concrete are used. The span of bridge for this particular case of study is 14m, l/d ratio is 14
and loading is IRC class AA. As it is clear from the graph, there is a gradual increase in cost
of longitudinal girder.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 238 editor@iaeme.com

 Parametric Study on T-Beam Bridge

14

12

stress intensity(N/mm^2)
10

0
0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.2 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.3
thickness of slab(m)

Figure 7 Variation of stress intensity with thickness of slab

Figure 5.7 shows the variation of intensity of stress with thickness of slab. The slab
thickness is varied from 150mm to 300mm. The spacing of longitudinal girder and cross
girder is 2.5m and 3.5m respectively. There is a gradual decrease in intensity of stress when
the thickness of slab increases. It is noted that the cost of slab increases linearly with the
thickness. As per IRC 112:2011, slab having a thickness less than 200mm develops higher
shear strength than the one which is having a thickness more than 200mm. Also, when the
slab thickness is less than 170mm the stress limitation criteria is not satisfied.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The optimal l/d ratio for the economical design of longitudinal girder using LSM is obtained
as 14.
Cost of girder increases gradually with increase in grade of concrete
Stress intensity decreases gradually with increase in thickness of deck slab. It is preferable to
keep the thickness in between 170mm and 200 mm.

REFERENCES
[1] Ultimate limit state of linear elements for bending section 8 of IRC: 112 flexural analysis
of beams. T Viswanathan Journal of the Indian Roads Congress Volume: 75 Issue
number: 1 2014

[2] Comparative study for shear design using IRC 112:2011 & IRC 21:2000,. B.H.Solanki
and Prof.M.D.Vakil. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume:
4, Issue: 6, June 2013

[3] Analysis of T-beam Bridges using Finite Element Method. R. Shreedhar Spurti
Mamadapur International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT).
Volume 2, Issue 3, September 2012.

[4] Study on Effectiveness of Courbons Theory in the Analysis of T-beam Bridges. M.G.
Kalyanshetti and R.P. Shriram. International Journal of Science and Engineering
Research. Volume 4, Issue 3, March 2013.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 239 editor@iaeme.com

 Anushia K Ajay, Asha U Rao and N.A. Premanand Shenoy

[5] Design of Bridges by N Krishnaraju, Fourth Edition, oxford and IBH Publishing
Co.Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

[6] Mohammed Anif and Prof. G Augustine Maniraj Pandian, Effect of Skew for Various
IRC Loadings on a T-Beam Bridge Section. International Journal of Civil Engineering
and Technology, 8(2), 2017, pp. 410417.

[7] Palden Humagai, Pavan Kumar Peddineni and C. Raja Mallu, Manual Analysis and
Design of Post Tensioned Pre-Stressed Concrete T-Beam Segment Bridge Using Proto-
Type Model. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp.
18721887

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 240 editor@iaeme.com