Section 4: Structural Analysis and Evaluation

SECTION 4: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4-i
4
4.1 SCOPE..................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.3 NOTATION ............................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.4 ACCEPTABLE METHODS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ........................................ 4-3
4.4.1 General ............................................................................................................................ 4-3
4.4.2 Amplification of Live Load Effects ................................................................................ 4-3
4.6.1.3 Structure Skewed in Plan ....................................................................................... 4-5
4.6.2 Approximate Methods of Analysis ................................................................................ 4-6
4.6.2.2 Beam-Slab Bridges and Box-Beam Bridges......................................................... 4-7
4.6.2.2.1 Application................................................................................................... 4-7
4.6.2.2.2 Slab-on-Beam and Box-Beam Bridges ............................................................. 4-13
4.6.2.2.2a Shear and Reaction.................................................................................... 4-14
4.6.2.2.2b Bending Moment....................................................................................... 4-15
4.6.2.2.3 Open Steel Boxes (c from 4.6.2.2-1)........................................................... 4-17
4.6.2.2.4 Wood Decks on Wood or Steel Beams....................................................... 4-17
4.6.2.2.6 Beams with Corrugated Steel Decks........................................................... 4-20
4.6.2.2.7 Special Loads with other Traffic................................................................ 4-21
4.6.2.2.8 Curved Steel Bridges .................................................................................. 4-21
A4 DECK SLAB DESIGN TABLE............................................................................................ 4-24
B4 LEVER RULE FORMULA................................................................................................... 4-25
C4 ALTERNATE MOMENT DISTRIBUTION FACTOR APPROACH.................................. 4-27

SECTION 4 (US)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

4.1 SCOPE

C4.1

4.2 DEFINITIONS

Adjusted equal distribution an approximate distribution factor method that is based upon a uniform distribution
(equal to all girders) with increases to better approximate rigorous analysis.

Calibrated lever rule an adjustment to the results of a lever rule distribution factor analysis to better approximate
rigorous analysis.

Lever rule An approximate distribution factor method that assumes no transverse deck moment continuity at interior
beams, rendering the transverse deck cross section statically determinate. The method uses direct equilibrium to
determine the load distribution to a beam of interest. The centerline of box girders may be assumed to be the center of
the girder and used for lever rule computations.

Lever rule formulae formulae that facilitate the use of the lever rule. Provided in Appendix B, these formulae are
functionally equivalent to the lever rule.

4.3 NOTATION

a
m
= calibration constant for the lever rule for moment (4.6.2.2.2)
a
v
= calibration constant for the lever rule for shear (4.6.2.2.2)

b
v
= calibration constant for the lever rule for shear (4.6.2.2.2)
b
m
= calibration constant for the lever rule for moment, effective flange width for normal forces acting at
anchorage zones (in.) (4.6.2.6.2) (4.6.2.2.2)

COV
S/R
= coefficient of variation of ratio of the samples of simplified (specification) to rigorous methods for live
load distribution factor computation (C4.4.2)

F
l
= optional modification factor based on span length in 4.6.2.2.2b. (C4.6.2.2.2)
F
st
= modification factor for structure type in Table 4.6.2.2.2b-3. (4.6.2.2.2)

g
m
= multiple lane live load distribution factor (4.6.2.2.7)

g
lever rule
= distribution factor computed with the lever rule. (4.6.2.2.2) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6)

mg = distribution factor, adjusted for the variability of the simplified method with an analysis factor, including
the effects of multiple presence. (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.2) (4.6.2.2.3) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6)
4-1
4-2 AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

mg
m
= distribution factor, adjusted for the variability of the simplified method with an analysis factor, including
the effects of multiple presence, moment. (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.2) (4.6.2.2.3) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6)
mg
v
= distribution factor, adjusted for the variability of the simplified method with an analysis factor, including
the effects of multiple presence, shear. (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.2) (4.6.2.2.3) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6)

N
g
= number of girders, beams, or stringers in the bridge cross section. (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.2) (4.6.2.2.3)
N
L
= maximum number of design lanes considered in an analysis (4.6.2.2.2, 4.6.2.2.3)
N
lanes
= number of lanes considered in an analysis, e.g., used for lever rule (4.6.2.2.2, 4.6.2.2.3)

S = girder spacing; if splayed use the largest spacing within the span, ft. If skewed, S is measured
perpendicular to the girder or support elements. (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.3) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6) (Appendix
B4)

W
c
= clear roadway width, ft. (4.6.2.2.2)

z
a
= number of standard deviations that the simplified distribution method approach is adjusted above the
mean rigorous analysis results; set to 0.5 (a conservative adjustment) (C4.4.2)

s
= live load distribution simplification factor from Table 4.6.2.2.1-2. (4.4.2) (4.6.2.2.1) (4.6.2.2.2)
(4.6.2.2.3) (4.6.2.2.4) (4.6.2.2.6)

S/R
= standard deviation of the samples of simplified (specification) to rigorous methods for live load
distribution factor computation (C4.4.2)

SECTION 4 (US): STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 4-3

4.4 ACCEPTABLE METHODS OF STRUCTURAL
ANALYSIS

4.4.1 General

C4.4

4.4.2 Amplification of Live Load Effects C4.4.2

Load effects based upon simplified methods of
Articles 4.6.2.2 shall be amplified by the live load
distribution simplification factors,
s
. Bridges rigorously
analyzed with methods of Article 4.4.1 may use a live
load analysis factor of 1.0. Bridges analyzed using
articles 4.6.2.3, 4.6.2.4, 4.6.2.5, 4.6.2.6, 4.6.2.7, and
4.6.3 may use an distribution simplification factor of
1.0. Rigorous analysis results shall not be less than 70
percent of those determined by the simplified methods
of 4.6.2.2, 4.6.2.3, 4.6.2.4, 4.6.2.5, 4.6.2.6, 4.6.2.7, and
4.6.2.3 without consent of the owner.
When a rigorous analysis is performed, the
distribution factors shall be calculated by the simplified
method outlined in the specification as well. The
codified method is expected to provide a reasonable
estimate of rigorous results. Therefore, when results
vary significantly the owner shall be advised. This
article is to encourage rigorous analysis by providing the
owner an approach to help ensure that results from
advanced methods will be reasonable. Distribution
factors below 70 percent of the simplified methods are
possible, especially in the cases of significant skew and
unusual geometries. The lower bound provides owners
impetus to encourage advanced methods with
underlying warning that requires additional review. The
analysis factors in Article 4.6.2.2.1 indicate the
situations where larger variability between rigorous and
simple methods is expected. Higher factors indicate
higher variability with respect to rigorous analyses. All
rigorous analysis should be compared with independent
hand checks as standard practice.
The procedure used to compute the analysis factor
is outlined below.

( )
/ /
1
s S R a S R
z = +

where:

s
is the distribution simplification factor

S/R
is the mean of the ratio of the simple to rigorous for
each sample
i
i
S
R

S/R
is the standard deviation of the ratio of the simple to
rigorous for each sample

z
a
is the number of standard deviations that the method
is above the mean of the rigorous results

Solve for
s
to give


( )
( )
/
/
/ /
1 1
a S R
s a S
S R S R
z
z COV

+
= = +

R

where COV
S/R
is the coefficient of variation.

For one-half standard deviation, i.e., z
a
= 0.5,
substitution gives
( )
( )
/
/
/ /
1 0.5 1
0.5
S R
s S R
S R S R
COV

+
= = +

For details, see Puckett, et al. (2006)

.
4.6.1.3 Structure Skewed in Plan

When the line supports are skewed and the
difference between skew angles of two adjacent lines of
supports does not exceed 30 degrees, the effect of skew
may be ignored.
Shear in the exterior beam at the obtuse corner of
the bridge shall be adjusted when the line of support is
skewed more than 30 degrees. The value of the
adjustment factor shall be obtained from Table 1 and
applied to the distribution factors specified in 4.6.2.2. In
determining the end shear in multibeam bridges, the
skew correction at the obtuse corner shall be applied to
all beams. The adjustment for shear shall be applied for
reactions. A rigorous analysis shall be performed for
skews exceeding 60 degrees.
The maximum bending moment in the beams of a
skewed bridge is less than in a similar straight bridge. A
reduction for such may be ignored.

C4.6.1.3

The effect of skew is relatively small when the
skew angle is less than 30 degrees. However, the
adjustments provided for small skew may be used. The
moment reduction for skew may be conservatively
ignored in design.
The skew adjustment for shear also applies to
reactions at interior and exterior supports. NCHRP 20-7
Report 107 (Modjeski and Masters, 2002) outlines a
linear interpolation in the transverse and longitudinal
direction for the skew adjustment factor. This
refinement may be used.
The skew adjustment factor shall be applied to
shears and reactions near all supports, both interior and
exterior.

Table 4.6.1.3-1 Adjustment Factors for Load Distribution Factors for Support Shear of the Obtuse Corner.
Type of Superstructure
Applicable Cross-Section
from Table 4.6.2.2.1-1 Correction Factor
Range of
Applicability
Concrete Deck, Filled Grid,
Partially Filled Grid, or Unfilled
Grid Deck Composite with
Reinforced Concrete Slab on Steel
or Concrete Beams; Concrete T-
Beams, T- and Double T-Section
a, e and also i, j
if sufficiently connected to
act as a unit
1.0 0.20tan + 0 60
3.5 16.0
20 240
4
b
S
L
N

Precast Concrete I, Bulb Tee
Beams, and Precast channel sections
with Shear Keys
h, k
1.0 0.09tan +

0 60
3.5 16.0
20 240
4
b
S
L
N

Cast-in-Place Concrete Multicell
Box
d
12.0
1.0 0.25 tan
70
L
d

+ +

0 60
6.0 13.0
20 240
35 110
3
c
S
L
d
N
<
<

Concrete Deck on Spread Concrete
Box Beams
b, c
12.0
1.0 tan
6
Ld
S
+
0 60
6.0 11.5
20 140
18 65
3
b
S
L
d
N
<

Concrete Box Beams Used in
Multibeam Decks
f, g
12.0
1.0 tan
90
L
d
+
0 60
20 120
17 60
35 60
5 20
b
L
d
b
N
<

4.6.2 Approximate Methods of Analysis

C4.6.2

Articles 4.6.2 are largely based upon the research
work of NCHRP 12-26 and 12-62 (Zokaie et al 1991,
Puckett et al 2006).

.


4.6.2.2 Beam-Slab Bridges and Box-Beam
Bridges

4.6.2.2.1 Application

The provisions of this Article may be applied to
straight girder bridges and horizontally curved concrete
bridges, as well as horizontally curved steel girder
bridges complying with the provisions of Article
4.6.1.2.4. The provisions of this Article may also be
used to determine a starting point for some methods of
analysis to determine force effects in curved girders of
any degree of curvature in plan.

Except as specified in Article 4.6.2.2.7, the
provisions of this article shall be taken to apply to
bridges being analyzed for:

A single lane of loading, or
Multiple lanes of live load yielding
approximately the same force effect per lane.
If one lane is loaded with a special vehicle or
evaluation permit vehicle, the design force effect per
girder resulting from the mixed traffic may be
determined as specified in Article 4.6.2.2.7.

C4.6.2.2.1

The V-load method is one example of a method of
curved bridge analysis which starts with straight girder
distribution factors (United States Steel 1984).

For two- and three-girder bridges, the live load on
each beam shall be the reaction of the loaded lanes
based on the lever rule unless specified otherwise herein.
The lever rule involves summing moments about
one support to find the reaction at another support by
assuming that the supported component is hinged at
interior supports.

When using the lever rule on a three-girder bridge,
the notional model should be taken as shown in Figure
C1. Moments should be taken about the assumed, or
notional, hinge in the deck over the middle girder to find
the reaction on the exterior girder.

Figure C4.6.2.2.1-1 Notional Model for Applying Lever
Rule to Three-Girder Bridges.

The provisions of this article shall be taken to apply
to bridges being analyzed for single and multiple lanes
of live load, except as specified in Article 4.6.2.2.7.
Bridges not meeting the requirements of this article shall
be analyzed as specified in Article 4.4.1.

As specified in Article 3.6.1.1.2, multiple presence
factors shall be independently applied based upon the
number of loaded lanes or as specified herein.
The multiple presence and analysis simplification
factors are applied after the computation of the
distribution factors. This independence keeps the three

The distribution of live load, specified in Article
4.6.2.2.2, may be used for girders, beams, and stringers
that meet the following conditions and any other
conditions identified in tables of distribution factors as
specified herein:

Width of deck is constant,
Beams are parallel and have approximately the
same stiffness and spacing,
Unless otherwise specified, the number of
beams is not less than four,
Unless otherwise specified, the position of the
outside wheel, absolute value of d
e
, does not
exceed the girder spacing S,
Curvature in plan is less than the limit specified
in Article 4.6.1.2.4, or where distribution
factors are required in order to implement an
acceptable approximate or refined analysis
method satisfying the requirements of Article
4.4 for bridges of any degree of curvature in
plan;
Cross-section is consistent with one of the
cross-sections shown in Table 1.

aspects of a simplified live load distribution estimate
distinct. The procedure is outlined below:

Article 4.6.2.2 is used to estimate the live load
effect calibrated near the mean of rigorous
analyses. For example, see Figure C4.6.2.2.1-1
from Puckett et al (2006) in which
approximately 1500 bridges were rigorously
analyzed to provide the basis for the simplified
method outlined herein.
Some simplified approaches better approximate
rigorous analysis than others for various bridge
types and loading conditions. For cases where
the simplified method predicts the rigorous
analysis results well, the distribution
simplification factor is near unity. As an
example, the coefficient of variation is 13.4%
for the ratio of the simple method
(specification) divided by the distribution factor
based upon rigorous analysis for the data
illustrated in Figure C4.6.2.2.1-1. For this case,
the analysis factor is 1.04 and shifts this ratio
approximately one-half standard deviation to
the conservative side. In cases exhibiting more
variability, the distribution simplification factor
is larger, e.g. cross section types d, f, and g in
Table 4.6.2.2.1-2 (two or more loaded lanes).
Numerous examples are given in Puckett et al
(2006).
Finally, the multiple presence factors are
applied.
Clearly, all three of these factors could be combined
into one coefficient for further computational
simplification. However, with this approach the
Designer is apprised of the effect of variability of the
simple procedure (distribution simplification factor) and
the effect of multiple presence. In previous
specifications, these effects were masked by embedding
the factors into the distribution factor equations.


Figure C4.6.2.2.1-1 Example Specification-based Distribution vs. Rigorous Analysis for Moment

Where moderate deviations from a constant deck
width or parallel beams exist, the equations in the tables
of distribution factors may be used in conjunction with a
suitable value for beam spacing. The distribution factor
may either be varied at selected locations along the span
or else a single distribution factor may be used.
Most of the equations for distribution factors were
derived for constant deck width and parallel beams. Past
designs with moderate exceptions to these two
assumptions have performed well when the S/D
distribution factors were used. While the distribution
factors specified herein are more representative of actual
bridge behavior, common sense indicates that some
exceptions are still possible, especially if the parameter
S is chosen with prudence.
Cast-in-place multicell concrete box girder bridge
types may be designed as whole-width structures. Such
cross-sections shall be designed for the live load
distribution factors in Articles 4.6.2.2.2 for interior
girders, multiplied by the number of girders, i.e., webs.
Whole-width design is appropriate for torsionally-
stiff cross-sections where load-sharing between girders
is extremely high and torsional loads are hard to
estimate. Prestressing force should be evenly distributed
between girders. Cell width-to-height ratios should be
approximately 2:1.
If one lane is loaded with heavy vehicles (for
example, a special vehicle or evaluation permit vehicle)
with routine traffic in adjacent lanes, the design force
effect per girder may be determined as specified in
Article 4.6.2.2.7. In such cases, the multiple presence
factor is prescribed by the owner.

The bridge types indicated in tables in Article
4.6.2.2.2, with reference to Table 1, may be taken as
representative of the type of bridge to which each
approximate method applies.
Except as permitted by Article 2.5.2.7.1, regardless
of the method of analysis used, i.e., approximate or
refined, exterior girders of multibeam bridges shall not
be designed for a total load effect less than an interior
beam.


Table 4.6.2.2.1-1 Common Deck Superstructures Covered in Articles 4.6.2.2.2 through 4.6.2.2.6.

SUPPORTING COMPONENTS TYPE OF DECK TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION

Steel Beam

Cast-in-place concrete slab,
precast concrete slab, steel
grid, glued/spiked panels,
stressed wood

Closed Steel or Precast Concrete
Boxes

Cast-in-place concrete slab

Open Steel or Precast Concrete
Boxes

Cast-in-place concrete slab,
precast concrete deck slab

Box

Monolithic concrete

Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee Beam

Monolithic concrete


Precast Solid, Voided or Cellular
Concrete Boxes with Shear Keys

Cast-in-place structural
concrete overlay

Precast Solid, Voided, or Cellular
Concrete Box with Shear Keys and
with or without Transverse Post-
Tensioning

Integral concrete

Precast Concrete Channel Sections
with Shear Keys

Cast-in-place structural
concrete overlay

Precast Concrete Double Tee
Section with Shear Keys and with
or without Transverse Post-
Tensioning

Integral concrete

Precast Concrete Tee Section with
Shear Keys and with or without
Transverse Post-Tensioning

Integral concrete

Precast Concrete I or Bulb-Tee
Sections

Cast-in-place concrete,
precast concrete

Wood Beams

Cast-in-place concrete or
plank, glued/spiked panels
or stressed wood


Live load effects determined with the simplified
methods of Article 4.6.2.2.2 shall be increased by the
live load distribution simplification factor as specified in
Table 2,

s simplified
mg mg = (4.6.2.2.1-1)

where:

s
= live load distribution simplification factor of Table
4.6.2.2.1-2.

m = multiple presence factor as specified in Article
3.6.1.1.2

g
simplified
= distribution factor per 4.6.2.2.2.

mg = distribution factor considering the analysis factor,
see Table 4.6.2.2.1-2, and effect of multiple
presence.


Table 4.6.2.2.1-2. Distribution Simplification Factors

One-lane
Two or
more lanes One-lane
Two or
more lanes
Shear 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.04
Moment 1.04 1.07 1.11 1.04
Shear 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.04
Shear 1.03 1.03 1.05 1.08
Moment 1.02 1.05 1.13 1.05
Shear 1.05 1.02 1.04 1.03
Moment 1.17 1.04 1.18 1.06
Shear 1.02 1.03 1.03 1.03
Moment 1.14 1.04 1.08 1.07
Shear 1.03 1.06 1.15 1.10
Shear 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Moment 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Precast Concrete I-Beam,Precast
Concrete Bulb-Tee Beam,
Precast Concrete Tee Section
with Shear Keys and with or
without Transverse Post-
Tensioning, Precast Concrete
Double Tee with Shear Keys
with or without Post-Tensioning,
Precast Concrete Channel with
Shear Keys
1.04 1.08 1.10 1.04
Interior
Steel I-Beam a
h, k, i, j
Structure Type
AASHTO
LRFD Cross
Section
Type Action
Exterior
Moment
Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee
Beam
e
Box
d
1.21
Precast Concrete Spread Box
Beam
b
Adjacent Box Beam with Cast-
in-Place Concrete Overlay,
Adjacent Box Beam with
Integral Concrete
f, g
1.05
Open Steel Box Beam c
Moment 1.15 1.10

C4.6.2.2.2

Article 4.6.2.2.2 is summarized below. See Puckett
et al (2005 a,b) , Huo et al (2003), and Patrick et al
(2005) for details.

One loaded lane for moment, and for one and
multiple loaded lanes for shear:

mg =
s
m[a(g
lever rule
) + b]

4.6.2.2.2 Slab-on-Beam and Box-Beam Bridges

The live load distribution for the bridge cross
sections a to h and k from Table 4.6.2.2.1-1 may be
determined as specified herein. Cross section and deck
types include: concrete deck, filled grid, partially filled
grid or unfilled grid deck composite with reinforced
concrete on steel or concrete beams, concrete T-beams,
double T-sections and spread boxes. Steel open sections
c may be determined per Article 4.6.2.2.3.

where a and b are constants, m is the multiple presence
factor, and
s
is the live load distribution simplification factor.

The lower bound is number of lanes divided by number

of girders.

A modified uniform distribution approach is used for
multiple loaded lanes for moment:

( )
10
C
s m m
g
W
mg m a b F
N

= +

L

In Appendix 4B, lever rule formulae are provided
for simplification and are based on a 6-ft gage and 4-ft
vehicle spacing. The designer could compute the lever
rule distribution factors in the usual manner and then
adjust the result by the calibration constants a and b as
outlined. For adjacent or spread box beams, the center
of the beam may used as the girder location for lever
rule computations.

The equation for multiple loaded lanes for moment
is based upon Henrys method (Huo et al, 2003), which
starts with a uniform distribution (same for all girders,
see above), using a 10-ft design lane, and then adjusts
the result upward, typically 10 to 15 percent. The a
m
and b
m
are recalibrations that vary from Huos original
work. Note that the multiple presence factor for
multiple lanes loaded for moment is equal to 0.85 or
higher. The four or more lanes loaded case (with m =
0.65) will not control.

The 2006 Specifications are provided in Appendix
D4 as an alternative method.

4.6.2.2.2a Shear and Reaction

The live load distributions for shear and reactions
are determined using distribution factor based upon the
lever rule adjusted per Equation 1 with coefficients from
Table 1. Cross section types i, j may also be
determined using Equation 1 if sufficiently connected to
ensure continuity of transverse deck bending moments.

( )
lanes
v s v lever rule v
g
N
mg m a g b m
N

= +

where a
m
, b
m
and F
L
are constants, W
c
is the curb-to-curb
distance, ft. and N
g
is the number of girders. The F
L
term
is excluded from the specification equation for
simplicity. Its use is optional. For span lengths less than
or equal to 100 ft, F
L
is 1.0. For span lengths greater
than 100 ft, F
L
is 0.95. Average span lengths may be
used for negative moment regions.

(4.6.2.2.2a-1)

where:

mg = distribution factor including multiple presence


g
lever rule
= distribution factor based upon the lever rule

a
v
, b
v
= calibration constants for shear and reactions
defined in Table 1

m = multiple presence factor as specified in Article
3.6.1.1.2

s
= live load distribution simplification factor of Table
4.6.2.2.1-2.

N
lanes
= number of design lanes considered in the lever
rule analysis.

N
g
= number of girders in the cross section

For the concrete beams, other than box beams used
in multibeam decks with shear keys: Deep, rigid end
diaphragms shall be provided to ensure proper load
distribution; and if the stem spacing of stemmed beams
is less than 4.0 ft. or more than 10.0 ft., a refined
analysis complying with Article 4.4 shall be used.

Table 4.6.2.2.2a-1. Live Load Shear Calibration Factors (per Equation 4.6.2.2.2a-1)

a
v
b
v
a
v
b
v
a
v
b
v
a
v
b
v
Steel I-Beam a 0.70 0.13 0.83 0.11 1.04 -0.12 0.99 0.01
Concrete Bulb-Tee Beam, Precast
Concrete Tee Section with Shear Keys
and with or without Transverse Post-
Tensioning, Precast Concrete Double
Tee with Shear Keys with or without
Post-Tensioning, Precast Concrete
Channel with Shear Keys
h, i, j, k 0.83 0.07 0.92 0.06 1.08 -0.13 0.94 0.03
Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee Beam e 0.79 0.09 0.94 0.05 1.24 -0.22 1.21 -0.17
Cast-in-Place Concrete Multicell Box
Beam
d 0.85 0.00 0.82 0.04 1.19 -0.20 0.71 0.23
Adjacent Box Beam with Cast-in-Place
Concrete Overlay
f
Adjacent Box Beam with Integral
Concrete
g
Precast Concrete Spread Box Beam b 0.61 0.15 0.78 0.12 1.00 -0.11 0.83 0.07
AASHTO
LRFD
Cross
Section
Type Structure Type Lever Rule
Use Article 4.6.2.2.3
0.87 -0.05 1.00 -0.10 1.05 0.03
Two or More Lanes
Shear
Exterior Interior
One Loaded Lane Two or More Lanes One Loaded Lane
0.91 0.03

4.6.2.2.2b Bending Moment

The live load distribution for bending moment is
determined using either lever rule or the adjusted
uniform method per Tables 1 and 2. Cross section types
i and j may also be determined using Tables 1 and 2
if sufficiently connected to ensure continuity of
transverse deck bending moments. W
c
is the travel way
width (curb-to-curb distance), ft.

The procedures of Appendix 4C may be used as an
alternative method for computing distribution factors for
bending moment. This method is provided primarily to
achieve better correlation with rigorous analysis for one
loaded lane.

N
lanes
is the number of lanes consider in the analysis
using the lever rule and N
L
is the maximum number of
design lanes.

Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1. Distribution of Live Loads per Lane for Moment in Longitudinal Beams for Slab-on-Beam and Box-
Beam Bridges (a-h, k, and possibly i, j from Table 4.6.2.2-1)

Number of
Loaded
Lanes
Girder Distribution Factor Multiple Presence Factor
Use integer part of
m shall be greater than or equal to 0.85.
m = 1.2
Interior and
Exterior
One
to determine number of loaded lanes
N
L
for multiple presence.
Interior and
Exterior
Two or
more
Loaded
Lanes
10
c L
m s m m
g g
W N
mg m a b m
N N

= +

12
c
W
( )
lanes
m s m lever rule m
g
N
mg m a g b m
N

= +

Table 4.6.2.2.2b-2. Live Load Moment Calibration Factors (per Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1)
a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
Concrete
g
0.62
Structure Type
AASHTO
LRFD
Cross
Section
Type
0.77 -0.06 1.00 -0.08
-0.20 1.25 0.14 0.68 -0.19 1.39 -0.41 1.33
0.53 -0.08 1.17 -0.24 0.97 -0.12 1.14 0.19
Lever Rule Uniform Lever Rule Uniform
Moment
Exterior Interior
One Loaded Lane Two or More Lanes One Loaded Lane Two or More Lanes
Steel I-Beam a
-0.04 1.14 -0.41 1.40 -0.14 1.11 0.15 0.65
h, i, j, k
-0.10 0.93 -0.82 1.71 -0.07 0.65 -0.09 0.54
0.02 0.26 0.05 0.64 -0.15 0.59
Beam
d
Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee Beam e
Concrete Overlay
f
Use Article 4.6.2.2.3
Precast Concrete Spread Box Beam b 0.00 0.90 -0.17
-0.01 0.53


4.6.2.2.3 Open Steel Boxes

The live load distribution for open steel box beams
is determined per Equation 1. For systems that exceed
the range of applicability, use lever rule or rigorous
analysis. For purposes of this article, the live load
distribution simplification factors per 4.4.2 may be taken
as 1.0.

For multiple steel box girders with a concrete deck,
the live load flexural moment may be determined using
the distribution factor determined by the following
expression:

( )
0.425
0.05 0.85
L
vor m s
g L
N
mg
N N

= + +

(4.6.2.2.3-1)

where:

N
L
= number of design lanes

N
g
= number of girders in the cross section

For:
5 . 1 5 . 0
g
L
N
N

When the spacing of the box girders varies along
the length of the bridge, the value of N
L
shall be
determined, as specified in Article 3.6.1.1.1, using the
width, W, taken at midspan.

For multiple steel box girders with a concrete deck
in bridges satisfying the requirements of Article
6.11.2.3, the live load flexural moment may be
determined using the appropriate distribution factor
specified in Equation 1. Where the spacing of the box
girders varies along the length of the bridge, the
distribution factor may either be varied at selected
locations along the span or else a single distribution
factor may be used in conjunction with a suitable value
of NL. In either case, the value of NL shall be determined
as specified in Article 3.6.1.1.1, using the width, w,
taken at the section under consideration.

The results of analytical and model studies of
simple span multiple box section bridges, reported in
Johnston and Mattock (1967), showed that folded plate
theory could be used to analyze the behavior of bridges
of this type. The folded plate theory was used to obtain
the maximum load per girder, produced by various
critical combinations of loading on 31 bridges having
various spans, numbers of box girders, and numbers of
traffic lanes.
Multiple presence factors, specified in Table
3.6.1.1.2-1, are not applied because the multiple factors
in past editions of the Standard Specifications were
considered in the development of Equation 1 for
multiple steel box girders.
The lateral load distribution obtained for simple
spans is also considered applicable to continuous
structures.
The bridges considered in the development of the
equations had interior end diaphragms only, i.e., no
interior diaphragms within the spans, and no exterior
diaphragms anywhere between boxes. If interior or
exterior diaphragms are provided within the span, the
transverse load distribution characteristics of the bridge
will be improved to some degree. This improvement can
be evaluated, if desired, using the analysis methods
identified in Article 4.4.

4.6.2.2.4 Wood Decks on Wood or Steel Beams
The live load distribution for shear and bending
moment for the cross section types a and l from
Table 4.6.2.2.1-1 may be determined by applying the


distribution factors of Table 1. For purposes of this
article, the live load analysis factors per 4.4.2 may be
taken as 1.0.

The live load flexural moment and shear for interior
beams with transverse wood decks may be determined
by applying the lane fraction specified in Table 1 and
Eq. 1. For exterior beams, use the lever rule and Eq. 1.

When investigation of shear parallel to the grain in
wood components is required, the distributed live load
shear shall be determined by the following expression:
( ) 0.50 0.60
LL LU LD
V = V V +
(4.6.2.2.4-1)

where:

V
LL
= distributed live load vertical shear (kips)

V
LU
= maximum vertical shear at 3d or L/4 due to
undistributed wheel loads (kips)

V
LD
= maximum vertical shear at 3d or L/4 due to
wheel loads distributed laterally a specified
herein (kips)

For undistributed wheel loads, one line of wheels is
assumed to be carried by one bending member.

Table 4.6.2.2.4-1. Distribution of Live Load per Lane for Bending Moment and Shear in Beams with Wood Decks.

Type of
Deck
Application
Cross
Section from
Table
4.6.2.2.1-1
Girder
Location
One Design Lane
Loaded (Use One-
Lane Multiple
Presence Factor)

Two Or More
Design Lanes
Loaded (Use
Two Loaded
Lanes Multiple
Presence Factor,
i.e., m = 1)
Range of
Applicability
Interior mg = m(S/8) mg = m(S/7.5) Plank a, l
Exterior mg = m(g
lever rule
) mg = m(g
lever rule
)
S 5.0 ft
Interior mg = m(S/11) mg = m(S/9.0) Stress
Laminated
a, l
Exterior mg = m(g
lever rule
) mg = m(g
lever rule
)
S 6.0 ft
Interior mg = m(S/10) mg = m(S/8.5) Spike
Laminated
a, l
Exterior
mg = m(g
lever rule
) mg = m(g
lever rule
)
S 6.0 ft
Interior
mg = m(S/12) mg = m(S/10.0)
Glued
Laminated
Panels on
Glued
Laminated
Stringers
a, l
Exterior
mg = m(g
lever rule
) mg = m(g
lever rule
)
S 6.0 ft
Interior
mg = m(S/11) mg = m(S/9.0)
Glue
Laminated
Panel on
Steel
Stringers
a, l
Exterior
mg = m(g
lever rule
) mg = m(g
lever rule
)
S 6.0 ft

4.6.2.2.5 Flexural Moments and Shear in Transverse Floorbeams

If the deck is supported directly by transverse floorbeams, the
floorbeams may be designed for loads in accordance with Table 1.
For purposes of this article, the live load analysis factors per 4.4.2
may be taken as 1.0.

The fractions provided in Table 1 shall be used in conjunction
with the 32.0-kip design axle load alone. For spacings of floorbeams
outside the given ranges of applicability, all of the design live loads
shall be considered, and the lever rule may be used.


Table 4.6.2.2.5-1 Distribution of Live Load per Lane for Transverse
Beams for Moment and Shear.

Fraction of
Wheel Load to
Each Floorbeam
Range of
Applicability Type of Deck
4
S
N/A Plank
Laminated Wood
Deck
5
S
S 5.0
Concrete
6
S
S 6.0
Steel Grid and
Unfilled Grid Deck
Composite with
Reinforced Concrete
Slab
4.5
S
t
g
4.0
S 5.0
Steel Grid and
Unfilled Grid Deck
Composite with
Reinforced Concrete
Slab
6
S
t
g
> 4.0
S 6.0
Steel Bridge
Corrugated Plank
5.5
S
t
g
2.0

4.6.2.2.6 Beams with Corrugated Steel Decks

The live load flexural moment for interior beams with corrugated
steel plank deck may be determined by applying the distribution
factor, g, specified in Table 1. For purposes of this article, the live
load analysis factors per Article 4.4.2 may be taken as 1.0.

Table 4.6.2.2.6-1 Distribution of Live Load Per Lane for Bending Moment Beams with Corrugated Steel Plank Decks

Beam Location One Design Lane
Loaded
Two or More Design
Lanes Loaded
Range of
Applicability
(Use One-Lane
Multiple Presence
Factor)
(Use Two Loaded
Lanes Multiple
Presence Factor, i.e.,
m = 1)
mg
m
= m(S/11) mg
m
= m(S/9.0) Interior 5.5
2.0
g
S
t

Exterior mg
m
= m(g
lever rule
) mg
m
= m(g
lever rule
)

4.6.2.2.7 Special Loads with other Traffic

The provisions of this article may be applied where
the approximate methods of analysis for beam-slab
bridges specified in Article 4.6.2.2 and slab-type bridges
specified in Article 4.6.2.3 are used.

( ) ( )
p 1 D m 1
G G g G g g = +
(4.6.2.2.4-1)

where:

G = final force effect applied to a girder

G
p
= force effect due to special vehicle

g
1
= one-lane live load distribution factor

G
D
= force effect due to design loads

g
m
= multiple-lane live load distribution factor

C4.6.2.2.7

In Equation 1, the multiple presence factors are not
included in the distribution factors. The owner should
provide a multiple presence factor for the combined case
if it is assumed different than unity.

A similar formula was developed from a similar
formula presented without investigation by Modjeski
and Masters, Inc. (1994) in a report to the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation in 1994, as was examined
in Zokaie (1998).

4.6.2.2.8 Curved Steel Bridges

Approximate analysis methods may be used for
analysis of curved steel bridges. The Engineer shall
ascertain that the approximate analysis method used is
appropriate by confirming that the method satisfies the
requirements stated in Article 4.4. In curved systems,
consideration should be given to placing parapets,
sidewalks, barriers and other heavy line loads at their
actual location on the bridge. Wearing surface and other
distributed loads may be assumed uniformly distributed
to each girder in the cross-section
C4.6.2.2.8

The V-load method (United States Steel 1984) has
been a widely used approximate method for analyzing
horizontally curved steel I-girder bridges. The method
assumes that the internal torsional load on the bridge
resulting solely from the curvatureis resisted by
selfequilibrating sets of shears between adjacent girders.
The V-load method does not directly account for sources
of torque other than curvature and the method does not
account for the horizontal shear stiffness of the concrete
deck. The method is only valid for loads such as normal
highway loadings. For exceptional loadings, a more
refined analysis is required. The method assumes a
linear distribution of girder shears across the bridge
section; thus, the girders at a given cross-section should
have approximately the same vertical stiffness. The
Vload method is also not directly applicable to
structures with reverse curvature or to a closed-framed
system with horizontal lateral bracing near, or in the
plane of one or both flanges. The V-load method does
not directly account for girder twist; thus, lateral
deflections, which become important on bridges with
large spans and/or sharp skews and vertical deflections,
may be significantly underestimated. In certain
situations, the Vload method may not detect uplift at end
bearings. The method is best suited for preliminary
design, but may also be suitable for final design of
structures with radial supports or supports skewed less
than approximately 10.

The M/R method provides a means to account for the

effect of curvature in curved box girder bridges. The
method and suggested limitations on its use are
discussed by Tung and Fountain (1970).

Vertical reactions at interior supports on the concave
side of continuous-span bridges may be significantly
underestimated by both the V-load and M/R methods.
Live load distribution factors for use with the Vload and
M/R methods may be determined using the appropriate
provisions of Article 4.6.2.2.

Strict rules and limitations on the applicability of both of
these approximate methods do not exist. The
Engineer must determine when approximate methods of
analysis are appropriate.

SECTION 4 (US)
REFERENCES

Huo, X.S., Conner, S.O., and Iqbal, R., Re-examination of the Simplified Method (Henrys Method) of Distribution
Factors for Live Load Moment and Shear, Final Report, Tennessee DOT Project No. TNSPR-RES 1218, Tennessee
Technological University, Cookeville, TN (June 2003).

.

Modjeski and Masters, Inc., 2002. Shear in Skewed Multi-Beam Bridges, NCHRP 20-07/Task 107 Final Report,
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

Patrick, M.D., Huo, X.S., Puckett, J.A., Jablin, M.C., and Mertz, D., Sensitivity of Live Load Distribution Factors to
Vechile Spacing, Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE, in review.

Puckett, J. A., Huo, X. S., Patrick, M.D., Jablin, M.C., Mertz, D., and Peavy, M.D., Simplified Live Load
Distribution Factor Equations for Bridge Design, Proceedings of International Bridge Engineering Conference,
Transportation Research Board, Paper Number 113, in review.

Puckett, J. A., Huo, X. S., Mertz, D., Jablin, M.C., Patrick, M.D., and Peavy, M.D., 2006 Simplified Live Load
Distribution Factor Equations. NCHRP Report for 12-62. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC.
(Tentative).

4-23

APPENDIX

A4 DECK SLAB DESIGN TABLE

SECTION 4: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 4-25

B4 LEVER RULE FORMULA

Tables B4-1 and B4-2 may be used to perform lever rule computations. The following assumptions were used in
developing these tables and should be considered when using the listed values for analysis:

two-foot spacing between the outer wheel centroid and the curb/barrier
six-foot axle gage
four-foot between vehicles.

The limitations of the equations are illustrated in the tables. Where the limitations are not met, conventional lever
rule computations apply.

Table B4-1. Lever Rule Distribution of Live Loads per Lane Longitudinal Beams for Slab-on-Beam and Box-Beam Bridges
for Interior Girders

Girder
Location
Number
of Loaded
Lanes Distribution Factor Range of Application Loading Diagram
Number
of Wheels
to Beam
1
Use lever rule and
manually place the
vehicle for critical
effect on the first
interior beam
Interior
varies
2 or more
4
3
1
2
2
1
1
2
6
0
e
S ft
d

3
1
S
6
0
e
S ft
d
>
1
2
4
0
e
S ft
d

2
1
S
4 6
0
e
S ft
d
<
3 5
2 S
6 10
0
e
S ft
d
<
10
2
S
10 16
0
e
S ft
d
<
0
e
d <
6' 6' 4'
S S
e
d S
4' 6' 6'
S S
6' 6' 4'
d S
e
S S
S
6'
S
e
d S
6'
6' 6'
S S
4'


Table B4-2. Lever Rule Distribution of Live Loads per Lane Slab-on-Beam and Box-Beam Bridges for
Exterior Girders

Girder
Location
Number
of Loaded
Lanes Distribution Factor Range of Application Loading Diagram
Number
of Wheels
to Beam
2
2
3
4
1
1
2 or more
Exterior
1
2 2
e
d
S
+
( ) 6
e
e
d S ft
d S
+
<
3
1
e
d
S S
+ ( ) 6
e
d S ft + >
3
1
e
d
S S
+ ( ) 10
e
d S ft +
3 3 8
2 2
e
d
S S
+ ( ) 10 16
e
d S ft < +
( ) 16 20
e
d S ft < +
e
d S
6' 6' 4'
e
d S
6' 6' 4'
e
d S
6' 6' 4'
S
e
d S
6'
S d
e
6'
2 16
2
e
d
S S
+

)
C4 ALTERNATE MOMENT DISTRIBUTION FACTOR APPROACH

Better one-lane loaded estimates may be achieved with
the combined use of the lever rule (LR), uniform
distribution (Uniform), or parametric formula method
(PF) as summarized in Table 4C-1. The value of the
distribution factor determined by using the methods
prescribed in Table 4C-1 and shall be modified by the
calibration factors provided in Tables 4C-2 and analysis
factors provided in Table 4C-3. Shear computations are
as prescribed in Article 4.6.2.2 and do not change with
the methods outlined in this appendix.

The moment distribution factor may be computed as:

( , ,
m s m m
mg m a LR Uniform or PF b = +

(4C-1)

where:

g
uniform
=
( ) ( ) 10
g
Travelway width
N

(4C-2)

and the parametric distribution is

3
1 2
1
Exp
Exp Exp
PF
g
S S
g
D L N

=

(4C-3)

where Exp1, Exp2, Exp3, and D are constants that vary
with bridge type,

S = the girder spacing in feet,

L = the span length in feet,

and

N
g
= the number of girders or (number of cells + 1) for
the bridge.

NCHRP 12-62 provides the basis for Article 4.6.2.2.
Within that work, compromises were made to
accommodate simplification. In most cases, the
simplified approach works well and provides reasonable
live load distribution factors with good correlation
relative to rigorous results. However, in some cases
decreased accuracy relative to rigorous analysis resulted,
specifically for flexure distribution factors for one
loaded lane. To better estimate the live load effects for
the one loaded lane case, a parametric power equation
may be used. See Equation 4C-3.

For the one-lane loading case, the transverse deflections
(and curvatures) are much more localized than the
multiple-lanes loaded case. Therefore, a parameter that
represents the longitudinal to transverse stiffness
provides a better live load estimate. The quantification
of this was achieved by the geometric ratio (S/L).

The span length, L, may be used where the point of
interest resides within the interior portion of the span.
The average of the adjacent span lengths may be used
for the regions near the pier. All moments should carry
the same distribution factors, i.e., whether of positive or
negative sense. See Table 4C-4 for guidance.

The correlation coefficients for the flexure cases for the
lever rule, uniform distribution, and parametric equation
methods are presented in Puckett et al (2006). In some
cases, the parametric equation provides a significant
improvement in accuracy, and this may be of particular
importance to cases where a bridge is being load rated.


Table 4C-1. Simplified Method

h, k, i, j a d f, g e b
1
Multiple Uniform Uniform PF Uniform PF Uniform
1 LR LR PF PF PF PF
Multiple LR LR PF Uniform LR LR
h, k, i, j a d fg e b
exp1 0.34 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00
exp2 0.26 0.18 0.35 0.27 0.30 0.26
exp3 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.45 0.00 0.30
D 24.30 42.30 1.00 1.00 44.60 1.00
PF Constants
Moment
Lanes
Bridge Types
Interior
PF
Exterior

Table 4C-2 Calibration Factors for Moment

a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
a
m
b
m
0.53 0.19 0.71 0.23 1.53 -0.17 1.17 -0.08
0.68 0.14 0.85 0.15 1.17 -0.07 1.39 -0.19
0.65 0.15 0.84 0.13 2.44 -0.58 1.14 -0.04
1.25 -0.12 1.8 -0.12 1.13 -0.04 2.03 -0.05
Concrete
g
2.26 -0.35 0.54 0.19 1.85 -0.30 0.90 0.00
Open Steel Box Beam c Use Article 4.6.2.2.3
b Precast Concrete Spread Box Beam
Uniform Parametric Formula Lever Rule Parametric Formula
Concrete Overlay
f
Uniform Parametric Formula Uniform Parametric Formula
1.20 -0.05 0.64 0.05
Parametric Formula Parametric Formula Parametric Formula Parametric Formula
Uniform Parametric Formula Lever Rule
e
Uniform Parametric Formula Lever Rule Lever Rule
h, i, j, k
Lever Rule
Beam
d
Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee Beam
1.31 -0.12 0.53 -0.01
Steel I-Beam
Structure Type
Cross
Section
Type
Moment
Exterior Interior
One Loaded Lane
Two or More Lanes
Loaded
Two or More Lanes
Loaded
One Loaded Lane
a
Lever Rule Lever Rule Uniform Parametric Formula


Table 4C-3 Distribution Simplification Factors
One-lane
Two or
more lanes One-lane
Two or
more lanes
Steel I-Beam a 1.04 1.06 1.04 1.04
Cast-in-Place Concrete Tee
Beam
e 1.02 1.03 1.13 1.05
Box
d 1.07 1.05 1.06 1.03
Precast Concrete Spread Box
Beam
b 1.10 1.07 1.11 1.07
Open Steel Box Beam c 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Structure Type
AASHTO
LRFD Cross
Section
Type
Exterior Interior
Adjacent Box Beam with Cast-
in-Place Concrete Overlay,
Adjacent Box Beam with
Integral Concrete
f, g
Concrete Bulb-Tee Beam,
Precast Concrete Tee Section
with Shear Keys and with or
without Transverse Post-
Tensioning, Precast Concrete
Double Tee with Shear Keys
with or without Post-Tensioning,
Precast Concrete Channel with
Shear Keys
h, i, j, k
1.05 1.16 1.10 1.08
1.04 1.06 1.05 1.04

Table 4C-4 L for Use in Live Load Distribution Factor Equations.

L (ft.) FORCE EFFECT
Positive Moment The length of the span for
which moment is being
calculated
The average length of the two
adjacent spans
Negative MomentNear interior supports
of continuous spans from point of
contraflexure to point of contraflexure
under a uniform load on all spans
Negative MomentOther than near
interior supports of continuous spans
The length of the span for
which moment is being
calculated
Shear The length of the span for
which shear is being
calculated
Exterior Reaction The length of the exterior span
Interior Reaction of Continuous Span The average length of the two
adjacent spans

Section 4: Structural Analysis and Evaluation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 4: Structural Analysis and Evaluation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SECTION 4: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

SECTION 4 (US): STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 4-5

You might also like