Rsi PDF

This document is the property of Larsen & Toubro Limited, ECC Division - EDRC and must not be passed
on to any third person or firm not authorised by us, nor be copied/made use of in full or
PROOF CHECKED REVIEWED
NAME / DESIGNATION SIGNATURE DATE NAME / DESIGNATION SIGNATURE DATE

Utpal Bhaumik, Dy.Team Leader
David Race, Project Director John Carrington, Team Leader
18.05.12 G For Approval YY DVR DVR

18.05.12 F For Approval YY DVR DVR
25.02.12 E For Approval YY DVR DVR
20.02.12 D For Approval YY PJT PJT
25.01.12 C For Approval YY PJT PJT
23.01.12 B For Approval YY PJT PJT
07.11.11 A For Approval (HM-LI-L1SL1E-M0101-RPT-DN-VIA-01-006) YY PJT PJT
DATE REV. NO. DESCRIPTION Designed Checked Approved
part by such person or firm without our prior permission writing
REVISIONS
LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED

ECC Division - INFRA IC, IET
CLIENT : CONCESSIONAIRE :
HYDERABAD METRO RAIL
L&T METRO RAIL (HYDERABAD) LTD
PROJECT : HYDERABAD METRO RAIL PROJECT
SUPPLIER / CONTRACTOR: LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED

ECC Division - INFRA IC, IET
JOB No. 11103
TOTAL NO. OF PAGES TITLE :
NAME SIGN DATE
DSGN YY 07.11.11
CHKD PJT 07.11.11

RAIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION REPORT FOR STRAIGHT AND CURVED
SPANS
APPD PJT 07.11.11
CODE REV.
DOC.No. HM - LE - L1SL1E - M0101 - RPT - GR - VIA - 00 - 006
G
RELEASED FOR PRELIMINARY TENDER INFORMATION  APPROVAL CONSTRUCTION

LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED
ECC Division - INFRA IC, IE&T
Document No. Date

PROJECT: Hyderabad Metro Rail Project HM-LE-L1SL1E-M0101- 18-05-2012
RPT-GR-VIA-00-006 Rev G
TITLE : Rail Structure Interaction Designed Checked Sheet
Report for Curved Spans YY DVR 2
CHANGE RECORD PAGE
Revision Description of Revision Date of Submission
A First Submission 07/11/2011
B Incorporated CE Review Comments 23/01/2012
C Incorporated CE Review Comments 25/01/2012
D Incorporated CE Review Comments 20/02/2012
E Incorporated CE Review Comments 25/02/2012
F Incorporated CE Review Comments 18/05/2012
G Incorporated CE Review Comments 18/05/2012

Rail Structure Interaction Report – Curved Spans
Hyderabad Metro Rail Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1
2. REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................3
3. DESCRIPTION OF MODEL ...........................................................................................................4

3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................4
3.2 FOUNDATION .....................................................................................................................5
3.3 PIER .....................................................................................................................................5
3.4 BEARINGS...........................................................................................................................5
3.5 GIRDER ...............................................................................................................................5
3.6 PLINTH (RAIL SEAT) ..........................................................................................................6
3.7 TRACK CLIP (RAIL FASTENER) ........................................................................................6
3.8 RAIL .....................................................................................................................................6
4. LOADS APPLIED ..........................................................................................................................7

4.1 TEMPERATURE (OT) .........................................................................................................7
4.2 BRAKING AND TRACTION (LF) .........................................................................................7
4.3 VERTICAL TRAIN LOAD (TW) – TWO TRACKS LOADED ................................................7
4.4 COEFFICIENT OF DYNAMIC IMPACT (I) ..........................................................................7
4.5 RAIL FRACTURE ................................................................................................................7
4.6 CREEP & SHRINKAGE (SC)...............................................................................................8
5. SUMMARY OF RESULTS ...........................................................................................................10

5.1 INDIVIDUAL LOAD CASES ...............................................................................................10
5.2 LOAD COMBINATIONS ....................................................................................................10
5.3 DISSIMILAR SPANS .........................................................................................................10
5.4 ADJUSTMENT FOR 2.0-METER X 2.0-METER COLUMNS ............................................10
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................11

6.1 TRANSVERSE RSI FORCES............................................................................................11
7. APPENDIX 1 – RESULTS SUMMARY TABLE ..........................................................................12
8. APPENDIX 2 – BEARING SPRING CALCULATION .................................................................13
9. APPENDIX 3 – UIC 60 RAIL PROPERTIES ...............................................................................14
HM-LE-L1SL1E-M0101-RPT-GR-VIA-00-006 Rev G
Parsons Brinckerhoff
18/05/2012
i
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the rail structure interaction study for curved spans of the
Hyderabad Metro Rail Project. The Hyderabad Metrorail Corridor is being designed as
a simple span viaduct with span length typically measuring 31 meters. The total length
of viaduct is greater than 29,000 meters running from Miyapur to LB Nagar. The rail
system on the viaduct is continuous welded rail system (CWR) with direct fixation to
the track plinth which cast directly on the viaduct box girder. This report will
summarize the analysis of rail structure interaction (RSI) for the viaduct to determine
the individual effects of temperature rise and fall, acceleration and braking forces, rail
fracture, and train load.
The Hyderabad Metro Rail Design Basis Report (DBR) Section 2: Viaduct, Rev. G
describes the parameters for the rail structure interaction study in Section 5.14, Long
Welded Rail Forces. The primary additional reference listed in the DBR is UIC Code
774-3R, Track/Bridge Interaction Recommendation for Calculations. The general
concept of the RSI analysis is to simulate the rail connection to the bridge girder using
bilinear springs. In addition the stiffness of the bridge bearings, bridge piers and
bridge foundations affect the RSI analysis results.
Figure 1.1: RSI Modeling Concept
18/05 /2012
1
In summary, the purpose of the Rail Structure Interaction Analysis for curved spans is
to:
 Determine distribution of forces to the piers due to temperature rise and fall.
 Determine distribution of forces to the piers due to longitudinal forces.
 Determine distribution of forces to the piers due to rail fracture.
 Determine distribution of forces to the piers due to creep & shrinkage.
This revision addresses the following CE comments:
 Correct loading for rail fracture load case.

 Provide results for 25-meter spans and 128-meter radius.
 Confirm/correct longitudinal force value for 128-meter radius and 9-meter pier
height.
 Confirm distribution of forces for case of dissimilar spans on each side of a pier
for temperature and creep.
 Confirm that horizontal force due to vertical train load is not include in the RSI
forces, but is included in live load forces used for design.
 Temperature Rise and Fall are per the DBR Rev. G.
 Substructure members have been updated to divide the pier element into three
elements to include the additional stiffness of the pedestal and footing.
 Add table of values agreed with the CE.
18/05 /2012
2
2. REFERENCES
The following references are made for this study:
1. Hyderabad Metro Rail Design Basis Report Section 2: Viaduct, Rev. G
2. UIC Code 774-3R, Track/Bridge Interaction Recommendation for Calculations,

International Union of Railways
18/05 /2012
3
3. DESCRIPTION OF MODEL
3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
All models except 128-meter radius consist of 37 x 31 meter spans for a total length of
1,147 meters, which is the approximate distance between stations. The 128-meter
radius model includes seven 25-meter spans at the mid section of the model to obtain
results for the shorter spans used for the smaller radius spans. 1.8m x 1.8m pier size
is considered in the modelling. MIDAS Civil 2011 structural analysis software is used
for modelling. A total of 12 models having four pier heights and two radius of curvature
have been analysed as mentioned below. One model is also run to study the effect of
variation in pier size.
 10.50 meter pier height :

o Straight, 250-meter, and 128-meter radius
 16.0 meter pier height ( Pier size 2.0m x 2.0m ):
o Straight, 250-meter radius
* Height of pier = top of pier cap to foundation bottom
* The values for 1000m & 500m radius are interpolated.
* Soft copies of MIDAS input files ( In CD ) is enclosed with this report.
Figure 3.1a: 37 Spans x 31 Meters per Span Model (R = 250‐Meters)
18/05 /2012
4
Fastener
Rail
Plinth
Girder Rigid
Pier Bearing
Figure 3.1b: Model Detail
3.2 FOUNDATION
Foundations are considered as fixed supports to maximize resulting forces.
3.3 PIER
1.800 meter x 1.800 meter cross section with pier height = 9.0, 12.0 and 15.0 meters
above top of footing. The average pier height is 9.7 meters above existing ground
level.
3.4 BEARINGS
Expansion bearings are 600 x 600x100 mm elastomeric bearings modelled as elastic

links that represent two bearings (Refer to Appendix 1 for calculations):
 Vertical Stiffness = 3,800,000 kN/m

 Longitudinal Stiffness = 7,000 kN/m
 Lateral Stiffness = 380,000 kN/m
 Torsional Rotation Stiffness = 1,000,000 kN/m (Assumed)
 Longitudinal Rotation Stiffness = 147,000 kN-m/rad
 Lateral Rotation Stiffness = 3,800,000 kN-m/rad
Fixed bearings are modelled as a beam end rotational release at the top of pier
3.5 GIRDER
Trapezoidal Concrete Box Girder is modelled as a beam element.
18/05 /2012
5
3.6 PLINTH (RAIL SEAT)
Concrete plinth is modelled as a beam element. Spacing of plinths and subsequently

track clips is 0.65 meters. Track clips fasten the rail to each plinth.
3.7 TRACK CLIP (RAIL FASTENER)
Track clip is modelled as a bilinear spring with displacement uo at the beginning of the
plastic zone equal 0.5 mm, and resistance of 40 kN per meter for the unloaded track
and 60 kN per meter for the loaded track as noted in UIC 774-3R, 1.2.2
For rail fracture, the resistance is 50% of the toe load defined in the DBR. For a toe
load per rail seat of 2.0 tonnes, the slip resistance for four rails is:
2.0 tonnes x 4 rails x 50% = 4.0 tonnes (40.0 kN) for 2 tracks @ 0.65 meter spacing
Figure 3.7: Fastener Slip Resistance per Track ‐ Bilinear Spring
100
80 Rail Fracture (per Seat)
Fasterner Slip Resistance, kN
Unloaded Track (per Meter)
Loaded Track (per Meter)
60
40
20
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0
Rail Slip Displacement, mm
3.8 RAIL
4 - UIC 60 Rails are modelled as one beam element with the properties of 4 rails.
Properties of the rail are provided in the Appendix 2.
18/05 /2012
6
4. LOADS APPLIED
4.1 TEMPERATURE (OT)
As defined in DBR Section 5.14 the following temperature loads are to be considered:
 Temperature Rise: Girder Temperature = +17oC
 Temperature Rise: Rail Temperature = +34oC
 Temperature Fall: Girder Temperature = -17oC
 Temperature Fall: Rail Temperature = -34oC
4.2 BRAKING AND TRACTION (LF)
As defined in DBR Section 5.9 the following longitudinal forces are to be considered:
 Braking load equal 18% of un-factored vertical train live load
 Traction load equal 20% of un-factored vertical train live load
These loads are applied as a concentrated force at axle locations in two load cases
for a pair of two car trains and a pair six car trains. This force is calculated as follows:
 Wt. Of One Axle = 17 tonnes
 Braking Load = 18% x 17 tonnes = 3.06 tonnes (30.0 kN)
 Traction Load = 20% x 17 tonnes = 3.40 tonnes (33.3 kN)
4.3 VERTICAL TRAIN LOAD (TW) – TWO TRACKS LOADED
 As defined in DBR Section 5.6 the following vertical train load is considered:
 4 axle car with load per axle of 17 tonnes
 Axle configuration as described in the DBR
 One, two, three, four, five and six car trains are considered in the live load
envelope generated by a moving load analysis.
 One train on each track is considered in the analysis.
4.4 COEFFICIENT OF DYNAMIC IMPACT (I)
As defined in DBR Section 5.7 the following coefficient of dynamic impact is

considered:
 I = 1.2
The coefficient of impact is not applied to braking and traction forces.
4.5 RAIL FRACTURE
As defined in DBR Section 5.14, rail fracture as been considered. Since the analysis
model consists of a single rail, the release of force due to fracture on one rail has
been modelled with a bilinear spring at the location of fracture. The load limit for the
18/05 /2012
7
bilinear spring is 75% of the rail force at the location of the fracture. This represents
the remaining 3 rails that are not fractured. 25% of the force is applied at the rail
fracture location to represent the release of force due to rail fracture.
At the selected location at Pier 19 the forces are
 Rail Force, Temperature Fall: 3200 kN

 Bilinear Spring, 75% Rail Force: 2400 kN
 Rail Fracture Force, 25% Rail Force: 800 kN
3500
3200.0
3000
2500
Axial Force ‐ Rail, kN
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
X Along Bridge, m
Figure 4.5: Axial Force ‐ Rail, Temperature Fall ‐34oC
4.6 CREEP & SHRINKAGE (SC)
The effects of creep and shrinkage are estimated based on an equivalent temperature
fall loading applied to the box girder. As defined in IRC: 18-2000, the estimated
ultimate strains are as follows:
 Creep (100% fck at time of stressing): 4.0 x 10-4 per 10 MPa


Shrinkage (Age of concrete = 90 days): 1.5 x 10-4
With an average long-term compressive stress of 6.33 MPa, the creep strain is:
0.633 x 4.0 x 10-4 = 2.53 x 10-4
18/05 /2012
8
The combined creep and shrinkage strain is:
2.53 x 10-4 + 1.5 x 10-4 = 4.03 x 10-4
Using an average of the ultimate creep and shrinkage strain, the equivalent
temperature fall is:
0.5 x -4.03 x 10-4 / 1.17 x 10-5 = -17.2 oC
This is approximately equal to the reference temperature fall for the RSI analysis, so
results for bridge girder temperature fall will be referenced for effects due to creep and
shrinkage. Due to long term effects, the force is equivalent to 50% of the temperature
effect.
18/05 /2012
9
5. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
5.1 INDIVIDUAL LOAD CASES
Refer to Appendix 1 for summary of RSI individual loadings results for curved spans.
5.2 LOAD COMBINATIONS
RSI forces are added in the standard load combinations listed in the DBR.
5.3 DISSIMILAR SPANS
The following additional force occurs at dissimilar spans due to temperature fall.
OT‐
Pier Span Span
Height Length1 Length2 Long Vz
(m) (m) (m) (kN)
9.0 25.0 31.0 30.7
12.0 25.0 31.0 21.5
15.0 25.0 31.0 15.9
9.0 22.0 31.0 44.7
12.0 22.0 31.0 31.1
15.0 22.0 31.0 22.9
5.4 ADJUSTMENT FOR 2.0-METER X 2.0-METER COLUMNS
The following increase in longitudinal force occurs at 2.0-meter x 2.0-meter piers

based on MIDAS analysis results.
Pier 1.8mx1.8m 2.0mx2.0m LF

Height Pier LF Pier LF Increase
(m) (kN) (kN) (%)
9 200.0 245.6 22.8%
12 170.1 210.5 23.8%
15 148.9 185.1 24.3%
Average 23.6%
By inspection it can be seen that the percentage increase is proportional to the

increase in cross-sectional area:
Area (1.8 x 1.8) = 1.8m x 1.8m = 3.24 m2

Area (2.0 x 2.0) = 2.0m x 2.0m = 4.00 m2
Area (2.0 x 2.0)/ Area (1.8 x 1.8) = (4.00m2 – 3.24m2) / 3.24m2 = 23.5%
18/05 /2012
10
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the RSI analysis for curved spans lead to the following conclusions and
recommendations:
6.1 LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE RSI FORCES
Transverse RSI forces vary depending on the radius of curvature and pier height. The
RSI forces to be used in design are summarized in Appendix 1. Accompanying
longitudinal RSI forces are also listed.
Design piers for the appropriate RSI force based on pier height and radius of
curvature as listed in the table in Appendix 1.
18/05 /2012
11
7. APPENDIX 1 – RESULTS SUMMARY TABLE
18/05 /2012
12
Summary of RSI forces
RSI Forces at Pier cap Top (Service Limit State)
pier height for foundation bottom to pier cap top 10.5 m
Longitudinal Force Creep &
Rail Fracture (RF)
Span Braking Traction(LF) Shrinkage
Radius (m) Length
Trans Vy Long Vz Long Vz Trans Vy
(m) Trans (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Straight 31.0 0.0 260.0 0.0 245.0 0.0
1000.0 31.0 ‐13.0 260.0 ‐27.5 245.0 11.0
500.0 31.0 ‐15.5 260.0 ‐49.5 245.0 20.0
250.0 31.0 ‐50.0 260.0 ‐85.5 257.0 37.0
128.0 25.0 56.0 260.0 ‐128.0 245.0 60.0
pier height for foundation bottom to pier cap top 13.0 m
Span Rail Fracture (RF)
Braking Traction(LF) Shrinkage
Radius (m) Length
(m) Trans (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Straight 31.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 211.9 0.0
1000.0 31.0 ‐13.4 200.0 ‐26.7 211.9 10.1
500.0 31.0 ‐16.5 200.0 ‐48.2 211.9 19.6
250.0 31.0 ‐51.0 200.0 ‐84.5 211.9 36.6
128.0 25.0 58.0 200.0 ‐126.2 211.9 59.8
pier height for foundation bottom to pier cap top 16
Radius (m) Length
(m) Trans (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Straight 31.0 0.0 178.0 0.0 165.3 0.0
1000.0 31.0 ‐14.6 178.0 ‐26.8 165.3 9.6
500.0 31.0 ‐29.0 178.0 ‐48.5 165.3 19.0
250.0 31.0 ‐54.4 178.0 ‐83.9 165.3 35.0
128.0 25.0 58.2 178.0 ‐123.5 165.3 53.9
pier height for foundation bottom to pier cap top 19
Radius (m) Length
(m) Trans (kN)
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Straight 31.0 0.0 150.0 0.0 137.0 0.0
1000.0 31.0 ‐15.4 150.0 ‐26.3 137.0 9.8
500.0 31.0 ‐30.5 150.0 ‐47.7 137.0 18.6
250.0 31.0 ‐56.1 150.0 ‐81.7 137.0 33.2
128.0 25.0 59.0 150.0 ‐118.1 137.0 48.1
Notes
1 The braking and traction forces have to be increased by 10% to cater for sudden
variation in height
2 The unbalanced temperature and shrinkage ad creep forces have to be applied from
results based on model or calculated manually
3 The component for longitudinal forces (Braking and traction ) are for a pier size of 1.8m X1.8m. The
fores have to be modified in proportion to change in Stiffness of pier.
4 The overall temperature variaion of +/‐ 34°C is considered for design. The forces due to temperature
may be calculated by the formula 2657/R
5 These values are tabulated based on the RSI report submitted by the DDC.
6 The radial component due to creep & shrinkage can be ignored as it is opposite to centrifugal force
and will not govern the design.
7 ‐'ve sign indicates outward direction.
8. APPENDIX 2 – BEARING SPRING CALCULATION
18/05 /2012
13
PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Page
COMPUTATION SHEET Made By PJT
PRELIMINARY ‐ FOR INFORMATION ONLY Date 9‐Jul‐11
Subject Hyderabad Metro ‐ Corridor I Checked by
Schematic Design Phase ‐ Bearing Spring Constants Date
Elastomeric Bearing Spring Constants
Bearing Data
L = 0.6 m = Bearing Length
W = 0.6 m = Bearing Width
l = 0.1 m = Elastomer Height
I = 0.0108 m4 = Moment of Inertia
G = 0.83 Mpa = Shear Modulus
σ = 5.5 Mpa = Bearing Stress
ε = 0.04 = Bearing Strain
s = 2.6 m = Bearing Spacing (Lateral)
Longitudinal Rotational Stiffness (1 Bearing)
E = 137.5 Mpa = σ/ε = Elastic Modulus
Pe = 1,465,636 kN = pi^2EI/l ^2
Kr = 146,564 kN‐m/rad = Pel
Horizontal Stiffness (One Bearing) ‐Free
Kh = 3,486 kN/m = GLW/l
Vertical Stiffness
P = 15,278 kN = Vertical Bearing Load
dl = 0.004
Kv = 3,819,444 kN/m
Horizontal Stiffness (Fixed)
P = 764 kN = 5% Vertical Bearing Load
dl = 0.002
Kv = 381,944 kN/m
Lateral Stiffness (Free & Fixed)
P = 764 kN = 5% Vertical Bearing Load
dl = 0.002
Kv = 381,944 kN/m
Lateral Rotational Stiffness (2 Bearing)
Kv = 3,819,444 kN/m
s = 2.6 m
p = 8.1681409
radian = 2.6
Kr = 3,819,444 kN‐m/rad
PB-CP001 (08/08) RSI - Bearing Spring Constants Rev 1.xlsx 600x600

9. APPENDIX 3 – UIC 60 RAIL PROPERTIES
18/05 /2012
14

Rsi PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rsi PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This document is the property of Larsen & Toubro Limited, ECC Division - EDRC and must not be passed

PROOF CHECKED REVIEWED

NAME / DESIGNATION SIGNATURE DATE NAME / DESIGNATION SIGNATURE DATE

18.05.12 G For Approval YY DVR DVR

LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED

PROJECT : HYDERABAD METRO RAIL PROJECT

SUPPLIER / CONTRACTOR: LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED

CHKD PJT 07.11.11

RELEASED FOR PRELIMINARY TENDER INFORMATION  APPROVAL CONSTRUCTION

Document No. Date

CHANGE RECORD PAGE

Revision Description of Revision Date of Submission

A First Submission 07/11/2011

B Incorporated CE Review Comments 23/01/2012

C Incorporated CE Review Comments 25/01/2012

D Incorporated CE Review Comments 20/02/2012

E Incorporated CE Review Comments 25/02/2012

F Incorporated CE Review Comments 18/05/2012

G Incorporated CE Review Comments 18/05/2012

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1

2. REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................3

3. DESCRIPTION OF MODEL ...........................................................................................................4

4. LOADS APPLIED ..........................................................................................................................7

5. SUMMARY OF RESULTS ...........................................................................................................10

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................11

7. APPENDIX 1 – RESULTS SUMMARY TABLE ..........................................................................12

8. APPENDIX 2 – BEARING SPRING CALCULATION .................................................................13

9. APPENDIX 3 – UIC 60 RAIL PROPERTIES ...............................................................................14

This revision addresses the following CE comments:

 Correct loading for rail fracture load case.

The following references are made for this study:

1. Hyderabad Metro Rail Design Basis Report Section 2: Viaduct, Rev. G

2. UIC Code 774-3R, Track/Bridge Interaction Recommendation for Calculations,

3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION

 10.50 meter pier height :

Foundations are considered as fixed supports to maximize resulting forces.

Expansion bearings are 600 x 600x100 mm elastomeric bearings modelled as elastic

 Vertical Stiffness = 3,800,000 kN/m

Trapezoidal Concrete Box Girder is modelled as a beam element.

3.6 PLINTH (RAIL SEAT)

Concrete plinth is modelled as a beam element. Spacing of plinths and subsequently

3.7 TRACK CLIP (RAIL FASTENER)

4.1 TEMPERATURE (OT)

4.2 BRAKING AND TRACTION (LF)

4.3 VERTICAL TRAIN LOAD (TW) – TWO TRACKS LOADED

4.4 COEFFICIENT OF DYNAMIC IMPACT (I)

As defined in DBR Section 5.7 the following coefficient of dynamic impact is

4.5 RAIL FRACTURE

At the selected location at Pier 19 the forces are

 Rail Force, Temperature Fall: 3200 kN

4.6 CREEP & SHRINKAGE (SC)

 Creep (100% fck at time of stressing): 4.0 x 10-4 per 10 MPa

0.633 x 4.0 x 10-4 = 2.53 x 10-4

The combined creep and shrinkage strain is:

2.53 x 10-4 + 1.5 x 10-4 = 4.03 x 10-4

0.5 x -4.03 x 10-4 / 1.17 x 10-5 = -17.2 oC

5.1 INDIVIDUAL LOAD CASES

5.2 LOAD COMBINATIONS

5.3 DISSIMILAR SPANS

5.4 ADJUSTMENT FOR 2.0-METER X 2.0-METER COLUMNS

The following increase in longitudinal force occurs at 2.0-meter x 2.0-meter piers

Pier 1.8mx1.8m 2.0mx2.0m LF