Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Elevation
Plan
• Solid Piers with Cut ease waters
Approach slab
Back or dirt wall
Wing wall
backfill
Beam
Columns
Pile Bent Abutment
• A pile-bent abutment with stub wings is another
type of spill-through abutment,
• a row of driven piles supports the beam
SELECTION OF ABUTMENTS:
The type of abutments is selected based on the
following consideration:
• Construction and maintenance cost
• Cut or fill earthwork situation
• Traffic maintenance during construction
• Construction period
• Safety of construction workers
• Availability and cost of backfill material
SELECTION OF ABUTMENTS Cont….
• Superstructure depth
• Size of abutment
• Horizontal and vertical alignment changes
• Area of excavation
• Aesthetics and similarity to adjacent structures
• Previous experience with the type of abutment
• Ease of access for inspection and maintenance.
• Anticipated life, loading condition, and acceptability
of deformations.
STEPS FOR DESIGN OF ABUTMENTS:
A series of steps must be followed to obtain a satisfactory design.
STEP 1: SELECT PRELIMINARY PROPORTIONS OF THE
WALL
STEP 2: DETERMINE LOADS AND EARTH PRESSURES
STEP 3: CALCULATE MAGNITUDE OF REACTION FORCES
ON BASE
STEP 4: CHECK STABILITY AND SAFETY CRITERIA
a. Location of normal component of reactions
b. Adequacy of bearing pressure
c. Safety against sliding
STEP 5: REVISE PROPORTIONS OF WALL AND REPEAT
STEPS 2-4 UNTIL STABILITY CRITERIA IS SATISFIED
AND THEN CHECK FOR SETTLEMENT
Design of Retaining Wall Type
(Gravity) Abutments
Materials for Abutment
• Masonry
• Good quality stone in cement mortar (1:4)
• Mass concrete
• 1:3:6 Mix (by volume) with large size of aggregate
• Reinforced concrete
• For RC abutment M20 concrete with nominal
reinforcement at face,
Preliminary Dimensions of Gravity Abutments
• Abutment Height
– From hydrological data based on HFL Approach slab
Back or dirt wall
• Abutment Batter:
– On water face – 1 in 24 to 1 in 12 Wing wall
– On earth face – 1 in 3 to 1 in 6
• Abutment Width
– Top width – enough to put bearing
– Bottom Width – 0.4 to 0.5 times the height of thebackfill
abutment
• Abutment Length – at least equal to width of the bridge
W My W W e b W 6We W 6 e
3 2 1
A I bl lb 12 2 bl lb lb b
M stab
1.5
M overt
Steps for Design of Abutment Cont…
• Calculate stresses due to EQ
– Calculate EQ force on Super structure and finally stresses
at base (in both directions)
– Calculate EQ force on Live load and finally stresses at
base (in both directions)
• Finally calculate total stresses due above considered
forces and check whether these stresses are with in
permissible stress rang of concrete
Steps for Design of Abutment Cont…
• Approach slabs:
– Minimum straight length = 15 m on either side of bridge
– Approach slab straight not curved
– Slope must be gradual, such that the vehicles on other side
must be visible
• Weep holes:
– to drain out the water accumulated at back of the abutment
– Size of weep hole: 150 mm deep and 75 mm wide
– Spacing of weep holes = not greater than 1 m in horizontal
as well as vertical direction
Example on Analysis of Abutment
asg asg asg
sahfbch asg
Approach Slab
asg
asg
asg Abutment
1.8m
1.8m
A
8m
7m
2.8m
Plan at Bottom
2.8m
Section at AA
A
1.8m 1.8
m
0.5m 0.9
0.9 7.2m A
m m
HFL Plan at Top
8m A
7m
2.8m
LIMIT STATES
• When abutments fail to satisfy their intended
design function, they are considered to reach
“limit states”
• Limit states can be categorized into two types:
– Ultimate Limit States
– Serviceability Limit States
ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES
• An abutment reaches an ultimate limit state when:
– Strength of a least one of its components is fully
mobilized or
– Structure becomes unstable.
• In the ultimate limit state an abutment may
experience serious distress and structural damage,
both local and global.
• In addition, various failure modes in the soil that
supports the abutment can also be identified.
• These are also called ultimate limit states, they
include bearing capacity failure, sliding, overturning,
and overall instability.
SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES
• An abutment experiences a serviceability limit state
when it fails to perform its intended design function
fully, due to excessive deformation or deterioration.
• Serviceability limit states include excessive total or
differential settlement, lateral movement, fatigue,
vibration, and cracking.
Dynamic Analysis of Bridges:
When load passes over the bridge Span deflects quickly
After the passing the load Bridge comes to its original position
due elasticity
This loading and unloading causes vibrations in the bridge
Effects of vibrations:
• Unpleasant physiological and psychological reaction of human
• Structural damage
• Structural damage occurs due to additional stresses in the
bridge elements
• Earlier studies have been made to determine additional load
using the impact factor to avoid the damage due to additional
stresses
• Impact factor does not guarantee to control the vibrations
• To control the vibrations in the bridges Several thumb rules
are used by codal provisions
• Limiting the Span to depth ratio
• Limiting the deflection to span ratio
• Due to above limitations Bridge becomes more rigid
Bridge is less prone to vibrations
• Since above provisions not based on frequencies
No guarantee against occurrence of vibrations
Factors affecting the vibrations in bridges:
• Rigidity of bridge
• First-mode natural frequency of vibration of bridge deck
• Natural frequencies of vehicle system and the suspension
systems
• Vehicle speed
• Ratio of vehicle weight to bridge weight
• Irregularities in the bridge deck and approaches
• ill functioning of expansion joints
• Damping characteristics of bridge and vehicle system
• Many studies have been made, but these are case specific and
can not be generalized since they focus on few parameters only
not all at a time
• Codal Provisions:
• Codes of several countries recommend the use of Impact
factor
• Due to the use of impact factor additional design static load
• Needs more Section strength of section No Failure of
structural elements due to dynamic effects
• Indirectly reduces the vibrations in bridge due to more rigid
sections
• But no guarantee
Impact factors by different countries:
British Standards: 25% is added to the axel load or pair of
adjacent wheels which produce greatest bending moment or
shear force as the case may be
All other countries consider the span length as a parameter to
decide the impact factor
In British, Germany and Italy Impact factors are ignored for
span > 30m, 50m and 100m respectively (other countries use
certain minimum impact factor for large span bridges)
In different countries the Maximum impact factors may vary from
25% to 65%
In India, Japan and Austria In addition to span, the bridge
material is also considered as additional parameter Material is
considered due to the fact that steel bridges are more prone to
vibrations due to light weight as compared to concrete.
Some countries like France and Belgium also consider the
vehicle speed
Austria specifies different Impact factors for the directly loaded
girder and indirectly loaded girder
Human Aspect of Vibrations
• Normal range of the fundamental frequency of bridge system
varies from 1 to 20 cps
• If this frequency coincides with the frequency of vehicle
Resonance Vibrations
• Human Physiological and Psychological discomfort to human
• The human physiological and Psychological discomfort
depends on frequency
0.25 to – 1 cps Associated with motion sickness
2 cps Associated with motion sickness and head
resonance (for horizontal movement)
4 – 6 cps major resonance of the whole body
7-9 cps abdominal resonance
10-12 cps unspecified trunk resonance
• Few studies have been made to study the reaction of
passengers on vibrations
Practical Approach for Vibration analysis:
British Standard (CP117 Part 2-1967) and Lenzen’s criterion
may be adopted to check the vibration problem in bridges:
Estimate the maximum deflection () due to a single 20 tone
hypothetical load placed at center of span as well as at mid of
width of bridge (in inches) using the fully composite flexural
rigidity of deck
Estimate the fundamental frequency of the bridge Nf using the
relation
2 EI g
Nf 2 cycle per sec ond
L wd
Where, L = span of the bridge; (ft)
g = 32.2 ft/sec2
EI = Flexural rigidity of the full width section of the bridge deck
expressed in ft tone units
wd = dead load of deck including the finishes expressed in kN/m
of the bridge span
Calculate the parameter = 0.4 if Nf > 4 Cps
= 0.75 if Nf < 4 Cps
Or 2 -3 beams can often be lifted in, singly or joined in pairs, by cranes on each bank
Roller launch method: The bridge is constructed in situ and then jacked across the
span using rollers and cantilever technique.
A temporary nose section is used this is removed once the bridge is in position
1 in 24 to 1 in 3 to
1 in 12) 1 in 6
Various Shapes of stress Distribution and Maximum
bearing Stress