Guidelines for Bridge Design

Introduction
Welcome to the State Aid-Bridge Handbook. The purpose of this document is to consolidate all of the information that has been distributed by our office, at various times and locations, over the years. We hope that you will find this handbook helpful in your bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects. In this chapter you will find: A description of the various bridge types and their components, their advantages and disadvantages. A handout on the State Aid Bridge Process, which talks about what documents need to be submitted to our office and the process that will occur. An explanation of Bridge Funding Eligibility. Includes a chart that shows what is eligible for funding in the various bridge funds.

Submittal and Approval Process For Bridge Projects

Preliminary Plans Submittal

The owner, or his consultant, shall submit to State Aid Bridge, Hydraulic Data Sheet, Risk Analysis, Soils Report and 3 sets of Preliminary Plans. Preliminary Plans shall typically contain (at a minimum): title sheet general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes bridge layout sheet survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 2 sets to the owner for review 1 set for owners files and 1 set for the owners consultant. A copy of the transmittal letter is forwarded to: State Bridge Engineer, DSAE, Consultant, SA Bridge file.

Final Plans Submittal

The owner, or his consultant, shall submit 2 sets of Final Plans and Design Build Specifications to State Aid Bridge. Plans shall typically contain (at a minimum): title sheet general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes bridge layout sheet substructure design survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. An Engineers estimate of project should also be submitted. State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 1 set to the owners consultant. A copy of the transmittal letter is forwarded to: Owner, DSAE, SA Bridge file.

Tracing Submittal
The owner, or his consultant, shall submit tracings to District State Aid containing all appropriate signatures including the owner and his consultant. State Aid Bridge receives the Tracings from S.A.L.T. or District State Aid, backchecks against the Final plans and gets the signature of the State Bridge Engineer. Tracings are then returned to S.A.L.T. or District State Aid for letting.

BRIDGE FUNDING ELIGIBILITY

Federal Bridge Funds (FBF), designated BR in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), are available for up to 80% of the abutment to abutment costs of eligible bridge rehabilitation or reconstruction work on any publicly owned bridge or culvert longer than 20 feet (clear span as measured along the roadway centerline). Abutment to abutment costs include the 2 foot granular fill or concrete slab above the top of a culvert and all materials under the fill or slab. Bridges to receive funds are selected by the Area Transportation Parnterships (ATP). Federal Funds are provided in part and limited to federal funds indicated in the STIP. Funding is dependent on the availability of funds. Bridges, which are deficient under federal criteria and have a sufficiency rating less than 50 are eligible for reconstruction. Bridges, which are deficient under federal criteria and have a sufficiency rating less than 80 are eligible for rehabilitation. Bridges with a sufficiency rating greater than 80 are not eligible for Federal Bridge Funds. Minnesota State Transportation Funds, State Bridge Bonding funds (SBB), aka Fund 29 are available for up to 100% (typically 20% for matching FBF) of the abutment to abutment costs of eligible rehabilitation or reconstruction work on any publicly owned bridge or culvert longer than 10 feet (clear span as measured along the roadway centerline), or roadway in lieu of bridge work. Work must be done by contract, not local forces. Bridges, which are deficient under federal criteria and have a sufficiency rating less than 80 are eligible for SBB. Roadway in lieu of bridge projects are eligible for SBB, up to the cost of replacing the structure; this includes structure removal, grading, and right-of-way. Bridges that replace structures less than 10 feet long are eligible for SBB. Eligibility for Town Bridge Funds is the same as SBB. Items not eligible for FBF and SBB may be eligible for State Aid funding (SA) if on a State-Aid route. Town Bridge (Twn Br) funds are available for up to 100% of eligible township bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or other necessary work. The County may request 100% funding if the cost is less than $20,000. Items eligible for bridge items is shown in the Twn Br column.

 Approach grading is eligible after the first $10,000 of local cost (including bridge removal), if requested in writing. Turnback funds may be used to replace or repair bridges on Trunk Highway turnback projects. Eligibility is the same as shown in the SA column. Prorated means the item is partially eligible at the ratio of participating to nonparticipating items. Traffic control and mobilization are two common examples. Decorative or aesthetic items are limited to the estimated cost of the standard item. For example, a chain link fence may be standard, but the designer feels a decorative railing is appropriate in particular situation. The proration rate is the estimated cost for chain link fence, divided by actual unit price of the decorative railing.

BRIDGE FUNDING ELIGIBILITY

ITEM ELIGIBILITY
FBF TWN BR SBB SA

CONDITIONS

GENERAL
Mobilization X X X X 100% eligible if approach grading is to the touchdown point. Pro-rated by participating bridge amount if grading goes beyond touchdown point.

Structure Excavation Engineering & Surveying Bridge and NonBridge Removals Salvage

X See Tech Memos 93-SA-05 for eligibility of historic/archaeological review services with federal planning funds. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost

X X*

X X

X*

. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost . 100% eligible if approach grading is to the touchdown point. Pro-rated by participating bridge amount if grading goes beyond touchdown point. *May be eligible on road-in-lieu of bridge projects. Whether electrical, gas, telephone not owned by subdivision of the State; or storm, sanitary owned by subdivision of the State.

Traffic control

Right of Way

X*

X*

Utility Work

BRIDGE STRUCTURES
Granular Backfill for Abutment Drainage System X X X X

BRIDGE FUNDING ELIGIBILITY

ITEM
Granular Bedding Bridge Foundation & Structure Slope Preparation & Paving Concrete Sidewalk on Bridge Drainage System Lighting Systems (including conduit) Guard Rail

ELIGIBILITY
FBF X X X TWN BR X X X SBB X X X SA X X X

CONDITIONS

Includes piling, beams, joints, rebar, overlays, bearings

If existing &/or if urban & walks approaching (up to 6 both sides, 8 if only one side). On the bridge and/or behind abutments If lighting is justified. Ornamental units prorated to standards.

X Prorated to cost of standard railing or chain link fence. Subject to 5% of annual construction allocation cap. See landscape guidance.

Ornamental Metal X Rail Architectural Surface Treatment

CULVERTS
Culvert Pipe & Aprons Culvert Bedding X X X X

BRIDGE FUNDING ELIGIBILITY

ITEM
Culvert Backfill Including Granular

ELIGIBILITY
FBF X TWN BR X SBB X SA X

CONDITIONS
Eligible to minimum depth of cover required (usually 2).

APPROACH WORK
Clearing & Grubbing Common Excavation for Approaches Topsoil Borrow X* X * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost.

X*

* See note (1) Approach Grading Cost.

X*

* See note (1) Approach Grading Cost. Concrete, bituminous or aggregate. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost.

Surfacing

X*

Curb & Gutter Sidewalks Along Approaches Channel Excavation

X*

X*

* See note (1) Approach Grading Cost.

To the touchdown point.

EROSION CONTROL
Riprap Silt Fence Turf Establishment X X X* X* X X X X Granular or geo filter incidental. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost. * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost.

BRIDGE FUNDING ELIGIBILITY

ITEM ELIGIBILITY
FBF TWN BR SBB SA

CONDITIONS

OTHER
Water Retention Projects X* X * See note (1) Approach Grading Cost. Needs to replace a deficient bridge.

(1) Approach grading costs are those costs for grading & surfacing the roadway approaches to the bridge, from the bridge to the point where an alignment that meets design standards can match into the existing alignment. Bridge removal is an approach grading cost. For Town Bridge Funds only, costs in excess of $10,000 are eligible. Note this list represents the projects that commonly apply for bridge funds. If you have a project replacing a deficient bridge and would like more information on potential bridge funding, contact Mark Gieseke at 651-296-7679.

10

SUMMARY OF BRIDGE UNIT COST PER BEAM TYPE

This table is updated at the end of every fiscal year and was created in the following manner: Bid tabs for all bridges let in a fiscal year are sorted by bridge type. The total cost of all bridges of a particular type was calculated. The total cost of the bridges is then divided by the total area of the bridges decks.
FISCAL YEAR BEAM TYPE C-ARCH C-SLAB DBL T DESIGN GLULAM PCB PCBped PT SLAB R-FRAME STEEL TIMBER TRUSS TTS $188.47 $112.90 $113.60 $97.56 $111.92 $96.93 $68.75 $61.09 $68.52 $227.62 $75.75 $98.97 $73.55 $90.77 $99.33 $67.06 $60.25 $107.78 $104.29 $112.63 $342.79 $123.90 $70.86 $65.54 $115.11 $221.61 $79.73 $123.56 $103.97 $153.82 $69.05 $128.24 $74.96 $71.72 $68.81 $63.54 $64.44 $53.27 $58.34 $54.18 $186.00 $140.39 $64.84 $56.43 $101.88 $96.75 $58.56 $102.42 $63.90 $67.64 $56.06 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997

These costs have not been adjusted for time. Prices on certain structure types can fluctuate geographically.

11

Bridge Type Selection

The major consideration for bridge type selection for bridges on the State Aid system is initial cost. Future maintenance costs, construction time, and location are considered when there is little or no increase in initial cost. Selecting an appropriate superstructure type is a critical factor in the planning and design process. County/Municipal Engineers, or their consultants usually make the choice of bridge type as they prepare the preliminary bridge layouts. In some cases the county/municipality may have a preference for a certain type of bridge. If there is any question as to the proper design for the situation, please contact the State Aid Bridge Office for assistance in determining bridge type and span lengths. The following are the most common superstructure types currently used by Mn/DOT on the Local system. They list the economical and practical span limits, and some advantages and disadvantages of each superstructure type. Selecting the most economical bridge type can range in difficulty from very easy to extremely difficult. Along with selecting from the bridge types listed below, other options such as the posttensioned slabs, box culverts and pre-cast arches should also be considered.

Click on the links below to read more about each structure type: Pre-stressed Concrete I-Beam Pre-cast Concrete Rectangular Beam Cast-In-Place Simple Concrete Slab Span Cast-In-Place Continuous Concrete Slab Span Timber Slab Steel, Continuous Spans Pre-cast, Double Tee Beam Spans

12

Pre-stressed Concrete I-beams

Beam Size 27M 45M 36M 54M 72 63 81 Size Limitation Spans up to 75 feet Spans up to 115 feet Spans up to 95 feet Spans up to 135 feet Spans up to 160 feet Spans up to 150 feet Spans up to 170 feet

Advantages
1. 2. 3. 4. Invariably the most economical for spans between 45 ft. and 150 ft. Beam details standardized Adaptable to most geometric conditions Durable, low maintenance

Disadvantages
1. Not a shallow depth structure 2. Cannot be curved to fit difficult geometrics 3. Shipping limitations may limit the use of longer beams

Pre-Cast Rectangular Beams

14 18 22 Spans up to 43 feet Spans up to 52 feet Spans up to 55 feet

Advantages
1. Reduced construction time 2. Longer span lengths at minimized structure depths 3. At times, can reduce the number of substructure units.

Disadvantages
1. Cannot be curved to fit difficult geometrics 13

Cast-In- Place Simple Concrete Slab Span

Span ranges 15 to 40 feet when conventionally reinforced

Advantages
Minimum depth for short spans Ease of design and detail Aesthetic for small stream crossings

Disadvantages
1. 2. 3. 4. Not the most economical solution Requires formwork support Limited span length Maximum skew at 45 degrees

Cast-In-Place Continuous Concrete Slab Span

Constant depth thickness up to about 50 feet middle spans for three or more spans Constant depth thickness up to about 40 feet middle spans for two spans Variable depth thickness up to about 65 feet middle spans for three or more spans

Advantages
1. Absolute minimum depth 2. Economical solution 3. Aesthetic for small stream crossings

Disadvantages
1. Limited span length 2. Requires formwork support 3. Maximum skew at 45 degrees

14

Timber Slab
1 or 3 spans with a maximum span length of about 25 feet

Advantages
1. Timber bridges can be constructed in virtually any weather conditions. 2. Do not require special equipment for installation, and can normally be constructed without highly skilled labor. 3. Present a natural and aesthetically pleasing appearance in natural surroundings.

Disadvantages
1. The use of timber bridges are limited to low-volume roads, roads with ADT under 750 2. Asphalt wearing surface tends to crack from differential deck deflections,which can lead to premature deterioration. 3. Not the most economical solution

Steel, Continuous Spans

Rolled beams maximum spans up to about 90 feet Plate Girders - maximum spans over 200 feet

Advantages
1. Usually the best choice for spans over 145 ft. 2. Can be curved or cut to any geometry 3. Lighter than concrete superstructures

Disadvantages
1. Expensive 2. Painting is unreliable 3. Weathering steel stains supports and rusts under continuous moisture or salt exposure

15

Pre-cast, Double Tee Beam Spans

Maximum span length of 48 feet for the 22 inch depth stem Maximum span length of 64 feet for the 30 inch depth stem

Advantages
1. May reduced construction time 2. May reduced inspection time 3. Economical pre-cast bridge in the 30 ft. to 40 ft. span range

Disadvantages
1. Not appropriate for flared or curved structures or skews 2. Not appropriate for higher ADT roadways where salt is applied to bridge 3. Not appropriate on steep grades

16

Cadd Standards and Special Provisions

The following are links to MnDOT's web sites where you can download CADD Standards and Special Provisions for Roads and Bridges:

www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup

Site where you can download ROAD DESIGN Special Provisions, CADD Standards, Technical Memorandums, etc. This site provides the most current Bridge CADD Standards and Special Provisions files. It also includes links to the Bridge Management and Bridge Inspection sites.

www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge

17

Preliminary Plans
This chapter will assist you in submitting your initial bridge packet to our office. The owner, or his consultant, shall submit a packet, which will consist of: 3 sets of Preliminary Plans, Hydraulic Data Sheet, Risk Analysis and Soils Report. Preliminary Plans typically contain (at a minimum): o A title sheet o A general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information o The bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements o Design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes o Bridge layout sheet o Survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. The State Aid Bridge Office will review and mark up the preliminary plan and make comments in red. Two sets of the plan will be returned to the owner for review 1 set for owners files and 1 set for the owners consultant. Copies of the transmittal letter will be forwarded to the State Bridge Engineer, the DSAE, the consultant and to the SA Bridge file. Information that may be useful in this chapter includes the preliminary plan review checklist, hydraulic guidelines including how to determine the road overtopping flood frequency and setting of the low member elevation. The Hydraulic Data Sheet has been included as well as an explanation of the Risk Analysis process. The section on bridge railings includes a link to the FHWA web site and the chapter on Bridge Railings from MnDOT's Bridge Design Manual. Lastly, the sections on Substructure and Superstructure describe the different elements of a bridge and gives design criteria.

18

PRELIMINARY BRIDGE PLAN REVIEW CHECK LIST

BRIDGE # __________________ CHECKED BY: ______________ DATE PRELIMINARY PLAN RECD. _____________ DATE PRELIMINARY PLAN RETD. _______ ROUTE. ____________________________________ CITY/COUNTY. ________________________________________ CONSULTANT_____________ NO. OF SHEETS IN PLAN _______________ BRIDGE STRUCTURE INFO: _______________________________________________________________________ PROJECT # ________________________________________ ESTIMATED REVIEW TIME. _____________ ACTUAL TOTAL REVIEW TIME _______________

CHECK AREAS WITH

(Refer to Bridge Design Manual and priority guidelines for type of review or check)
July 30, 2003

GENERAL PLAN AND ELEVATION Plan: North arrow, Stations and elevations on working line, Label Centerline Roadway, Horizontal clearances Bridge width curb to curb, Span arrangements, Skew angle, Out to out of deck, Flow direction, Verify layout data with PDR Working point locations, Floor drains, Substructure identification, B.M. disk and Name plate locations Section: Structure depth, Beam spacing, Bridge width curb to curb, Out to out deck width, Deck cross slopes, Railing style

BRIDGE LAYOUT Layout showing working points: North arrow, Control point, label centerline roadway, working point locations, label substructure units, identify gutterlines, Skew angle Abutment corner details: Typical wingwall configuration at abutment corners, Working point locations Railing type, Dimension from gutterline to edge of deck Dimension from centerline bearing abutment to end of bridge, Dimension from centerline bearing abutment to front face of abutment Working point table:

BRIDGE SURVEY Contracted Profile: Vertical curves, Approximate channel bottom, Prop. Br. #, Exist Br. #, Design flood elevation, Proposed/Existing Rdwy. Profiles Plat: Utility information, North arrow, Exist bridge. data, Plan of prop. Bridge, Skew of bridge, Stream path, Flow direction Existing/Prop. R/W lines, Label centerline of roadway, Overhead lines, Utilities, North arrow Typical Sections:

19

Elevation: Substructure type and fixity, Label substructure units, Span numbers, Pile type Proposed profile line, Low member elevation, vertical clearances, Abutment slopes, Berm width Riprap size, Channel width, Channel elevation, Design flood elevation Design Data Block: Design specifications and method,Truck loading, Design stresses, Design speed, Design rating, A.D.T., Deck area: out to out width X out to out length, Bridge ID Title Block: Bridge number, Bridge location descriptionSEC./TWP./RANGE, City/Township/County names, SAP/SP #, Signature line for State Bridge Engineer Other: Pay items and Pay item numbers, Nonparticipating items Construction notes, Bench mark data, List of sheets, Certification/Signature block for designer and owner

Table for dimensions between working points

X-section up/down stream/centerline bridge X-section existing/proposed roadway Proposed rdwy. surface, Shoulder width, Lane width, Recovery area

Table of deck elevations at working points Other: Certification block for designer Title block showing bridge number, SAP/SP #

Hydraulics: Engineers observation at bridge site, Engineers proposed structure recommendations Engineers hydraulic recommendation, Pier scour elevation, Bench mark info. , Bridge survey location information Survey plan/profile: Test pile locations, Limits/thickness of riprap, R/W lines, Stationing of substructure units, Excavation/fill notes, North arrow, Skew angle Test pile size and length, rdwy profile info. Riprap size, Channel width, Channel elevation, Design flood elevation, Boring info.

20

Hydraulic Guidance Overtopping Design Frequency Guidelines for Bridges

The design flood is equal to the overtopping flood when overtopping occurs before the 100year event; otherwise use a design flood of Q100. Existing overtopping sections that will be left alone might be an odd year (e.g. Q18), use this as the design flood. You may want to use the term Design/Overtopping Flood rather than Design Flood, in these instances, to avoid confusion. Overtopping frequency is selected based on ADT. MnDOTs Hydraulics Section have recommended the following minimum overtopping frequencies: ADT 0-10 11-49 50-399 400-1499 1500+ MINIMUM OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY 2 5 10 25 50

The State Aid Bridge Unit will start to question the design if the overtopping is higher than the following: ADT 0-149 150-499 500-1499 MINIMUM OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY 10 25 50

For economic reasons, the overtopping frequency should not be greater than recommended unless the design of the profile grade dictates. When existing profiles have less frequent overtopping, the condition can remain, but a more frequent overtopping should at least be considered. Some further considerations: Limitations to the overtopping frequency can be imposed by roadway geometrics such as maximum or minimum grade lines, site-distance, vertical curvature, inplace road grades, etc. Check clearance requirements for ice and debris. 21

Consider the topographical features such as stream levees, elevation of the watershed divide and clearances for highways or railroads that have bridges. Note any navigation clearance requirements. Flood plain ordinances or other legislative mandates may limit allowable backwater or encroachment on the flood plain. Channel stability considerations, which may limit velocity or the amount of constriction. Consideration should be given to ecological features such as wetlands or other sensitive environments, geological or geomorphic conditions or constraints, including subsurface conditions. Note any social considerations such as the importance of the facility as an emergency evacuation route in time of peril. Availability of funds to construct the facility. (This item may or may not be a consideration in a first appraisal but could ultimately govern the design selection.)

Minimum Low Member Elevation

For overtopping year less than 100 No debris problem or velocity less than 5 fps Debris problem and velocity greater than or equal to 5 fps For overtopping year greater than or equal 100 No debris problem or velocity less than 5 fps Debris problem and velocity greater than or equal 5 fps Concrete Slab Span Overtopping TW1 Overtopping TW Concrete Slab Span Q100 TW1 Q100 TW PreStressed I Girder or Steel Girder Overtopping TW Double Tee, Timber Beam or Timber Slab Overtopping TW+1

Overtopping TW+1 Overtopping TW+2 PreStressed I Girder or Steel Girder Q100 TW Q100 TW+1 Double Tee, Timber Beam or Timber Slab Q100 TW+1 Q100 TW+2

TW denotes tailwater or stage. Any low member elevations less than the above criteria, will require a complete structural design for buoyant and lateral forces due to stream-flow, ice and debris. Consideration must be given to the possibility that the debris will increase the upstream water surface elevation. A higher low member elevation can be used when the roadway design dictates or there are hydraulic considerations such as increased flood damage potential 22

to upstream properties. When there is no overtopping, use the design flood.

Risk Assessment
Risk analysis and/or assessment is based on the theory that roads should not all be designed for an arbitrary design frequency. Instead the design selected for an encroachment should be supported by analysis of design alternatives with consideration given to capital cost and risks; and other economic, engineering, social and environmental concerns. Mn/DOT has developed a risk assessment procedure to screen projects. The purpose of the questionnaire is to determine the level of analysis required. It is not a comprehensive design checklist nor should it replace good engineering judgment. Culverts that are 48 inches or larger will require an assessment to determine whether or not a risk analysis is necessary to determine the frequency of design flood. The Risk Assessment Form should be filled out and signed by the engineer making the hydraulic recommendation and placed in the documentation file. The procedure consists of a DATA REQUIREMENTS section and a LTEC DESIGN section. Start with the first question and follow directions included in the form. All questions do not have to be answered. The column on the right hand side is titled LTEC DESIGN. LTEC refers to the Least Total Economic Cost. If any checks are made in the LTEC column the designer must then proceed with a Risk Analysis or document justification of why the Risk Analysis is not needed. "The Design of Encroachments on Flood Plains Using Risk Analysis" Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 17 provides the procedures needed to do a risk analysis of drainage structures. This publication can be downloaded from the FHWA web site http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/hydpub.htm. Click here for Figure A and Figure B. These are provided for use in answering question 2d. Click here to download Risk Assessment Form

23

Hydraulic Data Form

This form must be submitted with the Preliminary Plan * Stream Name Drainage Area Flood of Record Maximum observed highwater elevation Design flood ( ____-year frequency) Road sag point elevation Design stage Total stage increase Headwater elevation Stage increase of the inplace condition Min. waterway opening below elevation _______________ Low member at or above elevation Mean velocity through structure Main channel velocity Overtopping: ____ X 100 year or 500-year frequency flood Road sag point elevation Stage Total stage increase Headwater elevation Stage increase of the inplace condition Mean velocity through structure Main channel velocity Basic flood (100-year frequency) Stage Total stage increase Headwater elevation Stage increase of the inplace condition Min. overflow area above sag point elev. Mean overflow velocity Mean velocity through structure Approximate flowline elevation Estimated pier scour elevation Skew Scour Code *Items to be shown on grading plan

Bridge # __________________ Date______________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ __________________________

* *

24

Scour Code Summary

Mn/DOT Literal Definition Code A NON-WATERWAY B CLOSED-SCOUR Description Bridge not over waterway. Bridge is closed to traffic; field review indicates that failure of piers and/or abutments due to scour is imminent or has occurred. Bridge is closed to traffic for reasons other than scour. Prior to reopening the bridge it must be evaluated for scour and recoded. Bridge is scour critical; field review indicates that extensive scour has occurred at bridge foundations. Immediate action is required to provide scour countermeasures. Culvert structure. Scour calculation, evaluation, and/or screening has not been made. Bridge Structure. Scour calculation, evaluation, and/or screening has not been made. All substructure foundations are known. Scour calculation, evaluation and/or screening has not been made. Bridge on unknown foundations. Bridge foundations (including piles) well above flood water elevations.

CLOSED-NOT SCOUR OBS SCOURIMMEDIATE PROTECTION REQUIRED CULVERT NO EVAL-FOUND KNOWN NO EVAL-FOUND UNKNOWN FOUND ABOVE WATER

E F

G H I J K

SCREEN-LOW RISK Bridge screened, determined to be low risk for failure due to scour SCREEN- SCOUR SUSC SCREEN-LIMITED RISK STABLE-EVAL STABLE-SCOUR ABOVE FTG STABLE-SCOUR IN FTG/PILE Bridge screened, determined to be scour susceptible. Bridge screened, determined to be of limited risk to public, monitor in lieu of evaluation and close if necessary. Scour evaluation complete, bridge judged to be low risk for failure due to scour. Bridge foundations determined to be stable for calculated scour conditions; calculated scour depth from the scour prediction equations is above top of footing. Bridge foundations determined to be stable for calculated scour conditions; calculated scour depth 25

L M

from the scour prediction equations is within limits of footing or piles. O P STABLE-ACTION REQUIRED STABLE DUE TO PROT Bridge foundations determined to be stable for scour conditions; Scour action plan requires additional action. Countermeasures have been installed to correct a previously existing problem with scour. Bridge is no longer scour critical. Scour countermeasures should be inspected at least once every 4 years and after major flows, or as recommended in the scour action plan. Report any changes that have occurred to countermeasures.

CRITICAL-MONITOR Bridge has been evaluated to be scour critical. Scour action plan recommends monitoring the bridge during high flows and closing if necessary. CRITICAL- PROT REQ Bridge has been evaluated to be scour critical. Scour action plan recommends this bridge as a priority for installation of countermeasures. Until countermeasures are installed, monitor bridge during high flows and close if necessary.

Guidance on bridges in a designated Floodplain

When working in floodplains zoned Zone A- Approximate Method, there no need to involve FEMA, just follow the State Permitting Process. MnDNR requests that a courtesy notification be sent to: Suzanne Jiwani, PE Floodplain Mapping Hydrologist 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4040 (651)-296-9224 email: suzanne.jiwani@dnr.state.mn.us. All floodplains zoned Zone AE that are in detailed study areas; FEMA will need to be contacted if the water surface elevation is impacted. There are two types of floodway models, one with a detailed analysis of the floodway and one without a floodway detailed analysis (this type is becoming very rare). If the new or revised structure does not change the Flood Insurance Studys Water Surface Profile, FEMA requires a copy of your model, a copy of the as-built plans and a cover letter stating that the BFE (Base Flood Elevation) is unaffected. This information should be sent within 6 months of the project completion to FEMA along, with a courtesy notification to Suzanne Jiwani. FEMA also requested that if possible, they would like to have the following form filled out: http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/mn_wksht.pdf. 26

If the water surface elevation is increased by more than 0.01 foot upstream of the structure, a CLOMR (Conditional Letter of Map Revision) needs to be submitted to FEMA before work has begun and is a condition of the DNR Permit. If you decrease the water surface elevation published in the floodway data table, usually 0.1 foot or more, then a LOMR (Letter of Map Revision) needs to be submitted within 6 months of the project completion. The forms that need to be submitted can be downloaded from the following website: http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/en_main.htm

FEMA has four types of models for CLOMR or LOMR Submittal: 1.Duplicate Effective Model- This is the model FEMA supplies you. They may contain errors. 2.Duplicate Corrected Effective Model- The above model with the errors corrected and any additional cross sections you may need for your model added. 3.Existing or Pre Project Condition Model- A model of what is out there at present time. 4.Post Project Condition Model- The model of what you are proposing. MnDNR and FEMA look at the difference between models 4 and 3 for stage increase. The location for the difference is taken sufficiently upstream, as to not include effects of draw down, etc. HEC-RAS models are preferred. They can be of just the reach you are impacting, must be of sufficient length of the reach for the water surface elevation to tie into the existing model within 0.5 ft, although FEMA prefers 0.1 ft. If problems are found in the existing models, please notify Suzanne via email. She will note the problem areas and use the information as part of the prioritization for study updates. Guidance on the FEMA Process can be found at the following website: http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/en_main.htm Any questions or concerns can be addressed to Suzanne Jiwani at the above phone number or e-mail address.

27

Hydraulic Web Pages

The following are some helpful web sites to assist you with the hydraulic analysis.

Interactive Watershed Page

This web site assists the user with an interactive web application. You'll have the ability to display drainage area information for the 84 Major watersheds represented in Minnesota. The web site also has tools that allow you to add up the drainage areas of the Minor watersheds within the selected Major watershed. Characteristic information for some of the minor watersheds has been determined by the USGS and this data is also displayed when available.

Corps of Engineers Current Streamflow Conditions

Real time data on gages operated by the Army Corps of Engineers.

USGS Minnesota Water Resources Data

A link to the USGS stream page. Includes links to real time data on gages operated by the USGS. Also includes rating curves for selected gages, Water Resources Data Reports and links to a host of water related web sites. Downloadable publications for design of Hydraulic Structures

FHWA Hydraulics Publications

28

Superstructure Guidelines
The following are additional guidelines on using the following types of superstructure.

Pre-stressed Concrete Beams

To check beam size use the beam size chart. The chart was created using LRFD methodology. Beam spacing is ideally 8 to 10 for economy. Seven I-beam sections are available for use in Minnesota. These sections range in depth from 27 inches to 81 inches. Identical top flange dimensions and identical bottom flange dimensions are used for each section. All should have 6inch thick webs. The only variation is the web height. Set the minimum deck overhang beyond the edge of the fascia beam flange at 6 inches. The maximum overhang (measured from centerline of fascia beam) should not exceed the smallest of the following three values: Depth of beam 40% of lateral beam spacing 32 inches plus 1/2 of the top flange width

The low member elevation should be set at: Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping TW Overtopping TW + 1 Q100 TW Q100 TW + 1

29

PRESTRESSED
170

CONCRETE

BEAM GRAPH
DESIGN CRITERIA
f 'c = 8500psi f 'ci = 7000psi INITIAL PULL 2000K

160

81" 72"
V ER IF Y SHIPPI N G

44 @ 5.0"

HL-93 LOADING 0.6" STRANDS

44 @ 5.0" 44 @ 5.0"

FOR SPANS WITHIN A FEW FEET OF M AXIM UM , A PRELIM INARY ANALYSIS IS RECOM M ENDED. NUM BERS ADJACENT TO THE POINTS ON THE GRAPH REPRESENT AN APPROXIM ATE DESIGN NUM BER OF STRANDS AND CENTER OF GRAVITY.

150

140

63"

44 @ 5.5"

44 @ 5.0" 44 @ 5.0"

130

54M

42 @ 5.1 "

42 @ 5.1 "

44 @ 5.0"

44 @ 5.0"

120
40 @ 4.9" 40 @ 4.8"

42 @ 4.8"

44 @ 5.6"

110

45M

" 38 @ 5.1 38 @ 4.6" 40 @ 5.5"

100

36 @ 4.6"

38 @ 4.6"

36M
90

34 @ 4.5" 34 @ 4.2"

36 @ 4.4"

38 @ 5.4"

36 @ 5.5" 32 @ 4.1 " 32 @ 4.1 " 30 @ 3.8"

80

27M
70

30 @ 4.3"

32 @ 5.6" 28 @ 4.4"

28 @ 4.4"

60

22" REC.
32 @ 9.1"

26 @ 4.4"
26 @ 5.1"

26 @ 5.1 "

50

18" REC.
28 @ 6.6"

26 @ 5.1"

40

30

14" REC.
22 @ 5.1"

20 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 BEAM SPACING (FEET)

30

Pre-Cast Rectangular Beams

These beam bridges may be used on short span bridges requiring low profiles. They are an alternative to the slab span bridge. The advantages of the rectangular beam bridge are: reduced construction time longer span lengths at minimized structure depths at times, can reduce the number of substructure units are appropriate where construction of falsework for a conventional slab span bridge would be difficult or unwanted Please reference the current Mn/DOT PCB Graph for span lengths and beam spacing requirements. The available depths are 14, 18 and 22. The Beam Design can be based on 7,500 psi initial and 9,000 psi final maximum concrete strengths. Strand size can be either 0.5 or 0.6, but the 0.6 often allows for the elimination of a beam line. The low member elevation should be set at: Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Set the minimum deck overhang beyond the edge of the fascia beam flange at 6 inches. The maximum deck overhang (measured from centerline of fascia beam) should not exceed the smallest of the following values: Depth of Beam 40% of Lateral Beam Spacing Overtopping TW Overtopping TW + 1 Q100 TW Q100 TW + 1

Timber Slab
Timber slab or panel bridges are used on small stream crossings. 1 or 3 spans with a maximum span length of about 25 feet, at this time, timber bridges are feasible for short- and mediumspan structures. 31

Timber slab bridges are generally constructed with longitudinal nailed laminated planks. This superstructure is easy to fabricate and install. The planks are generally made from creosotetreated Douglas-fir timber. The low member elevation should be set at: Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Timber simple or continuous slab spans should be designed so that the deflections due to service live loads does not exceed 1/500 of the span. The use of timber bridges is limited to low-volume roads. Timber bridges tend to deteriorate faster if subjected to high repetitions of heavy loads. Their cost effectiveness should always be evaluated for each site. Because of timber piling performance problems (pier piles breaking, decay and rotting), steel piling is being used for all substructures. Overtopping TW + 1 Overtopping TW + 2 Q100 TW + 1 Q100 TW + 2

Double T Beam Span

This is our policy on the use of double tee bridges. As always we do not allow them on the Trunk Highway, however, we do allow them on our local road system as long as the following conditions are met: Low ADT Low or no deicing salts used on bridge. Flat grades Square bridge is preferred Low member is at least one foot above design flood, allow for two feet of free board if there are known debris problems. The bridge structure should be cost competitive with other bridge structures.

The low member elevation should be set at: Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps 32 Overtopping TW + 1 Overtopping TW + 2

Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps

Q100 TW + 1 Q100 TW + 2

Steel Continuous Spans

Should be considered on curved alignments. Usually the best choice for spans over 145 feet. Steel continuous spans may be advantageous in regions of the state with poor foundation soils, and where significant substructure movement is anticipated. Structure Types: Span Less than 50 ft. Between 50 and 120 ft. Over 120 ft Structure Type Rolled beam Gray area (can use either rolled or plate girder) Plate girder

Rolled beams may be difficult to obtain in lengths over 90 feet. Constant plate girder depths can span up to 350 feet. Haunches are efficient over 350 feet. Girders can be spaced at 10 foot intervals for spans in the 180-foot range. Maximizing girder spacing generally results in cheaper bridges. The cost effectiveness should always be evaluated for each site. Set the minimum deck overhang beyond the edge of the fascia beam flange at 6 inches. The maximum overhang (measured from centerline of fascia beam) should not exceed the smallest of the following three values:
Depth of beam 40% of lateral beam spacing 32 inches plus 1/2 of the top flange width

The low member elevation should be set at: Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps 33 Overtopping TW Overtopping TW + 1 Q100 TW

Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Design methods used ASD LFD LRFD

Q100 TW + 1

Use structural steel only where it can be repainted safely and economically Bridges will be reviewed in the preliminary stage to determine which bridges should be painted. Avoid details that are difficult to paint. Weathering steel stains supports and rusts under continuous moisture or salt exposure and may not reach desired appearance in extremely dry climate. Paint weathering steel 1.5 times the beam depth from joints and bearing assemblies.

Concrete Slab Span Bridge

Preliminary Slab Thickness:

Notes: S is the length of the longest span (ft) Skew can be ignored for slab bridges with skew angles of 20 or less Increase slab thickness to satisfy shear requirements when skew angle exceeds 20 Slab type bridges should not be used for bridges with skew angles greater than 45 End spans should be approximately 80% of the center span length to balance moments and prevent uplift. Overtopping <100yr w/ no debris problem or 34 Overtopping TW 1

velocity <5fps Overtopping <100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ no debris problem or velocity <5fps Overtopping 100yr w/ debris problem and velocity 5fps

Overtopping TW Q100 TW 1 Q100 TW

35

Substructure Guidelines
Cast Bearing Assemblies
The Bridge Office in conjunction with the Metal Casting Industry has developed new curved cast bearing assembly details. These details provide an alternate to the traditional welded curved plate bearing assemblies. These new cast assemblies are to be used with the 12"X24" bearing pads only. A copy of the standard can be downloaded from the bridge web site. Go to http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/ , click on Bridge Cadd Standards, B details (English) and download B317.exe & B318.exe. Our smallest bearing pad is now 12"x24", the 8"x's and 10"x's should no longer be used unless approved by the State Bridge Engineer. It's our hope that this effort will economize the fabrication process, and enhance product availability during peak times of bridge construction. This memo serves as authorization to incorporate the new cast bearing assemblies B317 & B318 into future bridge projects that call for a 12"x24" pad only. The designer should check the fit up of the cast assemblies at all bridge seats. To incorporate the cast bearing assemblies into the PCB bridge plan, the following steps should be taken. 1. Pay item "Bearing Assembly" remains unchanged on the plan. However, we advise that a reference symbol be placed adjacent to pay item "Bearing Assembly". The reference symbol will indicate that payment for curved plate bearing assembly or at the contractors discretion, curved cast bearing assembly alternate will be made under pay item "Bearing Assembly". 2. The bridge special provisions should include the special provision write up for cast bearing assemblies. All special provisions can be downloaded from the MnDOT Bridge Office web site (see above), click on Bridge Special Provisions, Special Provisions 2000 Edition (MetricEnglish). The provision for the assemblies is BS2ME-2402.8. 3. Insert detail no. B317 (PCB Fixed Curved Cast Bearing Assembly) & B318 (PCB Expansion Curved Cast Bearing Assembly) into plan along with detail no. B310 & B311 (PCB Fixed & Expansion Curved Plate Bearing Assembly).

36

Integral Abutment Update

37

Bridge Railings
The FHWA has begun enforcing the use of crash tested railings on bridges. There is a lot of confusion as to what can and cant be used. The following is a link to their web site: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safety/fourthlevel/hardware/bridgerailings.htm MnDOT's office of Bridges and Structures is in the process of updating the Bridge Design Manual. As part of this manual, a revised Bridge Railing chapter is being developed that will contain the new standards. We are including a copy of the interim revised chapter for your convenience. Please be advised that this is a work in progress and further updates may be coming.

38

5-392.204 BRIDGE RAILINGS A. Introduction The design requirements for railings utilized on Mn/DOT bridges have undergone changes in recent years. Crash testing requirements have been established by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and AASHTO Specifications have been revised. Additionally, the desire for more attractive railings has influenced the style of railings on projects where aesthetics has been a major consideration. Accidents involving objects thrown from overpasses onto traffic below has led to the adoption of protective screening requirements. The rapid increase in bicycle trails and traffic has increased attention on bicycle railings. This section of the Bridge Design Manual details our policies regarding the design of bridge railings for Mn/DOT projects. B. General The design of newly constructed bridge railings must conform to the requirements of the latest edition of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications as given in chapter 13. This specification gives geometric and strength requirements and also requires crash testing. FHWA requires all bridges carrying traffic on the National Highway System (NHS) to be crash tested regardless of speed, in accordance with NCHRP Report 350 Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. There are 6 levels of service and testing depending on vehicle size and speed. A list of crash tested railings is found on the FHWA Web sites: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/bridgerailing.htm http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/longbarriers.htm
Crash testing requirements may be waived if an analytical evaluation shows the railing to be crash worthy. This allows minor changes to crash tested railings without having to go through the time and expense of crash testing. For bridges on the NHS any such evaluation must be approved by the FHWA.

Crash testing has shown that during impact vehicles slide along the top of the railing and parts of the vehicle, especially the boxes on trucks, extend beyond the face of the railing a considerable distance.Attachments to bridge railings such as architectural metal railings or objects just behind the railing such as light poles must address safety concerns presented by this encroachment including: 1) Snagging on posts which can result in the attachment (post for example) penetrating the occupant compartment or causing the vehicle (hood for example) to penetrate the cab. 2) Spearing objects such as a horizontal railing member penetrating windshields and injuring occupants. 3. Debris falling onto traffic below. Attachments within the area of encroachment shall be designed to break away before severely damaging the vehicle, contain any debris from damaging traffic below and have no members, such as rail ends, which might spear the occupant compartment. Ends of rails shall be sloped at 45 degrees or flatter to reduce the chances of spearing. Posts should be set back from the face of railing to minimize snagging. Small sections of curb or sidewalk placed in front of railings cause vehicles to vault up onto the railing. For this reason sidewalks with a projection between 9 inches and 3.5 ft. 39

from the face of railing are not allowed and curb heights are limited to a maximum of 8 inches. Railing designs should include consideration of safety, cost, aesthetics and maintenance. The safety shapes (Type J & F) were developed to minimize damage to vehicles as well as containing and redirecting vehicles back onto the roadway and have low initial and maintenance costs. Maintenance costs can be minimized by using designs that allow for easy replacement of damaged sections and use of standard railings so replacement components can be stockpiled. Coatings on metal railings should be as durable as possible to withstand the harsh environment of snow and salt. The three general classes of bridge railings are Traffic Railings, Pedestrian or Bicycle Railings and Combination Railings. Bridge cross sections showing these three classes are shown in Fig. A 5-392.204. These classes of railings are further defined in the following sections. C. Traffic Railings Traffic railings are designed to contain and safely redirect vehicles. Requirements based on speed are as follows. 1. High speed roadways with a design speed of 45 mph or more: Mn/DOT requires crash testing to Test Level 4 as the minimum standard for these roadways. Test level 4 is run with a small car at 60 mph, a pickup truck traveling 60 mph and a single unit van truck impacting at 50 mph. This railing will normally be the 32 high Type F concrete barrier (Std. Fig. 5-397.114-117). Where aesthetics is a concern the tubular traffic railing which has a 1-9 high concrete base with a structural tube railing and posts mounted to the top of the concrete base (Std. Fig. 5-397.157) is an acceptable alternative and provides a more open view to drivers crossing the bridge. The Preliminary Bridge Unit should be consulted for additional acceptable railings. A bicycle railing attachment to the F barrier has been developed by Mn/DOT for use where the bridge shoulders carry a bicycle route as defined in the Mn/DOT State Bicycle Transportation System Plan or another recognized authority. This attachment (Std. Fig. 5-397.158) has been crash tested to Level 4. The bicycle railing addition adds height to the railing to protect bicycle riders and has a cable system in the rails to contain pieces of the railing in the event of an accident and a weakened post designed to lessen the impact to vehicles in the event of a hit. This railing may be applied to other traffic railings provided that the same or greater offset distance to the face of metal rail is provided and the post attachment has the same or greater strength. The cable system must be maintained even if there is no traffic below as the cables act to keep the entire rail system intact during a crash. Attachments other than for traffic safety features (signs and lighting) are discouraged and are allowed only if crash tested or an analytical evaluation has shown them to be crash worthy. Light poles should be located behind the back of the barrier.

40

A more stringent rail design may be considered on a case-by-case basis for bridges with high design speeds, high truck volume, and curvature or other site-specific safety considerations. Generally a Test Level 5 railing should be considered for these sites. Test Level 5 includes a small car and a pickup truck, all traveling at 60 mph plus a van-type tractor trailer impacting at 50 mph. As a guide a 42 inch high Type F railing is recommended for bridges having a horizontal curvature of 5 degrees and sharper on a roadway where the design speed is 45 mph or higher. The Preliminary Bridge Plans engineer will designate the rail design on the Preliminary Bridge Plan. 2. Low speed Roadways having a design speed of 40 mph or under: Mn/DOT requires crash testing to Test Level 2 as the minimum standard for these roadways. Test Level 2 is run with an automobile and pickup truck, both impacting at a speed of 45 mph. Normally these railings will be the same as used for higher speeds, usually the Type F concrete railing, but with the reduced level required for crash testing more options are available. The Preliminary Bridge Unit should be consulted for additional acceptable railings. If the addition of an ornamental metal railing to the top of the traffic railing is desired a 32 high vertical faced traffic railing shall be used rather than the Type F. The vertical face will cause more damage to a vehicle for minor hits but reduces the tendency for the vehicle to climb the face or roll over and will keep the vehicle back from the metal rail. A small, 2 wide by 6 high curb should be provided at the base of the rail to minimize snowplow damage to the railing. For design speeds of 35 mph and below a metal railing may be used on the top of the concrete railing, as it is unlikely that vehicles will contact the metal portion.1 For a design speed of 40 mph the front face of the metal railing shall be offset a minimum of 9 inches from the face of railing at the top of concrete.2 D. Pedestrian or Bicycle Railings Pedestrian or bicycle railings are generally located at the outside edge of a bridge sidewalk and are designed to safely contain pedestrian or bicyclists. AASHTO specifications require pedestrian railings to be at least 3-6 in height and bicycle railings to be at least 4-6 in height. The height is measured from the top of the walkway to top of rail. The openings between members of a pedestrian railing should not allow a 4 inch sphere to pass through the lower 27 inches of the railing and a 6 inch sphere should not pass through any openings above 27 inches. This is more restrictive than AASHTO and is intended to prevent small children form slipping through the railing. The Uniform Building Code requires a 4 inch maximum opening.

See Guidelines for Attachments to Bridge Rails and Median Barriers by Keller, Sicking, Faller, Polivka & Rhode, Draft Report April 13,2001 p 6&19 See Guidelines for Attachments to Bridge Rails and Median Barriers by Keller, Sicking, Faller, Polivka & Rhode, Draft Report April 13,2001 p 28. 9 offset at 40 mph judged acceptable based on 12 offset at 45 mph.

41

E. Combination Railings Combination Railings are dual purpose railings designed to contain both vehicles and pedestrians or bicycles. These railings are generally located at the outside edge of a bridge sidewalk. A raised sidewalk is used to clearly define the walkway area and keep roadway drainage off the walkway and the sidewalk curb offers some protection to pedestrians from errant vehicles entering the walkway. There is no other barrier between the roadway and the sidewalk. Combination railings are applicable for design speeds of 40 mph and under - above that speed a barrier is required between the roadway and sidewalk. Mn/DOT requires crash testing to Test Level 2 for these railings and the strength and geometrics requirements for bicycle or pedestrian railings also apply. Combination railings will normally consist of a 2-4 high concrete parapet with a fence or ornamental metal railing mounted on the top. The concrete parapet serves to contain traffic and has been judged to meet crash test Level 2. The metal railing must comply with the strength and geometric requirements for bicycle or pedestrian railings. A noncrash tested metal railing may be used on the top of the concrete barrier, as it is unlikely that vehicles will contact the metal portion. The highway face of the concrete parapet shall be relatively smooth with beveled recesses up to 2 inches deep allowed for inset panels and beveled form liner textures. Concrete posts above the parapet are acceptable but they may not project in front of the parapet. When there is a bikeway or sidewalk separated from traffic by a railing, the railing should be the 32 Type F concrete railing when the shoulder is 6-0 or greater in width. If the roadway shoulder is less than 6-0, a 42 Type F concrete railing should be utilized for added protection. Metal railings should not be placed on top of the traffic railing between a sidewalk and a roadway. Although they might increase protection somewhat for bicyclists, they can be a definite hazard to vehicles.
F. Protective Screening for Bridge Overpasses

The addition of protective screening to bridge railings is a further Mn/DOT policy requirement. The practice of adding protective screening is common nationwide in response to accidents and fatalities that have occurred due to pedestrians throwing objects from overpasses onto vehicles below. Protective screening will be included in the design of bridges crossing another roadway, or railroad, for new bridges and when railings are replaced on existing bridges as follows. 1. On all bridges where there is a sidewalk included in the design. A protective screening system will be incorporated in the design of the railing adjacent to the sidewalk. 2. On all pedestrian bridges. The protective screening will be placed on both sides of the bridge. The protective screening system will preferably be a chain link fence system or a railing system. The height of the fence or railing will be 8-0 above the top of the sidewalk. For sites with special aesthetic treatments involving ornamental railings, a minimum 42

height of 6-0 will be allowed. However, it should be recognized the lower railing height provides a reduced level of protection. The protective screening system will not allow objects 6 in diameter or greater to pass through the fence or railing. G. Architectural/Ornamental Railings In response to local requests, special railing designs have been incorporated in some projects to address aesthetic concerns. These ornamental architectural bridge railings have been utilized in lieu of standard combination railings for placement on the outboard side of bridge sidewalks. The Office of Bridges and Structures will consider railing designs in addition to our standard railings for such locations and corridors. It is recommended that special railings incorporate features from the standard railings, such as connection details, as much effort in design, fabrication and construction has gone into developing these details. Mn/DOT participation in the cost of aesthetic railings is governed by the Mn/DOT Policy Manual of June 2001. See Web sites: http://www2.dot.state.mn.us/engserv/techsup/prelet/municipal/files/ds11.pdf http://www2.dot.state.mn.us/engserv/techsup/prelet/municipal/files/ds12.pdf . Railings are included with other aesthetic costs of the bridge and Mn/DOT participation is limited to 5%, 7% or 15% of the cost of a basic bridge, depending on the aesthetic level of the bridge.

43

Final Plans
This chapter will assist you in the final plan review process. The owner, or his consultant, shall submit 2 sets of Final Plans and Design Build Specifications to the office of State Aid Bridge. Plans shall typically contain (at a minimum): title sheet general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes bridge layout sheet substructure design survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. An Engineers estimate of project should also be submitted. State Aid Bridge Office will review the plans and do marks up comments in red. One set of the plan will be returned to the owners consultant. Copies of the transmittal letter will be forwarded to the Owner, the DSAE and to the SA Bridge file. Discussions in this chapter include the final plan review process and a final review checklist. The section on final review will tell you which areas of the plan we check in depth. Special care should be taken to insure that these areas are done correctly to save time on both the review process and the reworking of the plan. Go to http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/ to download Special Provisions.

FINAL BRIDGE PLAN REVIEW PRIORITY

3/5/02

THOROUGH CHECK:

Layout Geometry/Alignment:
Stations and elevations on survey line Deck cross-section dimensions Coordinates at working points and key stations Pay items Design data block on GP&E sheet. Bridge rating must be included Certification Block Standard Plan Notes Horizontal and vertical clearances Deck and seat elevations at working points Working line location Substructure locations (stations) Project numbers Job Number Framing plan shown on partial plan Slab span design

These items found must be correct so a thorough check is necessary to assure that the geometry given on the plans fits the roadway layout. A check of other items that are 44

geometric-related may require the performance of calculations to assure that the bridge components will fit together on the structure and will be constructed at the correct locations. Most of this information can be checked using data from the approved preliminary plan. These checks are important because errors that carry through to construction can be very costly to correct. Other items can be checked by observation, but the check should be thorough enough to eliminate possible errors that may occur in such areas as the pay items in the Schedule of Quantities. Use of the correct pay items can be difficult for a consultant to anticipate because of frequent changes. Numbers, descriptions and units must be correct because these are carried through the entire accounting system for the Project. Framing plans, including the proposed beams, are the backbone of the bridge design and must be assured as correct on the partial plan before the consultant gets deep into the design of the remainder of the bridge. CURSORY REVIEW:

Superstructure:

Substructure:

PCB strand patterns (in partial plan) vs. Abutment and pier design checked consultants calculations against consultants calculations PCB conformance to industry standards Conformance to foundation (fci) and use of tested design programs recommendations Max. moments and stresses in steel beams Pile loads and earth pressures. Check by examining consultants calculations, against consultants calculations. Steel beam sections Steel beam splice locations and diaphragm spacing, flange plate thickness increments Concrete Mix Nos. (enough to save 800# + of steel) Misc Details, Quantities, and Rebar series increments (min. length interval: 3) Other Items: Railing lengths & metal post spacing to Interior beam seat elevations assure fit on bridge Use of B-Details and Standard Plan Bottom-of-footing elevations to assure Sheets adequate cover Conformance to aesthetic requirements. Constructability General Notes, Construction notes, Reference notes Quantity items on tabulations

All plans should have a cursory review to note the completeness of the work. This would consist of reading and observing the contents of the plans. Such review can usually be performed quickly and would normally not require numerical calculations. The reviewer should be experienced enough to know what looks right and what doesnt look right. 45

This type of review would require reading of standard plan notes and other notes that give direction to the contractor for construction. Listed items should be reviewed for conformance to office and industry practice. Obvious errors or inconsistencies on any parts of the plans should be marked for correction. The consultants are usually well versed in design procedures and do not need much assistance from our office. To assure that the plans reflect the consultants design, a comparison of their calculations with the plan details is recommended. An independent design by our office is time consuming and is not recommended unless there is a reasonable doubt as to their design. NO REVIEW: Diagonals on layout sheet Figures in Bills of Reinforcement Quantity values (incl. totals of tabs) Bar shapes and dimensions Rebar placement dimensions Bar marks on details against listed bars Aesthetic detail dimensions Timeliness of Delivering Plans, Calcs., Quantities, CADD

A thorough check of these items would be time-consuming and may not produce corrections that are vital to construction; therefore, it is recommended that little or no time be spent on the listed items. For example, numerous errors can occur in the Bills of Reinforcement, however, checking this information is too time-consuming so the burden of providing correct data should be placed on the consultant.

46

FINAL BRIDGE PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST

BRIDGE # __________________ CHECKED BY: ______________ DATE FINAL PLAN RECD. _____________ DATE FINAL PLAN RETURNED. _____________ ROUTE. ____________________________________ CITY/COUNTY. ________________________________________ CONSULTANT. _______________________ NO. OF SHEETS IN PLAN _______________ BRIDGE STRUCTURE INFO: ________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT # ______________________________________________ ESTIMATED REVIEW TIME. _____________ ACTUAL TOTAL REVIEW TIME ______________ CHECK AREAS WITH
AREA GP& E SHEET H & V Clearances GEOMETRICS Stations Elevations Dimensions Minimum Bar Size

(Refer to Bridge Design Manual and priority guidelines for type of review or check)
LAYOUT Work Line Loc. Working Points Drops Seat Elevations Working Points W/P Seat Elevs. Design Pile Type & Loads Earth Pressure Working Points W/P Seat Elevs. Design Pile Type & Loads Earth Pressure ABUTMENTS Beam Spacing PIERS Beam Spacing SUPERSTRUCTURE Roadway Width Beam Spacing Beam Section(s) Length and Width Beams/ AASHTO Steel Beams Slab (per table) LL Deflection DL Deflections Camber Diagram Design RAILINGS Length

3/5/02

STANDARDS

SURVEY SHTS

DESIGN

PAY ITEMS AND QUANTITIES

Conformance To Foundation Recs. Design Block Title Block Project Numbers AASHTO Code Rating Item Numbers Descriptions Units & (P) Quantities Std. Plan Notes Const. Notes Reference Notes Initials for designer, drafter, checkers Certification Aesthetics

Test Piles

Sheet Tab. Items Pile Notes Const. Jts.

Sheet Tab. Items Pile Notes Const. Jts.

Sheet Tab. Items Steel Beam Notes Camber/Defl. Notes Test Piles

NOTES

OTHER

47

Miscellaneous
March 13, 2002

Submittal and Approval Process For Design-Build Pedestrian Bridge Projects

(Those utilizing State or Federal Transportation Funds or locally funded bridges crossing a Trunk Highway)

- Pre-letting Design Plans

- Preliminary Plans Submittal: The owner, or his consultant, shall submit 3 sets of Preliminary Plans. Plans shall typically contain (at a minimum): title sheet general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. - State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 2 sets to the owner 1 set for owners files and 1 set for the owners consultant. Final Plans Submittal The owner, or his consultant, shall submit 2 sets of Final Plans and Design Build Specifications. Plans shall typically contain (at a minimum): title sheet general plan and elevation showing span lengths, pier and abutment locations, and profile grade information bridge cross section showing deck material and railing requirements design & material specifications, painting requirements, loading requirements and construction notes substructure design (may or may not be designed prior to letting) survey sheets including hydraulic information and boring logs. Also, submit the Engineers estimate of project. - State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 1 set to the owners consultant. Final Reproducible Plan Submittal The owner, or his consultant, shall submit a Final Reproducible Plan set to District State Aid containing all appropriate signatures including the owner and his consultant.

48

- State Aid Bridge receives the Reproducible Plan from S.A.L.T. or District State Aid, back-checks the Plans and gets the signature of the State Bridge Engineer. Plans are then returned to S.A.L.T. or District State Aid for letting.

- Post-letting Design Plans

Preliminary Plans Submittal (May be waved on simple bridge projects) The contractor shall submit 2 sets of Preliminary Plans containing the new bridge superstructure. The Preliminary Plans shall include: drawings detailing the span lengths pier and abutment locations profile grade information critical clearance dimensions beam/truss size and spacing foundation information. It shall also include an adequate amount of preliminary detailing to show that the intent of the original plans and specifications are being met. State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 1 set to the contractor. Final Plans Submittal The contractor shall submit 2 sets of Final Plans and superstructure calculations (assuming that the substructures were designed pre-letting). The Final Plans shall combine the new superstructure details with the appropriate preletting bridge plan sheets (including the substructure) to create a new, comprehensive bridge plan, numbered sequentially. The structure drawings shall be modified as needed to assure proper fit of the pedestrian bridge and the substructure. There will be no title sheet or approach grading sheets in the postletting plan. State Aid Bridge reviews and marks up comments in red and returns 1 set to the contractor. Final Reproducible Plan Submittal The contractor shall submit a Final Reproducible Plan set containing all appropriate signatures. This includes the signature of the owner, the contractors consultant, as well as the certification of all plan sheets by the respective designers. - State Aid Bridge back-checks the Plans and gets signature from State Bridge Engineer. Signed originals are then forwarded on to the Project Engineer who shall then furnish the Contractor with 3 sets of prints of the complete bridge plans. See Technical Memorandum No. 99-20-B-03 at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/tmemo/active/tm99/9920b3.html for further information on the Design-Build process.

49

Summary of Internet Links

The following table summarizes internet links that will assist the designer in their bridge projects. Internet Link http://www.dot.state.mn.us/library/dot_forms.html Description MnDOT LibraryForms Office of www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup Technical Support www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge Bridge Office Home Page http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/hydpub.htm FHWA Hydraulic Publications http://www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/en_main.htm FEMAs Home Page http://nt49dmnspl.cr.usgs.gov/watershed/start_page.htm USGS Interactive Watershed Page http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safety/fourthlevel/hardware/bridgerailings.htm FHWAs Railing Web Site http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/longbarriers.htm FHWAs Web Site for Guardrail http://www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/tmemo/active/tm99/9920b3.html Design-Build Tech Memo

Culverts
Culvert Types Mn/DOT Precast Concrete Culvert 10W X 10H- Maximum fill ht. Range 15-25 12W X 12H- Maximum fill ht. Range 15-23 14W X 14H- Maximum fill ht. Range 11-17 Mn/DOT Precast Concrete Arch Pipe Class IIA- 8 maximum depth of cover Class IIIA-16 maximum depth of cover Class IVA-23 maximum depth of cover 122span X 78 rise-Class IIIA, IVA 138span X 87 rise-Class IIIA, IVA 154span X 97 rise-Class IIIA, IVA 169span X 107rise-Class IIA, IIIA 50

Mn/DOT Precast Concrete Arch 24-00span X 8-00rise maximum fill ht. 16 43-11span X 13-8rise maximum fill ht. 8

Bebo Bridge Arch

11-2span X 03-06rise fill ht. Ranges 1.5-15 84-0span X 29-10rise fill ht. Ranges 1.5-15

Con-Span Three Sided Concrete Box

12-0span X 03-00rise fill ht. up to 20 42-0span X 14-00rise fill ht. up to 20

Hanson-Span Three Sided Concrete Box

16-0span X 12-00rise fill ht. up to 20 40-0span X 12-00rise fill ht. up to 20

State-Aid Bridge Approval of Culvert Plans:

- For multiple culvert arrangements proposed to include four or more parallel culverts will require a structure type study for approval prior to final plan preparation. - All culvert designs, which do not use Mn/DOT standard plans/plates

State Bridge Engineer Approval/Signature of Culvert Plans:

- All culvert designs, which do not use Mn/DOT standard plans/plates

State-Aid Bridge Approval of Culvert Shop Drawings:

- All culvert designs, which do not use Mn/DOT standard plans/plates - Include the construction note Shop drawing approval per spec. 3238.2A is required on all culvert plans requiring shop drawing review. If the Designer chooses to alter any details and/or construction notes on the Standard Culvert Plan Sheets, the following will be required: 51

- The Designer will indicate that the Plan Sheet has been modified by labeling the lower right hand corner of the sheet with the word Modified. - The Designer must sign and certify the modified sheets - The culvert plan should be approved by the State-Aid Bridge Office and signed by the State-Aid Bridge Engineer if significant modifications are made to the Standard Plan sheets. - The Culvert Barrel Details Sheet should always be signed and certified by the Designer. The lintel beams shown on the Type III Culvert Concrete End Sections should never be removed. They are structural, and aid in supporting construction loads. The lintel beam shown on the Type I Culvert Concrete End Section could be removed without jeopardizing the integrity of the culvert. However, we highly recommend the use of the lintel beam on these end sections, as they serve to retain the in-slope of the roadway. In the past we have allowed the omission of the dropwalls on culvert projects. The dropwalls serve to protect the culvert end sections from significant undermining from scour. The Designer may use appropriate riprap protection in lieu of the dropwall if the risks of scour are justified. We highly encourage the use of the dropwalls; dropwalls should definitely be used in streams with velocities exceeding 10 F.P.S. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the State-Aid Bridge Office at (651) 747-2151.

Modular Block Retaining Walls

Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls (MSEW) have been around for thousands of years. An early example of this type of construction is found at Ziggurat of Ur in Mesopotamia. This structure was built around 2500BC and still stands today. The basic construction is earth reinforced with woven mats. Portions of the Great Wall of China were also constructed in this fashion. Modular Block Walls are a recent reincarnation of this ancient construction technique. MnDOT has developed Standard Designs for Modular Block Retaining Walls. Use the Standard Plan Sheet link below to download copies of the plan sheets. Here is some criteria to be aware of when designing this type of wall:

10' maximum exposed wall height 2' minimum embedded wall height 2' Leveling pad Select Granular Borrow Modified should be used as backfill 52

Modular Block Retaining Wall Web Pages

Technical Memorandum Standard Plan Sheet A link to the Technical Memorandum on "Use of Dry-Cast Segmental Masonry Retaining Wall Units". This link will take you to the main Standard Plan Sheet download page. You will need to scroll down to get to sheets .640 through .645. This site has further links to: approved block list approved reinforcements for each strength class approved block to reinforcement connection combinations

Approved Products Lists

Materials Control Schedule

MN/DOT Standard Specifications for Construction Book

Special Provisions

MN/DOT Road Design Manual

This schedule outlines the minimum sampling and testing required for most materials used in highway construction. Some items that are rarely used or materials of recent development are often covered by special provisions and may not be shown on the schedule. For more information regarding contract requirements for testing, please reference the "Standard Specifications for Construction"; Specification 1603 Materials: Specifications, Samples, Tests, and Acceptance. This site defines many construction requirements including standard backfill materials. Here you will find Special Provisions Boiler Plates and Proposal Order information. The boiler plates are used to prepare the Division S for trunk highways. The Proposal Order indicates the make-up of the complete Bidding Proposal. Chapter 9-4.0 has a discussion on retaining walls

53

Computer Printed Bid Schedule

At a recent Associated General Contractors (AGC)/Mn/DOT Bridge Committee meeting, it was brought to our attention that Contractors would prefer the option of submitting bids generated by computer, when bidding on local agency projects. The Contractors are not asking for an electronic bid submittal, but the ability to make use of the computer to generate and print the bid schedule. This is advantageous, as it allows the Contractors to make last minute competitive bid updates without the potential for errors commonly associated with the traditional hand written bid schedules. SALT, working in conjunction with the State Aid Bridge Office has added a section on Computer Generated Bids to the State Aid Website. At the discretion of the Local Agency, they can now download Special Provision 1206Preparation of Proposal and 1207-Irregular Proposals & Guidelines for Approval located at www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid under Downloadable Documents & Forms: Plans and Proposals. This optional version of the construction specifications 1206 and 1207, allows a bidder to use a computer to generate and print a Substitute Bid Schedule in lieu of using the Local Highway or Street Departments traditional paper bid schedule. The substitute bid schedule shall be in a format conforming to Guidelines for Approval of Substitute Computer Printed Bid Schedule for Local Highway and Street Projects.