CONCRETE DECK SLAB DESIGN

OVERVIEW DISCUSSION

For monolithic concrete bridge deck slabs satisfying certain conditions, an empirical
design, requiring no analysis, is permitted in the AASHTO specifications. Continuity
between the deck and its supporting components is desired and encouraged.
Furthermore, composite action between the deck and its supporting components is
required where technically feasible. It should be noted that the deck is preferred to be
jointless or continuous to improve the weather and corrosion-resisting effects of the whole
bridge. This will reduce inspection efforts and maintenance cost and will increase
structural effectiveness and redundancy.

For simplicity, the reinforced concrete deck slab is referred to as an RC deck or a deck
hereafter. Note also that such a design is required not only for brand new construction
but also for new decks on existing structures for deck replacement. Such a deck
replacement often takes place along with repair and/or rehabilitation of other bridge
components, such as beams, bearings, piers, and abutments. While typical RC deck life
is about a half or less of the bridge design life of 75 years, deck replacement is almost
always required more frequently than bridge replacement.

We begin with the deck because the nature of the design process generally follows a
top-down approach. While this is not to imply that, by any means, bridge design is a linear
affair (it is not), it should serve to make the new designer aware that certain information
must be available prior to an element’s design. It is difficult to design the primary
members if one does not know how much dead load the deck will contribute or to design
the piers if the end reactions from the superstructure frame are unknown. Each element
in a highway bridge plays off of the other. This means that there will be a certain degree
of jumping back and forth between design examples before one can get a full
appreciation of all the aspects that go into a bridge design.

As mentioned, most of the design criteria governing the design of reinforced concrete
deck slabs are derived from AASHTO 3.24, which covers both the design of slabs and
distribution of wheel loads on the slab. A general note to the engineer new to bridge
design: AASHTO utilizes the expression “continuous over more than two supports” when
speaking of deck slabs. For the most part, this describes a slab continuous over multiple
stringers. Therefore, if a concrete slab rests on seven wide flange stringers, this slab would
be termed continuous over more than two supports. The reader should not be confused
with a continuous span bridge which has been discussed previously. This implies a
longitudinal continuity over a pier or other intermediate support.

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

1
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
AASHTO STANDARD:
PLACEMENT OF WHEELLOADS FOR SLAB DESIGN

When designing a slab, the centerline

of the wheel load is placed a distance
of 1 ft. (0.30 m) from the face of the curb.
If there is no curb or sidewalk present, the
loads are placed 1 ft. from the face of the
bridge railing. When designing the sidewalk and
associated slab, fascia stringer, etc., a
wheel load on the sidewalk is placed 1 ft.
from the face of the bridge rail. If a
barrier, rather than a railing, is present,
this condition can be ignored. If a
barrier is not present, though, the following
allowances may be made:
LOAD FACTOR DESIGN
β = 1.0 rather than the 1.67 for slabs

PROCEDURE for ANALYSIS for the GIVEN EXAMPLE

(GENERAL METHOD)

GIVEN PARAMETERS

The design of this slab will be performed using Load Factor Method (LFD) of AASHTO
Standard Specifications. The top flange width is found by consulting the AISC Manual of
Steel Construction in the W Shapes Dimension section. Although this bridge has a
monolithic deck with integrated wearing surface, the design of the slab should account
for a future wearing surface to be applied to the deck surface.

STEP 1: EFFECTIVE SPAN LENGTH

This step follows the verbiage of the AASHTO code explicitly. This makes the calculation
of the effective span length somewhat involved. A more direct approach is to take,

S = Center to Center Stringers - W/2

For slab on girder bridges with identical stringer properties, this is a more direct approach.
For concrete girder bridges, however, the effective span length is the clear span length
between the girder top flanges.

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

2
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
AASHTO EFFECTIVE SPAN LENGTH

STEP 2: COMPUTE MOMENT DUE TO DEAD LOAD

The dead load is taken as a distributed load acting over the effective span length of the
slab. The future wearing surface load was given as an area load which we take to act
over the 1 ft. wide unit strip of slab. The moment due to dead load is computed in
accordance with Equation 3.33. If the slab is continuous over more than two supports, as
we have here, be careful not to use the standard wL2/8 equation for a simple span under
distributed load.

Dead Load Moments. For simple spans, the dead load moment can be taken as the
maximum moment for a simply supported beam under a uniform distributed load. That
is, for an effective span length of S,
𝒘𝑺𝟐
MDL=
𝟖

For slabs continuous over more than two supports, however, an approximation must be
made. Although AASHTO offers no specific dead load moment equation, the generally
accepted expression is,
𝒘𝑺𝟐
MDL=
𝟏𝟎

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

3
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
Total Factored Moment. For deck slab design, the load factors for dead load and live
load are 1.30 and 2.17 respectively.

STEP 3: COMPUTE MOMENT DUE TO LIVE LOAD

Since the slab is continuous over more than two supports, we have to use the proper
equation, which has the 0.8 multiplier. The value of P used is 16 kips since our live loading
was specified to be HS20-44. We computed the live load plus impact moment by
multiplying the live load moment by 1.30. Another way of doing this is to compute an
impact only moment by multiplying the live load moment by 0.30. Then the two moments
are added together. This way saves a step.

Main Reinforcement Perpendicular to Traffic. The placement of main reinforcement

perpendicular to the direction of traffic typically occurs in structures where the concrete
deck slab rests on a set of longitudinally oriented primary members. The most common
example of this is a slab-on-stringer bridge. The live load moment for slab spans simply
supported in the transverse direction is calculated as follows:

𝑺+𝟐
MLL = (
𝟑𝟐
)𝑷
Where
MLL = live load moment per foot-width of slab, ft-lb
S = effective span length, ft.
P = live load
P = 16 kips for H20 and HS20 loading or
P = 20 kips for H25 and HS25 loading

If the slab is continuous over more than two supports, AASHTO introduces a multiplier of
0.8 which is applied to both positive and negative moments.

𝑺+𝟐
MLL = (𝟎. 𝟖)(
𝟑𝟐 )𝑷

The variable definitions are the same as for Equation 3.28. Both equations are applicable
to effective spans which are between 2 ft. and 24 ft. inclusive (0.61 m to 7.31 m).
This range of lengths, therefore, means that the vehicle impact factor applied to live
loads will always be 30 percent. Recall that,

50
I=
𝐿+125

Therefore, for an extreme case of an effective span length of 24 ft., we would have I =
0.33 or 33 percent. Since I cannot be greater than 30 percent, we will always use an
impact factor of 1.30 in calculating the effects of live load on a concrete slab.

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

4
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
Main Reinforcement Parallel to Traffic. The placement of main reinforcement parallel to
the direction of traffic occurs in structures where the slab resists major flexural forces or
floor beams are present. A truss bridge with floor beams but without stringers where
concrete slab is supported by floor beams would be an example of this type of structure.
For these types of bridges, AASHTO specifies that the slab be analysed as a beam having
an effective width E, a length S, and a depth as described before, such that

E = 4+0.06S
Where E = effective width of slab, ft.
S = effective span length, ft.

The effective width cannot be greater than 7.0 ft. (2.13 m). This value is given for truck
wheel loading. If lane loading governs, though, a width of 2E is to be used. If the slab is
simply supported, AASHTO specifies approximate maximum live load moments based on
the loading conditions, where for HS20 loading,

MLL = 900S for S≤50

MLL = 1000 (1.30S- 20.0) for 50<S<100

Where MLL = live load moment, ft-lb

S = effective span length, ft.

When the slab is continuous over two or more supports, truck or lane loads should be
positioned so as to cause maximum positive and negative moment.

STEP 4: COMPUTE TOTAL FACTORED MOMENT

The load factors are:

DL = 1.3
LL = 1.3×1.67 = 2.17

STEP 5: COMPUTE EFFECTIVE DEPTH OF SLAB

The effective depth of slab for bending moment capacity is the distance between the
center of the main reinforcement and the top surface of the slab. Since this deck does
not have a separate wearing surface, we assume 0.5 inch of the deck on top will be lost.
We also assume a 1.0 inch concrete cover at bottom, and #5 bars will be used.

STEP 6: COMPUTE REQUIRED MAIN REINFORCEMENT

Next, we determine the actual bar spacing based on an assumed #5 bar. We first try to
use #5 @ 6". Readers can refer to any reinforced concrete text books for calculating the
bending moment capacity. AASHTO uses the same equations as ACI code.
The moment capacity in the first try is 39% more than the total factored moment. So we
increase bar spacing by approximately 33%, using #5 @ 8". By recalculating the moment
capacity, we know that the moment capacity is still more than what is required.
Therefore, #5 @ 8" will be used for the design. Like any reinforced concrete beams, the

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

5
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
deck should also be checked for the minimum reinforcement requirement (AASHTO
8.17.1), and the maximum allowable reinforcement ratio (AASHTO 8.16.3.1).

To determine the amount of distribution steel required, the amount of main reinforcement
needed is multiplied by a specified percentage. This percentage varies, depending on
whether the main reinforcement is parallel or perpendicular to the direction of traffic.
For main reinforcement perpendicular to the direction of traffic the percentage is given
as,
𝟐𝟐𝟎
Percent of Main = ≤ 67 Percent
√𝑺
Or, when the reinforcement is parallel to the direction of traffic, we use the expression

𝟏𝟎𝟎
Percent of Main = ≤ 50 Percent
√𝑺

Where S = effective span length, ft.

The limiting values of 67 percent and 50 percent specified, are maximum, not to exceed
limits. The reason for locating the distribution steel at the bottom of the deck slab is that
moments transverse to the main reinforcement cause tension which will be evidenced in
the lower portion of the slab. If the main reinforcement is laid perpendicular to traffic, the
distribution steel is to be placed on the middle half of the span, between stringers. Also,
no less than 50 percent of the amount used in the middle is to be placed in the outer
quarters of the span (AASHTO 3.24.10.3).

Minimum Slab Thickness. The minimum thickness in AASHTO Standard Specifications are
defined for concrete flexural members so that they are provided with adequate stiffness
to resist excessive deflections. For reinforced concrete slabs, this means a deck slab
whose main reinforcement is parallel to the direction of traffic. For slabs which are simply
supported, the minimum depth of slab (ft.) is given as,

𝟏.𝟐(𝑺+𝟏𝟎)
tmin =
𝟑𝟎
Or, when the slab is continuous over more than two supports, the minimum slab
thickness is defined as,
(𝑺+𝟏𝟎)
tmin = ≥ 𝟎. 𝟓𝟒𝟐 where S = effective span length (feet).
𝟑𝟎

Railing Loads. The portion of slab which resists loads induced by railing posts varies
depending on whether a parapet is present or not (AASHTO 3.24.5.2). When a parapet is
not present, the effective length of slab resisting the post loads is given as,
E = 0.8X + 3.75
Or, when a parapet is provided, the effective length of slab is defined by the following:
E = 0.8X + 5.0

Where E = effective length of slab resisting railing load, ft.

X = distance from center of a post to point of analysis, ft.

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

6
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
STEP 7: DISTRIBUTION STEEL IN BOTTOM OF SLAB

Distribution steel is computed in accordance with the given equation. Since the
value cannot be greater than 67 percent, we use this percentage to obtain the
0.31 in2/ft. required distribution steel. #5 bars at a 12 in spacing gives 0.31 in2/ft. In
a real design, the maximum reinforcement and minimum reinforcement should
also be check. See AASHTO 8.16.3.1 and 8.17.1 for details.

Illustrative Problem

PROBLEM: Design the transversely reinforced concrete deck slab shown in the cross
section detail below.

GIVEN: Bridge to carry two traffic lanes. Bridge loading specified to be HS20-44.
Concrete strength fc´= 4.5 ksi.
Grade 60 reinforcement fY = 60 ksi.
Account for 25 psf future wearing surface. Assume stringers are W36x150. Deck has
integrated wearing surface.

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

7
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
GENERAL SOLUTION

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

8
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE
9
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE
10
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department
Detailed transverse cross-section of the reinforced concrete deck slab

CE527- BRIDGE ENGINEERING ENGR. Romsan D. Lopez, BSCE

11
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering Department