Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Iitk Rdso Guidelines
Iitk Rdso Guidelines
November 2010
Developed for
Indian Railways
Prepared by:
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
Kanpur
November 2010
ISBN .................................
PARTICIPANTS
Prepared by:
Sudhir K. Jain, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
Durgesh C. Rai, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
O. R. Jaiswal, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur
Coordinated by:-
R. K.Goel, Director/SB-I/B&S/RDSO
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 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). Effective coordination was done from RDSO side by Shri R.K.Goel,
Director/SB-I/B&S/RDSO to communicate the various parts to concerned officials at RDSO & with
other organizations and giving feed back to I.I.T.-Kanpur. Engineers from RDSO, Luckow have
reviewed several versions of this document. Piyush Agarwal, the then Executive Director/B&S;
Mahesh Kr. Gupta, Executive Director/B&S; R.K. Goel, Director/ SB-I, B&S; Pradip Kumar,
Director/ CB-II, B&S; Anil Kalra, Director/ CB-I, B&S; Vivek Bhushan Sood, Professor/Bridge,
IRICEN, Pune; Atul Verma, ADEN/Bridge Design/SEC Railway at RDSO; H. O. Narayan, Asstt.
Design Engr., B&S; R.N. Shukla, Senior Section Engineer/Design, B&S; Sujeet Nath Gupta, Section
Engineer/Design, B&S have provided valuable suggestions to improve the same. Comments and
suggestions have also been received from Debasis Roy, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur; S K
Thakkar, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee; Mahesh Tondon, Tandon Consultant, Delhi; Laxmy
Parameswaran, Central Road Research Institute, Delhi; T. Viswanathan, Aarvee Associates architects
engineers & consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; Alok Bhowmick, B & S Engineering Consultants Pvt. Ltd.,
Delhi; D.B. Rao, NBRDC, Hyderabad; A. K. Gupta, Professor & Head, Structural Engineering
Department, MBM Engineering College, Jodhpur K. N. Sreenivasa, L&T Railway Business Unit,
Faridabad; P. K. Jain, Chief Engineer/KRCL, New Delhi; Milind Bhoot, IBG Asia, Mumbai.
IIT Kanpur
RDSO Lucknow
CONTENTS
PART 1: Provisions and Commentary
1. Terminology ........................................................................................................................... 1
2. Symbols ............................................................................................................................. 5
3. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 8
3.1 - General .........................................................................................................................................8
3.2 - Modifications over Existing Bridge Rules ................................................................................8
3.3 - Railway and Road Bridges ......................................................................................................10
3.4 - References .................................................................................................................................11
4. Relevant Codes/ Standards................................................................................................. 12
5. Scope ........................................................................................................................... 13
6. General concepts................................................................................................................. 14
6.1 - ......................................................................................................................................................14
6.2 - ......................................................................................................................................................14
6.3 - ......................................................................................................................................................14
6.4 - ......................................................................................................................................................15
6.5 - ......................................................................................................................................................15
6.6 - ......................................................................................................................................................15
6.7 - ......................................................................................................................................................15
6.8- Ground Motion ............................................................................................................................18
6.9 - Assumptions...............................................................................................................................18
7. Conceptual Considerations.................................................................................................. 20
8. Design Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 23
8.1 - Seismic Zone Map ....................................................................................................................23
8.2 - Importance Factor .....................................................................................................................24
8.3 - Methods of Calculating Design Seismic Force .....................................................................26
8.4 - Seismic Weight and Live Load ................................................................................................29
8.5 - Combination of Seismic Components ....................................................................................30
8.6 - Damping and soil Properties ...................................................................................................33
8.7 - Combination of Seismic Design Forces with Other Forces ................................................37
8.8 - Vertical Motions .........................................................................................................................39
9. Seismic Coefficient Method (Single mode Method)............................................................. 41
9.1 - Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient................................................................................42
9.2 - Maximum Elastic Forces and Deformations .........................................................................46
9.3 - Design Seismic Force Resultants for Bridge Components.................................................47
10. Response Spectrum Method (Multi mode Method) ........................................................... 51
10.1 - Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient in Mode k ...........................................................51
10.2 - Inertia Force due to Mass of Bridge at Node j in Mode k .................................................53
10.3 - Maximum Elastic Forces and Deformations .......................................................................55
10.4 - Design Seismic Force Resultants in Bridge Components ................................................56
10.5 - Multi-directional Shaking ........................................................................................................57
11. Time History Method.......................................................................................................... 58
11.1 - Modeling of Bridge ..................................................................................................................58
11.2 - Analysis ....................................................................................................................................58
11.3 - Ground Motion .........................................................................................................................59
11.4 - Interpretation of Time History Analysis Results .................................................................60
12. Pushover Analysis ............................................................................................................. 62
13. Superstructure ................................................................................................................... 63
13.1- .....................................................................................................................................................63
13.2 - ....................................................................................................................................................63
13.3 - ....................................................................................................................................................63
14. Substructure ...................................................................................................................... 68
14.1 - Scour Depth .............................................................................................................................68
14.2 - Hydrodynamic Force ..............................................................................................................68
14.3 - Design Seismic Foce ..............................................................................................................72
14.4 - Substructure of Continuous Girder Superstructure ...........................................................73
15. Foundations ....................................................................................................................... 74
15.1 - ....................................................................................................................................................74
15.2 - ....................................................................................................................................................74
15.3 - ....................................................................................................................................................74
16. Connections....................................................................................................................... 76
16.1 - Design Force for Connections ..............................................................................................76
16.2 - Displacements at Connections .............................................................................................77
16.3 - Minimum Seating Width Requirements ...............................................................................77
17. Special Ductile Detailing Requirements for Bridges Substructures ................................... 80
18. Special Devices ................................................................................................................. 81
18.1 - Seismic Isolation Devices ......................................................................................................81
18.2 - Shock Transmission Units .....................................................................................................81
19. Bridges with Seismic Isolation ........................................................................................... 83
19.1 - General .....................................................................................................................................83
19.2 - Design Criteria .........................................................................................................................86
19.3 - Analysis Procedure .................................................................................................................87
19.4 - Requirements on Isolator Unit ..............................................................................................88
19.5 - Tests on Isolation System .....................................................................................................90
19.6 - System Adequacy ...................................................................................................................94
19.7 - Requirements for Elastomeric Bearings ..............................................................................94
20. Post earthquake Operation and Inspection ....................................................................... 97
Appendix – (A) References...................................................................................................... 98
Appendix – (B) Relevant Codes and Standards ...................................................................... 99
Appendix – (C) Ductile Detailing Specifications..................................................................... 100
Appendix – (D) Zone Factors for Some Important Towns ..................................................... 107
Appendix – (E) Pushover Analysis ........................................................................................ 108
Appendix – (F) Dynamic Earth Pressure ............................................................................... 111
Appendix – (G) Simplified Procedure for Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential ...................... 115
Appendix – (H) System property modification factors............................................................ 125
Appendix – (I) Post Earthquake Operations and Inspections ................................................ 129
Example 1 – Railway Bridge with Simply Supported Steel Superstructure ........................... 132
Example 2 – Comparison of Design Seismic Forces for Short and Long Span Railway Bridges140
Example 3 – Calculation of Seismic Forces for Superstructure............................................. 145
Example 4 – Analysis of Superstructure for Vertical Component of Earthquake................... 154
Example 5 – Base Isolated Railway Bridge with Simply Supported Steel Superstructure .... 157
Example 6 – M- curve for a Reinforced Concrete (RC) Section .......................................... 164
Example 7 – Obtain plastic moment, MP for RC pier and the maximum seismic coefficient
required for plastic hinge formation .................................................................. 168
Example 8 - Liquefaction Analysis using SPT data ............................................................... 170
Example 9 - Liquefaction Analysis using CPT data ............................................................... 172
IITK-RDSO GUIDELINES ON SEISMIC
DESIGN OF RAILWAY BRIDGES
Provisions with Commentary and Explanatory Examples
1. Terminology
For the purpose of these 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
consist 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 cross-
section of the bridge due to design seismic force for shaking along a considered direction applied on the
structure.
Ductility
Page 1
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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
make them adequately ductile.
Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient (Ah)
A plot of horizontal acceleration value, as a fraction of acceleration due to gravity, versus natural period of
vibration T that shall be used in the design of structures.
Epicenter
The geographical point on the surface of the earth vertically above the focus of the earthquake.
Focus
The point inside earth on the fault where the slip starts that causes the earthquake.
Importance Factor (I)
A factor used to obtain the design spectrum depending on the importance of the structure.
Linear Elastic Analysis
Analysis of the structure considering linear properties of the material and load-versus deformation
characteristics of the different component of the structure.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the state in saturated cohesion less soil wherein the effective shear strength is reduced to
negligible value during an earthquake due to pore pressures caused by vibrations approaching the total
confining pressure. In this situation, the soil tends to behave like a fluid mass.
Magnitude
The magnitude of earthquake is a number which is a measure of energy released in an earthquake. It is
defined as logarithm to the base 10 of the maximum trace amplitude, expressed in microns, which the
standard short-period torsion seismometer world register due to the earthquake at an epicenteral distance
of 100 km.
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE)
Maximum considered earthquake is the largest reasonably conceivable earthquake that appears possible
along a recognized fault or within a tectonic province.
Maximum Elastic Force Resultant (Fenet)
The force resultant (namely axial force, shear force, bending moment or torsional moment) at a cross-
section of the bridge due to maximum elastic seismic force for shaking along a considered direction
applied on the structure.
Maximum Elastic Seismic Force (Fe)
The maximum force in the bridge component due to the expected seismic shaking in the considered
seismic zone.
Modal Mass (Mk)
Modal mass of structure subjected to horizontal or vertical ground motion is a part of total seismic mass of
the structure that is effective in mode k of vibration. The modal mass for a given mode has a unique value
irrespective of scaling of the mode shape.
Mode Shapes Coefficient (Φjk)
The spatial pattern of vibration when the structure is vibrating in its normal mode k is called as mode
Page 2
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
shape of vibration of mode k. Φjk is coefficient for jth node in kth mode.
Natural Period
Natural period of a structure is its time period of undamped vibration.
(a) Fundamental Natural Period: It is the highest modal time period of vibration along the considered
direction of earthquake motion.
(b) Modal Natural Period: 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
simultaneously, and they also pass through equilibrium positions simultaneously.
Over strength
Strength considering all factors that may cause an increase, e.g., steel strength being higher than the
specified characteristic strength, effect of strain hardening in steel with large strains, and concrete
strength being higher than specified characteristic value.
P- Δ Effect
IT is the secondary effect on shears and moments of frame members due to action of the vertical loads ,
interacting with the lateral displacement of structure resulting from seismic forces.
Response Acceleration Coefficient (Sa/g)
It is factor denoting the design acceleration spectrum of the structure subjected to earthquake ground
motion, and depends on natural period of vibration and damping of structures.
Response Reduction Factor (R)
The factor by which the actual lateral force, that would be generated if the structure were to remain elastic
during the most severe shaking that is likely at that site, shall be reduced to obtain the design lateral
force.
Response Spectrum
It is a representation of the maximum response of idealized single degree of freedom systems of different
periods for a fixed value of damping, during that earthquake. The maximum response is plotted against
the undamped natural period and for various damping values, and can be expressed in terms of
maximum absolute acceleration, maximum relative velocity or maximum relative displacement.
Restrainer
A steel rod, steel cable, rubber-impregnated chain, or similar device that prevents a superstructure from
becoming unseated during an earthquake.
Seismic Mass
Seismic weight divided by acceleration due to gravity.
Seismic Weight ( W )
Total dead load plus part of live load.
Skew
The angle between the centerline of the superstructure and a horizontal line perpendicular to the
abutments or bents.
Soil Profile Factor
A factor used to obtain the elastic acceleration spectrum depending on the soil profile underneath the
structure at the site.
Strength
The usable capacity of a structure or its members to resist the applied loads.
Page 3
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Stiffness of Piers ( or bents )
The force required to produce unit deformation in the pier under a lateral load applied at its top.
Substructure
Elements such as piers, abutments, and foundations that support the superstructure.
Superstructure
The bridge elements supported by the substructure.
Zone Factor (Z)
A factor to obtain the design spectrum depending on the perceived seismic risk of the earthquake zone in
which the structure is located.
Page 4
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
2. Symbols
a Structural width in the direction of hydrodynamic pressure
A Elastic seismic acceleration coefficient
Fke Inertia force vector due to mass of bridge under earthquake shaking along a
direction in mode k
Fp Maximum Positive force
Fn Maximum Negative force
Page 5
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
e Maximum elastic force resultants at a cross-section due to all modes considered
Fnet
Fmax Maximum force
Fy Yield Force
g Acceleration due to gravity
h Longer dimension of the rectangular confining hoop measured to its outer face
Hp Height of Pier
I Importance Factor
K Bulk modulus of elastomer
Kd , Ku & Post – elastic stiffness, Elastic ( unloading ) stiffness , Effective stiffness resp.
Keff
( Clause 19.4.2 and Figure – 11 )
Smaller effective stiffness
Ke
i
larger effective stiffness
Ke
j
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
m Number of modes of vibration considered
mj Total mass of the jth mode
My Moment Capacity of the column/pier section at the first yield of the reinforcing steel
M O Sum of the over strength moment capacities of the hinges resisting lateral loads
Qd Characteristic strength
R Response Reduction Factor
r1 , r 2 , r 3 Force resultants due to full design seismic force along two principal horizontal
directions and along the vertical direction, respectively
S Pitch of spiral or spacing of hoops
Sa Bridge flexibility factor along the considered direction
g
Page 6
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Vnet Design seismic force resultant in any component of the bridge due to all modes
considered
W Seismic weight, which includes full dead load and part live load
Wb ,W1,W2 Widths of seating at bearing supports at expansion ends of girders.
jk Mode shape coefficient for jth, degree of freedom in kth mode of vibration
y Yield Curvature
Page 7
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
3. Introduction C3.0 Introduction
a) Effect of flexibility of the bridge on the design a) In the present guidelines, first maximum
seismic force is included with the help of time earthquake force which will act on the bridge
period of bridge. (also called elastic earthquake force) is
obtained. Then, depending on ductility and
energy dissipating capacity of different bridge
component, design force is specified for
different bridge component. In contrast to this,
the existing Bridge Rules provisions, suggest
seismic coefficient method for bridges. In this
method, the seismic coefficient for different
zone is specified and this coefficient is same for
all types of bridges. Thus, design earthquake
force does not depend on the structural dynamic
characteristics of the bridges. For example, as
per existing Bridge Rules, the design seismic
coefficient for a bridge with pier height of 10 m
and 30 m will be same, and it does not depend
on the flexibility of the bridge.
Page 8
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
b) The concept of design earthquake force for b) In existing Bridge Rules, the design seismic
elastic behavior of bridge and reduction in forces are directly specified, which is often
design earthquake using inelastic behavior by misunderstood as the maximum expected
considering ductility of components is included. seismic force on the bridge under design
seismic shaking.
c) Seismic zones and response spectrum as c) In IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 a new seismic zone
per IS 1893(Part 1):2002 are used. map along with zone factors is given. As
against this, for bridges, IS 1893 (1984)
which has old zone map, gives seismic
coefficient for each zone. The same
coefficients are also used in existing Bridge
Rules.
e) New load combinations consistent with the e) In existing Bridge Rules, load combinations
present international practice are introduced. are not mentioned. The Indian Railway
Standard (IRS) for concrete bridge design
specifies load combination, for ultimate and
serviceability limit state. In these load
combinations, load factors for live load and
seismic loads are quite different than other
international bridge codes. The IRS for steel
bridge design and sub-structure and
foundation, does not explicitly specify load
combinations.
i) Information on the post-earthquake operation i) This information is taken from AREMA code.
and inspection is provided
Page 9
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
3.3 - Railway and Road Bridges C3.3 – Railway and Road
Railway bridges are functionally and Bridges
behaviorally different from the other bridges. In case of railway bridges, the ratio of dead load
Firstly, the controlled traffic environment permits of superstructure to live load could be quite
better assessment of train load on the bridges. different than that for highway bridges. This
Secondly, the presence of continuous rails over ratio could also be significantly different for
the bridge spans provides restraint against bridges with steel superstructure and concrete
longitudinal and transverse movement during superstructure. Various differences of railway
earthquakes. Thirdly, the superstructure bridges and highway bridges are as follows:-
configuration of railway bridges is different than
that of the other types of bridges. (i) Simple span structures are preferred over
continuous structures for railway 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
Page 10
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
for railway bridges that might not be
acceptable generally for highway users.
Page 11
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
4. Relevant Codes/ C4.0 Relevant Codes/
Standards Standards
The several Codes/Standards are necessary
adjuncts to these guidelines and these are
listed in Appendix - B.
Page 12
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
The provisions of the present guidelines are Seismic evaluation of existing railway bridges
applicable for the seismic design of new requires much detailed analysis which is
railway bridges. These provisions are not beyond the scope of the present guidelines.
applicable for the seismic evaluation and Such detailed analysis is required to assess the
retrofitting of the existing railway bridges. present strength of the materials, to assess the
ductility of the seismic load carrying members,
The provisions of these guidelines are for present utility of the bridge, loading conditions
railway bridges wherein, seismic action is etc. Specialized literature shall be referred for
mainly resisted through flexure of pier and this purpose. Some of the references for
through abutments, i.e., bridges composed of seismic evaluation and retrofitting are:
vertical pier-foundation system supporting the
1. AASHTO (1994), Manual for Condition
deck structure with or without bearings.
Evaluation of Bridges, Second Edition,
American Association of State Highway
For certain bridges with special geometry and
and Transportation Officials, Washington
for special locations, additional detailed
DC, USA.
analysis, not covered in this guidelines, is
required. These are mentioned in Clause 6.7. 2. Japan Road Association (1995) - Reference
Bridges not requiring seismic analysis are for Applying Guided Specification to New
given in clause 6.5. Highway Bridge and Seismic Strengthing
of Existing Highway Bridges.
The present guidelines also cover the seismic
Useful suggestions for evaluation and
design of the bridges with seismic isolation
strengthening of various components such as
devices.
piers/columns can be derived from the
followings documents specially developed for
Some information on post-earthquake
buildings:
operation and inspection is also included
1. FEMA 356 (2000) Prestandard and
Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation
of Buildings. Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Washington, D. C.,
USA.
2. ASCE 11-99, Guideline for Structural
Condition Assessment of Existing
Buildings, American Society of Civil
Engineers, USA.
3. IITK-GSDMA Guidelines - Seismic
Evaluation and Strengthing of Building,
IIT Kanpur.
http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/IITK-
GSDMA/EQ06.pdf
Page 13
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
6.1 - C6.1 -
Actual forces that appear on portions of The earthquake codes provide design forces
bridges during earthquakes may be greater which are substantially lower than what a
than the design seismic forces specified in structure is expected to actually experience
these guidelines. However, ductility arising during strong earthquake shaking. Hence, it is
from material behavior and detailing, and over important that the structure be made ductile and
strength arising from the additional reserve statically redundant to allow for alternate load
strength in them over and above the design transfer paths. Ductile design and detailing
forces, are relied upon to account for this enables a designer to use a lower design force
difference in actual and design lateral loads. (i.e., a higher value of response reduction
factor R) than for an ordinarily-detailed
structure.
6.2 - C6.2-
The response of a structure to earthquake Provisions of this guidelines deal with the
shaking is a function of the nature of inertia forces induced due to ground shaking.
foundation soil, materials, form, size and mode However, other effects of ground shaking like
of construction, and characteristics and liquefaction of soil, sliding failure of soil strata
duration of ground motion. These guidelines are not included. Some information on soil
specifies design forces for structures standing liquefaction is included in Appendix – G.
on soils or rocks which do not settle or slide
due to loss of strength during shaking.
6.3 - C6.3–
The reinforced and prestressed concrete Provisions for ductile design and detailing for
components shall be under-reinforced so as to reinforced concrete structures are provided in
cause a ductile failure. Further, they should be Appendix – C and IS: 13920-1993. However,
designed to ensure that premature failure due provisions for ductile detailing of prestressed
to shear or bond does not occur. Stresses concrete, steel and prefabricated structures are
induced in the superstructure due to not yet available in the form of Indian
earthquake induced ground motion are usually Standards. If such structures are to be designed
quite nominal. Therefore, ductility demand for high seismic zones of the country, it is
under seismic shaking has not been a major expected that the designer will ensure suitable
concern in bridge superstructures during past ductility following the practices of countries,
earthquakes. However, the seismic response e.g., USA, Europe, New Zealand and Japan,
of bridges is critically dependent on the ductile with advanced seismic provisions. The ductile
characteristics of the substructures. Provisions detailing is required for substructures,
for appropriate ductile detailing of reinforced foundations and connections only and not of
concrete members given in Appendix – A shall the superstructure
be applicable to substructures. Bridges shall be
designed such that under severe seismic
shaking plastic hinges form in the substructure,
Page 14
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
6.4 - C6.4–
Masonry and plain concrete arch bridges with Designers are prohibited to consider masonry
spans more than 12 m shall not be built in the and plain concrete arch bridges of spans more
seismic zones IV and V. than 12 m as structural systems for bridges in
high seismic zones, since these systems do not
possess adequate ductility or reserve strength
and may not withstand forces due to strong
ground shaking.
6.5 - C6.5-
Box and pipe culverts need not be analyzed for Existing Bridge Rules also exempt box and
seismic forces. pipe culverts from seismic design.
6.6 - C6.6-
Following bridges need not be analyzed for Single span bridges of spans upto 30m are
seismic forces : exempted from seismic analysis. These bridges
comprise of single span resting on abutment
(a) In Zones II & III, bridges with overall length
with no intermediate pier. However, minimum
less than 60m or spans less than 15m
seat width is provided and connections in
(b) Single span bridges upto 30m span restrained direction are designed for seismic
force.
6.7 - C 6.7 –
For specific cases of bridges, some additional Specialist literature shall be referred for
studies/analysis should be required, which are information regarding additional studies like
described in Table 1. site specific spectrum, estimation of fault
movement, spatial variation of ground motion,
soil liquefaction etc.
The site specific spectrum studies requires
knowledge about seismic potential of active
faults in that region characteristics of the path
through which seismic wave travel and soil
strata on which structures stands. Such studies
Page 15
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 16
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS
1. In zone IV and V, bridges with individual Modeling of the bridge including geometrical
span length more than 120 m and/or pier nonlinearity, P-delta effect and soil-structure
height is more than 30 m. interaction is needed.
Pushover analysis may be done to ascertain the
energy dissipation characteristics of ductile members.
(Details given in APPENDIX I)
3. Geological discontinuity exists at the site Spatial variation of ground motion shall be considered.
4. Bridge site close to a fault (< 10 km) which Site specific spectrum shall be obtained. Else, near-
may be active. source modifications as per Clause 8.1.1 and 8.8.3
shall be done. Specialist literature shall be required to
obtain site specific spectrum.
If bridge is crossing the fault, detailed geological
studies shall be performed to estimate past
movements across the fault. Bridge to be designed so
as to withstand the expected fault displacements. Help
from geological / seismological persons with enough
experience will be required to calculate fault
movement.
5. In zone IV and V, if the soil condition is poor, Site specific spectrum shall be obtained.
consisting of marine clay or loose sand (e.g.,
where the soil up to 30m depth has average
SPT N value equal to or less than 20)
6. Site with loose sand or poorly graded sands Liquefaction analysis is required (Details given in
with little or no fines. Liquefiable soil. APPENDIX I). Liquefaction is the act or process of
transforming any substance into a liquid state. In non-
cohesive soils it is the transformation of the soil in the
solid state to the liquefied state due to the increase in
the pore pressure and the consequent reduction in the
effective stress.
Page 17
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
In some cases, the effect of vertical component of All structures experience a constant vertical
ground motion has to be specifically considered. acceleration (downward) equal to gravity (g) at all
The effect of vertical component is particularly times. Hence, the vertical acceleration during ground
important in the following components/situations: shaking can be just added or subtracted to the gravity
depending on the direction of motion.
a. Prestressed concrete decks.
b. Bearings, hold down devices, and linkages. Vertical acceleration shall be of significant
c. Horizontal cantilever structural elements consideration in bridges with large spans. Reduction
such as cantilevers of deck slabs and in gravity loads due to vertical component of ground
cantilever bridges. motion can be particularly detrimental for prestressed
d. Situations where stability (overturning girders. Vertical seismic forces may cause reduction
/sliding) becomes critical. in stabilizing forces and combined with this, the
e. Bridge sites located near fault. horizontal seismic force can cause dislocation of
structures.
The effect of the vertical seismic component on
substructure and foundation may, as a rule, be
omitted in zones II and III.
Page 18
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
a) Earthquake causes impulsive ground motions, The note mentioned after assumption (a) has been
which are complex and random in character, necessitated in view of experience such as that in
changing in period and amplitude, and each Mexico City (1985).
lasting for a small duration. Therefore,
The earthquake occurred 400 km away from the
resonance of the type as visualized under
Mexico City. A great variation in damages was seen
steady-state sinusoidal excitations will not
in the Mexico City. Some parts experienced very
occur, as it would need time to build up such
strong shaking whereas some other parts of the city
amplitudes.
hardly felt any motion. The peak ground acceleration
Note: However, there are exceptions where at soft soils in the lake zone was about 5 times higher
resonance-like conditions have been seen to occur than that at the rock sites though the epicentral
between long distance waves and tall structures distance was same at both the locations. Extremely
founded on deep soft soils. soft soils in lake zone amplified weak long-period
waves. The natural period of soft clay layers
happened to be close to the dominant period of
incident seismic waves and it created a resonance-
like conditions. Buildings between 7 and 18 storeys
suffered extensive damage since the natural period of
such buildings was close to the period of seismic
waves.
c) The value of a elastic modulus of materials, It is difficult to precisely specify the modulus of
wherever required, may be taken as for static materials such as concrete, masonry, and soil
analysis unless a more definite value is because its value depends on factors such as stress
available for use in dynamic conditions level, loading condition (static versus dynamic),
material strength and age of material.
For such materials, there tends to be large variation
in the value of E. For instance, for concrete, IS
456:1978 recommends Ec = 5700fck, where is IS
456:2000 has modified the value to Ec = 5000fck;
both under static condition. Further, the actual
concrete strength will be different from the specified
value. Hence, the code simply allows the modulus of
elasticity for static analysis to be used for earthquake
analysis also.
Page 19
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Superstructure
Simple spans of standard configuration are preferred
by railways since they have performed well during
past earthquakes and are easy to replace if need
arises. In simple spans lateral load on piers 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 integral bridges, pier and deck constitute a frame
action which is beneficial in resisting the seismic
forces. Also, unseating of the span does not occur.
Page 20
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
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.
Page 21
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 22
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 23
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 24
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 25
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
8.3.1 - C8.3.1 –
The seismic forces for bridges shall be generally The existing Bridge Rules follow a very simplistic
estimated by Seismic Coefficient Method (Single method for calculating design seismic force. In this
Mode Method) described in Section 9.0. Response method, design seismic force computation does not
Spectrum Method (Multi Mode Method) described in include consideration of flexibility of the bridge.
Section 10 shall be used in zones IV and V in This implies that all the bridges in a seismic zone,
following cases: irrespective of their span, pier height and structural
system adopt the same design acceleration
(a) Irregular bridge as defined in section 8.3.5.2
coefficient.
(b) Individual span more than 80m
(c) Continuous bridge This guideline includes the effect of bridge flexibility
(d) Height of top of pier / abutment from the base in its design force computation. Further, it permits
of foundation is more than 30m. the use of both the Seismic Coefficient Method
(single Mode Method) and the Response Spectrum
Method (Multi Mode Method). The Seismic
Coefficient Method assumes that (a) the fundamental
mode of vibration has the most dominant
contribution to seismic force, and (b) masses and
stiffness are evenly distributed in the bridge resulting
in a regular mode shape.
The seismic coefficient method is applicable when
dynamic behavior of the bridge can be sufficiently
approximated by a single degree of freedom system.
This condition is considered to be satisfied in
following cases:
a) In longitudinal direction of approximately
straight bridges, with continuous deck, the
seismic forces are carried by the piers, and the
total mass of the piers is less than 20% of the
mass of the deck
b) For the above bridge in transverse direction, if
the bridge is approximately symmetric about
the center of the deck, i.e., when the
eccentricity between the center of stiffness of
the supporting members and the center of mass
of the deck does not exceed 5% of the length of
the deck.
c) For bridges with simply supported spans, no
significant interaction between piers is expected
and the total mass of each pier is less than 20%
of the tributary mass of the deck (Tributary
mass of the deck on a pier is the half mass of
the deck on either side of the pier).
Page 26
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8.3.2 - C8.3.2 -
The Time History method described in Section 11.0 Ground motion records to be used in the time history
shall be used in following cases: analysis shall be obtained after site specific studies.
These studies shall be performed by a team of
(i) To verify the result of Response Spectrum
experts and shall be peer reviewed, i.e., reviewed
Method for highly irregular bridges in zone IV,
independently by other experts.
and V.
(ii) Bridges with special devices like Shock
Transmission Units (STU), and seismic
isolation devices, time history method is
mandatory.
8.3.3 - C8.3.3-
The Pushover analysis described in Section 12.0 International bridge codes are now recommending
may be used to ascertain the nonlinear load use of Pushover Analysis for bridges. Pushover
carrying capacity and ductility of pier with more than analysis is a nonlinear analysis which estimates the
50 m height and individual span more than 120 m. nonlinear load carrying capacity of the bridge pier,
and assesses the energy dissipating capacity of
ductile members. This analysis estimates if the
provided ductile detailing is enough to accommodate
seismic loads on the bridge.
8.3.4 – C8.3.4 -
For applying seismic forces obtained using Seismic
Coefficient Method or Response Spectrum Method
and for applying earthquake ground motion in Time
History Method (THM), the mathematical model of
bridges shall be used. This model shall
appropriately model the stiffness of superstructure,
bearings, piers and bridge ends. Analysis of bridge
model under dead load, live load and seismic loads
gives bending moment, shear and axial forces in
various bridge components.
Page 27
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
(a) It is straight or it describes a sector of an arc (a) Fig C1a represents the straight regular bridge.
which subtends an angle less than 90 at the Whereas Fig C1 b show the straight bridge with
center of the arc, and Φ < 900.
Φ Φ < 90o
Fig C1b Regular Bridge with Φ < 90o
(c) If multi-column piers are used then the stiffness (c) Multi-column pier (bent) is quite commonly used
of the stiffest columns within piers shall not be in highway bridges. They provide frame action in
25% more than the stiffness of the most flexible transverse direction. Similarly for continuous
column in that pier. bridges, frame action in the longitudinal direction
can also be achieved. Details regarding configuration
of multi-column pier for regular bridges are given in
CALTRANS.
Page 28
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8.4 - Seismic Weight and Live C8.4 – Seismic Weight and Live
Load Load
Live load used in the calculation of seismic weight
can be different than the live load used in load
combinations. Live load for seismic weight is given
in Clause 8.4.2, whereas live load for load
combination is given in Clause 8.7
8.4.2- Live load in seismic weight C8.4.2 – Live load in seismic weight
No live load (train load) shall be considered while By the live load , one usually refers to vehicular
calculating horizontal seismic forces along the traffic. Seismic shaking in the direction of traffic
direction of traffic (Longitudinal direction). 50% live causes the wheels to roll once the frictional forces
load (excluding impact effect) shall be considered are overcome. The inertia force generated by the
while calculating horizontal seismic forces in the vehicle mass in this case is smaller than that if the
direction perpendicular to traffic (transverse vehicle mass were completely fastened to the span.
direction). Further, the inertia force generated by the vehicle
mass due to friction between the superstructure deck
and wheels, is assumed to be taken care of in the
usual design for braking forces in the longitudinal
direction. Thus, live load is ignored while estimating
the seismic forces in the direction of traffic.
On the contrary, under seismic shaking in the
direction perpendicular to that of traffic (transverse
direction), the rolling of wheels is not possible. In
Page 29
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8.4.3 - C8.4.3 –
The vertical seismic forces shall be obtained by While calculating vertical seismic forces, the seismic
considering full live load (excluding impact effect) weight shall include full live load. It may be noted
on the bridge. that while calculating lateral seismic forces, 50%
live load is included in seismic weight for transverse
direction, where as no live load is included for
seismic weight in longitudinal direction.
8.5.1 - C8.5.1 -
For regular bridges, the two orthogonal horizontal For regular bridges, the two orthogonal horizontal
directions are usually the longitudinal and directions (say x- and y-directions) are usually the
transverse direction of the bridges (Fig 2a). For longitudinal and transverse directions of the bridge.
such bridges analysis shall be done for seismic For such bridges, it is sufficient to design the bridge
forces in longitudinal and transverse directions. The for seismic forces acting along each of the x- and y-
seismic force resultants (Bending Moment, Shear directions separately. During earthquake shaking,
Force and Axial Force) at any component obtained when the resultant motion is in a direction other than
from the analysis in longitudinal and transverse x and y, the forces can be resolved into x- and y-
directions shall be considered separately. components, which the elements in the two principal
directions are normally designed to withstand.
Page 30
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Y
X
X- and Y- indicate global axes; x- and y- are local
axes for column/pier.
y
MyX x
M Yy
MxX MYx
8.5.2 - C8.5.2 -
For irregular bridges, particularly, skew bridge (Fig. In case of irregular bridges, particularly those with
2b), design seismic force resultants shall be skew, design should be done by considering the
obtained along x-and y-direction. The design seismic force component in x-direction and y-
seismic force resultant (Bending Moment, Shear direction. In such a case, the bridge should also be
Force and Axial Force) at any component shall be designed for earthquake forces acting along the
obtained as follows: directions in which the structural systems of the
substructures are oriented. One way of getting
(a) ±r1 ± 0.3r2 around this without having to consider too many
possible earthquake directions is to design the
(b) ±0.3r1 ± r2
structure for:
where (a) full design force along x-direction (ELx) acting
simultaneously with 30% of the design force in
r1 Force resultant due to full design seismic the y-direction (ELy); i.e., (ELx+0.3ELy), and
force along x direction,
(b) full design force along y-direction (ELy) acting
r2 Force resultant due to full design seismic simultaneously with 30% of the design force in the
force along y direction. x-direction (ELx); i.e., (0.3ELx+ELy).
This combination ensures that the components
(particularly the substructure) oriented in any
direction will have sufficient lateral strength. In case
vertical ground motions are also considered, the
same principle is then extended to the design force
combinations in the three principal directions.
Page 31
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
x x
y y
M x M xX 0 . 3 M Yx My MyX 0.3MYy
Design
Moments
M x = 0.3M xX + M Yx My = 0.3MyX + MYy
8.5.3-
When vertical seismic forces are also considered,
(Clause 6.8.1), then for regular bridges, the design
seismic force resultants shall be obtained for the X-,
Y- and Z-direction separately. For irregular bridges,
the design seismic force resultant at any
component shall be computed as follows:
(a) ±r1 ± 0.3r2 ± 0.3r3
Page 32
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8.5.4 - C8.5.4 -
As an alternative to the procedure in 8.5.2 and When seismic force is applied in X-direction, the
8.5.3, the forces due to the combined effect of two bending moments in column are M x and
X
M yX . x-
or three components can be obtained on the basis
of ‘square root of sum of square (SRSS) that is and y- are local directions. Similarly, for seismic
force in Y-direction, the bending moment in column
r12 r22 or r12 r22 r32 M Yy . The design moment, M X in x-
Y
are M x and
direction and in y-direction is given by is given by,
Where r1, r2 and r3 are as defined in Clause 8.5.2
or 8.5.3. MX ( M xX ) 2 + ( M yX ) 2 and
MY ( M Yx ) 2 + ( M Yy ) 2
8.6 - Damping and soil Properties C8.6 - Damping and soil properties
8.6.1.1- C8.6.1.1
If well foundation is used, then 10% damping shall Generally piers are considered fixed at the top of the
be used. well foundation, i.e., foundation is considered to be
rigid. For such models, increased damping of 10%
may be used to account for the additional energy
dissipation due to interaction between well
foundation and adjoining soil. Alternatively, a
rigorous soil-structure interaction analysis can be
performed by modeling the well foundation and the
surrounding soil.
Page 33
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8.6.1.2- C8.6.1.2-
In case the guard rails are effectively provided, on Railway track along with effectively provided guard
single span of bridge upto 30 m length, 10 % rails provides a continuous load path in longitudinal
damping in longitudinal direction can be direction. Thus, for short bridges, they help in
considered. However, in the transverse direction enhancing the participation of abutment and
damping will not change. adjoining soil in the shaking in longitudinal
direction. Hence, damping is increased for 10% for
such cases. A similar provision is given in AREMA
for short bridges.
8.6.3- C8.6.3-
The values for allowable bearing pressure in soil
given in Table 5 applies to the upper 30m of the soil
profile. Profiles containing distinctly different soil
layers shall be subdivided into layers, each
designated by a number that ranges from 1 (at the
top) to n (at the bottom), where there are a total of n
layers in the upper 30 meters, and a weighted
average will be obtained as follows:
n
di
N i 1
n d
Ni
i 1 i
n
where d
i 1
i is equal to 30 m, Ni is the standard
Page 34
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
This is particularly important for foundations in soft flexibility, time period increases, which in turn, leads
soil conditions and in cases where deep to reduction in seismic forces. On the other hand, due
foundations are used. Soil flexibility leads to longer to soil flexibility the lateral deflection of structure
natural period and hence lowers seismic forces, increases, which may require inclusion of P-Delta
however, on the other hand, it results in larger effect in the analysis and may affect the stability of
lateral deflections. Soil parameters, like, elastic the structure.
properties and spring constants shall be properly
estimated. In many cases, one gets a range of
values for soil properties. In such cases, the highest
values of soil stiffness shall be used for calculating
the natural period and seismic forces, and lowest
value shall be used for calculating the deflection.
Page 35
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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.
Type of soils
Soil Type Definition
Well graded gravel (GW) or well graded sand (SW) both with less than 5% passing 75 μm
sieve (Fines);
Type I: Rock or Hard Soils Well graded Gravel – Sand mixtures with or without fines (GW-SW);
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.
Type II: Stiff Soils Poorly graded sands or Poorly graded sands with gravel (SP) with little or no fines having
Page 36
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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
Silts of Intermediate compressibility (MI);
Silts of High compressibility (MH);
Clays of Intermediate compressibility (CI);
Type III: Soft Soils
Clays of High compressibility (CH);
Silts and Clays of Intermediate to High compressibility (MI-MH or CI-CH);
Silt with Clay of Intermediate compressibility (MI-CI);
Silt with Clay of High compressibility (MH-CH).
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 37
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 38
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
8.8.1- C8.8.1-
For superstructure with span upto 80 m, the effect Long span bridges are more sensitive to vertical
of vertical motion can be considered by analyzing motion and analysis for vertical acceleration shall be
Page 39
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
the superstructure for 25% additional dead weight carried out. For spans less than 80 m, simplified
in upward and downward direction. approach, taken form CALTRANS is suggested.
8.8.2- C8.8.2-
For superstructure with span more than 80m, Vertical component of ground shaking can make the
analysis for vertical ground motion shall be done. superstructure to vibrate in vertical plane. In short
span bridges, superstructure will be quite rigid and
Such analysis requires time period of
its time period will be very low. However, in long
superstructure in vertical direction. Time period for
span bridges, superstructure could be flexible. For
the superstructure has to be worked out separately
continuous superstructure, time period of
using the property of the superstructure, in order to
superstructure can be obtained by modeling it using
estimate the seismic acceleration coefficient (Sa/g)
general purpose structural analysis software.
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
2 m
TV = L2 , where L is the span, m is the
π 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
For locations, within 10 km of active fault, seismic In the regions very close to active fault, ground
zone factor for vertical ground motion may be taken motion characteristics could be quite different. In
as equal to that for horizontal motion. (which shall near-source regions, seismic hazards shall be based
include the 20% increase in horizontal PGA as per on detailed geological study of fault and local site
Clause 8.1.1). condition. In absence of such detailed study, the
zone factor for vertical motion is taken as same as
that for horizontal motion. It is to be noted that, for
such near source locations, the zone factor for
horizontal motion has already been enhanced by
20%. Thus, the zone factor for the horizontal and
vertical motion in zone V would be 0.36 x 1.2 =
0.432g.
Page 40
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 41
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 42
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Spectrum Acceleration Coefficient (Sa/g)
Damping % Factors
0 3.20
2 1.40
5 1.0
7 0.90
10 0.80
15 0.70
20 0.60
25 0.55
30 0.50
Page 43
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
W
T 2
1000 F
Fig. C3b – Design vibration unit in transverse
W = Full Wight of the superstructure, 80%
weight of substructure, and appropriate amount In the seismic weight, full weight of superstructure
of live load in kN. (pier) shall be considered. However, when a single
pier and corresponding superstructure is idealized as
F = Horizontal force in kN required to be SDOF system, only 80% weight of substructure
applied at the centre of mass of superstructure (pier) is considered. This is so, because the
for one mm horizontal deflection at the top of distributed weight of the pier is lumped at the top
pier/abutment for the earthquake in the level. During lateral ground motion, the lateral
transverse direction, and the force to be seismic force on pier would be distributed along its
applied at the top of the bearings for the height. In the SDOF model, the lateral seismic force
earthquake in the longitudinal direction. corresponding to pier weight is to be lumped at the
(2) For multi-span integral bridges (continuous top and hence only 80% pier weight is included in
bridges), the design vibration unit consists of a the seismic weight. The appropriate amount of live
number of substructures and superstructure load implies that 50% live load in transverse
portions supported by it (Fig. C-3c). The direction and no live load in longitudinal direction.
fundamental natural period ( T ) shall be In response spectrum analysis (Clause 10.0), where
calculated by any suitable method. For free vibration analysis is carried out to obtain natural
example, Rayleigh’s method may be used as time period, total weight of substructure is
follows: considered.
T 2 δ
W (s)us2 ds
W (s)u(s)ds
Continuous bridge; F = fixed and M = movable bearings
W s Weight of the superstructure and
substructure at position s (kN)
u (s ) Displacement at position s caused in the
acting direction of inertial force when the
force corresponding to the weight of the
For transverse direction
superstructure and substructure above the
Page 44
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 45
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
9.1.1.1- C9.1.1.1-
For ultimate limit state, the cracked flexural stiffness CALTRANS, AASSHTO and Eurocode use cracked
of reinforced concrete pier shall be used. The flexural stiffness. For piers/columns which are
cracked flexural stiffness is the initial slope of the compression members, the effective flexural stiffness
moment curvature (M-) curve and is given by is considered to be 0.5 to 0.7 times gross flexural
stiffness, depending on the level of axial stress.
My
E c I eff =
where, φy
My is the moment capacity of the column/pier
section at the first yield of the reinforcing steel, and
y is the yield curvature.
In the absence of more rigorous estimate, effective
moment of inertia, Ieff, can be taken as 0.75 times
gross moment of inertia, Ig.
9.2 - Maximum Elastic Forces and C9.2 - Maximum Elastic Forces and
Deformations Deformations
The inertia forces due to mass of each component The seismic forces, thus obtained on each component
or portion of the bridge as obtained from Clause of bridge are used in linear static analysis of bridge
9.2.1 shall be applied at the center of mass of the to obtain the response quantities such as bending
corresponding component or portion of the bridge. moment, shear force, axial force and deformation.
A linear static analysis of the bridge shall be An adequate mathematical model of bridge shall be
performed for these applied inertia forces to obtain made and seismic forces shall be applied at the
the force resultants (e.g., bending moment, shear centre of mass of each component. Mathematical
force and axial force) and deformations (e.g., model of 2-span bridge is shown in Fig C3. Here
displacements and rotations) at different locations piers (or column) are modeled by three frame
in the bridge. The stress resultants Ve and elements. Likewise superstructure is modeled using
deformations so obtained are the maximum elastic four frame elements. Such mathematical model can
force resultants (at the chosen cross-section of the also be analyzed by using standard structural analysis
bridge component) and the maximum elastic software. Seismic forces along with various loads
deformations (at the chosen nodes in the bridge (such as DL, LL) shall be applied on the model and
structure), respectively. analysis shall be done to obtain the response
quantities (bending moment, shear force, axial force
and deformation).
Node
Element
Page 46
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
9.2.1- Inertia Force Due to Mass of Each C9.2.1 - Inertia Force Due to Mass of
Bridge Component Each Bridge Component
The inertia force due to the mass of each bridge The inertia force due to the mass of a bridge
component (e.g., superstructure, substructure and component under earthquake ground shaking in a
foundation) under earthquake ground shaking along particular direction depends on the elastic seismic
any direction shall be obtained from acceleration coefficient computed for shaking along
that direction. Clearly, this acceleration coefficient
F e AhW will be different along different directions owing to
different natural periods along those directions.
where Moreover, seismic weight will also be different in
Ah = Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient along the longitudinal and transverse directions due to
the considered direction of shaking obtained different amount of live load in the two directions.
as per Clause 9.1, and
W = Seismic weight as discussed in Clause 8.4.
Page 47
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 48
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 49
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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
RCC Piers without ductile detailing
- Single Column, Wall Type 2.0
- Frame Type 2.5
Steel Framed Construction 2.5
Steel Framed Piers (with properly designed cross bracings) 3.5
Masonry/PCC piers (unreinforced )* 1.5
RCC Abutment 2.0
Masonry/PCC Abutment 1.5
Connections (including bearings)
Superstructure to abutment 0.8
Superstructure to column or pier 1
Columns or piers to foundations 1
Expansion joints within a span of the superstructure 0.8
Superstructure 1.0
Foundations ** 1.5
* This pier is not allowed in seismic zone IV and V
** For stability analysis of well foundation by conventional method, seismic forces can be
further reduced by a factor of 2.0.
Notes: 1. Response reduction factor is not to be applied for the calculation of displacements.
2. R value for foundations, also refer Clause 15.1
3. For connections, also refer Clause 16.1.1
4. Usually superstructure are rigid and are unlikely to posses much ductility, and they are
usually designed for elastic forces. However, if Earthquake forces with R=1 , are very
high and if they govern the design of superstructure ,then one should obtain the
maximum load carrying capacity of the pier ( which is designed as ductile member), and
superstructure shall be designed for the forces equal to maximum load carrying capacity
of the ductile member i.e. pier.
Page 50
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 51
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
2.50 Tk ≤ 0.67
Sa
1.67/Tk 0.67 ≤ Tk 3.00
g k 0.56 Tk ≥ 3.00
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.
Page 52
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
To be used for k =
Spectrum Acceleration Coefficient
(Sa/g)k
Page 53
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
k m 1
T
= ,
k T m k
Ak = Elastic seismic acceleration coefficient for
mode k as defined in Clause 10.1,
g = Acceleration due to gravity, and
Page 54
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 55
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
10.3.1 C10.3.1-
The number of modes to be considered in the Standard text books on structural dynamics cover
analysis shall be such that at least 90% of the total details of response spectrum method, number of modes
seismic mass of the structure is included in the to be included and missing mass corrections.
calculations of response for earthquake shaking
along each principal direction. If modes with
natural frequency beyond 33 Hz are to be
considered, modal combination (Clause 10.3 (a)
and 10.3 (b)) shall be carried out only for modes
with natural frequency less than 33 Hz. Modes
with natural frequency exceeding 33 Hz shall be
treated as rigid modes and accounted for through
missing mass correction discussed below:
At degree of freedom j, the missing mass is given
by
n
C j m j (1 Pk kj ) m j
k 1
where
Pk Modal participation factor for mode k,
φ kj Mode shape coefficient for jth, degree of
freedom in kth mode of vibration
th
m j Total mass of the j mode,
th
c j Fraction of missing mass for j mode.
Lateral force associated with missing mass is
Z
Fjmissing c j m j I
2
Page 56
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 57
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Ground level
after scour
Page 58
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
11.3.2 Ground Motions for Two- and C11.3.2 Ground Motions for Two- and
Three-Dimensional Analysis Three-Dimensional Analysis
For 2-dimesional analysis, ground motion consists For a bridge with multi-column piers, the 2-
of horizontal acceleration time history in the Dimensional model for longitudinal direction is shown
direction under consideration. If vertical ground in Fig C7. For this model, the X-component of ground
motion is to be considered, then, vertical motion will be used. For analysis in transverse
acceleration time history is also used. direction, the model is shown in Fig C8. For this
model, the Z-component of ground motion will be
For 3-dimenstional analysis, ground motions
used.
consist of pairs of time histories of appropriate
components of horizontal accelerations. For each On the other hand, if 3-dimensional model of the bridge
pair of horizontal acceleration time histories, is used Fig C9, then both the component will be applied
Page 59
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
x g (t)
zg (t)
Fig C7- 2-Dimensional Model
Fig C8 - 2-Dimensional
for longitudinal Direction
Model for Transverse
Direction
xg (t )
zg (t )
Page 60
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 61
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 62
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
13.1- C13.1 –
The superstructure shall be designed for the For seismic analysis in lateral directions, seismic forces
design seismic forces specified in Clauses 9.0 or will be governed by the time period of the combined
10.0 along with the other appropriate loads. system of substructure and substructure. For obtaining
vertical forces on superstructure, time period of
The superstructure shall be designed for lesser of
superstructure will have to be obtained. Usually
following forces:
superstructures are quite rigid in vertical direction,
a) Elastic seismic forces i.e. seismic forces with except for long span bridges. The elastic seismic force
R= 1.0 obtained as per Clause 9.0 or Clause 10.0 shall be
applied along with the other loads (like DL, LL, etc.)
b) Forces developed when over strength plastic on the mathematical model of the superstructure and
moment hinges are formed in the linear static analysis shall be carried out. If necessary,
substructure. As described in Appendix A. the vertical seismic forces shall also be considered.
13.2 - C13.2 -
Under simultaneous action of horizontal and Since the supporting width of the span in the transverse
vertical accelerations, the superstructure shall direction is relatively small in comparison with that in
have a factor of safety of at least 1.5 against the longitudinal direction, overturning of
overturning. In this calculation, the forces to be superstructures (that are resting on the substructure
considered on the superstructure shall be the without being monolithically connected) in the
maximum elastic forces generated in the transverse direction may be possible under the
superstructure, as calculated using Clauses 9.2 combined action of seismic forces along transverse and
and 10.3. vertical directions. Of course, in these calculations, the
direction of vertical seismic force shall be taken so as
to produce the worst effect.
Railway bridges invariably contain guard rails, which
are likely to provide resistance to overturning in
transverse direction.
13.3 - C13.3 -
The superstructure shall be secured to the This clause makes it mandatory in high seismic
substructure, particularly in seismic zones IV and regions to have suitable linking devices provided
V, through vertical hold-down devices and anti- between the superstructure and substructure if they had
dislodging elements in horizontal direction as not been monolithically connected, and between the
specified in Clauses 13.3.1 and 13.3.2, suspended spans, if any, and restrained portion of the
respectively. These vertical hold-down devices superstructure.
and anti-dislodging elements may also be used to
(a) vertical hold-down devices to prevent the
secure the suspended spans, if any, with the
superstructure from lifting off from its supports
restrained portions of the superstructure.
atop the substructure particularly under vertical
However, the frictional forces shall not be relied
seismic forces combined with the transverse
upon in the design of these hold-down devices or
seismic forces, and
Page 63
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
13.3.1.1 - C13.3.1.1 -
Where vertical force U, due to the combined effect
of maximum elastic horizontal and vertical seismic
forces, opposes and exceeds 50%, but is less
than 100%, of the dead load reaction D, the
vertical hold-down device shall be designed for a
minimum net upward force of 10% of the
downward dead load reaction that would be
exerted if the span were simply supported.
13.3.1.2 - C13.3.1.2 -
If the vertical force U, due to the combined effect
of maximum horizontal and vertical seismic forces,
opposes and exceeds 100% of the dead load
reaction D, then the device shall be designed for a
net upward force of 1.2(U-D); however, it shall not
be less than 10% of the downward dead load
reaction that would be exerted if the span were
simply supported.
Page 64
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Girder
Girder Girder
Pier
Page 65
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
13.3.2.1 – C13.3.2.1 –
The linkage shall be designed for at least the The design seismic force for each bridge component is
elastic seismic acceleration coefficient Ah times only a fraction of the maximum elastic force that can be
the weight of the lighter of the two connected sustained by it, if it were to remain completely elastic
spans or parts of the structure. during earthquake shaking. However, the deformations
calculated from the linear analysis of the bridge
subjected to these design forces are much smaller than
the actual deformations that may be experienced during
seismic shaking.
13.3.2.2- C13.3.2.2-
If the linkage is at locations where relative Unseating of superstructure from the substructure or
deformation are permitted in the design then, the suspended span from the restrained portion are the
sufficient slack must be allowed in the linkage so possible consequences if the actual deformations are
that linkages start functioning only when the not accounted for in the design of the supports at these
relative design displacement at the linkage is interface points. Sometimes, the two portions that move
exceeded. relative to each other are securely fastened by positive
horizontal linkage elements. These devices are usually
high tensile wire strand ties, cables or dampers. For the
purposes of the design of these devices, the
recommendations from the AASHTO code are used.
The design forces specified are conservative to provide
increased protection at a minimum increased cost.
13.3.2.3- C13.3.2.3 –
When linkages are provided at columns or piers,
the linkage of each span may be connected to the
column or pier instead of the adjacent span.
13.3.2.4- C13.3.2.4-
Reaction blocks (or seismic arrestors) when used Due to the presence of guard rails, which are likely to
as anti-dislodging elements shall be designed for offer resistance to sliding during seismic event, the
seismic force equal to 1.5 times the elastic seismic strength requirements of anti-dislodging elements can
coefficient multiplied by tributary weight of spans be reduced.
corresponding to that pier/abutment.
Page 66
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Shock absorber
Concrete block
Abutment
Shock absorber
Steel bracket
Abutment
Rails
Reaction Reaction
block block
Pier
Bearings
Page 67
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
14.2.1- C14.2.1-
For the submerged portion of the pier, the total This clause is retained as given in IS: 1893-1984,
horizontal hydrodynamic force along the direction except that Ah replaces h. Again, as stated earlier in
of ground motion is given by this guideline, Ah is different from h. Hence, the
hydrodynamic forces calculated as per this code will be
F Ce AhWe
much higher than those estimated as per IS: 1893-
where Ce is a coefficient given by Table 8, 1984.
depending on the height of submergence of the
pier relative to that of the radius of a hypothetical
enveloping cylinder (Fig. 5); 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. 6; the coefficients C1, C2, C3 and C4
in Fig. 6 are given in Table 9.
Page 68
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
14.2.2- C14.2.2-
In response spectrum analysis, to account for The expression for WWP is taken from Japanese
hydrodynamic pressure, additional weight of water highway bridge code. In response spectrum analysis,
shall be added over the submerged depth of pier. mathematical model of the bridge is analyzed. For
The weight of water to be added at a height of including the hydrodynamic force effect in this model,
3/7H from the ground level, is given by: an additional weight is to be included. The mass
corresponding to this added weight would generate the
3 bH P b inertia force which shall be same as the hydrodynamic
WWP W0 A0 (1 )
4 a 4H force. The expression for WWP is similar to CeWe term
given in Clause 14.2. A comparison of WWP and CeWe
for b/H < 2.0 for a wall type pier is shown below:
3 bH P b Pier Height = 8m, Pier sectional area = 1 x 3 m2 ,
WWP W0 A0 (0.7 )
4 a 10 H Water depth, H = 2/3 x 8 = 5.33 m
for 2.0 < b/H < 4.0 Case I) Seismic loading along 3 m face :
9 bH P
WWP W0 A0 Radius of enveloping circle = 0.5 m, H = 5.33 m
40 a H / radius = 5.33 / 0.5 = 10.66 ; Ce = 0.73
for 4.0 < b/H and We = wo x π x (radius)2 x H
where, = 1 x 3.1428 x (0.5)2 x 5.33 = 4.184
b = structural width perpendicular to hydrodynamic Ce x We = 0.73 x 4.184 = 3.05
pressure, b = 1 m, a = 3 m, Ao = 1 x 3 = 3 m2
a =structural width in the direction of
hydrodynamic pressure,
Ao = sectional area of the substructure, and 3 bH P b
WWP W0 A0 (1 )
Wo= density of water. 4 a 4H
Hp = pier height
WWP = 3.81
H = height of submerged portion of pier
Case II) Seismic loading along 1 m face :
3 bH P b
WWP W0 A0 (1 )
4 a 4H
Page 69
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
WWP = 30.9
Thus, the values of CeWe and WWP are comparable for
both the directions of seismic loading.
PROVISIONS
Table - 8. Values of Ce
Page 70
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS
Direction of
Seismic Shaking
C1H C3F
(Resultant of pressure on
C2pb shaded area up to depth C1H)
H
C4H pb = 1.2F/H
pb
Fig. 6: Hydrodynamic Pressure Distribution on the Substructure due to Steam Flow (Clause
14.2.2)
Page 71
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 72
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
14.4.1 - C14.4.1
When the superstructure of a multi-span bridge
consists of a single continuous girder resting on a
restrained bearing (in longitudinal direction) over
one of the piers and on sliding bearings over the
other piers, the design seismic force at the top of
the substructures along the longitudinal direction
of the bridge shall be taken as follows:
(a) For the pier supporting the restrained bearing,
it shall be the full elastic seismic force
transmitted from the superstructure to the top
of the pier in the longitudinal direction divided
by the appropriate response reduction factor,
assuming no friction between the other sliding
bearings and the corresponding piers.
(b) For the other piers supporting the sliding
bearings, it shall be the horizontal friction
force generated on the pier due to the
superstructure resting on the pier considering
the maximum possible friction between the
sliding bearings and the top of the pier.
14.4.2 – C14.4.2 -
In transverse direction, the seismic force from
superstructure is to be transmitted to the
substructures in proportion to their lateral stiffness.
14.4.3 - C14.4.3 -
While considering the stability of the substructure,
such as, wingwalls, abutments etc., against
overturning, the minimum factor of safety shall be
1.5 under simultaneous action of maximum elastic
seismic forces in both horizontal and vertical
directions during the earthquake.
Page 73
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
15.1 - C15.1 -
The foundations of all bridges shall be designed to
resist lesser of the following forces:
(a) Design seismic forces obtained from Clauses
9.3 or 10.4 using value of R as 1.5.
(b) Forces developed when over strength plastic
moment hinges are formed in the substructure,
as described in Appendix A.
Note – For stability analysis of well foundation by
conventional method, seismic forces can be further
reduced by a factor of 2.0.
15.2 - C15.2 -
Not withstanding the provisions in relevant codes,
the following factor of safety shall be adopted for
seismic design of foundation under ultimate
condition:
Factor of safety against overturning - 1.5
Factor of safety against sliding - 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 –
In loose sands or poorly graded sands with little Damages to foundations have very serious implications
or no fines, vibrations due to earthquake may from structural safety considerations. Also, foundation
cause liquefaction or excessive total and repairs are very expensive as it is very difficult to
differential settlements. In Zones IV and V, the access and to make alterations in them. Hence, it is
founding of bridges on such sands should be required to ensure that these are not damaged. This
avoided unless appropriate methods of clause is intended to achieve the objective that in case
compaction or stabilization are adopted. of severe ground shaking, the foundation is not
Liquefaction analysis procedure is given in damaged. This is done first by requiring a much lower
APPENDIX G. Foundation should be taken to value of response reduction factor for foundation than
sufficient depth below the layers of soil which are for the substructure, i.e., a much higher design seismic
Page 74
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
susceptible to liquefaction. coefficient for foundation than that for the substructure.
However, this is qualified through the concept of
capacity design.
Since the seismic forces are inertia induced, the
foundation can never experience a seismic force higher
than what the substructure is capable of transmitting to
it. The attempt is to obtain this upper-bound force that
can be transmitted by the substructure by calculating
its overstrength plastic moment capacity. The code
requires the lower of (a) and (b) of Clause 15.1 to be
used in design of the foundation.
Page 75
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
16.1.1 –Seismic Zone II and III C16.1.1 – Seismic Zone II and III
The connections between adjacent sections of the In low seismic regions, the effort in the seismic design
superstructure or between the superstructure and of the bridges is reduced to some extent by this clause
the substructure shall be designed to resist at by requiring only a simple design force calculation for
least horizontal seismic force in the restrained the restrained supports (e.g., rocker or elastomeric
directions equal to 0.2 times the vertical dead load bearings). The clause, same as that in the AASHTO
reaction at the bearing, irrespective of the number code, is considered to provide a somewhat
of spans. overestimate of the design force.
Page 76
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 77
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
L= Length (in meters) of the superstructure to Hence, this clause attempts that even under maximum
the adjacent expansion joint or to the end of expected deformations, possibility of collapse or loss
superstructure. In case of bearings under of span are minimized through conservative provisions
suspended spans, it is sum of the lengths of the of minimum seating widths. The values of seating
two adjacent portions of the superstructure. In widths recommended for high seismic regions are
case of single span bridges, it is equal to the higher than those for low seismic regions; this is
length of the superstructure. because of higher potential of connection failures in
high seismic zones. The minimum seat width is
For bearings at abutments, Hp is the average
required in longitudinal as well as transverse direction.
height (in meters) of all columns supporting the
superstructure to the next expansion joint. It is Based on the data supplied by RDSO, minimum seat
equal to zero for single span bridges. For bearings width for different types of bridges is given in Table
at columns or piers, Hp is the height (in meters) of C2
column or pier. For bearings under suspended
spans, Hp is the average height (in meters) of the
two adjacent columns or piers.
Graphical representation of seating widths is
shown in Fig. 7. Height of Pier (Hp)
L
Slab/Girder
Abutment G.L.
W
(a) Abutment The Minimum seating width given in various codes are:
L1 L2
Page 78
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PIERS
3050 3710 3890 3960 915 255 76 420 378 629 *
3660 4320 4500 4575 915 255 75 420 379 632 *
4570 5310 5490 5565 995 255 75 460 381 634 *
6100 6910 7090 7165 1065 255 75 495 383 638 *
ELEVATION 9150 10900 10200 10300 1150 300 100 525 388 646 *
(NOT TO SCALE) 12200 13100 13300 13400 1200 300 100 550 392 654 *
d B-PSC GIRDERS
w
12200 13100 13300 13400 1200 300 100 550 392 654 *
18300 19400 19650 19800 1500 400 150 675 402 670
w w
24400 25600 26050 26200 1800 600 150 825 411 686
30500 31900 32450 32600 2100 700 150 975 421 702
e a e 45100 46150 46850 48150 3050 2000 60 875 444 740
g c g C-STEEL/COMPOSITE GIRDERS
9150 10900 10200 10300 1150 300 100 525 388 646 *
f b f 12200 13100 13300 13400 1200 300 100 550 392 654 *
18300 19400 19650 19800 1500 400 150 675 402 670
w 24400 25600 26050 26200 1800 600 150 825 411 686
30500 31900 32450 32600 2100 700 150 925 421 702
PLAN 45700 47250 47850 48150 2450 900 300 1075 444 740
a = Nominal Clear Span 61000 63000 63700 64000 3000 1000 300 1350 468 780
b = Centres of Bearings
c = Over all length of Girder/Slab 76200 78800 79600 79900 3700 1100 300 1700 492 819
d = Centres to Centres of Piers 91500 94000 95200 95800 4300 1800 600 1850 515 858
e = Width of Piers at Top
f = Centres of Bearings on piers 5000 1800 600 2200 539 898
g = Clearance between spans 5500 2000 700 2400 563 937
w = Minimum width of seating of spans on supports
Hp = Height of Pier in meters.
L = Length in meters of Superstructure to the adjacent expansion joint
or to the end of Superstructure. Note:- 1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.
Page 79
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 80
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Super Structure
Pier
STU unit
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 82
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 83
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 84
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
A1
0.8
0.6
IS 1893 Zone V
0.4 Soil Type I
(5% damped)
Composite spectrum
for isolated bridge A2
0.2
Period of non- A3
isolated bridge
Teff
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period of
Period Shift
PERIOD (sec) isolated bridge
Page 85
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Force Fmax
Fy Kd
Qd
Keff
Ku Ku
Displacement
max
EDC
Qd = Characteristics Strength
Fy = Yield Force
Fmax = Maximum Force
Kd = Post-elastic stiffness
Ku = Elastic (unloading) stiffness
Keff = Maximum bearing displacement
EDC = Energy dissipated per cycle = Area of hysteresis loop (shaded)
Fig.10 Bilinear force-deflection model for isolator (Clause 19.0)
Page 86
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
250 AhTeff 2
di mm,
BI
W
where, Teff 2
Keff g
Since, the isolator unit has low stiffness, the
displacement increases. The clearance in the two
orthogonal directions shall be the maximum
displacement determined in each of the directions
from the analysis. The clearance shall not be less
than
200 AhTeff 2
mm
BI
where, BI is the damping coefficient corresponding
to the effective damping ratio of the isolator unit.
The value of BI shall be taken from Table 10.
Page 87
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 88
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
19.4.3 - Vertical Load and Rotational C19.4.3 – Vertical Load and Rotational
Stability Stability
In laterally undeformed state, the isolation system The buckling load capacity of bearing can be
shall provide a factor of safety of at least three calculated using following relation:
against the vertical loads. It shall also be shown to
be stable under 1.2 times the dead load and
S1S 2 GAr For circular
vertical load due to seismic force. Further, its 2 2
stability against the lateral displacement equal to Pcr
the offset displacement and 1.1 times the total S1S 2GAr For square
design displacement shall be checked. 6
The isolator shall have the rotation capacity to S1 = shape factor of the rubber bearing and for the
accommodate rotation due to dead load, live load lead-plugged rubber bearing it is defined as
and construction misalignment, which shall not be Ab Apl
less than 0.005 radians. Ab = bonded area and Apl = area of
Br tr ,
lead-plug
B
S2 = second shape factor (aspect ratio) defined as
Tr
Ar = overlap area between the top-bonded and bottom-
bonded elastomer areas of a displaced bearing, as
shown in Fig. 12
Buckling load capacity under vertical load can be
calculated for non-seismic displacement by replacing
Ar by Ab in the above relation.
Page 89
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Circular
B2
Ar sin
4
d
B 2 cos 1 r
B
Bonded dimension
Rectangular dt
B1
Bonded dimension
B2
Ar B2 B1 d1
Page 90
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
19.5.3 – C19.5.3 –
These tests are done at manufacturing units and
the specimens involved in the test are not used.
The prototype test is to be conducted on at least
two specimen of full size. The system
characterization tests are conducted on various
components as per the requirements of the
corresponding IS codes.
19.5.4 – C19.5.4–
th
A shake table test on model not less than 1/4 of
full model shall be done. Scale factors for this test
shall be well established. Wear or travel and
fatigue tests are conducted to check if the
movements due to thermal displacements and live
load rotation can be accommodated. The thermal
displacements and live load rotations shall
correspond to at least 30 years of expected
movement. The tests shall be applied at the
design contact pressure and at 200C 80C. The
rate of application shall be not less than 63.5
mm/minute.
19.5.5 – C19.5.5
The tests shall be done for following minimum :
Bearings – 1.6 km
Dampers attached to the web of the neutral axis –
1.6 km
Dampers attached to the girder bottom – 3.2 km.
19.5.6 – C19.5.6
The prototype specimen shall be tested in the
following sequence for prescribed number of
cycles:
Page 91
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Test Description
(A) Component
Twenty fully reversed cycles between limits of plus and minus maximum load
Wind and
for a total duration not less than 40 seconds. After the cyclic testing, the
braking
maximum load shall be held for 60 seconds.
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
Seismic -1
mentioned. The results of test corresponding to design displacement are used
for finding stiffness and damping properties.
Fully reversed cycles of loading at design displacement for 25 cycles. The test
Seismic -2
shall be started from a displacement equal to the offset displacement.
The prototype
specimen shall
be tested in the
Three fully reversed cycles between limits of plus and minus the maximum
following
load for a total duration not less than 40 seconds. After the cyclic testing, the
sequence for
maximum load shall be held for 60 seconds. This test is done to ascertain the
prescribed
survivability of the isolator after the major earthquake.
number of
cycles: Wind
and braking
(B) Prototype
Seismic
Three fully reversed cycles of loading at the deign displacement. The test
performance
verifies service load performance after the major earthquake.
verification
Page 92
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
19.5.7 – C19.5.7 –
The force deflection characteristics of the isolator
shall be based on cyclic load test results (seismic
test described above) for each fully reversed cycle of Force
loading (Fig. 10). The effective stiffness of an keff
isolator unit shall be calculated for each cycle of Fp
loading as follows:
Fp Fn Δn Δp
K eff
p n Displacement
Fn
where, P and n are maximum positive and Fig. C13 Hysteretic Behavior
negative displacements and FP and Fn are maximum
positive and negative forces at P and n
respectively (Fig. 10). Force
keff
Fp
Δn Δp
Displacement
Fn
19.5.8 – C19.5.8–
The equivalent viscous damping ratio () is given by
Page 93
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
19.7.1 Shear Strain Components for 19.7.1 – Shear Strain Components for
Isolation Design Isolation Design
The various components of shear strain in the
bearing shall be computed as:
Page 94
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
3S1P
2 A G(1 2kS 2 )
r
s
Shear strain due to non-seismic lateral
displacement
s ,s
Tr
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, S1 shall be
taken as the plan area of the elastomer layer divided
by the area of perimeter free to bulge.
s is non seismic lateral displacement resulting from
creep, post-tensioning, shrinkage and thermal
effects,
di is seismic lateral displacement,
θ is design rotation and shall not be less than 0.005
rad.
Tr is total elastomer thickness,
Page 95
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 96
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
PROVISIONS COMMENTARY
Page 97
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
2) “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications”, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), USA, 2007.
3) Seismic Design Criteria”, California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS), USA, 2006.
4) Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance”, Eurocode 8: Part 2: Bridges, European
Committee for Standardization, 2005.
6) “Specifications for Highway Bridges”, Part V Seismic Design Japan Road Association, 2003.
7) “Seismic Design for Railway Structures”, Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), Japan,
2000.
8) “Seismic Design Criteria for High Speed Rail Project“, National Center for Research on
Earthquake Engineering, Taiwan, 1992.
9) Murty, C.V.R. and Jain, S.K. “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, 2000.
10) Murty, C.V.R. and Jain, S.K. “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, 2000
11) Skinner ,R.I. , Kelly , T.E. and Robinson , B. “ Seismic Isolation for Designers and Structural
Engineers”, Robinson Seismic Ltd.
12) “AASHTO Guide Specifications for Seismic Isolation Design “American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), USA, 2000.
Page 98
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
1) IRC:6 Standard Specification and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, 2000
2) IRC:83 (Part III) Standard Specification and Code of (Part III) Practice for Road Bridges
Section IX: - Bearings, 2002
3) IRS Code of Practice For Plain, Reinforced & Prestressed Concrete For General Bridge
Construction, Third Revision, 2004
4) IRS Code of Practice For the Design of Sub-Structures and Foundation of Bridge, Second
Revision,2004
5) IRS Code of Practice For the Design of Steel or Wrought Iron Bridges Carrying Rail, Road or
Pedestrian Traffic, Second Revision, 2004
6) IRS Bridge Rules specifying the Loads for Bridge Design of Super Structure and Sub- Rules
Structure of bridges, Second Revision, 2004
8) IS 1893 (Part I) Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part I: General
Provisions and Buildings, 2002
9) IS 1893 (Part 3) Draft Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Bridges and
Retaining Walls, 2008
10) IS 13920 Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structure Subjected to Seismic Forces-Code
of Practice, 1993
Page 99
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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.
C-1 Specification
C-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.
C-2 Layout
(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.
C-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.
Page 100
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
(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.
Page 101
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
can occur. This transverse reinforcement should extend for a distance from the point of maximum
moment over the plastic hinge region over a length l0. The length l0 shall not be less than,
(a) 1.5 times the column diameter or 1.5 times the larger cross sectional dimension where yielding
occurs
(b) 1/6 of clear height of the column for frame pier (i.e when hinging can occur at both ends of the
column)
(c) 1/4 of clear height of the column for cantilever pier (i.e when hinging can occur at only one end of
the column)
(d) 600 mm
The parallel legs of rectangular stirrups shall be spaced not more than 1/3 of the smallest
dimension of the concrete core or more than 350 mm centre to centre. If the length of any side of the
stirrups exceeds 350 mm, a cross tie shall be provided. Alternatively, overlapping stirrups may be
provided within the column.
C-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 0.09 SDk 1 ck
Ac fy
fck
or, Ash = 0.024SDk
fy
Page 102
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
C-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
Ag f
Ash 0.24 Sh 1.0 ck
Ar fy
or,
f ck
Ash 0.096Sh
fy
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.
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.
Once the position of the plastic hinges has been determined and these regions detailed to ensure
a ductile performance, the structure between the plastic hinges is designed considering the capacity of
the plastic hinges. The intention here is:
(i) To reliably protect the bridge against collapse so that it will be available for service after a
major shaking.
(ii) To localize structural damage to the plastic hinge regions where it can be controlled and
repaired.
The process of designing the structure between the plastic hinges is known as “capacity design”.
To avoid a brittle shear failure design shear force for pier shall be based on overstrength moment
capacities of the plastic hinges and given by:
Vu =
∑M O
Page 103
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
where
∑M O
= 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.
Beam-column joints should be designed properly to resist the forces caused by axial loads,
bending and shear forces in the joining members. Forces in the joint should be determined by considering
a free body of the joint with the forces on the joint member boundaries properly represented.
The joint shear strength should be entirely provided by transverse reinforcement. Where the joint
is not confined adequately (i.e. where minimum pier and pile cap width is less than three column
diameters) the special confinement requirement should be satisfied.
C-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.
C-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 45º around the column as per prevailing practices.
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.
Page 104
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Earthquake
A
Force
Column Cap
Earthquake
Potential Plastic
Hinge Regions
Pile Cap
Pile
Elevation Section AA
a. Single column or pier type substructures
Earthquake Force A
Column Cap
Earthquake
Potential Plastic
Hinge Regions
Piles
A
Elevation Section AA
(b) Multi-column or frame type substructures
Fig. C-1: Potential location of plastic hinges in substructures (Clause C-0).
Page 105
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 106
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 107
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
where, Y is yield displacement of the system from its initial position to the formation of plastic hinge.
E-3 Displacement capacity
The local displacement capacity of a member is obtained from its curvature capacity, which is determined
from the moment curvature (M-) analysis. The expected stress strain curve or material properties of
concrete and steel are used. For confined concrete, the Mander’s model shown in Fig. E-1 is used, and
the stress-strain model shown in Fig. E-2 is used for steel. The moment curvature analysis obtains the
curvatures associated with a range of moments for a cross-section, based on the strain compatibility force
equilibrium conditions. The M- curve (Fig. E-3) can be idealized with an elastic perfectly plastic curve to
estimate the plastic moment capacity of a cross-section. The idealized plastic moment capacity is
obtained by balancing the areas between the actual curve and the idealized curve beyond the first
reinforcing bar yield point (Fig. E-3).
Page 108
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Idealized curve
Actual curve
Here, Mp is the plastic moment capacity , My is the first reinforcing bar yield point & Mne is the expected
nominal moment capacity, u is the curvature capacity at the failure limit state defined as the concrete
strain reaching cu or the confinement reinforcing steel reaching the reduced ultimate strain cuR. Similarly,
Y is the idealized yield curvature defined by an elastic-perfectly plastic representation of M- curve (Fig.
E-3).The idealized plastic curvature capacity, P, which is assumed constant over plastic hinge length, LP
is given by P = u - Y. The hinge length, LP in mm is given by
LP = 0.08L + 0.022fyedbl 0.044fyedbl for columns (mm, MPa)
LP = G + 0.044fyedbl for horizontally isolated flared columns
Here, G is the gap between the isolated flare and the soffit of the bent cap. With reference to Fig. E-4, the
plastic rotation capacity, P = LP x P and
L
P P L P
2
Page 109
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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.
Page 110
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Active wedge
kh W s
-
Active wedge Ws
H
Failure Surface EAE
Kh W ha EAE
w
(1-Kv ) R
Cantilever Wall
F-1.1.1 Active Pressure Due to Earth fill - The general conditions encountered for the design of
retaining walls are illustrated in Fig. F 1. The total active pressure exerted against the wall shall be the
maximum of the two given by the following expression:
1
E AE H 2 (1 Ah ) K AE (F.1.)
2
Where the seismic active earth pressure coefficient KAE is given by
2
cos 2 ( ) sin( )sin( i )
E AE 1 (F.2.)
cos cos cos( )
2
cos( )cos(i )
and where
= unit weight of soil (kN/m3)
H = height of wall in (m)
Ф=angle of friction of soil (0)
Av= vertical seismic coefficient– it’s value being taken consistently throughout the stability analysis of wall
Page 111
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Ah
θ tan -1
1 Av
F.1.1.2 Point of Application – From the total pressure computed as above subtract the static active
pressure obtained by putting Av = Ah = θ = 0 in the expression given by equation F.1and F.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.
F.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:
1
EPE H 2 (1 AV ) K PE (F.3.)
2
Where the seismic passive earth pressure coefficient KPE is given by
2
cos 2 ( ) sin( )sin( i )
EPE 1 (F.4.)
cos cos cos( )
2
cos( ) cos(i )
F.1.2.2 Point of application - From the static passive pressure obtained by putting k h kv 0 in the
expression given by equation F.3 and F.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.
F.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:
qH cos
( E AE ) q (1 AV ) K AE (F.5.)
cos(i )
F.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.
F.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:
qH cos
( PPE )q K PE (F.6.)
cos(i )
F.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
Page 112
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
a) The value of shall be taken as the value 1/2 of for dry backfill.
b) The value of θ shall be taken as follows:
t Ah
tan 1 (F.7.)
b (1 Av )
Where
d) From the value of earth pressure found out as above, subtract the value of earth pressure determined
by putting Av = Ah = θ = 0but using buoyant unit weight. The remainder shall be dynamic increment.
F.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.
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.
Page 113
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Tan(900-) =
l
OR
h2
h1
e =
e =
Notes:
(1) Exact solution when ru = 0. e =
(2) Approximate Solution when ru > 0.
Page 114
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Step 2: Evaluate the total vertical stress v and effective vertical stress v for all potentially
liquefiable layers within the deposit.
Step 3: The following equation can be used to evaluate the stress reduction factor rd :
1
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): 817-
833.
Page 115
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
For assessing liquefaction susceptibility using the SPT go to Step 5a, for the CPT go to Step 5b, and the
shear wave velocity go to Step 5c, to compute cyclic resistance ratio (CRR7.5) for Mw 7.5 earthquakes.
Cyclic resistance ratio, CRR for sites for earthquakes of other magnitudes or for sites underlain by non-
horizontal soil layers or where vertical effective stress exceeds 1 atmospheric pressure is estimated by
multiplying CRR7.5 by three correction factors, Km, Kα and Kσ respectively. Here correction factors for
magnitude sloped stratigraphy and effective stress has been denoted with symbols Km, Kα and Kσ,
respectively. These correction factors are obtained from figures G-1, G-2 and G-3.
Step 5a:
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 G-1 in the absence of test-specific energy measurement.
The standardized SPT blow count is obtained from the equation:
N 60 N .C60
where C60 is the product of various correction factors. Correction factors recommended by various
investigators for some common SPT configurations are provided in Table G-2.
Calculate the normalized standardized SPT blow count, N1 60 using N 1 60 C N N 60 , where N1 60 is
the standardized blow count
normalized to an effective overburden pressure of 98 kPa in order to eliminate the influence of confining
pressure. Stress normalization factor CN is calculated from following expression:
CN Pa / v
1/ 2
C N 9.79 1 / v
1/ 2
The Critical Resistance Ratio (CRR) or the resistance of a soil layer against liquefaction is estimated from
Figure A-5 for representative N 1 60 value of the deposit.
Step 5b:
Calculate normalized cone tip resistance, q c1N cs , using qc1N cs K c Pa v n qc Pa
where q c 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.
K c 1.0 for I c 1.64 and
4 3 2
K c 0.403I c 5.581I c 21.63I c 33.75I c 17.88 for I c 1.64
The soil behavior type index, I c , is given by Ic 3.47 log Q 2 1.22 log F 2
Q qc v Pa Pa v , F f q c v 100 , f is the measured sleeve friction and n
n
where
has the same values as described earlier. Assess susceptibility of a soil to liquefaction using Figure G-6.
The CRR for a soil layer is estimated from Figure A-6 using the q c1N cs value representative of the layer.
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 and deformability of deposits with Ic>2.6 should thus be treated on a material specific basis.
Page 116
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Step 5c:
Vs1 Vs Pa v
0.25
Calculate normalized shear wave velocity, Vs1 , for clean sands using: subjected to
Vs1 1.3 Vs .
The CRR for a soil layer is estimated from Figure G-7 using the Vs1 value representative of the layer.
Appropriate CRR- Vs1 curve should be used in this assessment depending on the fines content of the
layer.
Step 6: Correct CRR7.5 for earthquake magnitude (Mw), stress level and for initial static shear using
correction factors km, k and k, respectively, according to:
2
B. Seed, K. O. Cetin, R. E. S. Moss, A. M. Kammerer, J. Wu, J. M. Pestana, M. F. Riemer, R.B. Sancio, J.D. Bray,
R. E. Kayen, and A. Faris 2003. Advances in Soil Liquefaction Engineering: A Unified and Consistent Frame
Work, Proceedings of 26th Annual ASCE Los Angeles Geotechnical Spring Seminar, Keynote Presentation,
Long Beach, California.
Page 117
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 118
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Table G-2: Correction Factors for Non-Standard SPT Procedures and Equipment.
Page 119
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
ho / v
Figure G-3: Correction for initial static shear (Note: Initial static shear for an embankment
may be estimated from Figure A-4)
Page 120
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
P
Z x
R2
x x 2 x log e
R1
P
xz Z
1 P 2 R2
1
( x z log e 2) 2
2 R1
PZ R2 1
max ( Log e2 2) 2
R1
Figure G-4: Initial static shear under an embankment
Page 121
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
CRR7.5
(N1)60
Figure G-5: Relationship between CRR and (N1)60 for sand for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
Page 122
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
CRR7.5
(qc1N)cs
Figure G-6: Relationship between CRR and (qc1N)cs for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
CRR7.5
Vs1 m/s
Figure G-7: Relationship between CRR and Vs1 for Mw, 7.5 earthquakes
Page 123
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
100
Liquefiable if %finer
than 5µm ≤15
wl (%)
wl = 35
wn = 0.9wl
0
0 100
100
Not Liquefiable
Ip (%)
Test if Wn ≤ 0.85Wl
Liquefiable if Wn ≤ 0.85Wl
20
12
0
0 37 47 100
Wl (%)
Figure G-8b: Proposal of Seed et al. (2003)
Page 124
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Where,
t = factors to account for effect of temperature
a = factors to account for effect of aging
v = factors to account for effect of velocity (including freq. for elastomeric bearings)
tr = factors to account for effect of travel (wear)
c = factors to account for effect of contamination (in sliding system)
scrag = factors to account for effect of scragging a bearing (in elastomeric systems)
Page 125
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
max,a
Kd Qd
Low-Damping 1.1 1.1
natural rubber
High-Damping rubber with small difference between scragged and 1.2 1.2
unscragged properties
High-Damping rubber with large difference between scragged and 1.3 1.3
unscragged properties
Lead - 1.0
Neoprene 3.0 3.0
for design Qd Kd
0
C HDRB1 HDRB2 LDRB2 HDRB1 HDRB2 LDRB2
21 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
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
HDRB = High damping rubber bearing
LDRB = Low damping rubber bearing
1
Large difference in scragged and unscragged properties (more than 25%)
2
Small differences in scragged and unscragged properties
max,scrag
Qd Kd
HDRB HDRB with HDRB with HDRB
LDRB LDRB
with βeff ≤ 0.15 βeff ≤ 0.15 βeff ≤ 0.15 with β eff ≤ 0.15
Page 126
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 127
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
* Test data based on 1/8-inch sheet, recessed by 1/16 inch and bonded.
Page 128
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
I.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 I-1 and I-2 will govern the operations.
Response
Details
level
Resume maximum operation speed. The need for the continuation of inspections
I
will be determined by proper authority responsible for maintenance of P.Way.
All trains and engines will run at restricted speed within a specified radius of the
II epicenter until inspections have been made and appropriate speeds established by
proper authority.
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
III 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.
Page 129
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Potential for scour or ponding against embankment due to changes in water course
I.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 Displaced or damaged bearings
o Stretched or broken anchor bolts
o Distress in viaduct tower
o Buckled columns or bracings
o Tension distress in main members or bracings
o Displaced substructure elements
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.
Page 130
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 131
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
1. Problem Statement:
A three span simply supported Railway Bridge with steel superstructure of open web girder and ballast
less track has equal spans of 76.2 m. Train load is Heavy Mineral type (HM loading). Bridge is located in
Zone V. The soil at the bridge site is of hard type (Type I). The circular RC pier has 12 m height and 2 m
diameter. Height of submerged pier is 4 m. Analyze the bridge for seismic loads at Ultimate Limit State.
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.
The schematic diagram of the bridge is shown below in Figure 1.1. Grade of pier concrete and
reinforcement are M30 and Fe415 respectively. Density of concrete is 25 kN/m3. RC pier has ductile
detailing.
76.2 m 76.2 m 76.2 m
Pier Height = 12 m
G.L.
Page 132
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
8
Dead Load (DL) per meter of 76.2 m girder CDA 0.15
(6 76.2)
without track load = 43.7 kN/m
= 0.25
(As per data supplied by RDSO)
Impact Load = CDA X L.L.
= 0.25 X 9800 = 2450 kN
DL per meter of ballast less track = 0.4 kN/m
(As per data supplied by RDSO)
1.3. Seismic Wight
DL per meter of superstructure Seismic weight in longitudinal direction
Total DL of superstructure
= 44.1 x 76.2 = 3360 kN Seismic weight in transverse direction
= Total DL of structure +50 % LL
= π x 22 /4 x 12 x 25 = 942 kN
1.4. Fundamental Natural period
Total DL of structure
= DL of superstructure + 80% DL of pier For simply supported bridges, the fundamental
natural period (T) in seconds is given by:
(Section 9.1.1)
= 3360 + 0.8 x 942 = 4114 kN T =2 δ
(Section 9.1.1)
Page 133
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
FH 3
p Lateral force to be applied, F = 9014 kN
3 EI 3
FH p
3 EI
Where,
H p = Pier height from top of foundation = 9014х 123 / (3 х 27386130 х 0.589) = 0.32 m
= 12 m
T = 2 δ = 2х 0.32 = 1.13 sec
E = Modulus of elasticity of pier material
=5000√fc
1.5. Seismic Load as per IITK-RDSO
(Section 6.2.3.1, IS456:2000) Guidelines
= 5000√30 = 27386 N/mm2
= 27386130 kN/m2 1.5.1 Horizontal Elastic Seismic Acceleration
I g = Gross moment of inertia of pier section Coefficient
= π/64 х D4 = π x 24 /64
= 0.785 m4 Horizontal elastic seismic acceleration
coefficient, Ah
Ieff = effective moment of inertia of pier section
Z S
Ieff = 0.75 x Ig (Section 9.1.1.1) Ah I a (Section 9.1)
2 g
= 0.75 x 0.785 = 0.589 m4
Where,
Z = 0.36 (zone V; Table 3)
1.4.1. Longitudinal Direction
I = 1.5 (Table 4)
In longitudinal direction, no live load is
considered. (Section 8.4) Damping = 5% (Section 8.6.1)
3
Lateral deflection,
FH p Longitudinal direction :
3 EI Sa/g = 1.0 / 0.77 = 1.31
Page 134
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
(Section 9.2.1)
In longitudinal direction H = Height of submerged portion of pier
e
F = 0.35 x 4114 = 1440 KN = 1/3 of pier height = 4 m
In transverse direction r = Radius of enveloping cylinder
e
F = 0. 24 x 9014 = 2163 KN =1m
1.5.2.2 Design Seismic load H/r = 4,
Hence ,
Design seismic load is obtained by dividing the Ce = 0.73
elastic seismic by response reduction factor, R
(Table 8 of Section 14.2)
(Section 9.3)
Ah in longitudinal direction = 0.35
Since, RCC Pier with ductile detailing,
Page 135
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 136
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 137
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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 existing Bridge Rules + IRS concrete code
Time period = 0.77 sec;
h = 0.12
Ah/R = 0.35 / 2.5 = 0.14
Transverse Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines existing Bridge Rules + IRS concrete code
Time period = 1.15 sec; h = 0.12
Ah/ R = 0.24/2.5 = 0.096
Page 138
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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 existing Bridge Rules + IRS concrete code
Time period = 0.77 sec; h = 0.18
Ah/R = 0.59 / 2.5 = 0.24
1.4 DL + 1.6 EQ
1.25 DL + 1.5 EQ
1.25DL +0.3(LL+IL)+1.2EQ 1.4DL +1.75(LL+IL)+1.25EQ
Page 139
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
2. Problem Statement:
In Example 1, details on seismic load calculations are covered. Also, a comparison of seismic forces from
the proposed guidelines and the existing Bridge Rules is given. In order to assess the difference in design
seismic forces obtained from the IITK-RDSO for various types of railway bridges, two examples
considered. These two examples represent two extreme types of bridges. The first one (Bridge A) has
short span and low pier height and the second one (Bridge B) has long span and tall pier height. The
preliminary geometric details of the two bridges are:
Bridge A: Span = 12.2 m, Pier Height = 8m, Pier diameter = 2 m
Bridge B: Span = 76.2 m, Pier Height = 30 m, Pier diameter = 3 m
These are regular, multi-span, and simply supported bridges. Hence, only one unit comprising of one span
and pier need to be considered using seismic coefficient method. The bridges are considered in seismic
zone V, with hard soil type. Piers are of reinforced concrete and are provided with the ductile detailing.
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.
2.1 Weight Calculations
Table 2.1 Weight Calculations
Component Bridge A Bridge B
Span 12.2 m 76.2 m
Height 8m 30 m
Diameter of pier 2m 3m
Soil type Hard, = 1.0 Hard, = 1.0
Importance Factor (I) 1.5 1.5
Seismic zone Z = 0.36, 0 = 0.08 Z = 0.36, 0 = 0.08
Response reduction factor, R 2.5 2.5
Dead Load (DL) per meter girder without track load 8.80 kN/m 43.7 kN/m
DL per meter of ballast less track 0.4 kN/m 0.4 kN/m
DL per meter of superstructure 9.2 kN/m 44.1 kN/m
Total DL of superstructure 112 kN 3360 kN
DL of one pier 628 kN 5301 kN
Total DL of structure 615 kN 7602 kN
Live Load (LL) for HM loading on span 166.2 kN/m 128.6 kN/m
Total live load 2028 kN 9800 kN
Impact Load 1197 kN 2450kN
Seismic Wight
Longitudinal direction 615 kN 7602 kN
Transverse direction 1629 kN 12502 kN
Gross moment of inertia of pier section 0.785 m4 3.976 m4
Effective moment of inertia of pier section 0.589 m4 2.982 m4
Page 140
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 141
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 142
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Table 2.4 Comparison of seismic forces for Bridge A from proposed IITK-RDSO guidelines and
existing Bridge Rules + IRS Concrete Code (Hard Soil)
Longitudinal Direction
Proposed IITK-RDSO Guidelines existing Bridge Rules + IRS concrete code
Time period = 0.16 sec; h = 0.12
Ah/R = 0.68 / 2.5 = 0.27
251 kN 221 kN 92 kN
118 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 861 kN and
horizontal force of 313 kN. As per the proposed guidelines, the pier will be designed for Axial force of
769 kN and lateral force of 665 kN. Thus, the design lateral forces from the proposed guidelines is
double 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 72 kN and As per
Appendix XIII of existing Bridge Rules the Tractive / Braking force, which acts in longitudinal
direction will be 510 kN.
Page 143
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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 existing Bridge Rules + IRS concrete code
Time period = 1.83 sec; h = 0.12
Ah / R = 0.15 / 2.5 = 0.06
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 are
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.
Page 144
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
3. Problem Statement:
A simply supported railway bridge with steel superstructure of plate girder – welded type has a span of
24.4 m. Train load is Heavy Mineral type (HM loading). Bridge is located in Zone V. The soil at the
bridge site is of hard type (Type I). The circular RC pier has 12 m height and 2 m diameter. Calculate
lateral seismic forces on bridge superstructure. Bridge pier has isolated spread footing type foundation.
Solution:
Page 145
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
= π x 22 /4 x 12 x 25 = 942 kN H p = 12 m
3.2.2. Live Load
E = Modulus of elasticity of pier material
Live Load (LL) for HM loading on 24.4m span =5000√fc = 27386130 kN/m2
= 146.52 kN/m
(Section 6.2.3.1, IS456:2000)
(As per data supplied by RDSO)
I g = π/64 х D4 = 0.785 m4
Page 146
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
FH P2 1348 123
3EI 3 27386130 0.589 Longitudinal direction :
= 0.05 m Sa/g = 1.0 / 0.44 = 2.28
Ah = 0.36 / 2 x 1.5 x 2.28= 0.62
Time period T 2 = 0.44 sec
Transverse direction:
3.4.2. Transverse Direction
Sa/g = 1.0 / 0.67 = 1.49
In transverse direction, 50% live load is
considered. (Section 8.4) Ah = 0.36 / 2 x 1.5 x 1.49 = 0.40
Page 147
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Lateral forces
IITK –RDSO Guidelines Existing bridge rules Racking / Braking force
Longitudinal 366 kN 71 kN 882 kN
Direction
Transverse 961 kN 286 kN 144 kN
Direction
Page 148
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
3505 mm
600 mm
(2150 WEB + 100 FLANGE +150 SLEEPER
+ 156 RAIL + 25 PACKING = 2581)
2581 mm
1980 mm
Page 149
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
1
5
.
2
13.46t
1000
2
Force at node ‘A’ = =7.6t
W.L. due to above transverse load = 9.91 + 2.47
3 4
1
5
.
2
+ 13.46 = 25.84 t = 256 kN
Force at node ‘H’ = = 11.4t
3.9 Seismic Calculation
1 4
1
5
.
2
3
.
8
t
Transverse seismic load as per IIT-RDSO
guidelines (Table 3.1 above) Force at node I =
961KN>256KN Shear in end way = 56.75 – 3.8 = 52.95t
Hence, seismic forces are governing by Racking Eff. Length of bracing =
force @ 600 kg/m (eff. Span > 20m) (cl.2.9.1 of
2
0
.
7
1
9
8
1
7
0
.
6
B.R)
=(600 x 25.6)/1000=15.36 t
= 0.7 x 261.36 = 182.95 cm
2
6 1
1
.
3 8
6
Total lateral load = 98.1 + 15.36 = 113.5t
5
2
.
9
5
7
0
t
1
1 2
3
.
5
9
5
6
.
7
5
t
A B C D E F G H I
1980 mm
1706.5
25600 mm
R = 56.75 t R = 56.75 t
Page 150
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
7
0
1
4
.
7
2
Area = 50.12cm
4
.
7
6
n=
rmin =4.01mm
Slenderness ratio = 182.95/4.01 =46 Say 16 Nos. 22 power driven field rivets
Pac = 13.95-(13.95-12.59)*6/20 (From table 3.11 DESIGN OF GUSSET PLATE (SIZE
(iv) of SBC) 325 x 10 x 370)
= 13.95-.408=13.54 kg/mm2 Welded Design of End Gusset Plate
Pac (with occasional load) = 13.54*7/6 L = 2 (325 + 181) = 1012 mm
=15.8kg/mm2 = 1.58t/cm2 (From table (i) of
Permissible stress in weld =
SBC)
(Cl.13.4.1 of Weld Bridge Code)
Area required = 70/1.58 = 44.3 cm2
Strength of weld = 0.7 X 5 X 101.2 X 1.02
Area provided =50.12 cm2 > 44.3 cm2 safe
= 72.25 X 5t/cm
3.10 DESIGN OF CONNECTION
Force in gusset due to end lateral = 70t
BETWEEN GUSSETS PLATE TO TOP
7 2
0 .
s
0
.
9
6
c
m
LATERAL BRACING
7
2
5
Size of weld
Rivet Value
Use 22 power driven field rivets Provide 10mm weld size
Strength of rivet in single shear Welded Design of Intermediate Gusset Plate
2
2
.
3
5
0
.
9
4
4
.
0
8
t
f= 820)
L = 820 + 2 x 181 + 510 = 1692mm
Strength of one rivet in bearing against 10mm
thick gusset plate = 2.35 x 1 x 2.2 Strength of weld = 0.7 x S x 189.2 x 1.02
=5.17t = 120.80 x S t/cm
Rivet value R = 4.08t Force in gusset plate due to end lateral = 2 x
52.95 = 105.0t
R (with occ-load) = 4.08 x 1.167 = 4.76t
325
10 510 10
181
181
10 10
GUSSET PL.
GUSSET PL. 370x10x820
325x10x370 820
Page 151
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
1
0
5
.
9
Provide 10mm weld
1
2
0
.
8
Size of weld S = = 0.877cm
6 9
2 .
4 8
t
3.11 DESIGN OF BOTTOM LATERAL
BRACING = 624 kN = = 63.7t
A lateral bracing system between the bottom 50% of L.L. = 0.5 x 3575 = 1788 kN
flange of sufficient strength to transmit 1/4th of (appendix xii of B.R)
total lateral load (Cl. 5.13.2 of SBC)
7 4
0 Seismic Load on moving load
Force in end lateral = = 17.5t = 1788 x Ah = 1788 x 0.4 = 715.2 kN =
73t
Eff. Length of bottom bracings L = 0.7 x 261.36 (Ah=0.4 as per draft IITK)
= 182.95 cm Seismic force on fixed structure
Using s 110 x 110 x 10mm = D.L. Ah = 594 x 0.4 = 237.6 kN =
2
a = 21.06 cm 24.3t
rvv = 2.14 cm Additional vertical effect of seismic on lee-ward
left 182.95 girder due to O.T. effect
86
rmin 2.14 24.3x1.3 73x(2.581 0.6 1.75)
= 198t
Pac with occasional loads
1.980
8.32 10.57 Load/bearing = 198/2 =99t
10.57 6 10.57 0.675
20 ANALYSIS OF VERTICAL FORCES
2
= 9.89 kg/mm Due to D.L.
Area required of bottom lateral bracing Seismic force = D.L. x Av = 594 x 0.45
17.5 (Ah=0.45 as per draft IITK)
15.22cm 2 21.06cm 2 O.K.
1.15 = 267.3 kN = 27.3t
3.12 ANALYSIS OF DESIGN FORCE FOR Due to L.L. (Shear)
BEARING DESIGN Seismic force = L.L. (50%) x Av
Analysis of Transverse forces for design = 1788 x 0.45 = 804.6 kN = 82.1t
5
5
4
.
5
7
Fy = maximum S.F./Bearing = =
4
Force/bearing = = 27.35t
138.39 t (From DD/2000/2)
Transverse seismic force/bearing Loads/Bearing
9
6
1
2
4
.
5
2
t
Fz =
Seismic
(as per table 3.1 of draft IITK) Fy 138.39t 138.39+99+27.3 = 265t
Fx = Longitudinal Force/Bearing =
8
8
2
3
6
6
Fx 45.0t 63.7t
2
Page 152
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
6
6
.
2 5
5
3
1
0
3.13 DESIGN OF ROCKER & ROLLER
7
BEARING = = 884 mm
2
4
3
1
t
/
m
3 6 2
2
6
5
1
0
2
0
0
1
.
5
6
4
3
k
g
/
c
m
=
1
1
0
5
=
Permissible stress = 711 x 1.167
7 2
4
3
1
1
0
(M-25 grade concrete)
B.M. at ‘A’ = =115885 kgcm
= 829.7 t/m2 O.K.
Design of Roller B.M. at ‘B’ =
2
2
1 2
3
4
3
1
1
0
6
6
.
2
5
1
4
1
0
Fy (with seismic) = 265 t
Provide 4 rollers of dia 150 mm
2
6 4
5
1
1
5
8
8
5
6
Load/roller = = 66.25t
1
1
0
1
5
7
0
7
/
6
2
3
/
2
4
1.5.3 t = =
Allowable working load/mm length = 0.517
= 0.5 x 150 = 75 kg/mm 1.9 cm
BEARING
COMPONENT EXISTING NEW REMARKS
TYPE
Base plate 750mm*460mm*50mm 1100mm*560mm*40mm
Rollers Two rollers 150mm dia. Four rollers 150mm dia.
Knuckle slab
60mm 75mm
thickness
Knuckle
65mm 65mm
A) Roller thickness
bearing
Saddle thickness 40mm 60mm
Four turned bolts 40mm Four turned bolts 40mm dia.
Saddle bolts
dia. property clause 6.6
Anchor bolts Four bolts 40mm dia. Eight bolts 40mm dia.
B) Rocker
Base plate 650mm*900mm*50mm 740mm*1100mm*40mm
bearing
Page 153
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
4. Problem Statement:
A simply supported railway bridge with steel superstructure of plate girder – welded type has a span of
24..4 m. Train load is Heavy Mineral type (HM loading). Bridge is located in Zone V. The soil at the
bridge site is of hard type (Type I). The circular RC pier has 12 m height and 2 m diameter. Analyze
bridge superstructure for vertical component of seismic forces
Solution:
Page 154
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Dead Load (DL) per meter of 24.4 m girder Thus , in addition to vertical loads due to Dead
without track load = 23.96 kN/m load and Live load , 25 % of additional dead
load in vertical direction.
(As per data supplied by RDSO)
Live Load (LL) for HM loading on 24.4m span 4.4.2 Static Analysis
= 146.5 kN/m
In this analysis, vertical seismic forces are
(As per data supplied by RDSO) obtained by calculating the time period in
vertical direction.
4.3 Seismic Wight for Horizontal motion For a simply supported span, the fundamental
time period Tv, for vertical motion is given as:-
2 m
Seismic weight for horizontal motion TV L2
EI
= Total DL of superstructure + 100 % LL
(Section 8.8.2)
= 24.4 + 146.52 = 170.9 kN/m
where,
L = Span of superstructure = 24.4 m
4.4 Method of Analysis
E = Modulus of elasticity of pier material
= 5000√fc = 27386130 kN/m2
4.4.1 Simplified Approach
(Section 6.2.3.1, IS 456:2000)
m = mass per unit length
As per Section 8.8.1 of IITK – RDSO
Guidelines, = (DL + 100 % LL) / g
For superstructure with span less than 80 m, the = (24.4 + 146.52) / 9.81 = 17.42 ton / m
effect of vertical motion can be considered by The superstructure comprises of two I-girders,
analyzing the superstructure for 25 % additional which are connected by horizontal members as
dead weight in upward and downward direction. shown in figure 4.1. The moment of inertia
Page 155
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
varies along length. Thus, one will have to use = 0.36 / 2 x 1.5 x 2 / 3 x 2.5
equivalent moment of inertia for the span.
= 0.45
Here , without getting in to details of calculation
of moment of inertia , it is assumed that, the time
period of the span in vertical direction will be 4.5 Vertical Seismic Force
less than 0.4 sec , so that the value of Sa/ g = 2.5
Vertical Seismic Force (EQ) V = Av x W
Spectral Acceleration Coefficient for vertical
motion is taken as two – thirds of horizontal = 0.45 x 213.65 = 96.1 kN / m
spectral acceleration.
(Section 8.8) Note: - 1) using the simplified approach, the
(Sa/ g) v = 2 / 3 x 2.5 = 1.67 seismic forces in vertical direction is 42.7 kN/ m
where as by static analysis seismic forces in
vertical direction is 96.1 kN/m.
Elastic Seismic Acceleration Coefficient, 2) If time period in vertical direction, Tv is
obtained preciously then, Sa/ g will get further
Z 2 S
Ah I a reduced.
2 3 g
Page 156
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
5. Problem Statement:
A three span simply supported Railway Bridge with steel superstructure of open web girder and ballast-
less track has equal spans of 76.2 m. It is proposed to provide Lead Rubber bearings (LRB) above pier to
support superstructure. Train load is Heavy Mineral type (HM loading). Bridge is located in Zone V. The
soil at the bridge site is of hard type (Type I). The circular RC pier has 12 m height and 2 m diameter.
Height of submerged pier is 4 m. Analyze the bridge for seismic loads at Ultimate Limit State.
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.
The schematic diagram of the bridge is shown below in Figure 1.1. Grade of pier concrete and
reinforcement are M30 and Fe415 respectively. Density of concrete is 25 kN/m3. RC pier has ductile
detailing.
76.2 m 76.2 m 76.2 m
Pier Height = 12 m
G.L.
Page 157
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Dead Load (DL) per meter of 76.2 m girder Impact Load = CDA X L.L.
without track load = 43.7 kN/m = 0.25 X 9800 = 2450 kN
(As per data supplied by RDSO)
5.3. Seismic Wight
DL per meter of ballast less track = 0.4 kN/m Seismic weight in longitudinal direction
(As per data supplied by RDSO) = DL + No LL (Section 8.4)
= 3360 kN (W2) for superstructure
DL per meter of superstructure = 754 kN (W1) for pier
= DL of girder + DL of track
= 43.7 + 0.4 = 44.1 kN/m Seismic weight in transverse direction
= DL + 50 % LL (Section 8.4)
Total DL of superstructure = 3360 + 0.50 x 9800
= 44.1 x 76.2 = 3360 kN = 8260 kN (W2) for superstructure
D 2 / 4 H p
= 754 kN (W1) for pier
DL of one pier =
= π x 22 /4 x 12 x 25 = 942 kN 5.4. Lead Rubber Bearing
Page 158
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 159
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
3S1 P K2
c = 1.614 < 2.5, hence OK.
2 Ar G 1 2kS 1
2
W1
K1
Shear strain form lateral load, where di = 169.82
di
s ,eq = 1.013 Figure 1.2 2-DOF Idealization
Tr
3EI
Shear strain due to rotation, assuming θ to be a Here, pier stiffness, K1
minimum value of 0.005 rad L3
where,
B2
r =0.6 L = Pier height from top of foundation = 12 m
2tiTr
E = Modulus of elasticity of pier material
Neglecting shear strain due to imposed non-
= 5000√fc (Clause 6.2.3.1, IS456:2000)
seismic lateral displacement
Therefore, total shear strain, = 5000√30 = 27386 N/mm2
= 0.785 m4
Pcr ,eq S1S 2 GAr = 5184 kN > 2065 kN,
2 2 K1 = 37342 kN/m
hence OK.
Page 160
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
5.5.2. Result
The modal analysis was carried out to find
system dynamic properties and tabulated in
Table 5.1 below. The deformations and base
shear were calculated for two modes and were
combined using SRSS rule.
Page 161
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
Page 162
IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
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 Proposed base isolated system
Period = 0.77 s; Ah = 0.35/2.5 = 0.14 As shown in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 above
Period =1.59 s; Ah=0.16g Period =1.47s; Ah=0.13g
LC 1 LC 2 LC 1 LC 2
Transverse Direction
Fixed base system Proposed base isolated system
Period = 1.15 s; Ah = 0.24/2.5 = 0.096 As shown in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 above
5378 kN 9053 kN
5143 kN 8818 kN
1042kN
1287 kN 1026 kN 909 kN
LC 1 LC 2
LC 2
LC 1
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.
Page 163
Draft IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
2-12 25 mm
b = 230 mm, D = 375 mm, d = 350 mm, d’ = 25 mm,
Asc = 226 mm2 (0.26%), Ast = 383 mm2 (0.44%),
375 mm 350 mm
fck = 20 N/mm2, fy = 415 N/mm2, fcr = 3.1305 N/mm2,
Modular ratio = m = 8.94, ES=200000 N/mm2,
2-12, 2-10
230 mm Ec = 22360 N/mm2.
concrete in tensile region is fcr and the moment Therefore, the triangular stress block is an
of resistance is given by assumption. Strain in concrete at the level of
compression steel is obtained as
Mcr = = 19.497 x 106 Nmm
’s = C = 0.0004527
Curvature () is given by = Stress in concrete at the level of
compression steel.
= 7.483 x 10-7 rad/mm.
f’s = 0.0004527 ES = 90.549 N/mm2
These values of M and are shown in the M-
curve shown in Fig. 6.5. Compressive force in concrete =
165
Draft IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
b) Yield Plateau ( y s sh ): f s f y
166
Draft IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
and fsc = 118.029 MPa. From above relation, M Software for nonlinear analysis for reinforced
= 51.398 kN-m and = 1.639 x 10-5 rad/mm. concrete provides facility to obtain moment
curvature relationship for a given RC section.
Table 6-1: Stepwise results in Tabular Form:
Section Builder module of SAP 2000 is one such
Manual SAP Results software. In the manual calculations shown in
Calculation the previous sections, M- calculations are done
Stage at three points only. In the software, the M-
M M
calculations are done at many points and a
(kNm) (rad/mm) (kNm) (rad/mm)
smooth curve is obtained. The input to software
Cracking 19.497 7.483 x 10-7 - - are geometrical details of cross section, quantity
of steel in tensile and compression region and all
Yielding 51.278 7.778 x 10-6 50.850 7.916 x 10-6
the material properties, viz., Young’s Modulus,
c=0.0010 51.938 1.639 x 10-5 52.075 1.570 x 10-5 Poisson’s Ratio, characteristic strength of
concrete and yield stress for steel.
c=0.0015 52.558 3.145 x 10-5 52.736 3.180 x 10-5
The stress-strain of concrete and steel are also
c=0.0020 52.875 4.934 x 10-5 52.967 5.000 x 10-5 required. In this context, it is to be noted that IS
c=0.0025 52.978 6.842 x 10-5 53.044 6.870 x 10-5 456 (2000) provides stress-strain curve of
concrete and steel. For the present problem, the
c=0.0030 54.036 8.645 x 10-5 53.414 8670 x 10-5 stress-strain curve of steel and concrete shown in
Fig.6.3 and Fig.6.4 are used. For concrete,
c=0.0035 56.013 1.031 x 10-4 54.219 1.038 x 10-4
stress-strain curve depends on level of confined
Similar calculations can be done for different steel. The details of The M- curve obtained
value of strain in concrete. (See table 6.1) using this software is shown in Fig 6.5. A
comparison of moment and curvature values
obtained from manual calculations and software
6.5 M- curve using software
is given in Table 6.1.
167
Draft IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
7. Problem Statement:
For the pier of bridge considered in Example 1, Calculate the plastic moment (Mp) of reinforced concrete
pier and the maximum seismic coefficient required to form the plastic hinge in the pier.
Solution:
168
Draft IITK-RDSO Guidelines for Seismic Design of Railway Bridges
This value is slightly higher than 1.4x Mu For this pier, In the transverse direction the
(i.e. 34070 kNm). seismic weight, W = 9014 kN (as per example
1)
Using the Section Builder module of SAP 2000
software and following the procedure described Pmax = (Ah) max x W
in Example 6, the value of plastic moment for Where, (Ah)max is lateral seismic coefficient
this RC section is obtained as 32530 kNm. required to achieve lateral force of Pmax.
(Ah) max = Pmax / W = 2940 / 9014 = 0.33g
7.4 Maximum Seismic Coefficient Thus, lateral seismic coefficient required to
achieve plastic moment is (Ah) max = 0.33g
Here, the maximum seismic coefficient (Ah)max, For superstructure design, if elastic forces
required to produce the plastic hinge in the pier
section is obtained. ( i.e. forces with R = 1 ) are quite large , then,
superstructure shall be designed for (Ah) max, i.e.
Lateral force required to develop plastic maximum lateral seismic coefficient at which
moment is Pmax. plastic hinge gets developed in the ductile
Mp = Pmax x h member, i.e., pier.
169
Example 8 - Liquefaction Analysis using SPT data
8. Problem Statement:
The measured SPT resistance and results of sieve analysis for a site in Zone IV are given in Table
8.1. Determine the extent to which liquefaction is expected for a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. The site
is level, the total unit weight of the soil layers is 18.5 kN/m3, the embankment height is 10 m and
the water table is at the ground surface. Estimate the liquefaction potential immediately
downstream of the toe of the embankment.
Table 8.1: Result of the Standard penetration Test and Sieve Analysis
Depth N 60 Soil Classification Percentage fine
(m)
0.75 9 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 11
3.75 17 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 16
6.75 13 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 12
9.75 18 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 8
12.75 17 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 8
15.75 15 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 7
18.75 26 Poorly Graded Sand and Silty Sand (SP-SM) 6
170
For N 1 60 16 , fines content of 8%
CRR 0.22 1 1 0.88 0.19
CRR7.5 0.22 (Figure G-5)
Factor of safety against liquefaction:
Corrected Cyclic Stress Ratio Resisting
Liquefaction: FS CRR / CSR 0.19 / 0.28 0.70
CRR CRR7.5 k m k k It shows that the considered strata are liable
to liquefy.
K m Correction factor for earthquake
magnitude other than 7.5 (Figure G-1) Summary:
1.00 for M w 7.5
K Correction factor for initial driving The extent of liquefaction for the strata of
static shear (Figure G-3) considered site on be read from Table 8.2,
1.00 , since no initial static shear where F. S. < 1.0 indicates the possibility of
K Correction factor for stress level liquefaction.
larger than 96 kPa (Figure G-2) 0.88
171
Example 9 - Liquefaction Analysis using CPT data
9. Problem Statement:
Prepare a plot of factors of safety against liquefaction versus depth. The results of the cone
penetration test (CPT) of 15m thick layer in Zone V are provided in Table 9.1. Assume the water
table to be at a depth of 2.35 m, the unit weight of the soil to be 18 kN/m3 and the magnitude of 7.5
and the peak horizontal ground acceleration as 0.15g.
172
Ic 3.47 log 42.19 2 1.22 log 0.903 2
2.19 For q c1 N cs 70.77 ,
173
Table9.2: Liquefaction Analysis: Water Level 2.35 m below GL (Units: kN and Meters)
qc fs
'
Depth v v rd (kPa) (kPa) CSR F Q Ic Kc (qc1N)cs CRR7.5 CRR FS
0.50 9.00 9.00 1.00 6456 65.20 0.10 0.45 241.91 1.40 1.00 242.06 0.20 0.20 2.10
1.00 18.00 18.00 0.99 9549 60.20 0.10 0.63 159.87 1.63 1.00 160.17 100.00 100.00 1033.55
1.50 27.00 27.00 0.99 3928 28.10 0.10 0.72 65.43 1.97 1.27 83.53 0.13 0.13 1.39
2.00 36.00 36.00 0.98 2062 21.90 0.10 1.08 33.54 2.31 1.99 68.04 0.11 0.11 1.14
2.50 45.00 43.53 0.98 15093 102.70 0.10 0.68 226.55 1.53 1.00 227.23 100.00 100.00 1011.48
3.00 54.00 47.63 0.98 5550 59.50 0.11 1.08 79.10 2.01 1.31 105.02 0.19 0.19 1.74
3.50 63.00 51.73 0.97 1074 35.90 0.12 3.55 13.96 2.92 5.92 87.81 0.14 0.14 1.24
4.00 72.00 55.83 0.97 911 14.40 0.12 1.72 11.15 2.83 5.01 60.64 0.10 0.10 0.83
4.50 81.00 59.93 0.97 3369 29.70 0.13 0.90 42.19 2.19 1.64 70.77 0.11 0.11 0.89
5.00 90.00 64.03 0.96 7069 35.70 0.13 0.51 86.63 1.79 1.10 96.60 0.16 0.16 1.24
5.50 99.00 68.13 0.96 4970 23.50 0.14 0.48 58.62 1.93 1.22 72.68 0.12 0.12 0.85
6.00 108.00 72.23 0.95 5143 23.30 0.14 0.46 58.85 1.92 1.21 72.45 0.12 0.12 0.83
6.50 117.00 76.33 0.95 6494 29.10 0.14 0.46 72.50 1.83 1.13 83.61 0.13 0.13 0.95
7.00 126.00 80.43 0.95 5724 18.10 0.14 0.32 62.00 1.83 1.13 71.56 0.11 0.11 0.79
7.50 135.00 84.53 0.94 4546 13.20 0.15 0.30 47.66 1.92 1.21 59.46 0.10 0.10 0.68
8.00 144.00 88.63 0.94 3939 13.50 0.15 0.36 40.04 2.02 1.33 55.18 0.10 0.10 0.64
8.50 153.00 92.73 0.93 3668 9.90 0.15 0.28 36.26 2.02 1.33 50.45 0.09 0.09 0.61
9.00 162.00 96.83 0.93 4530 12.90 0.15 0.30 44.09 1.95 1.24 56.79 0.10 0.10 0.64
9.50 171.00 100.93 0.92 10210 18.50 0.15 0.37 48.78 1.95 1.24 62.62 0.18 0.18 1.16
10.00 180.00 105.03 0.91 9278 19.30 0.15 0.43 43.22 2.02 1.33 59.94 0.15 0.15 0.97
10.50 189.00 109.13 0.89 11610 24.80 0.15 0.44 53.40 1.95 1.23 68.16 0.21 0.21 1.36
11.00 198.00 113.23 0.88 9788 15.90 0.15 0.34 43.84 1.98 1.27 58.01 0.15 0.15 1.01
11.50 207.00 117.33 0.87 12750 21.80 0.15 0.35 56.56 1.88 1.17 68.51 0.23 0.23 1.53
12.00 216.00 121.43 0.85 10786 19.30 0.15 0.37 46.67 1.97 1.26 61.23 0.17 0.17 1.12
12.50 225.00 125.53 0.84 10720 23.10 0.15 0.45 45.53 2.01 1.31 62.48 0.16 0.16 1.09
13.00 234.00 129.63 0.83 12478 27.50 0.15 0.46 52.39 1.96 1.25 68.09 0.20 0.20 1.37
13.50 243.00 133.73 0.81 14518 20.80 0.14 0.40 44.79 2.00 1.29 60.67 0.26 0.26 1.81
14.00 252.00 137.83 0.80 13853 17.30 0.14 0.35 41.93 2.00 1.30 57.21 0.23 0.23 1.61
14.50 261.00 141.93 0.79 12396 16.10 0.14 0.37 36.68 2.06 1.39 53.90 0.18 0.18 1.29
15.00 270.00 146.03 0.77 12441 15.50 0.14 0.35 36.23 2.06 1.38 53.24 0.18 0.18 1.29
174
FSliq
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
0
5
Depth (m)
Liquefiable Non-Liquefiable
10
13
15
175