Sharad Gupta & Harpreet Singh Yamuna Bridge EPE Package V - Presentation-2

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA
(EASTERN PERIPERAL EXPRESSWAY) BSEC

WORKSHOP ON CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES IRC:112 – 2011, ORGANISED BY IAHE
WORKSHOP ON IRC:112-
IRC:112-2011
WORKED OUT EXAMPLES

(EASTERN PHERIPHERAL EXPRESSWAY)
SHARAD KUMAR GUPTA

HARPREET SINGH
B&S ENGINEERING CONULTANTS PVT. LTD.

Structural Scheme & General Features of Bridge:
Location : Approx. 40 Km d/s to the existing Bridge over

river Yamuna at Kalindi Kunj at Delhi.
Span configuration : 10 Spans @ 60 m c/c exp. Joint (600m total length)
with two carriageway of total width 20.65m each
Superstructure : Two cell Precast Segmental PSC box girder
supported on bearings and two span made
continuous by deck continuity.
The depth of box girder is 3
3.50m
50m
Pier : Single Solid Circular RCC Pier (3.0m dia) with

Rectangular pier cap is provided. The width of pier cap
across traffic direction is kept a little wider than the
width of soffit of box girder.
1
Structural Scheme & General Features of Bridge:
Abutment : RCC Spill Through Type Abutment (Two Columns)

The backfill behind abutment is proposed with
φ = 32o, c = 0. For spill through abutment, slope in
front of abutment will be well protected by means of
stone pitching and launching apron.
Foundation : Circular RCC Well foundation (8.0m dia)

Bearings : Free Spherical Bearing for Vertical Load
: PIN/Metallic Guided Bearing for Horizontal Load
Expansion Joint : Modular Strip Seal Type

2
BRIDGE LAYOUT – GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING

BRIDGE LAYOUT – GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING
3
DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

General Loads
1. Dead loads
2. SIDL except Surfacing (Crash Barrier P1 type @ 0.76 t/m2)
3. Surfacing (Wearing Coat @ 0.2 t/m2)
4. Live Load
5. Wind load : As Per Clause 209.3 of IRC:6-2014

6. Temperature Differential
7. Vertical Seismic


CALCULATION OF FORCES DUE TO WIND
Wind force is calculated as per clause 209.3 of IRC:6-2010
Basic wind speed (Vb) as per figure 6 = 39.1 m/s
H (average ht of exposed surface from ground level) = 21 m
From table 4
Vz (hourly mean speed of wind at ht H) = 30.41 m/s
Pz (horiz. Wind pressure at ht H) = 554.6 n/m2
since table for is for basic wind speed (Vb) of = 33 m/s
So for Vb of 39m/s
Vz calculated = 36.0 m/s
Pz calculated = 777.2 n/m2
Upward/downward vertical wind force Fv (in N) = Pz x A3 x G x CL
Length of span = 60 m
Deck Width = 20.65 m
CL for lift coefficient = 0.75
Gust Factor = 2
Upward/downward wind force = 2.45 t/m
4
Distance from Bending Moment Shear

Section
Mid span (t-m) Force (t)
1-1 0 1016.00 0.00
22
2-2 72
7.2 952 39
952.39 17 67
17.67
3-3 14.4 761.56 35.34
4-4 21.6 443.51 53.01
5-5 19.5 549.41 47.86
6-6 25.3 230.58 62.09


Check for Thermal Effects
EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE RISE EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE FALL
5
DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

Vertical Seismic Force
Load per m on Superstructure Hence, UDL at mid span due to
vertical seismic force:
= 28.75 + 5.45 + (200t / 60m) x 0.2
DL SIDL LL = 0.2118 x (28.75 + 5.45 + 0.67)
= 28.75 + 5.45 + 0.67 = 7.38 t/m
= 34.87 t/m
At support:
Time Period =
=00.2118
2118 x (36
(36.94
94 + 5
5.45
45 + 0
0.67)
67)
=
= 9.12 t/m
= 0.684 sec
Seismic Coefficient

6
LOSSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

Immediate Losses Time Dependent Losses
1. Frictional Loss. 1. Relaxation Loss
2. Anchorage Seating Loss. 2. Shrinkage Loss
3
3. Elastic Shortening Loss
Loss. 3
3. Creep Loss

FRICTION LOSS
1. Loss Due to Wobble
Unintended Deviation of the Cable
Coefficient is K For HDPE Ducts 0.002/m length
2. Loss Due to Friction
Intended Deviation Angle Change
If “θ” is the angle change in radians
μ is the friction Coefficient For HDPE Ducts 0.17
If P is the jacking force then the force at any other point: PO

PO = P x e-(μθ+Kx)
7
Anchorage Seating Loss

When the cable is anchored, the wedges move over small distance
before the wires are firmly griped by the wedges. Movement of
wedges is called Wedge Set.
Due to movement of the wedge, the force in the cable gets reduced
near the anchorages. It is always calculated as:
Area of Stress diagram
= Slip
p value
E
Po Cable Stress
Area of the stress diagram

P1


Elastic Shortening Loss
Due to compressive stress imparted around the cables, the structure
shortens. Due to this there is a loss in the cable force and this is called as
Elastic Shortening loss. This can be calculated as follows:
Total Loss in force with in a group:

CompressiveStressaroundCable
× m(n − 1) x Area of one cable
2
Alternatively it can be computed based on sequence of stressing. Effect of
stressing of one group over other group:
Compressive stress around the cable x m x n x Area of cable.

where n is the number of cables.
8
Time Dependent Losses

Relaxation or Creep Loss in steel
JJustt like
lik concrete
t member b undergoes
d shortening,
h t i th steel
the t l wires
i also
l
try to increase it’s length under constant stress by sagging once the
wire sags it losses it’s stress level. The code gives loss as
percentage depending upon the stress level.
Initial Stress Relaxation Loss for Low
Relaxation steel (%)
0 5 fp
0.5 0
0.6 fp 1.25
0.7 fp 2.5
0.8 fp 4.5
The values are 1000 hr. value. For the loss at α, multiply by 3.

Shrinkage Loss (Shrinkage Strain - Clause 6.4.2.6 of IRC:112)

When the beam shrinks (loss of water), the beam undergoes shortening
of its length. This will lead to loss in prestressing force.
Creep Loss (Creep Strain - Clause 6.4.2.7 of IRC:112)

Creep is the increased strain in the structure due to sustained loads. It
depends upon the age of loading and compressive stress present in the
structure.
9
Load Combinations for Stress Check in SLS
Following load cases shall be considered. Each service stage load case shall be
considered with γsup = 1.10 & γinf = 0.90 as per clause 7.95 (6) of IRC: 112
SLS combinations (Rare):

Case1: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+1.0 LL+0.6 TF+1.0 PS (LL Leading+Thermal Accomp.)
Case2: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+1.0 LL+0.6 TR+1.0 PS ((LL Leading+Thermal
g Accomp.)
p)
Case3: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+0.75 LL+1.0 TF+1.0 PS (Thermal Leading+LL Accomp.)
Case4: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+0.75 LL+1.0 TR+1.0 PS (Thermal Leading+LL Accomp.)
Case5: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+1.0 LL+0.6 W+1.0 PS (LL Leading+Wind Accomp.)
Case6: 1.0 DL+1.0 SIDL1+1.2 SIDL2+0.75 LL+1.0 W+1.0 PS (Wind Leading+LL Accomp.)

Notations:
DL - Dead Load
SIDL-1 - S
S SIDL eexcept
cep surfacing
su c g
SIDL-2 - Surfacing
LL - Live Load
TR - Positive temperature gradient
TF - Reverse temperature gradient
W - Wind Load
S - Seismic Load
B - Buoyancy
WC - Water current forces
EP - Earth pressure due to back fill
LLS - Live load surcharge
PS - TENDON Primary Effects
10

Stresses at joint of Seg. S1 & S2 (0.8m from Support)
EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE RISE


Stresses at joint of Seg. S1 & S2 (0.8m from Support)
* Stresses due to other effects (Prestress +DL+75%LL+Losses)
EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE FALL
11


Load Combinations for Shear & Torsion in ULS
ULS Combination:
Case1: 1.35 DL+1.35 SIDL-1+1.75 SIDL-2+1.50 LL+0.9 W (LL Leading+Wind Accomp.)
Case2: 1.35 DL+1.35 SIDL-1+1.75 SIDL-2+1.15 LL+1.5 W (Wind Leading+LL Accomp.)
Case3: 1.35 DL+1.35 SIDL-1+1.75 SIDL-2+0.20 LL+1.5 S (Seismic Comb.)
The section is checked for flexure, shear & torsion under ULS condition.
12
ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

• As per Section 10 of IRC:112

13

14

15

16

17
ULTIMATE MOMENT CAPACITY

18

19
DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Transverse Analysis)

STAAD MODEL
STAAD MODEL WITH NODE NO.
Depth of Slab at Cantilever tip = 0.250m

Depth of Slab at Cantilever face = 0.450m
Depth of Slab at mid span = 0.240m
Thi k
Thickness off web
b = 0 300
0.300m
Soffit slab thickness = 0.250m
LOAD CALCULATION
Superimposed Dead Load

1.) Crash Barrier
Width of Crash Barrier = 0.50 m
Crash Barrier Load = 7.50 kN/m
2.) Wearing Coat
Weight of wearing coat (udl Load) = 2.00 kN/m2


Live Load as per Effective Width Method (as per Clause B3.2
off IRC-112)
IRC 112)
Number of Girders = 3.0

Spacing between Girders, lo (Effective Span) = 6.675 m
Cantilever length = 3.65 m
b/lo = 8.7
α (Constant)
(C t t) = 2 6 (Cont.)
2.6 (C t )
Thickness of wearing coat = 65 mm
Thickness of deck slab = 0.24 m
Total Width of Deck = 20.65 m
Total span = 57.8 m
20
of IRC-112))

of IRC-112)
Wheel-1 Wheel-2
Load Dist. of P with Dist. of P with
Position beff Position beff
Case Nearest beff Impact Nearest beff Impact
(X) (mod) (X) (mod)
Support (kN) Support (kN)
1 0.9 2.750 3.68 2.44 31.77 2.70 0.950 1.52 1.36 57.00
2 1.675 1.975 2.75 1.98 39.25 3.48 0.175 0.59 1.00 77.52
3 2.45 1.200 1.82 1.51 51.34 4.25 0.600 1.80 1.50 51.68
4 3 225
3.225 0 425
0.425 0 89
0.89 1 00
1.00 77 52
77.52 5 03
5.03 1 375
1.375 3 22
3.22 2 21
2.21 35 09
35.09
5 4.000 0.350 1.24 1.22 63.48 5.80 2.150 4.17 2.68 28.87
6 4.775 1.125 2.81 2.01 38.64 6.58 2.925 4.65 2.93 26.49
7 5.550 1.900 3.91 2.56 30.32 7.35 3.700 4.67 2.93 26.42
8 6.325 2.675 4.55 2.87 26.97 8.13 4.475 4.21 2.71 28.63
9 7.100 3.450 4.71 2.96 26.22 8.90 5.250 3.29 2.25 34.50
10 7.875 4.225 4.41 2.81 27.63 9.68 6.025 1.91 1.55 49.93
21


DISTORSIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE BOX GIRDER
Twisting moment or moment due to eccentric loading on the
box girder causes two effects:
1. Torsional shear flow (pure torsion) which is dealt in the
longitudinal analysis
2. Differential bending of the top & bottom slabs, which in turn
causes longitudinal warping and Transverse distortion of the
box girder.
The results of warping stresses obtained from Distortional
analysis are to be added to longitudinal analysis;
distortional bending effects are to be superimposed on
local (transverse) analysis of the box.
22

(CONSTRUCTION & ERECTION STAGE CHECK FOR BOX GIRDER)
CHECK OF SEGMENT FOR LIFTING CONDITION
• Check for flexure & Punching Shear Check


CHECK OF SEGMENT FOR STACKING ARRANGEMENT
23

CHECK OF SEGMENT S3 FOR LOAD DUE TO REAR SUPPORT


CHECK OF SEGMENT S3 FOR ANCHORING OF SUPPORT
24
DESIGN OF PIER & PIER CAP

SLS combinations:
Case1: 1.0 DL +1.0
1.0 SIDL1 + 1.0 SIDL2+
SIDL2 1.0 LL + 0.6 W + 0.15 B + 1.0 WC
Case2: 1.0 DL + 1.0 SIDL1 + 1.0 SIDL2+ 0.75 LL + 1.0 W + 0.15 B + 1.0 WC
ULS Combinations:
Case1: (Basic) 1.35 DL + 1.35 SIDL-1 + 1.75 SIDL-2 + 1.5 LL + 0.9 W + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
Case5: (Seismic) 1.35 DL + 1.35 SIDL-1 + 1.75 SIDL-2 + 0.2 LL + 1.5 S + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
Case6: (Seismic) 1.0 DL + 1.0 SIDL-1 + 1.0 SIDL-2 + 0.2 LL + 1.5 S + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
Case7: ((Erection)) 1.35 DL + 1.35 Cont. DL + 0.75 S + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
Case8: (Erection) 1.35 DL + 1.35 Cont. DL + 1.5 W * + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
Case9: (Accidental) 1.0 DL + 1.0 SIDL-1 + 1.0 SIDL-2 + 0.75 LL + 1.0 S + 0.15 B + 1.0WC
* with factor of 0.7 for construction stage as per Note 6 of Table 5 of IRC:6-2014.

Time Period Calculation

• Calculation performed in Staad Pro.
Salient Features of Model
• Fixed Support has been considered at pier Bottom
• For Time Period Calculation in Longitudinal Direction,
Lumped Mass of DL & SIDL Considered at bearing
Level
• For Time Period Estimation in Transverse Direction,
Lumped Mass of DL & SIDL Considered at respective
Center of Gravity.
25


SLENDERNESS CHECK OF PIER:
Case Vertical Primary Slenderness Limiting Value Secondry B.M, Increase in Total B.M. Moment Ratio of
Load B.M. ratio of of Slenderness due to B.M, due to (t.m) Capacity of MOR/
NED (t) M0ED (t.m) actual pier ratio λlim Slenderness Slenderness Section, ULS Total B.M.
(λa) (t.m) (%) (t.m)
1 2758 4811 54.09 41.32 936 19.5 5747 8855.3 1.54
2 3805 4811 54.09 35.18 1291 26.8 6102 9084.0 1.49
3 2981 7929 54.09 40.53 991 12.5 8920 10217.8 1.15
4 3790 7300 54.09 33.61 1353 18.5 8653 9081.9 1.05
26

SHEAR CHECK OF PIER:


CONFINEMENT REINFORCEMENT:
AS PER IRC:112 The Confinement Reinforcement depends on:
• Dimension of the Member

(Larger the dimension, less is the requirement)
• Design Axial Load
(Increase in axial load increase the confinement requirement)
• % Longitudinal Reinforcement
((Increase in Longitudinal
g Reinf. increase the confinement requirement)
q )
• Ratio of fck / fy
• Ratio of Ag / Ac
• The Mechanical Reinforcement ratio (ωwd ) which depends upon
several factors as noted above Upto dia of about 1.8m.
Beyond 1.8m, It is fixed as 0.18.
27
DESIGN OF WELL CAP

DESIGN OF WELL CAP

Well cap is provided to transfer the
loads and moments from pier to well
below.
Well cap top level is generally kept

above LWL.
28
For Well Cap Design Following steps are followed:
Estimation of Loads at pier Calculation of self weight

base and soil above cap
Application of loads over Staad Grillage Modelling

dispersed width /area
Calculation of Bending
Design & Detailing of
Moment & Shear Force in
reinforcement
SLS & ULS combinations

Preliminary Details:
Diameter off well
Di ll at top = 6.9m
69
Well cap Thickness = 2.2m
Steining Thickness = 0.95m
Diameter of pier = 3.0m
Well cap top /LWL = 186.5m
186 5m
Clear cover = 75mm
Grade of Concrete = M40
Reinforcement = Fe500
29
SKETCH WELL/WELL CAP/PIER

ESTIMATION OF LOADS AT PIER BASE

F
Forces att pier
i base
b are taken
t k from
f
pier design for all possible
combination in SLS and ULS
condition and same are used here
for the design of well cap.
cap
Seismic forces calculated above are
increased by 35%as per clause 219.8
of IRC:6
30
As per clause 6.2

6 2 and 6
6.4
4 of IRC 112
112- 2011,
2011 material
factors are different for basic/seismic and accidental
load combinations hence forces are compiled
separately and designed accordingly.
Reinforcement Steel = 0.87fyk; For accidental = fyk
Concrete = 0.446 fck; For accidental = 0.56fck

As per clause 16.4

16 4 (3) of IRC 112
112-2011
2011 for
hollow circular section a solid slab with
thickness 1/3rd of clear opening shall be
provided, integrally connected to walls.
Clear opening of well = 5m

Minimum thickness required = 1.67m,
Provided = 2.2m
31
STAAD MODELLING
Grillage with 0.25m member width is
developed in staad.
Self weight and weight of soil is applied
as member load over entire width.
Vertical loads and moments at pier base
are applied over dispersed area/width as
member loading.

STAAD MODEL
32
STAAD MODEL
TRANSVERSE MEMBERS

Diameter of pier = 3.0m

Effective depth of cap = 2.093m
2 093m
Dispersed diameter = 3+2.093*2
(at 45o dispersion) = 7.19m > 5.95m
(i.e. C/C steining)
Dispersed Area (π/4 * 5.952)
= 27.8m2
Intensity of load on member
= Load * Width (0.25m) / Dispersed Area
Moment per meter length

= Moment / width of dispersion
33
Critical one quarter is

identified for design
bending moment &
Sh
Shear f
force

SKETCH SHOWING
BENDING MOMENT
IN LONGITUDINAL &
TRANSVERSE
DIRECTION AT
CRITICAL LOCATION
34
Governing load case in longitudinal direction under

SLS condition is: HFL case with wind leading with
Max ML case
and in transverse direction is: HFL case with wind

leading with Max MT case
Maximum Bending Moment in governing SLS case is

388 tm/m in longitudinal direction and 364tm/m in
transverse direction.

STRESS CHECK IN SLS CONDITION
35

36
Construction Stage is governing for the design of well

cap in ULS condition
Maximum longitudinal Bending Moment = 692 tm/m

Maximum Shear Force in Long dir = 938 t
Maximum transverse Bending Moment = 625tm/m

Maximum Shear Force in Long dir = 943 t

37

38

Shear in cap is checked as per clause 10.2.3 of IRC

112 2011 at distance deff from face of steining
112-2011, steining, in our
case it is at face of pier.
Punching shear is checked at periphery of pier and at

distance 0.5d from face of pier as per clause 10.4.2 of
IRC 112-2011.
Maximum punching shear in governing case is 4500t

and corresponding moment is 4200tm.
39

DETAILING AS PER CLAUSE 16.6 OF IRC 112-2011:

1 Min Ast
1. = 0.26f
0 26fctm/fykbtd
= 0.26*3 / 500*btd = .00156 btd
OR = 0.0013 btd
2. Min Ast = 0.025 Ac

Provided 0.0044 btd
3. As per clause 16.6.1.3 (3) of IRC:112-2011, top

reinforcement is 25% of the maximum sagging
moment in span.
40

41
BSEC
THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PATIENCE
42

Sharad Gupta & Harpreet Singh Yamuna Bridge EPE Package V - Presentation-2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sharad Gupta & Harpreet Singh Yamuna Bridge EPE Package V - Presentation-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

(EASTERN PERIPERAL EXPRESSWAY) BSEC

WORKED OUT EXAMPLES

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

SHARAD KUMAR GUPTA

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

Structural Scheme & General Features of Bridge:

Location : Approx. 40 Km d/s to the existing Bridge over

Pier : Single Solid Circular RCC Pier (3.0m dia) with

Structural Scheme & General Features of Bridge:

Abutment : RCC Spill Through Type Abutment (Two Columns)

Foundation : Circular RCC Well foundation (8.0m dia)

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

BRIDGE LAYOUT – GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

BRIDGE LAYOUT – GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

5. Wind load : As Per Clause 209.3 of IRC:6-2014

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

Distance from Bending Moment Shear

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE RISE EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE FALL

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

LOSSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

If P is the jacking force then the force at any other point: PO

Anchorage Seating Loss

Area of the stress diagram

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

Total Loss in force with in a group:

Compressive stress around the cable x m x n x Area of cable.

Time Dependent Losses

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

Shrinkage Loss (Shrinkage Strain - Clause 6.4.2.6 of IRC:112)

Creep Loss (Creep Strain - Clause 6.4.2.7 of IRC:112)

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

Load Combinations for Stress Check in SLS

SLS combinations (Rare):

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE RISE

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

* Stresses due to other effects (Prestress +DL+75%LL+Losses)

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE FALL

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE (Longitudinal Analysis)

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE(Longitudinal Analysis)

 ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

 ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

 ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

BRIDGE OVER RIVER YAMUNA

 ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

 ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE SHEAR CAPACITY

ULTIMATE MOMENT CAPACITY

ULTIMATE MOMENT CAPACITY

ULTIMATE MOMENT CAPACITY

ULTIMATE MOMENT CAPACITY

Time Period Calculation