Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Draft
July 2010
Developed for
Indian Railways
By
Contents
PART 1: Provisions and Commentary
1.0 TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................................................................9
2.0 SYMBOLS ..............................................................................................................................12
3.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................15
3.1 .......................................................................................................................................... 15
3.2-....................... 15
3.3-......................... 17
3.4-......................... 18
4.0 REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................18
5.0 SCOPE....................................................................................................................................18
5.1 ............................................................................................................................................18
6.0 GENERAL CONCEPTS...........................................................................................................19
6.1 ..............................................................................................................................................19
6.2 ..............................................................................................................................................19
6.3 ..............................................................................................................................................19
6.4 ..............................................................................................................................................20
6.5 ..............................................................................................................................................20
6.6 ..............................................................................................................................................20
6.6.1 .................................................................................................................................................................................21
6.7 ..............................................................................................................................................21
6.8 GROUND MOTION ....................................................................................................................24
6.8.1 VERTICAL COMPONENT OF SEISMIC ACTION ................................................................................................................24
6.9 ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................25
Contents
PART 2: Explanatory Examples
Example No.
Type of Bridge
Page No.
1.
135
2.
143
3.
148
4.
153
5.
156
6.
163
PREFACE
In India, there are three codes / standards for seismic design of bridges. These are: IRC 6 of
Indian Road congress, IS 1893 of Bureau of Indian Standards and existing Bridge Rules of
Indian Railways. IRC 6, published by the Indian Road Congress, deals with highway bridges and
its seismic loading provisions have been modified in 2006, to bring them in line with the IS
1893(Part 1):2002. Bureau of Indian Standards code, IS 1893(1984) has provisions for highway
as well as railway bridges. The revised version of this code, which is to be published as IS
1893(Part 4), has not yet been finalized. Existing Bridge Rules of the Indian Railways has
derived its seismic loading provisions from IS 1893 (1984). In these provisions, seismic
coefficient method is used for bridges, wherein design seismic coefficient does not depend on the
flexibility of the bridge. Moreover, the ductility of bridge components is not considered while
calculating the design seismic loads. Similarly, there are no details about response spectrum and
time history analysis.
The present guidelines on seismic design of railway bridges have been developed under a project
given to IIT Kanpur by the Indian Railways. The scope of these guidelines is limited to the
seismic design of new railway bridges and these shall not be used for seismic evaluation of the
existing railway bridges. The provisions included herein, are in line with the general provisions
of IS 1893(Part 1):2002. For example, the zone map is taken from IS 1893(Part 1) and the
response spectra is similar to the one used in IS 1893(Part 1). In line with the present
international practice, these guidelines are written in two column format with provision on the
left side and explanatory commentary on the right side. The purpose of commentary is to explain
background / concept / basis of the provision. The commentary should help understand the
provision better and remove any confusion, but cannot be used in lieu of the provision.
This draft document was developed by a team consisting of Professor Sudhir K Jain, Professor
Durgesh C. Rai ( Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur) and Professor O R Jaiswal
(Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur). Mr. Piyush Agarwal, Mr. Mahesh
Kumar Gupta and Mr. R K Goel of Research Designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO),
Lucknow of the Indian Railways have offered useful suggestions in the preparation of this
document.
1.
Terminology
For the purpose of this guidelines, the following terms are defined
Base
The level at which inertia forces generated in the substructure and superstructure are transferred to the
foundation.
Bearing
An element often used to connect bridge girders to piers and abutments. Bearing are designed to allow or
prevent rotation and translation in different directions.
Bent
The intermediate support under the superstructure. A bent may have one or more columns, or it may
consists of a pier wall.
Bridge Flexibility Factor (Sa/g)
Also called Response Acceleration Coefficient (Sa/g). It is a factor to obtain the elastic acceleration
spectrum depending on flexibility of the structure; it depends on natural period of vibration of the bridge.
Center of Mass
The point through which the resultant of the masses of a system acts. This point corresponds to the
center of gravity of the system.
Closely-Spaced Mode
Closely-Spaced modes of a structure are those of its natural modes of vibration whose natural
frequencies differ from each other by 10 percent or less of the lower frequency.
Critical Damping
The minimum damping above which free vibration motion is not oscillatory.
Damping
The effect of internal friction, imperfect elasticity of material, slipping, sliding, etc., in reducing the
amplitude of vibration and is expressed as a percentage of critical damping.
Design Acceleration Spectrum
It refers to graph of maximum acceleration as a function of natural frequency or natural period of vibration
of a Single Degree Of Freedom (SDOF) system, for a specified damping ratio to be used in the design of
structures.
Design Horizontal Coefficient
It is a horizontal acceleration coefficient that shall be used to obtain design horizontal seismic force on
structures. Refer clause 9.1 and 10.1
Design Seismic Force
The seismic force prescribed by this standard for each bridge component that shall be used in its design.
It is obtained as the maximum elastic seismic force divided by the appropriate response reduction factor
specified in this standard for each component. Refer clause 9.3 and 10.3.
Design Seismic Force Resultant (V)
The force resultant (namely axial force, shear force, bending moment or torsional moment) at a crosssection of the bridge due to design seismic force for shaking along a considered direction applied on the
structure.
Ductility
Ductility of a structure, or its members, is the capacity to undergo large inelastic deformations without
significant loss of strength or stiffness.
Ductile Detailing
The preferred choice of location and amount of reinforcement in reinforced concrete structures to provide
for adequate ductility in them. In steel structures, it is the design of members and their connections to
Tk : The modal natural period of mode k is the time period of vibration in mode
k.
Normal Mode
Mode of vibration at which all its masses attain maximum values of displacements and rotations
10
11
2.
-Symbols
a
Ao
Ac
Dk2
Ag
Ak
Ar
As per Appendix B, Area of confined core concrete in the rectangular hoop measure
to its outer side dimensions
Ash
Ce
Cj
C1, C2,
C3, C4
Dk
di
Ec
EDC
Ex, Ey
Es
Fe
Inertia force due to mass of a bridge component under earthquake shaking along a
direction
missing
fck
fy
Fke
Inertia force vector due to mass of bridge under earthquake shaking along a
direction in mode k
Fp
Fn
12
e
Fnet
Fmax
Maximum force
Fy
Yield Force
Longer dimension of the rectangular confining hoop measured to its outer face
Hp
Height of Pier
Importance Factor
Kd , Ku &
Keff
Ke
i
Ke
j
Length (in meters) of the superstructure to the adjacent expansion joint or to the
end of superstructure. In case of bearings under suspended spans, it is sum of the
lengths of the two adjacent portions of the superstructure. In case of single span
bridges, it is equal to the length of the superstructure
mj
[ m]
My
Sum of the over strength moment capacities of the hinges resisting lateral loads
Ni
Pk
pb
Qd
Characteristic strength
r1 , r 2 , r 3
Force resultants due to full design seismic force along two principal horizontal
directions and along the vertical direction, respectively
Sa
g
Sa
13
ti
T1
Tk
Tr
us
Displacement at position s caused in the acting direction of inertial force when the
force corresponding to the weight of the superstructure and substructure above the
ground surface for seismic design is assumed to act in the acting direction of inertial
force
Lateral Shear Force
Ve
Vnet
Design seismic force resultant in any component of the bridge due to all modes
considered
Wb ,W1,W2
We
Z
Seismic weight, which includes full dead load and part live load
Widths of seating at bearing supports at expansion ends of girders.
Weight of water in a hypothetical enveloping cylinder around a substructure
Seismic zone factor
max
Y
FEd
Additional vertical load due to seismic overturning effects, base on peak response
under the design seismic action
jk
Mode shape coefficient for jth, degree of freedom in kth mode of vibration
Yield Curvature
missin g
14
PROVISIONS
3.
COMMENTARY
C3.0 Introduction
Introduction
3.1-
C3.1-
15
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
d)
16
f)
g)
h)
i) This information is taken from AREMA code.
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
3.3
C3.3
Railway
bridges
are
functionally
and In case of railway bridges, the ratio of dead load
behaviorally different from the other bridges. of superstructure to live load could be quite
Firstly, the controlled traffic environment permits different than that for highway bridges. This
better assessment of train load on the bridges. ratio could also be significantly different for
Secondly, the presence of continuous rails over bridges with steel superstructure and concrete
the bridge spans provides restraint against superstructure. Various differences of railway
longitudinal and transverse movement during bridges and highway bridges are as follows:earthquakes.
Thirdly, the superstructure
(i) Simple span structures are preferred over
configuration of railway bridges is different than
continuous structures for railway bridges.
that of the other types of bridges.
Many of the factors that make continuous
spans attractive for highway bridges are not
as advantageous for railway use. Continuous
spans are also more difficult to replace in
emergencies than simple spans.
(ii) The ratio of live to dead load is much higher
for a railway bridge than for a similarly sized
highway bridge. This can lead to
serviceability issues such as fatigue and
central deflection governing the designs
rather than strength.
(iii) Design impact load on railway bridges is
higher as compared to highway bridges.
(iv) Interruptions in service are typically much
more critical for railway than for highway
agencies. Therefore constructability and
maintainability without disruption to traffic
are crucial for railway bridges.
(v) Since the bridge supports the track
structure, the combination of track and
bridge movement cannot exceed the
tolerances in track standards. Interaction
between the track and bridge should be
considered in designing and detailing.
(vi) Seismic performance of highway and
railway bridges can vary significantly.
Railroad bridges have performed well
during seismic events.
(vii) Track structure ( along with guard rail )
serves as an effective restraint ( and
damping
agent)
against
bridge
displacements in case of railway bridges.
(viii) Railway bridge owners typically expect a
longer service life from their structures than
highway bridge owner expect from theirs.
(ix) Trains operate in a controlled environment ,
which makes type of damage permissible
17
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
for railway bridges that might not be
acceptable generally for highway users.
3.4
C3.4
4.
References
C4.0 References
5.
Scope
C5.0 Scope
5.1
C5.1-
1.
2.
Useful suggestions
for evaluation and
strengthening of various components such as
piers/columns can be derived from the
followings documents specially developed for
buildings:
1.
18
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
of
Buildings.
Federal
Emergency
Management Agency, Washington, D. C.,
USA.
6.
- General concepts
2.
3.
6.1 -
C6.1 -
6.2 -
C6.2-
6.3 -
C6.3
The
reinforced
and
prestressed
concrete
19
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
6.4 -
C6.4
6.5-
C6.5-
6.6-
C6.6-
20
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
6.6.1-
C6.6.1
6.7 -
C 6.7
21
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
ground motion at various locations along the
bridge length is of concern in such cases.
Information can be obtained in following
references:
1) Eurocode 8 (2005) Design of structures for
earthquake resistance Part 2: Bridges,
prEn 1998-2, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels.
2) Der Kiureghian A., and Neuenhofer A.,
1992, Response spectrum method for
multi-support excitations, Journal of
Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 21, pp 713-740.
22
PROVISIONS
Table 1 - Cases Requiring Special Studies/Analysis
Sr.
No.
Special studies/analysis
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
23
PROVISIONS
6.8- Ground Motion
COMMENTARY
C6.8- Ground Motion
24
PROVISIONS
6.9 Assumptions
COMMENTARY
C6.9- Assumptions
25
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
value. Hence, the code simply allows the modulus of
elasticity for static analysis to be used for earthquake
analysis also
7.
Conceptual
Considerations
7.0 Conceptual
Considerations
Conceptual considerations are aimed at providing
simplicity, symmetry, and displacement capacity in
the bridge so as to improve its seismic resistance.
This is similar to the role of architectural planning
and detailing in the seismic performance of
buildings. In the past earthquakes it is seen that
bridges with preferred configurations, superstructure,
substructure and ground conditions have performed
better than non preferred type. Bridges of non
preferred types require special considerations in
modeling, analysis, design, and construction.
The selection of an appropriate structure type and
configuration should take into account the seismic
hazard at the site, the soil condition and the bridge
performance requirement. In general, site near active
faults, site with potentially liquefiable or unstable
soil conditions and site with unstable sloping ground
conditions should be avoided, if practical, and
measures to improve the soil conditions should be
considered as an alternative.
Configuration
Criteria for determining an adequate structure
configuration and layout include simplicity,
symmetry and regularity, integrity, redundancy,
ductility and ease of inspection and repair. Bridge
should be simple in geometry and structural
behavior. Simple structure provides a direct and clear
load path in transmitting the inertial forces from
superstructure to ground. The bridge behavior under
seismic loads can be predicted with more certainty
and accuracy with fewer dominant modes of
vibration.
Bridges with features such as extreme curvature or
skew, varying stiffness and mass and abrupt changes
in geometry require special attention in analysis and
detailing to avoid permanent damages and failure.
Superstructure
Simple spans of standard configuration are preferred
by railways since they have performed well during
past earthquakes and can be returned to survive or
replaced. In simple spans lateral load on piers
26
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
depends on the weight of adjacent spans. If spans are
of equal length, then, all the piers are subjected to
almost same lateral seismic force.
In continuous bridges, since all the piers are
connected through deck the lateral seismic force on a
pier depends on stiffness of pier. In such cases, large
lateral force may get transmitted to one single pier of
large stiffness. Continuous spans may, however,
reduce the likelihood of unseating at the pier.
Long spans produce higher load demands on fewer
foundations which will increase foundation
vulnerability and reduce redundancy. Excessive
ballast and other non structural weight should be
avoided as far as practically by possible.
Substructure
Wide seat width at the abutment and the pier allow
for large displacements without unseating the bridge
spans. Multiple columns provide redundancy in the
substructure which is needed to survive the higher
level ground motions.
Ground Conditions
The foundation soil should be investigated for
susceptibility to liquefaction and slope failure during
the seismic ground motion. To the extent possible,
bridges in the region of high seismicity should be
founded on stiff, stable soil layers. Large diameter
pile foundations may be used to withstand the slope
failure or carry the bridge loads through liquefiable
soil layer to competent material.
Foundation
Bridges are built either on spread footing or deep
foundation. Bridges on spread footing supported by
firm soil have performed well during earthquakes.
Pile foundation has performed well except when
massive soil failure occurred. Generally the column
yield first; thus limiting the earthquake demand on
foundations. Moreover, the footing and pile cap
should be in deeper level to gain passive resistance.
27
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Configuration
1.1
1.2
Normal piers
Skewed piers
1.3
1.4
1.5
2.0
2.1
Superstructure
Simply supported spans
Continuous spans
(Integral Bridges)
2.2
Short spans
Long spans
2.3
Light spans
Heavy spans
2.4
No intermediate
within span
3.0
hinges
Intermediate hinges
Substructure
3.1
Wide seats
Narrow seats
3.2
Multiple column
Single column
4.0
4.1
Ground conditions
Stiff, Stable soil
Unstable soil
28
PROVISIONS
8.
COMMENTARY
Design Criteria
II
III
IV
0.10
0.16
0.24
0.36
29
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Zone factor (Z) accounts for the expected intensity of
shaking in different seismic zones Efforts have been
made to specify Z values that represent a reasonable
estimate of PGA in the respective zone. For instance,
Z value of 0.36 in zone V implies that a value of
0.36g is reasonably expected in zone V. But it does
not imply that acceleration in zone V will not exceed
0.36g. For example, during 2001 Bhuj earthquake,
peak ground acceleration of approximately 0.6g was
inferred from data obtained from the Structural
Response Recorder located at Anjar, 44kms away
from the epicenter.
Import
ance
Factor
Bridges included
Category
I
1.5
Bridge
1.25
Bridge
Other
Bridge
1.0
30
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
span.
Group A, B, C routes depend on traffic intensity and
strategic importance of the route.
31
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
32
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
8.3.1 -
C8.3.1
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
33
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
However, in case of long span bridges, irregular
bridges, higher modes may be important and their
mode shape may not be regular. Hence, for such
bridges this clause suggests the use of multi-mode
analysis namely Response Spectrum Method. It may
be clarified that mass concrete piers, common in
Railway bridges may be analyzed by the Seismic
Coefficient method, regardless of the mass ratio of
pier weight and the superstructure.
8.3.2 -
C8.3.2 -
(i)
8.3.3 -
C8.3.3-
8.3.4
C8.3.4 -
34
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
C8.5.1.1
< 90o
Fig C1b Regular Bridge with < 90o
35
PROVISIONS
8.3.5.2 - Irregular Bridge
COMMENTARY
C8.3.1.2 -
8.4.1-
C8.4.1 -
8.4.2-
C8.4.2 -
36
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
gap between wheel and rail. Due to this , during
sliding , the entire train load will not contribute to
seismic weight , hence , only 50 % of design live
load is considered in transverse direction. Existing
Bridge Rules also considers 50% live load in
transverse direction and no live load in longitudinal
direction.
8.4.3 -
C8.4.3
8.5.1 -
C8.5.1 -
37
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Y
X
M yX
M Yy
MxX
M Yx
M Yx are zero.
8.5.2 -
C8.5.2 -
(a) r1 0.3r2
(b) 0.3r1 r2
where
r1
38
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
(particularly the substructure) oriented in any
direction will have sufficient lateral strength. In case
x vertical ground motions are also considered, the
same principle is then extended to the design force
combinations in the three principal directions.
M yX
M xX
Y
y
M xY
Moments for
ground motion
along Z-axis
M x M xX 0 .3 M Yx
My MyX 0.3MYy
M x = 0.3M xX + M Yx
My = 0.3MyX + MYy
Design
Moments
39
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
8.5.4 -
C8.5.4 -
M yX . x-
are M x and
MX
MY
( M xX ) 2 + ( M yX ) 2 and
( M Yx ) 2 + ( M Yy ) 2
8.6.1 - Damping
C8.6.1 Damping
8.6.1.1-
C8.6.1.1
40
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
8.6.1.2-
C8.6.1.2-
8.6.3-
Pressure in Soils
C8.6.3-
di
N i 1
n d
i
i 1
where
d
i 1
41
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Foundation
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
i)
50
50
--
ii)
--
25
--
iii)
Raft foundations
50
50
--
iv)
50
25
--
v)
50
25
--
Well foundation
50
25
--
vi)
NOTES
1. The allowable bearing pressure shall be determined in accordance with IS 6403 or IS 1888.
2. If any increase in bearing pressure has already been permitted for forces other than seismic forces, the total
increase in allowable bearing pressure when seismic force is also included shall not exceed the limits specified
above.
3. Desirable minimum field values of N- If soils of smaller N-values are met, compacting may be adopted to achieve
these values or deep pile foundations going to stronger strata should be used.
Seismic Zone
Level
Depth below
Ground (in
meters)
N-Values
Remarks
III, IV and V
5
10
15
20
II (for important
Structures only)
5
10
15
20
For values of
depths between 5m
and 10m, linear
interpolation is
recommended.
4. The values of N (uncorrected values) are at the founding level and the allowable bearing pressure shall be
determined in accordance with IS 6403 or IS 1888.
5. The piles should be designed for lateral loads neglecting lateral resistance of soil layers liable to liquefy.
6. IS 1498 and IS 2131 may also be referred.
42
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
SOIL TYPE
Soil Type
Definition
Well graded gravel (GW) or well graded sand (SW) both with less than 5% passing 75 m
sieve (Fines);
Poorly graded Sand (SP) or clayey sand (SC), all having N above 30;
Stiff to hard clays having N above 16, where N is the Standard Penetration Test value.
Poorly graded sands or Poorly graded sands with gravel (SP) with little or no fines having
N between 10 and 30;
Stiff to medium stiff fine-grained soils, like Silts of Low compressibility (ML) or Clays of
Low Compressibility (CL) having N between 10 and 16.
All soft soils other than SP with N<10. The various possible soils are
43
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
2)
b) AREMA
Serviceability Limit State
1.0 (DL + EP + BO + PS + EQ) -- Concrete Structure
1.0 (DL + EP + BO + EQ)
c) AASHTO
Ultimate Limit State
(1.25 or 0.9) DC + (1.4 or 0.25) DD + (1.5 or 0.65)
DW + (1.5 or 0.9)EH + (1.35 or 0.9) EV + (1.5 or
0.75)ES + 1.0EL + 1.0PS + (1.25 or 0.9) CR + (1.25
or 0.9)SH + 0.5 ( LL + IM + CE + BR + PL + LS ) +
WA+ FR +EQ
For permanent loads, the maximum and minimum
value of load factor is given. Designer shall use those
values which produce the most critical combination
or worst effect. For example, if load A produces
the effect opposite to that of load B, then,
minimum value of load factor shall be used for load
A along with the maximum value for load B .
d) TRANSIT (New Zealand)
Ultimate Limit State
1) (1.35 or 0.8)DL + EL +1.35EP+1.35OW + SG +
ST + EQ + 0.33TP+ GW
2) 1.35DL+ 1.35EL+1.35EP + 1.35OW + 1.35SG +
0.45EQ + 1.49CN + GW
Serviceability Limit State
44
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
DL + EL + GW + EP + OW + SG + ST + EQ +
0.33TP
DL + EL + GW + EP + OW + SG + 0.33EQ + CN
45
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
8.8.1-
C8.8.1-
8.8.2-
C8.8.2-
Such
analysis
requires
time
period
of
superstructure in vertical direction. Time period for
the superstructure has to be worked out separately
using the property of the superstructure, in order to
estimate the seismic acceleration coefficient (Sa/g)
for vertical acceleration. It can be done by free
vibration analysis of superstructure using standard
structural analysis software. However, for simply
supported superstructure with uniform flexural
rigidity, the fundamental time period Tv, for vertical
motion can be estimated using the expression
m
2
, where L is the span, m is the
TV = L2
EI
mass per unit length, and EI is the flexural rigidity of
the superstructure.
When ultimate limit state is used, effective flexure
rigidity equal to 50% of gross flexural rigidity shall
be taken for concrete superstructure (RC and
Prestressed girders, slab decks).
8.8.3
C8.8.3
46
PROVISIONS
9.
Seismic Coefficient
Method (Single mode
Method)
COMMENTARY
C9.0 Seismic Coefficient
Method (Single mode Method)
The seismic coefficient method is applicable for
bridges as described in Clause 8.3.
47
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Ah = Z I S a
2
where
Sa
= Spectrum Acceleration Coefficient along the
g
Damping Factors
T 0.40
0.40 T 3.00
T 3.00
T 0..55
0.55 T 3.00
T 3.00
T 0.67
0.67 T 3.00
T 3.00
48
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
1):2002.
Factors
3.20
1.40
1.0
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.55
0.50
49
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
T =2
PH p 3
3EI eff .
W
1000 F
T 2
W ( s )us 2 ds
W (s)u(s)ds
W s Weight
of
the
superstructure
substructure at position s (kN)
and
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
24.4
45.7
76.2
L.
T.
L.
T.
L.
T.
0.21
0.38
0.30
0.51
0.45
0.69
0.34
0.60
0.47
0.79
0.70
1.07
10
0.32
0.50
0.41
0.65
0.57
0.86
12
0.44
0.67
0.55
0.86
0.77
1.13
15
0.65
0.96
0.81
1.22
1.10
1.60
20
0.67
0.82
0.74
0.97
0.90
1.20
25
1.03
1.23
1.12
1.42
1.33
1.73
30
1.46
1.71
1.57
1.95
1.83
2.35
L. = Longitudinal direction
T. = Transverse direction
Following assumption are made in the above
calculations:
1) Pier diameter is 1.5 m for pier of 6 m and 8 m
height.
Pier diameter is 2 m for pier of 10 m, 12 m and 15
m height.
51
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Pier diameter is 3 m for pier of 20 m, 25 m and 30
m height.
2) Seismic weight:
Longitudinal direction Total DL of superstructure
+ 80 % DL of pier
Transverse direction - Total DL of superstructure +
80 % DL of pier + 50 % LL
3) Effective moment of inertia, I eff = 0.75 Ig
4) DL of superstructure and LL for heavy mineral
loading is taken from IITK RDSO document.
9.1.1.1-
C9.1.1.1-
Where,
E c I eff =
My
y
52
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Node
Element
A hW
where
Ah = Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient along
the considered direction of shaking obtained
as per Clause 9.1, and
W = Seismic weight as discussed in Clause 8.4.
53
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
The design seismic force resultant V at a crosssection of a bridge component due to earthquake
shaking along a considered direction shall be given
Ve
V
by
R
where
Ve
54
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
to the design forces reflect these above factors.
Clearly, the different bridge components have
different ductility and over strength. For example,
the superstructure has no or nominal axial load in it,
and hence its basic behavior is that of flexure.
However, the substructure which is subjected to
significant amount of axial load undergoes a
combined axial load-flexure behavior. It is wellknown that the latter system is less ductile than the
former. Also, the damage to the substructure is more
detrimental to the post-earthquake functioning of the
bridge than damage to the superstructure. In the
second case, the span alone may have to be replaced,
while the first requires replacement of the entire
bridge and minor modifications may not help. Thus,
the R factors for superstructures are kept at a lower
value than those for substructures. The superstructure
is essentially expected to behave elastically and
hence R value is taken as unity. A similar argument
can be given for the R values of foundations which
are also lower than those for substructures.
An important issue is that of connections, which
usually do not have any significant post-yield
behavior that can be safely relied upon. Also, there is
no redundancy in them. Besides, there is a possibility
of the actual ground acceleration during earthquake
shaking exceeding the values reflected by the seismic
zone factor Z. In view of these aspects, the
connections are designed for the maximum elastic
forces (and more) that are transmitted through them.
Thus, the R factors for connections are recommended
to have values less than or equal to 1.0.
The R values for ductile frame type pier is taken as
3.25 as against 2.5 for single pier. For ductile RC
buildings, the value of R is 5.0 ( IS1893 (Part
1:2002)). The lower value of R for pier is due to less
redundancy as compared to buildings and nonavailability of alternate load path. In American code
the value for ductile frame type pier is 5.0 as
compared to R = 8 for ductile RC building frames. In
Eurocode the behavior factor, q is taken as 3.5 for
ductile RC pier as against 5.0 for ductile RC building.
It is expected that ductile structural forms,
particularly for substructures are inevitably used in
all important bridges and in high seismic zones. As
has been observed in the past earthquakes, ductile
structures out-perform non-ductile structures even
though they may have been designed for lower force.
55
PROVISIONS
Table 7: Response Reduction Factor R for Bridge Components and Connections
R
Substructure
RCC Piers with ductile detailing
- Single Column, Wall Type
2.5
- Frame Type
3.25
2.0
- Frame Type
2.5
2.5
1.5
RCC Abutment
2.0
Masonry/PCC Abutment
1.5
0.8
Superstructure to column
Superstructure
1
0.8
1.0
56
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
2-DOF Model
57
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Ak
Ak
Z
I Sa / g k
2
Damping factor
2.50
Sa
1.00/Tk
g
k 0.33
Tk 0.40
0.40 Tk 3.00
Tk 3.00
1.36/Tk
g k 0.45
Tk 0.55
0.55 Tk 3.00
Tk 3.0
1.67/Tk
g
k 0.56
Tk 0.67
0.67 Tk 3.00
Tk 3.00
g
k
Sa
1 15Tk
k
S
A plot of a versus Tk is given in Fig. 4 for 5%
g k
damping. Table 6 gives the multiplying factors for
obtaining spectral values for various other
damping percentages.
58
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
To be used for k = 1
Fkj = mj k Pk Ak g
The force vector Fke of maximum elastic inertia
forces at different nodes in mode k of vibration
due to earthquake shaking along a considered
direction shall be obtained as:
F [m ] P
e
k
Ak g
where
= Seismic mass matrix of the bridge
structure, as defined in Clause 10.2.1,
[m ]
59
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Pk
k m 1 ,
T
k m k
T
60
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
e
The maximum elastic force resultants Fnet
and the
maximum elastic deformations, due to all modes
considered, for the considered direction of
earthquake shaking, shall be obtained by
combining those due to the individual modes as
follows:
m
k 2
k 1
Where
* c
c 1
61
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
10.3.1
C10.3.1-
where
62
PROVISIONS
The design seismic force resultant
COMMENTARY
of ductility and over strength. Hence, the level of
design seismic force vis--vis the maximum elastic
force that will be experienced by the component if the
entire bridge were to behave linearly elastic, varies for
different bridge components. The values of the
response reduction factor R given in Table 7 reflect the
same.
Vnet at any
e
Fnet
e
where the maximum elastic force resultant Fnet
due to all modes considered is as obtained in
Clause 10.3, and Response Reduction Factor R of
that component of bridge is as per Table 7.
However, Response Reduction Factor shall not be
applied for calculation of design displacements.
63
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Ground level
after scour
Fig. C6 - Pier Fixed at top of foundation
11.2 Analysis
C11.2 Analysis
64
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
S(T ) x Z I ( Sa / g )
For a bridge with multi-column piers, the 2Dimensional model for longitudinal direction is shown
in Fig C7. For this model, the X-component of ground
motion will be used. For analysis in transverse
direction, the model is shown in Fig C8. For this
model, the Z-component of ground motion will be
used.
65
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Y
Y
Z
X
x g (t )
Fig C7- 2-Dimensional Model
for longitudinal Direction
z g (t )
Fig C8 - 2-Dimensional Model
for Transverse Direction
xg ( t )
11.4
Interpretation of Time
History Analysis Results
66
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
67
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
68
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
13. - Superstructure
C13. - Superstructure
13.1-
C13.1
13.2 -
C13.2 -
13.3 -
C13.3 -
69
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
anti-dislodging elements.
13.3.1.1 -
C13.3.1.1 -
13.3.1.2 -
C13.3.1.2 -
70
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Girder
Substructure
Anchor bolt
Girder
Girder
Pier
71
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
13.3.2.1
C13.3.2.1
13.3.2.2-
C13.3.2.2-
13.3.2.3-
C13.3.2.3
13.3.2.4-
C13.3.2.4-
72
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Shock absorber
Concrete block
Abutment
Shock absorber
Steel bracket
Abutment
Reaction
block
Pier
Rails
Reaction
block
Bearings
Fig C12 Reaction blocks in transverse direction
73
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
14. - Substructure
C14.0 Substructure
14.2.1-
14.2.1-
F Ce AhWe
where Ce is a coefficient given by Table 8,
depending on the height of submergence of the
pier relative to that of the radius of a hypothetical
enveloping cylinder (Fig. 6); and Ah is the elastic
seismic acceleration coefficient as per Clause 9.1
or 10.1; and We is the weight of the water in the
hypothetical enveloping cylinder. The pressure
distribution due to hydrodynamic effect on pier is
given in Fig. 7; the coefficients C1, C2, C3 and C4
in Fig. 7 are given in Table 9.
74
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
14.2.2-
14.2.2-
b = 1 m, a = 3 m, Ao = 1 x 3 = 3 m2
pressure,
a =structural width in the direction of
hydrodynamic pressure,
WWP
Hp = pier height
= 3.81
75
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
WWP
= 30.9
PROVISIONS
Table - 8. Values of Ce
Height of Submerged Portion (H)
Ce
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
0.39
0.58
0.68
0.73
C1
C2
C3
C4
0.1
0.410
0.026
0.9345
0.2
0.673
0.093
0.8712
0.3
0.832
0.184
0.8013
0.4
0.922
0.289
0.7515
0.5
0.970
0.403
0.6945
0.6
0.990
0.521
0.6390
0.8
0.999
0.760
0.5320
1.0
1.000
1.000
0.4286
76
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Direction of
Seismic Shaking
C3F
C1H
(Resultant of pressure on
shaded area up to depth C1H)
C2pb
H
C4H
pb = 1.2F/H
pb
Fig. 7: Hydrodynamic Pressure Distribution on the Substructure due to Steam Flow (Clause 14.2.2)
77
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
78
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
14.4-Substructure of Continuous
Girder Superstructure
14.4.1 -
C14.4.1
14.4.2
C14.4.2 -
79
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
15. - Foundations
C15.0 - Foundations
15.1 -
C15.1 -
15.2 -
C15.2 -
1.5
1.25
Notes:
Note 1: No live load to be considered when the net
effect has a stabilizing effect.
Note 2: Area under tension need not be checked
provided above criteria for overturning and sliding is
satisfied.
15.3 -
C15.3 -
15.4 -
C15.4
80
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
81
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
16. - Connections
C16.0 - Connections
82
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
before the substructure becomes plastic. Once the
substructure becomes plastic, the bridge will not be
able to sustain higher inertia forces.
16.2 - Displacements at
Connections
C16.2 Displacement at
Connections
500 + 2.5L + 10 Hp
83
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
where
L=
Length (in meters) of the superstructure to
the adjacent expansion joint or to the end of
superstructure. In case of bearings under
suspended spans, it is sum of the lengths of the
two adjacent portions of the superstructure. In
case of single span bridges, it is equal to the
length of the superstructure.
Slab/Girder
Abutment
G.L.
W
(a) Abutment
L2
L1
Slab/Girder
Slab/Girder
(A) AREMA:
Pier Top
W =(305+2.5L+10Hp)x(1+0.000125S2) mm
W1
W2
(b) Column or Pier
L1
Suspended
W =(500+2.5L+10Hp) mm
Restrained
Portion
( C) JAPAN HIGHWAYS
700 + 5 L
W
(c) Suspended Span on Restrained Portion of
Superstructure
84
SLAB/GIRDER
b
a
d
f
e
f
e
BEARINGS
ELEVATION
(NOT TO SCALE)
d
w
e
g
w
a
e
g
c
f
f
w
PLAN
*
*
PIERS
PIERS
PIERS
SPAN
*w
(c-a)/2
76
75
75
75
100
100
420
420
460
495
525
550
378
379
381
383
388
392
629
632
634
638
646
654
*
*
*
*
*
*
100
150
150
150
60
550
675
825
975
875
392
402
411
421
444
654
670
686
702
740
100
100
150
150
150
300
300
300
600
600
700
525
550
675
825
925
1075
1350
1700
1850
2200
2400
388
392
402
411
421
444
468
492
515
539
563
646
654
670
686
702
740
780
819
858
898
937
*
*
85
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
86
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
Super Structure
Pier
STU unit
87
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
19.1 - General
C19.1 General
88
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
loads and displacements from wind and traffic loads
and from creep , shrinkage and thermal movements.
The objective of isolation a bridge structure also
differs. In a building, isolation is installed to reduce the
inertia force transmitted into the structure above in
order to reduce the demand on the structural elements.
A bridge is typically isolated immediately below the
isolators by reducing the inertia loads transmitted from
the superstructure.
Although the type of installation shown in Fig. 9 is
typical of most isolated bridges, there are number of
variations. For example, the isolator may be placed at
the bottom of bents; partial isolation may be used if
piers are flexible ( bearing at abutments only ): a
rocking mechanism for isolation may be used.
89
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
90
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
91
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
di
where,
250 Ah Teff
B
Teff 2
mm,
W
K eff g
10
20
30
40
50
92
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
93
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
19.5.3
C19.5.3
94
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
19.5.4
C19.5.4
19.5.5
C19.5.5
19.5.6
C19.5.6
95
Description
(A) Component
Thermal
Wind and
braking
Twenty fully reversed cycles between limits of plus and minus maximum load
for a total duration not less than 40 seconds. After the cyclic testing, the
maximum load shall be held for 1 minute.
Seismic -1
Three fully reversed cycles of loading at each of the following multiples of the
total design displacement: 1.0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.0, and 1.25 in the sequence
mentioned. The results of test corresponding to design displacement are used
for finding stiffness and damping properties.
Seismic -2
Fully reversed cycles of loading at design displacement for 25 cycles. The test
shall be started from a displacement equal to the offset displacement.
The prototype
specimen shall
be tested in the
following
sequence for
prescribed
number of
cycles: Wind
and braking
Three fully reversed cycles between limits of plus and minus the maximum
load for a total duration not less than 40 seconds. After the cyclic testing, the
maximum load shall be held for 1 minute. This test is done to ascertain the
survivability of the isolator after the major earthquake
(B) Prototype
Seismic
performance
verification
Three fully reversed cycles of loading at the deign displacement. The test
verifies service load performance after the major earthquake.
Vertical load
96
PROVISIONS
19.5.7
COMMENTARY
C19.5.7
FigBehavior
Hysteretic
97
PROVISIONS
19.5.8
COMMENTARY
C19.5.8
98
PROVISIONS
19.7 - Requirements for
Elastomeric Bearings
COMMENTARY
C19.7Requirements for
Elastomeric Bearings
Shear strain
for S 15
Shear strain due to vertical load
for S > 15
Shear strain due to non-seismic lateral
displacement
Shear strain due to seismic lateral
displacement
Shear strain due to rotation
Where,
K is the bulk modulus of the elastomer, in the
absence of measured data, the value of K
may be taken as 2000 MPa. The shape
factor,
S shall be taken as the plan area of the
elastomer layer divided by the area of
99
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
2.5
c + s,s + r
5.0
c + s,eq + 0.5r
5.5
100
PROVISIONS
COMMENTARY
101
Appendix A 1
References
In the formulation of this guideline, assistance has been derived from the following publications:
1)
2)
3)
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2007, USA.
4)
5)
Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance, Eurocode 8: Part 2: Bridges, 2005, European
Committee for Standardization.
6)
7)
Specifications for Highway Bridges, Part V Seismic Design Japan Road Association, 2003.
8)
Seismic Design for Railway Structures, Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), Japan,
2000.
9)
Seismic Design Criteria for High Speed Rail Project , National Center for Research on
Earthquake Engineering, Taiwan, 1992.
10)
Murty, C.V.R. and Jain, S.K., 2000, A Proposed Draft for Indian Code Provisions on seismic
design for bridges-Part I: Code, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.26, No. 3, 223-234.
102
11)
Murty, C.V.R. and Jain, S.K., 2000, A Proposed Draft for Indian Code Provisions on seismic
design for bridges-Part II: Code, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.27, No. 2, 79-89
12)
Skinner ,R.I. , Kelly , T.E. and Robinson , B. Seismic Isolation for Designers and Structural
Engineers, Robinson Seismic Ltd.
13)
AASHTO Guide Specifications for Seismic Isolation Design ,American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2000, USA.
Appendix A 2
References
The following Codes/Standards are necessary adjuncts to these guidelines:
1)
IRC:6 Standard Specification and Code of 2000 Practice for Road Bridges
2)
IRC:6 Standard Specification and Code of 2000 Practice for Road Bridges
3)
IRC:83 Standard Specification and Code of (Part III) Practice for Road Bridges 2002 Section
IX: - Bearings
4)
IRS Code of Practice For Plain, Reinforced & Prestressed Concrete For General Bridge
Construction, Third Revision, 2004
5)
IRS Code of Practice For the Design of Sub-Structures and Foundation of Bridge, Second
Revision,2004
6)
IRS Code of Practice For the Design of Steel or Wrought Iron Bridges Carrying Rail, Road or
Pedestrian Traffic, Second Revision, 2004
7)
IRS Rules specifying the Loads for Bridge Design of Super Structure and Sub- Rules Structure
of bridges, Second Revision, 2004
8)
9)
IS 1893 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant (Part I) Design of Structures, Part I: General 2002
Provisions and Buildings
10)
IS 1893 Draft Criteria for Earthquake (Part 3) Resistant Design of Structures, 2008 Part 3
103
IS 13920 Ductile Detailing of Reinforced 1993Concrete Structure Subjected to Seismic ForcesCode of Practice
Appendix A
Ductile Detailing Specifications
(Clause 17.0)
A-0 General
The detailing rules given have been chosen with the intention that reliable plastic hinges should
form at the top and bottom of each pier column, or at the bottom only of a single stem pier under
horizontal loading and that the bridge should remain elastic between the hinges (Fig. A-1). The aim is to
achieve a reliable ductile structure. Repair of plastic hinges is relatively easy.
Design strategy to be used is based on assumption that the plastic response will occur in the
substructure. However, in case of a wall type substructure, the nonlinear behavior may occur in the
foundation-ground system.
A-1 Specification
A-1.1 Minimum grade of concrete should be M25 (fck = 25 MPa).
A-1.1 Steel reinforcement of grade Fe 415 (see IS 1786: 1985) or less only shall be used. However, high
strength deformed steel bars of grades Fe 500, having elongation more than 14.5 percent and conforming
to other requirements of IS 1786 : 1985 may also be used for the reinforcement.
A-2 Layout
104
(a) The use of circular column is preferred for better plastic hinge performance and ease of
construction.
(b)The bridge must be proportioned and detailed by the designer so that plastic hinges occur only
at the controlled locations (e.g., pier column ends) and not in other uncontrolled places.
A-3.1 Curtailment of longitudinal reinforcement in piers due to reduction in seismic bending moment
towards top.
A-3.1.1 The reduction of longitudinal reinforcement at mid-height in piers should not be carried out except
in tall pier.
A-3.1.2 In case of high bridge piers such as of height equal to 30m or more, the reduction of
reinforcement at mid height may be done. In such cases the following method should be adopted:
(i) The curtailment of longitudinal reinforcement shall not be carried out in the section six times the least
lateral column dimension from the location where plastic hinge is likely to occur.
(ii) The interval between hoop ties is specified to be less than 150mm in a reinforcement position. The
interval between hoop ties shall not change abruptly, the change must be gradual.
105
forces shall be adopted for supporting components of the bridge. The design shear force at the critical
section(s) of substructures shall be the lower of the following:
(a) Maximum elastic shear force at the critical section of the bridge component divided by the response
reduction factor for that components as per Table 7, and
(b) Maximum shear force that develops when
(i) the substructure has maximum moment that it can sustain (i.e., the overstrength plastic
moment capacity as per Clause A-5.2) in single-column or single-pier type substructure.
(ii) plastic moment hinges are formed in the substructure so as to form a collapse mechanism in
multiple-column frame type or multiple-pier type substructures, in which the plastic moment
capacity shall be the overstrength plastic moment capacity as per Clause A-5.2.
In a single-column type or pier type substructure, the critical section is at the bottom of the column or pier
as shown in Figure A-1(a). And, in multi-column frame-type substructures or multi-pier substructures, the
critical sections are at the bottom and/or top of the columns/piers as shown in Figure A-1(b).
106
A-5.5.1 The area of cross section, Ash, of the bar forming circular hoops or spiral, to be used as special
confining reinforcement, shall not be less than
Ag
f
Ash 0.09SDk
1 ck
Ac
fy
or,
Ash = 0.024SDk
fck
fy
2
D
4 k
A-5.5.2 The total area of cross-section of the bar forming rectangular hoop and cross ties, Ash to be used
as special confining reinforcement shall not be less than
or,
where
h = longer dimension of the rectangular confining hoop measured to its outer face
Ar = Area of confined core concrete in the rectangular hoop measure to its outer side dimensions.
Note: Crossties where used should be of the same diameter as the peripheral hoop bar and Ak shall be
measured as the overall core area, regardless the hoop area. The hooks of crossties shall engage
peripheral longitudinal bars.
A-5.5.2.1 Unsupported length of rectangular hoops shall not exceed 300mm.
A-5.5.3 For ductile detailing of hollow cross-section of pier special literature may be referred. Some of
the provisions for hollow RC piers are:
i) For hollow cylindrical piers, in the plastic hinge region, the ratio of internal diameter to thickness should
not exceed 8.0.
107
ii) For wall type hollow piers, in the plastic region, the ratio of clear width of the wall to thickness should
not exceed 8.0.
Vu
M
=
where
= the sum of the overstrength moment capacities of the hinges resisting lateral loads, as
detailed. In case of twin pier this would be the sum of the overstrength moment capacities at the top and
bottom of the column. For single stem piers the overstrength moment capacity at the bottom only should
be used.
h = clear height of the column in the case of a column in double curvature; height to calculated point of
contra-flexure in the case of a column in single curvature.
Outside the hinge regions, the spacing of hoops shall not exceed half the least lateral dimension of the
column, nor 300 mm.
108
A-7.1 Ductility of all the joints in the structure may be ensured by offsetting the splices / couplers where
the area of reinforcement provided is at least twice the required by analysis staggered 600 mm minimum.
A-7.2 The pier foundation joint or the slab pier joint ( in case of integral slab bridges ) must be
checked for principal tensile stress in the concrete around the junction , following an appropriate
prevailing method. The un-cracked joint may be designed by keeping the principal stresses in the joint
region below direct tension strength of concrete. If the joint cannot be prevented from cracking, additional
vertical stirrups may be added to the external concrete region around the column.
The joint stresses may be assumed to disperse 45 around the column as per prevailing practices. For
An appropriate prevailing methods following references may be useful:
1. Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N., Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings
John Wiley and Sons. Inc., 1992.
2. Xiao, Y., Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Bridges, McGraw Hill , 1989.
109
Earthquake
Force
Column
Cap
Earthquake
Potential Plastic
Hinge Regions
Pile Cap
Pile
A
Section AA
Elevation
Earthquake Force
Column
Cap
Earthquake
Potential Plastic
Hinge Regions
Piles
A
Elevation
Section AA
110
(c)
Rectangular hoops
111
Appendix - B
Zone Factors for Some Important Towns
(Clause 8.1)
Town
Zone
Zone Factor, Z
Town
Zone
Zone Factor, Z
Agra
Ahmedabad
Ajmer
Allahabad
Almora
Ambala
Amritsar
Asansol
Aurangabad
Bahraich
Bangalore
Barauni
Bareilly
Belgaum
Bhatinda
Bhilai
Bhopal
Bhubaneswar
Bhuj
Bijapur
Bikaner
Bokaro
Bulandshahr
Burdwan
Calicut
Chandigarh
Chennai
Chitradurga
Coimatore
Cuddalore
Cuttack
Darbhanga
Darjeeling
Dharwad
Dehra Dun
Dharampuri
Delhi
Durgapur
Gangtok
Guwahati
Goa
Gulbarga
Gaya
Gorakhpur
Hyderabad
Imphal
Jabalpur
Jaipur
Jamshedpur
Jhansi
Jodhpur
Jorhat
Kakrapara
Kalapakkam
III
III
II
II
IV
IV
IV
III
II
IV
II
IV
III
III
III
II
II
III
V
III
III
III
IV
III
III
IV
III
II
III
III II
III
V
IV
III
IV
III
IV
III
IV
V
III
II
III
IV
II
V
III
II
II
II
II
V
III
III
0.16
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.10
0.24
0.10
0.24
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.16
0.36
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.36
0.24
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.24
0.36
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.24
0.10
0.36
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.36
0.16
0.16
Kanchipuram
Kanpur
Karwar
Kohima
Kolkata
Kota
Kurnool
Lucknow
Ludhiyana
Madurai
Mandi
Mangalore
Monghyr
Moradabad
Mumbai
Mysore
Nagpur
Nagarjunasagar
Nainital
Nasik
Nellore
Osmanabad
Panjim
Patiala
Patna
Pilibhit
Pondicherry
Pune
Raipur
Rajkot
Ranchi
Roorkee
Rourkela
Sadiya
Salem
Simla
Sironj
Solapur
Srinagar
Surat
Tarapur
Tezpur
Thane
Thanjavur
Thiruvananthapuram
Tiruchirappali
Thiruvennamalai
Udaipur
Vadodara
Varanasi
Vellore
Vijayawada
VIshakhapatnam
III
III
III
V
III
II
II
III
IV
II
V
III
IV
IV
III
II
II
II
IV
III
III
III
III
III
IV
IV
II
III
II
III
II
IV
II
V
III
IV
II
III
V
III
III
V
III
II
III
II
III
II
III
III
III
III
II
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.36
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.16
0.24
0.10
0.36
0.16
0.24
0.24
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.24
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.24
0.24
0.10
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.10
0.24
0.10
0.36
0.16
0.24
0.10
0.16
0.36
0.16
0.16
0.36
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.10
112
Appendix - C
PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
(Clause 12.0)
C-1 Pushover analysis is performed to explicitly ascertain the displacement capacity of the bridge
structure. This analysis is explained for the reinforced concrete structures. This is done with the help of
static nonlinear analysis, in which nonlinear properties of concrete and reinforcing steel are used. The
displacement capacity shall be greater than the displacement demand. The procedure explained herein,
is based on Caltrans (2006).
C-2 Displacement demand
The displacement demand is twice the elastic displacement obtained using a linear analysis. The single
mode method (Clause 9.0) or multi mode method (10.0) may be used as per the requirements of Clause
8.3.1. From the displacement demand, D, the displacement ductility demand is obtained as
D = D / Y
where, Y is yield displacement of the system from its initial position to the formation of plastic hinge.
113
Idealized curve
Actual curve
Here, G is the gap between the isolated flare and the soffit of the bent cap. With reference to Fig. D-4, the
plastic rotation capacity, P = LP x P and
P = P x L
LP
2
c = Ycol + P
where, Ycol is the idealized yield displacement of the column (Fig. C-4).
114
The displacement capacity c thus obtained, shall be greater than the demand D obtained from linear
static analysis. The above described procedure to obtain the displacement capacity is for a cantilever
column, fixed at the base and free at the top. Similarly, analysis can be done for fixed-fixed column. For a
frame type substructure, M- curve is to be given for each member and the analysis becomes more
involved, for which help of standard software may be required .
It shall be ensured that the flexural hinge occurs prior to shear failure of column, and hence, the nominal
shear capacity shall be greater than the shear force corresponding to plastic hinge. Similarly, capacity
protection shall be provided to the other adjacent components such as bent cap, pile cap etc.
115
Appendix - D
Dynamic Earth Pressure
(Clause 14.3.1)
D-1. Dynamic earth pressure on abutments
D-1.1 Lateral Earth Pressure - The pressure from earth fill behind retaining walls during an earthquake
shall be as given in D.1.1.1 to D.1.4.1. In the analysis, cohesion has been neglected. This assumption is
on conservative side.
D-1.1.1 Active Pressure Due to Earth fill - The general conditions encountered for the design of
retaining walls are illustrated in Fig. D 1. The total active pressure exerted against the wall shall be the
maximum of the two given by the following expression:
(D.1.)
Where the seismic active earth pressure coefficient KAE is given by
K AE
cos 2
sin sin i
(D.2.)
and where
= unit weight of soil (kN/m3)
H = height of wall in (m)
=angle of friction of soil (0)
=angle of friction between soil and abutment (0)
Ah=elastic seismic coefficient [see Clause 9.1]
Av= vertical seismic coefficient its value being taken consistently throughout the stability analysis of wall
equal to 2/3 Ah.
tan -1
Ah (0)
1 Av
D.1.1.2 Point of Application From the total pressure computed as above subtract the static active
pressure obtained by putting Av = Ah = = 0 in the expression given by equation D.1and D.2. The
remainder is the dynamic increment. The static component of the total pressure shall be applied at an
elevation H/3 above the base of the wall. The point of application of the dynamic increment shall be
assumed to be at mid-height of the wall.
D.1.2 Passive Pressure Due to Earth fill The total passive pressure against the walls shall be the
minimum of the two given by the following expression:
116
(D.3.)
Where the seismic passive earth pressure coefficient KPE is given by
K PE
cos 2
sin sin i
(D.4.)
D.1.2.2 Point of application - From the static passive pressure obtained by putting k h kv 0 in the
expression given by equation D.3 and D.4, subtracts the total pressure computed as above. The
remainder is the dynamic decrement .The static component of the total pressure shall be applied at an
elevation H/3 above the base of the wall. The point of application of the dynamic decrement shall be
assumed to be at an elevation 0.66 H above the base of the wall.
D.1.3 Active Pressure Due to Uniform Surcharge - The active pressure against the wall due to a
uniform surcharge of intensity q per unit area of the inclined earth fill surface shall be:
(D.5.)
D.1.3.1 Point of application- The dynamic increment in active pressure due to uniform surcharge shall
be applied at an elevation of 0.66H above the base of the wall, while the static component shall be
applied at mid-height of the wall.
D.1.4 Passive Pressure Due to Uniform Surcharge-The passive pressure against the wall due to a
uniform surcharge of intensity q per unit area of the inclined earth fill shall be:
PP E q
q H co s
K PE
co s( i )
(D.6.)
D.1.4.1 Point of application- The dynamic decrement in passive pressures due to uniform surcharge
shall be applied at an elevation of 0.66h above the base of the walls while the static component shall be
applied at mid-height of the wall
(D.7.)
Where
117
D.2.3 Hydrodynamic pressure on account of water contained in earthfill shall not be considered
separately as the effect of acceleration on water has been considered indirectly.
D.4 Concrete or Masonry Inertia Forces - Concrete or masonry inertia forces due to 'horizontal and
vertical earthquake accelerations are the products of the weight of wall and the horizontal and vertical
seismic coefficients respectively.
NOTE - To ensure adequate factor of safety under earthquake condition, the design shall be such that the
factor of safety against sliding shall be 1.2 and the resultant of all the forces including earthquake force
shall fall within the middle three-fourths of the base width provided. In addition, bearing pressure in soil
should not exceed the permissible limit.
D.5 Reduction of seismic lateral loads: If the following three conditions are satisfied, seismic lateral
loads may be reduced as given by the following expression.
The wall system and any structures supported by the wall can tolerate lateral movement resulting
form sliding of the structure.
The wall base is unrestrained against sliding, other than soil friction along its base and minimal
soil passive resistance.
If the wall functions as an abutment, the top of the wall must also be unrestrained, e.g., the
superstructure is supported by sliding bearings.
A
k h 1.66 A
d
0.25
(D.8.)
Where:
A= maximum earthquake acceleration (dimensionless)
kh= horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient (dimensionless)
d= the lateral wall displacement (mm)
Note: The above equation should not be used for displacements of less than 25 mm. or greater than
118
approximately 200 mm. Typically this value can be assumed to be in between 50 mm to 100 mm.
However, the amount of deformation which is tolerable will depend on the nature of the wall and what it
supports, as well as what is in front of the wall. In addition to whether or not the wall can tolerate lateral
deformation, it is recommended that this simplified approach not be used for walls which have a complex
geometry, such as stacked walls, MSE ( Mechanically Stabilized Earth) walls with trapezoidal sections, or
back-to-back walls supporting narrow ramps, for walls which are very tall (over 50.0 ft.), nor for walls
where the peak ground acceleration A is 0.3g or higher. In such case, a specialist should be retained to
evaluate the anticipated deformation response of the structure, as potentially unacceptable permanent
lateral and vertical wall deformations could occur even if design criteria based on this pseudo static
approach are met.
119
120
Appendix F
(Clause 15.4)
Simplified Procedure for Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential
Due to the difficulties in obtaining and testing undisturbed representative samples from most
potentially liquefiable sites, in-situ testing is the approach preferred by most engineers for
evaluating the liquefaction potential of a soil deposit. Liquefaction potential assessment
procedures involving both the SPT and CPT are widely used in practice. The most common
procedure used in engineering practice for the assessment of liquefaction potential of sands and
silts is the Simplified Procedure1 2. The procedure may be used with either SPT blow count, CPT
tip resistance or shear wave velocity measured within the deposit as discussed below:
Step 1: The subsurface data used to assess liquefaction susceptibility should include the
location of the water table, either SPT blow count (N) or tip resistance of a standard CPT cone
qc or the shear wave velocity(Vs) , mean grain size D50 , unit weight, and fines content of the
Step 3: The following equation can be used to evaluate the stress reduction factor rd :
Step 4: Calculate the critical stress ratio induced by the design earthquake, CSR eq , as;
and
are the total and effective vertical stresses, respectively, at depth z, amax is
Step 5: Correct CSReq for earthquake magnitude (Mw), stress level and for initial static shear
using correction factors km, k and k, respectively, according to:
The correction factors are estimated using Figures F-1, F-2 and F-3 (in combination with figure
F-4), respectively.
For assessing liquefaction susceptibility using the SPT go to Step 6a, for the CPT go to Step 6b,
Youd, T.L., Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Chtristian, J.T., Dobry, R., Finn, W.D.L.,
Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J.P., Liao, S.S.C., Marcuson III, W.F., Martin, G.R.,
Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R.B., Stokoe II, K.H. 2001. Liquefaction
resistance of soils: Summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on
evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. J. of Geotech. and Geoenv. Engrg., ASCE. 127(10): 817833.
121
Step 6a: Evaluate the standardized SPT blow count ( N 60 ) which is the standard penetration test
blow count for a hammer with an efficiency of 60 percent. Specifications of the standardized
equipment corresponding to an efficiency of 60 percent are given in Table F-1. If nonstandard
equipment is used, N 60 , is obtained from the equation:
N60 N.C60
where
C60
various investigators for some common non-standard SPT configurations are provided in Table
F-2. For SPT conducted as per IS: 2131-1981, the energy delivered to the drill rod is 60 percent
and hence C60 = 1 is assumed.
Calculate the normalized standardized SPT blow count,
N1 60 C N N 60
Stress normalization factor CN is calculated from following expression:
C N Pa / v
1/ 2
Subjected to C N
2,
(CRR) or the resistance of a soil layer against liquefaction is estimated from Figure F-5
depending on the N1 60 value representative of the deposit.
Step 6b:
Calculate normalized cone tip resistance,
where
qc
v n qc Pa
is the measured cone tip resistance corrected for thin layers, exponent n has a value
of 0.5 for sand and 1 for clay, and Kc is the correction factor for grain characteristics estimated as
follows.
Ic
I c , is given by
where Q
qc v Pa Pa
v n ,
Although soils with Ic >2.6 are deemed non-liquefiable, such deposits may soften and deform
during earthquakes. General guidance is not available to deal with such possibilities. Softening
122
and deformability of deposits with Ic >2.6 should thus be treated on a material specific basis.
Step 6c:
Calculate normalized shear wave velocity,
Vs1 ,
Vs1 Vs Pa v
0.25
FS liq , as:
Standard Specification
Standard split-spoon sampler with: (a) Outside
diameter, O.D. = 51 mm, and Inside Diameter, I.D.
= 35 mm
(constant i.e., no room for liners in the barrel)
Drill Rods
Hammer
Rope
Borehole
Drill Bit
123
Table F-2: Correction Factors for Non-Standard SPT Procedures and Equipment.
Correction for
Correction Factor
hammer;
Hammer
Weight
or
C HW
H.W
63.5 762
Nonstandard
Sampler
Setup
(standard samples with room for
liners, but liners are used)
Short Rod Length
124
Figure F-3: Correction for initial static shear (Note: Initial static shear for an
embankment may be estimated from Figure F-4)
125
126
Figure F-5: Relationship between CRR and (N1)60 for sand for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
Figure F-6: Relationship between CRR and (qc1N)cs for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
127
Figure F-7: Relationship between CRR and Vs1 for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
128
Appendix - G
System property modification factors
(Clause 19.3 )
G-1 General
Kd,max = Kd x max,Kd
Qd,max = Qd x max,Qd
129
Kd
Qd
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.0
3.0
3.0
Low-Damping
natural rubber
Lead
Neoprene
Minimum Temp
Qd
for design
0
Kd
HDRB1
HDRB2
LDRB2
HDRB1
HDRB2
LDRB2
21
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.1
-10
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
-30
2.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.4
1.3
max,scrag
Qd
LDRB
1.0
Kd
HDRB
HDRB with
eff 0.15
1.2
1.5
LDRB
1.0
130
HDRB with
eff 0.15
1.2
HDRB
with
eff 0.15
1.8
Lubricated
PTFE
PTFE
Bimetallic Interfaces
Sealed
Unsealed
Sealed
Unsealed
Sealed
Normal
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.0
2.2
Severe
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.8
2.2
2.5
Condition
Unsealed
Environment
Lubricated
PTFE
PTFE
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
3.0
1.1
Not Allowed
Not Allowed
Not
Allowed
Bimetallic
Interfaces
Cumulative Travel
Unlubricated
Lubricated
PTFE*
PTFE
< 2010
1.1
1.1
To be established by test
> 2010
1.1
3.0
To be established by test
(M)
Bimetallic Interfaces
1005
131
* Test data based on 1/8-inch sheet, recessed by 1/16 inch and bonded.
Minimum Temp
for design
Unlubricated
Lubricated
PTFE
PTFE
21
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.3
-10
1.2
1.5
-30
1.5
3.0
132
Bimetallic Interfaces
To be established by
test
Appendix - H
H.0 - Post Earthquake Operations and Inspections
The response of railway tracks and bridges to an earthquake would depend on distance from
epicenter and nature of attenuation. The post earthquake train operations in the region shall be
cautiously started. The following guidelines have been based on AREMA Railway Engineering
Manual.
H.1 - Operations
After an earthquake is reported, the train dispatcher shall notify all the trains and engines within
150 km radius of the reporting area to run at restricted speed until magnitude and epicenter have
been determined by proper authority. After determination of the magnitude and epicenter,
response levels given in Table H-1 and H-2 will govern the operations.
Response
Level
Specified
Radius
0- 4.9
5.0 5.9
II
80 km
III
160 km
II
240 km
III
II
6.0 6.9
7.0 or above
Details
Resume maximum operation speed. The need for the continuation of inspections
will be determined by proper authority responsible for maintenance of P.Way.
II
All trains and engines will run at restricted speed within a specified radius of the
epicenter until inspections have been made and appropriate speeds established by
proper authority.
III
All trains and engines within the specified radius of the epicenter must stop and
may not proceed until proper inspections have been performed and appropriate
speed restrictions established by proper authority. For earthquakes of Richter
magnitude 7.0 or above, operations shall be directed by proper authority, but the
radii shall not be less than that specified for earthquakes between 6.0 and 6.99.
133
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Line, surface and cross level irregularities caused by embankment slides or liquefaction
Track buckling or pull apart due to soil movement
Offset across fault rupture
Disturbed ballast
Cracks or slope failures in embankments
Slides and/or potential slides in cuts, including loose rocks that could fall in an aftershock
Scour due to tsunami in coastal area
Potential for scour or ponding against embankment due to changes in water course
H.2.2 - Bridges
Following an earthquake, inspectors may need to travel by rail between bridges. River bed may
get flooded, hence, to quickly reach the bearings; alternate access routes shall be made. In steel
bridges following shall be observed carefully:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Displacement at bearings
Displaced substructure elements
Cracks in superstructure
Cracks in substructure
Inspection team shall also look for items which may fall on track. At an overpass, attention shall
be given to reduced span at bearings, damages to column and restrainer system. If there are
adjacent buildings to railway track, then such buildings shall also be inspected to ensure if they
can withstand aftershocks. Inspection team shall also look for damages to the powerlines
passing over the track.
134
135
Solution:
The lateral loads in transverse and longitudinal directions are calculated. Since the spans of the bridge are
simply supported, one pier can be considered as single degree of freedom system with half weight of
spans on either side. Hence, seismic coefficient method can be used for seismic load calculation. Seismic
loads will be obtained from IITK-RDSO Guidelines and also from provisions of existing Bridge Rules
and IRS Concrete Code. A comparison of loads obtained from IITK-RDSO Guidelines and existing
Bridge Rules will be presented.
Pier Height = 12 m
G.L.
136
= Total DL of structure + No LL
(Section 8.4)
DL of girder + DL of track
= 4114kN
Seismic weight in transverse direction
= Total DL of structure +50 % LL
Total DL of superstructure
(Section 8.4)
Total DL of structure
T = 2
(Section 9.1.1)
(Section 9.1.1)
FH
3 EI
137
3
p
T = 2
= 2
Horizontal
elastic
coefficient, Ah
= 0.785 m4
seismic
acceleration
(Section 9.1.1.1)
(Section 9.1)
Where,
Z = 0.36
1.4.1. Longitudinal Direction
I = 1.5
Damping = 5%
FH
(Section 8.6.1)
Longitudinal direction :
3
p
3 EI
Transverse direction:
= 0.15 m
Time period T 2
= 2
(Table 4 )
(zone V; Table 3 )
0.15 = 0. 77 sec
1.5.2. Elastic and Design Horizontal Seismic
Load
(Section 9.2.1)
FH
In longitudinal direction
3
p
3 EI
In transverse direction
Fe = 0. 24 x 9014 = 2163 KN
138
H/r = 4,
Hence ,
Ce = 0.73
R = 2.5
in longitudinal direction
= 0.73 x 0.35 x 123
= 32 kN
F = C e Ah W e
(Section 14.2)
= 21 kN
12
F (Resultant Pressure)
4m
R = 2.5
(Table 6 of Section 9.3)
2m
= 32 / 2.5 = 13 kN
= 21 / 2.5 = 9 KN
139
in transverse
Av
vertical
Seismic
2 Z
I Sa
g
3 2
Acceleration
(Section 8.9)
5143 kN
1287 kN
8818kN
1042 kN
869 kN
713 kN
Now,
Z = 0.36
I = 1.5
= 0.45
Since the vertical seismic acceleration
coefficient is less than 0.5, no vertical holddown devices will be required.
(Section 13.3.1 )
The design vertical
coefficient will be
seismic
acceleration
= Total DL of structure
= 4111 kN
Seismic weight in transverse direction
= Total DL of structure + 50 % of LL
= (4111 + 0.5 x 9800) = 9011 kN
(Section 8.8)
Where,
=1
140
(Section 16.3)
1731 kN
790 kN
27198kN
1352 kN
617 kN
141
Table 1.1 Comparison of seismic forces from proposed IITK-RDSO guidelines and
existing Bridge Rules + IRS Concrete Code (Hard soil)
Span = 76.2m, Pier Height = 12 m, Pier diameter = 2m, Hard soil
Longitudinal Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines
Time period = 0.77 sec;
Ah/R = 0.35 / 2.5 = 0.14
5143 kN
h = 0.12
5760 kN
8818 kN
869 kN
27198 kN
790 kN
713 kN
617 kN
1.4DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
Transverse Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines
h = 0.12
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
5760 kN
8818 kN
1731 kN
1042kN
1.25DL +0.3(LL+IL)+1.2EQ
27198 kN
1352 kN
1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ
1.4DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
Notes
1) The circular pier will be designed for the worst load case. From the above cases it is seen that as
per the Bridge Rule and IRS Concrete code, the pier will be designed for Axial force of 5760 kN
and horizontal force of 1731 kN. As per the proposed guidelines, the pier will be designed for
Axial force of 5143 kN and lateral force of 1287 kN. Thus, the design forces from the proposed
guidelines are almost same as those from the existing Bridge Rules.
2) The bridge is also subjected to other lateral loads like Racking force and Braking/Tractive forces.
As per Clause 2.9.1 of Bridges Rules, the racking force which acts in the transverse direction
will be 448 kN and As per Appendix XIII of existing Bridge Rules the Tractive / Braking force,
which acts in longitudinal direction will be 1325 kN.
142
In the above comparison, hard soil condition is considered. The comparison of seismic forces
from IITK-RDSO Guidelines and existing Bridge Rules will get affected if soil type changes.
The above example is again worked out for the soft soil condition and the comparison of results is
given in Table 1.2. In the existing Bridge Rules, the soil factor for soft soil also depends on the
type of foundation. Here, well foundation is considered.
Table 1.2 Comparison of seismic forces from proposed IITK-RDSO guidelines and
existing Bridge Rules + IRS Concrete Code (Soft soil)
Span = 76.2 m, Pier Height = 12 m, Pier diameter = 2m, Soft soil & Well foundation
Longitudinal Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines
h = 0.18
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
5760 kN
8818 kN
1184 kN
1191 kN
1.25DL +0.3(LL+IL)+1.2EQ
1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ
27198 kN
925 kN
1.4DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
Transverse Direction
Proposed IIT-RDSO Guidelines
h = 0.18
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
5143 kN
8818 kN
2595 kN
1739 kN
1.25DL +0.3(LL+IL)+1.2EQ
22293 kN
2028 kN
1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ
1.4DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
143
Solution:
Here details of the seismic load calculations will not be given. Rather, values of all the major quantities
will be mentioned. Seismic loads are obtained using IITK-RDSO guidelines and existing Bridge Rules.
144
Bridge A
Bridge B
12.2 m
76.2 m
8m
30 m
2m
Hard, = 1.0
1.5
Z = 0.36, 0 = 0.08
2.5
8.80 kN/m
0.4 kN/m
9.2 kN/m
112 kN
628 kN
615 kN
166.2 kN/m
2028 kN
1197 kN
3m
Hard, = 1.0
1.5
Z = 0.36, 0 = 0.08
2.5
43.7 kN/m
0.4 kN/m
44.1 kN/m
3360 kN
5301 kN
7602 kN
128.6 kN/m
9800 kN
2450kN
615 kN
1629 kN
0.785 m4
7602 kN
12502 kN
3.976 m4
0.589 m4
2.982 m4
IITK-RDSO
Guidelines
Fundamental period
Longitudinal
Transverse
existing Bridge
Rules
0.16 sec
0.26 sec
2.5
2.5
Longitudinal
Transverse
0.68/2.5 = 0.27
0.68/2.5 = 0.27
0.12
0.12
415 kN
1100 kN
166 kN
440 kN
74 kN
195 kN
36 kN
36 kN
14 kN
14 kN
0.45
145
0.45/2.5 = 0.18
IITK-RDSO
Guidelines
existing Bridge
Rules
1.83 sec
2.35 sec
0.55
0.43
0.15
0.12
0.15/2.5 = 0.06
0.12/2.5 = 0.048
0.12
0.12
1121 kN
1438 kN
488 kN
575 kN
912kN
1500 kN
75 kN
58 kN
30 kN
23 kN
0.45
0.18
146
Table 2.4 Comparison of seismic forces for Bridge A from proposed IITK-RDSO guidelines and
existing Bridge Rules + IRS Concrete Code (Hard Soil)
Span = 12.2 m, Pier Height = 8 m, Pier diameter = 2m, Hard soil
Longitudinal Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines
1736 kN
251 kN
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
861 kN
221 kN
h = 0.12
665 kN
92 kN
118 kN
1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ
1.25DL +0.3(LL+IL)+1.2EQ
1.4 DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
Transverse Direction
769 kN
6505 kN
769 kN
1736kN
552 kN
313 kN
5284 kN
244 kN
147
Table 2.5 Comparison of seismic forces for Bridge B from proposed IITK-RDSO guidelines and
existing Bridge Rules + IRS Concrete Code (Hard Soil)
Span = 76.2 m, Pier Height = 30 m, Pier diameter = 3 m, Hard soil
Longitudinal Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines
10642 kN
13177 kN
673 kN
1460 kN
580 kN
32080 kN
1140 kN
h = 0.12
10642kN
13177 kN
2400 kN
723 kN
32080 kN
1875 kN
Notes
1. The circular pier will be designed for the worst load case. From the above cases it is seen that as per
the Bridge Rule and IRS Concrete code, the pier will be designed for axial force of 10642 kN and
horizontal force of 2400 kN. As per the proposed guidelines, the pier will be designed for Axial force of
9502 kN and lateral force of 863 kN. Thus, the design lateral forces from the proposed guidelines is
almost one-third than that from the existing Bridge Rules.
2. The bridge is also subjected to other lateral loads like Racking force and Braking /Tractive forces. As
per Clause 2.9.1 the racking force which acts in transverse direction will be 448 kN and As per
Appendix XIII of existing Bridge Rules the Tractive / Braking force, which acts in longitudinal direction
will be 1325 kN.
148
Solution:
3.1. Preliminary Data
Section Property of Superstructure
Outside height (t3) = 2.05 m
0.62m
0.045m
2.05 m
0.045 m
1.98 m
149
T = 2
(Section 9.1.1)
Total DL of superstructure
= 24.4 x 24.4 = 594 kN
DL of one pier = D 2 / 4 H p
Where,
= x 22 /4 x 12 x 25 = 942 kN
H p = 12 m
I g = /64 D4 = 0.785 m4
= Total DL of superstructure + No LL
(Section 9.1.1.1)
(Section 8.4)
= 594 kN
Lateral deflection,
Seismic weight in transverse direction
= Total DL of superstructure +50 % LL
(Section 8.4)
150
= 0.05 m
Time period T 2
Transverse direction:
= 0.44 sec
(Section 9.2.1)
In longitudinal direction
= 0.11 m
Time period T 2
3.6.
= 0.67 sec
seismic
acceleration
Where,
Z = 0.36
I = 1.5
Damping = 5%
(Table 4 )
(Section 8.6.1)
Where,
Longitudinal direction :
=1
151
= 1.5
152
366 kN
71 kN
882 kN
Transverse
Direction
961 kN
286 kN
144 kN
420
1138
1138
1497
1678
1670
0.0
359
350
218
1670
1067
502
1067
1526
107
75
1720
65
1634
67
1634
0.0
206
347
107
619
0.0
492
1364
208
814
635
0.0
1303
735
423
483
Longitudinal
Direction
642
489
0.0
Sign Convention
All values in kN
476
Tension
Compression
483 kN
153
Solution:
4.1 Preliminary Data
Section Property of Superstructure
0.045m
0.045 m
0.62m
1.98 m
154
2.05 m
= DL of superstructure + LL + 25 % additional
DL
213 6 kN / m
24.4 m
(Section 8.8.2)
Where ,
L = Span of superstructure = 24.4 m
E = Modulus of elasticity of pier material
155
0.45
156
Solution:
The lateral loads in transverse and longitudinal directions are calculated. Since the spans of the bridge are
simply supported, one pier can be considered as single degree of freedom system with half weight of
spans on either side. Two bearings will be provided below each super structure girders above a pier
sharing equal loads. Hence, seismic coefficient method can be used for seismic load calculation. Seismic
loads will be obtained from IITK-RDSO Guidelines. A comparison of loads obtained from Base Isolation
bearings and fixed bearings will be presented.
76.2 m
Pier Height = 12 m
G.L.
157
76.2 m
= 3360 kN (W2)
= 754 kN (W1)
DL per meter of superstructure
=
DL of girder + DL of track
Total DL of superstructure
= 44.1 x 76.2 = 3360 kN
DL of one pier = D / 4 H p
= x 22 /4 x 12 x 25 = 942 kN
5.4.1. Properties
A circular bearing of 600mm overall diameter
with central lead core of 100mm diameter is
proposed. It has following properties.
DL of Pier to be lumped
= 80% DL of pier
= 0.8 x 942 = 754 kN
Size of bearing,
B=
600 mm
= 192 mm
158
= 0.82
Damping factor,
= 68.33 kN
5
0.57 (Table 6)
B=
Ah 1.5
Z Sa
I
B
g
2
where,
Z = 0.36
= 820 kN/m
(zone V; Table 3 )
I = 1.5
(Table 4 )
Ah= 0.0946
= 7169 kN/m
Te
Displacement, m PSA
5.4.2. Design
= 140.76 mm
Since m , re-iterate by assuming target
W=
Te = 2.56 sec
8260 / 4
= 2065 kN
Assuming, target displacement,
125 mm
Te = 1.37 sec
= 2.47 sec
4Q( y )
2 keff 2
0.59
B=
W
Te 2
gkeff
= 20.94% and
= 23.27%
159
= 29.28% and
B=
0.51
5.4.3. Check
Shape factor, S1
Ab Apl
Br tr
= 14.326
W2
B =4
S2
Tr
K2
W1
Br 2 m 2 = 570 mm
K1
Br
where,
Compressive modulus,
= 27386130 kN/m2
E A
c r = 11.7 MN/mm
tr
= /64 D4 = x 24 /64
W
sc 6 S1
= 1.517 < 2.5, hence OK.
k vr t r
= 0.785 m4
K1 = 37342 kN/m
Tr
= 1.013
Total shear strain, t sc sh = 2.531 < 5,
hence OK.
Buckling load capacity, Pcr G r S 1 S 2 A r
6
5.5.2. Result
160
Long.
Dir
Trans.
Dir
Description
Long.
Dir
Trans.
Dir
3360
8260
3360
8260
7180
5078
8740
5896
st
st
1.50
2.73
1.39
2.56
0.26
0.27
0.25
0.26
60.2
138.3
42.4
94.6
0.0875g
st
0.1168g
0.0697g
1.0125g
1.0125g
0.8100g
0.8100g
722.5
945
577
743
st
0.1375g
F Ce A We
(Section 14.2)
12 m
F (Resultant Pressure)
4m
2m
Hydrodynamic Pressure Distribution
on the Pier due to stream flow
161
H/r = 4,
Hence ,
Ce = 0.73
(Table 8 of Section 14.2)
= 0.81
= 72.7 kN
945 kN
722.5 kN
8818 kN
845 kN
679 kN
162
Table 5.3 Comparison of seismic forces between fixed base system and proposed base isolated
system as per IITK-RDSO guidelines
Span = 76.2m, Pier Height = 12 m, Pier diameter = 2m, Hard soil
Longitudinal Direction
Fixed base system
8818 kN
713 kN
869 kN
8818 kN
679 kN
722.5 kN
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
1.25DL + 0.3(LL+IL) + 1.2EQ
Transverse Direction
Fixed base system
8818 kN
1042kN
945 kN
1287 kN
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
1.25DL + 0.3(LL+IL) + 1.2EQ
8818 kN
845 kN
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
1.25DL + 0.3(LL+IL) + 1.2EQ
Notes:
1. Site specific study is required for hazard evaluation corresponding to DBE and MCE conditions.
2. LRB design shall be checked for MCE hazard level.
3. Effect of vertical acceleration shall be considered in case of near fault region.
163
Solution:
6.1 Preliminary Data
From Example 1, following data is taken:
Height of pier =12 m , Diameter of pier = 2 m, Seismic weight in longitudinal direction = 4114 kN,
Seismic weight in transverse direction = 9014 kN, Time period in longitudinal direction = 0.77 sec,
Time period in transverse direction = 1.13 sec,
Seismic forces obtained from Example 1 for Load combination 1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ are :
Vertical force = 5760 kN, Lateral forces in longitudinal direction = 1184 kN
Lateral forces in transverse direction = 2595 kN
164
Mp = Pmax x h
0.05
= 9014 kN
= 0.12
P t = 4%
4.2 / 30 = 0.14
M ux
f ck D 3
= 0.12
SAP software.
= 28800 kN-m
Plastic moment, Mp = 1.4 x M u, lim
= 1.4 x 28800
= 40320 kN-m
165