Professional Documents
Culture Documents
IRC-112 Explanatory Book PDF
IRC-112 Explanatory Book PDF
HANDBOOK TO
FEBRUARY 2013
Published by
THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Kama Koti Marg,
Sector-6, R.K. Puram
New Delhi 110 022
2011
(DRAFT) COMMENTARY & EXPLANATORY HANDBOOK
TO IRC:112-2011 : CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONCRETE
ROAD BRIDGES
CONTENT
SECTION 4. GENERAL
SECTION 7. ANALYSIS
NORMATIVE ANNEXURES
INFORMATIVE ANNEXURES
1.0 Introduction
For all linear members (including beams, columns, ties, struts etc.)
carrying axial forces arising from external loads or prestressing
effects of bonded or unbonded tendons, and resisting
simultaneously the bending moment, if any, arising from any
source, the distribution of strains at any section is taken as linear.
In other words, plane section before action of forces remains plane
after the action of forces, right up to the failure state.
Under this single assumption, which is reasonably valid for most of
the loadings up to failure stage, the ultimate strength of all types of
linear members is calculated, using stress-strain relationships
given in the Code. Either the simplified diagrams or more accurate
relationship can be used.
(4) Section 9: Ultimate Limit State of two and three
dimensional Elements for Out-of-plane and in-plane Loading
Effects
The generalised or classical solutions for such elements subjected
to combined in-plane and out-of-plane loading conditions are
complex for the regular use. This section gives simplified
approaches for the design of slabs and webs of box sections.
(5) Section 10: Design for Shear, Punching Shear and Torsion
The design verification of shear is carried out at ultimate strength
only. The design of members requiring shear reinforcement is
based on truss model. Shear design of members not requiring
shear reinforcement is based on results of extensive
experimentation.
The design of both reinforced and prestressed members is based
on the same model. This is a deviation from the past. The rules of
torsional resistance have also been changed from the past
practice.
Due to introduction of the new methods, detailed explanatory
portion is included in the Section itself
This section is very small in length, about 1and1/3 page long, but is
very significant in its contents. It is useful to understand the un-
stated but implied intents, which justifies somewhat longer
explanatory notes.
4.1 Scope 4.1
Unlike earlier codes, IRC: 112 not only strictly defines its scope
and applicability to Normal Concrete, but also permits partial use of
its recommendations to other types of concretes having different
properties and to different applications in which concrete is one of
the components ,e.g. hybrid structures.
The choice of making use of the appropriately valid provisions of
the Code left to the qualified and experienced personnel and use of
specialist knowledge.
The underlying assumptions stated in this Section bring the role of
the proper construction, supervision and maintenance for realising
structures fulfilling the design intents including the long life of 100
years. It will be useful discuss some of the aspects in detail,
entering in to the unstated but obviously related issues. The range
of validity of the codal recommendations will have to be examined,
and outside of this range the modifications to the same shall be
made staying within overall philosophy and without deviating from
the basic aims.
The term ‘hybrid system’ is not clarified or defined. However
systems in which load is resisted by combination of two or more
components in such a way that each component supplements its
capacity by the capacity of the other component. Reinforced
concrete and rolled or fabricated structural steel can be used to
make hybrid structure. The consistency of internal strains at the
contact surfaces, arising from bond, is not an essential condition at
ULS, although overall deformations have to be consistent. The
illustrative example is the use of structural steel tubes with concrete
infill made in the offshore structures.
This is a great step forward permitting and encouraging new
materials and methods and innovative uses. With iteration of this
pragmatic principle the Code has projected itself as a document
supporting development and progress and that it is ready for the
rapid developments expected in coming years. It is no longer a
hindrance to development and progress
4.3 Underlying Assumptions 4.3
The Code recognises that the limit state methods have not yet been
established in India for design of bridges and it has declared that it
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 4 / 1 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 4 / 2 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 4 / 3 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 4 / 4 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
CHAPTER 5 : BASIS OF DESIGN (2nd Draft)
5.0 Introduction
General
The Code also presumes that the exact meanings of the scientific
concepts and methods stated as forming the basis of the
recommendations aregenerally known. However, for practicing
engineers, some of the recently developed concepts need further
explanation. This Chapter provides the same where they can be briefly
clarified. Where an elaborate introduction is called for, specialist literature
should be referred.
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 1 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
5.1.2 Reliability aspects and codal approach
The Code does not use the direct evaluation of risk using methods of
mathematical probability. It uses semi-probabilistic methods in the design
format based upon statistical concepts of Characteristic values of loads
and material properties, and multipliers to modify them, which are termed
as partial factors. The Codeitself has clarified this point stating that:
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 2 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
(2) Deterministic models of structural behaviour.
(3) The international practices and past experience of
acceptable/unacceptable performance of structures.
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 3 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
reinforcement based on the rate of penetration of the attacking agent or
the type of deteriorating mechanisms for targeting a minimumstipulated
service life,the designers can refer to special literature such as fib
bulletins.
The basic approaches of Limit State Methods have been stated in Section
5.2 (1) to (6) as bellow:
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 4 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
(2) In field of road bridges, ultimate strength including strength controlled
by induced deformations (ULS) and serviceability limit state (SLS) are
mainly considered. As mentioned in Article 5.2 semi-probabilistic methods
are used to verify that the limits are not exceeded. The serviceability limit
states presently include checks to control overstress in concrete, crack-
widths and deflection of the structure. The deflection limits specified are
such as to achieve indirectly the rigidity and robustness, rather than so
achieve any functional need of the road traffic.
The Code indicates that for some structures the vibration control may
become an important consideration (e.g. for foot bridges and foot paths of
road bridges) although it is not considered in the Code. Limit state of
fatigue has also not been included.
Use of partial factors, which are different for the same load in verification
of different limit states, is made together with appropriate material factors
describing the minimum strength properties of the materials is made to
achieve the targeted level of reliability (safety). Appropriate experience
based methods are used to achieve the same where statistical methods
have not developed sufficiently.
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 5 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
For comprehensive description of this section refer Chapter 19, Annexure
A1 ‘Combination of Actions for Bridge Design’
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 6 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
the design. For high strength concretes the value is higher than 0.8, in
which case the use of this transformation introduces bias (although it is on
the conservative side) in the estimates of other properties of high strength
concretes.
The use of Global and Local analyses is required by the Code using the
appropriate methods. For details refer Chapter 7.
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 7 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
- The choice of the acceptance criteria is left to the mutual
agreement between the testing agency and user, except in the
case of acceptance testing of prestressing anchorages and
devicesfor which the methods of testing as well the acceptance
criteria are defined by the applicable national standards.
The overall approach of the Code for achieving the aim of durability has been
discussed in Article 5.1.3. For full explanatory discussion refer Chapter: 14.
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 5 / 8 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Typical stress-strain diagram for mild steel and HYSD (both Hot
rolled/ heat treated and cold worked) are shown in Fig 6.1of the
code and reproduced below.
from IS 1786 ) which is 108% of fyk (i.e. 540 MPa) for Fe 500 or
110% of fyk (i.e. 550 MPa) for Fe 500D (note that the minimum
value of 545 MPa & 565 MPa specified in IS 1786 for grade Fe
500 & Fe500 D is a manufacturing requirement). Thus ft / ys =
469.5 MPa for Fe 500 and 478.2 MPa for Fe 500D. In absence
of data from manufacturer, the value of εuk can be assumed
as 5% as given in table 18.1& IS 1786. Hence, the strain limit
for sloping arm of the curve shall be 0.9εuk= 4.5%.
For purpose of analysis & design, code has allowed to use the
representative stress-strain curve as shown in Fig 6.3 of the
code, which is reproduced from IS 1343-1980, for wire, strands
and bars and it has also specified two stress-strain diagrams,
the first is the bilinear and other is simplified bilinear given in fig
6.4 of the code which is reproduced below:
In Fig 6.4, the yield point is defined at 0.1% proof stress (fp0.1k).
This value can be taken as 0.87 times of fpk as per Fig. 6.3 of
the code. As per IS 14268, for strand of dia. 15.2, fpk = 260.2
kN / 140 mm2 = 1862 MPa. Hence, fp0.1k= 0.87 * 1862 = 1620
MPa and fpd = 1620/1.15 = 1409 MPa with strain of 1409MPa /
195 GPa = 0.007224. The value of εudcan be taken as 0.02.
Thus, the stress strain diagram for 15.2 mm, 7 ply, class II
stress relived strand to be used for design is shown below:
concrete M15 to M90 and their correlation with fck are given in
Annexure A2.
Depending on the purpose of analysis, it is necessary to use
appropriate probabilistic value of these properties, i.e. either
their mean value or 5% fractile or 95% fractile. For example,
for a section design, concrete strength shall be taken as lower
5% fractile i.e. fck, whereas, the mean value of the modules of
elasticity (Ecm) shall be used for calculating the deflection of the
members; because a small local patch of bad concrete (lays in
5% sample size of concrete) in the member decides the
ultimate strength carrying capacity of the entire member,
whereas the value of Ec at every section of the member
influences the deflection of the member.
C6.4.2.2 Compressive strength and strength development with time Cl. 6.4.2.2
C6.4.2.3 Tensile strength and its development with time Cl. 6.4.2.3
Prediction of shrinkage:
Table 6.6 & 6.8 of the code gives the final values of
autogenous & drying shrinkage strains directly for different
grades of the concrete and to predict these strains at any time
after the casting of concrete, the multiplying coefficient ßas and
ßds are given equations 6.13 and 6.15.
The values of final autogenious shrinkage, εca(∞) given in
Table 6.6 are obtained from following equation
εca(∞) = 2.5 (0.8 fck- 10) 10-6
i.e. the maximum distance the water molecule can travel, i.e.
from center of the wall to the outer surface of the concrete.
The concept is also true for other regularly used concrete
sections like solid square, solid rectangle, solid circular or
hollow circular section. It shall be noted that autogenous
shrinkage is not dependent on the RH or member size.
References:
7.1 Introduction
This chapter giving explanatory notes and guidelines for the
application of Codal ‘Section 7: Analysis’ is arranged differently from
the discussion of other sections. This arises from the fact that the
clauses of Section 7 assume substantial knowledge of the analytical
methods on part of the designer. As a result, stipulations of the Code
appear to be an unconnected set of requirements and
recommendations, lacking continuity in presentation, which is
unavoidable in the codal format in interest of brevity. However, In
order to explain the requirements of the codal clauses it is useful to
have general background of the classical as well as the modern
methods of analysis. A brief review of these methods is, therefore,
presented at the beginning in Section 7.2 and 7.3. Other special
methods of analysis used for bridges are briefly presented in Section
7.4. This recapitulation of the fundamentals will help in achieving
effective implementation of the Code.
This overview is necessary for another important reason. The users
of the Code and the Guidelines comprise practicing engineers
belonging to different age groups. They have received their basic
education at different times in last 45 years or so; in which period,
many new developments in the methods of analysis have taken
place. An element of ‘continued education’ for engineers of senior
and middle level of experience is thus unavoidable.
Thirdly, the present period is a period of transition in which many
design offices and individual designers are switching over to
automated, computerised analytical and design tools. These tools
allow use of more realistic models representing the behaviour of
DRAFT PREPD BY : SGJ Chapter 7 / 2 OF 32
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
structures and materials than the models suitable for hand analysis.
The analyses of bridge components require application of the
appropriate classical, modern or computerised analytical methods for
calculating response of the components, when subjected to different
loading conditions. The methods for doing so have been covered in
the Code. These methods are further explained in an introductory
manner in this Chapter. For the full treatment of any of these
methods refer text books, advanced literature and instruction
manuals of the computer programmes performing such analyses.
The distinction made in this Chapter between ‘Classical methods’,
‘Modern methods’ and ‘computerised methods, is not definitive but is
used for convenience of presentation.
7.2 Classical Methods of Analysis
7.2.1 Period before development of classical methods
The methods of design followed by the Master Builders of the early
civilisations as well as those of the medieval period right up to about
the second half of 19th century were based on the accumulated
experience of successes and failures, which were passed down in
the generations of tradesmen in form of practices and thumb rules.
These were extrapolated to larger and still larger structures and to
new materials by trial and error. Existing rules were modified taking
into account the differences of behaviour between the familiar and
new materials. New methods were sometimes based on full scale
experiments, but more often arose in the process of correcting
defects and failures. Many outstanding structures built in this way are
still surviving standing as a testimony to the creativity and inventive
spirit of these generations of builders.
X, u
A B
θ V V+dv
M M+dv
These general methods also account for the effects of shear strains,
and are also applicable to short beams, in which the shear
mechanism play significant role in load transfer. The generalised
equations of the theory are valid for members exhibiting large
deflections of the mid surface (Article 7.6.1). These methods
assume homogenous material characteristics having linear
relationship linking various types of stress and strains in the three
directions which are described by different modulii of elasticity and
Poisson’s ratio. For details reference is made to the text books on
this subject.
w
x
θx
CENTERLINE
AFTER LOADING
Z uz w CENTERLINE
BEFORE LOADING
X
ux
Y
uy
∂ 2 ⎛ dθ ⎞
⎜ EI ⎟ = q (x, t )
∂x 2 ⎝ dx ⎠
∂w 1 ∂ ⎛ dθ ⎞
=θ − ⎜ EI ⎟
∂x kAG dx ⎝ dx ⎠
three dimensional body where no local external forces act, are not
valid in the near vicinity of the load, where they are affected by the
way in which the loads are applied to the structure. However the
Saint-Venant’s Principle states that: (Quoted from Timoshenko and
Goodier from book ‘Theory of Elasticity).
‘If the forces acting on a small surface of an elastic body are
replaced by another statically equivalent system of forces acting on
the same portion of the surface, this redistribution of loading
produces substantial changes in the stresses locally but has
negligible effect on stresses at distances which are large in
comparison with the linear dimension of the surface on which the
forces are changed.’
This knowledge makes it possible to apply the overall general
solutions of structures which include portions of locally applied loads
without vitiating the overall analysis of the structure, except in the
local zones in the near vicinity of the loads or supports. In other
words, the overall evaluation of the internal stresses is substantially
reliable and can be used in practical designs. However, the
knowledge of the internal strain and stress distribution in the near
vicinity of external forces is essential for the proper design of these
local portions. This requirement is met by the methods of ‘Local
Analysis’.
Z Z
σz
M xy τzy
τzx
Fz;w τyz
σy
Myz; θyz τxz
Mzx; θzx τyx
(θx) Y dz σx
(θy) τxy 0 Y
Fy;v Mzx
Fx;u Mxy dx
X Myz, θyz X
(θx) dy
Eurocode).
7.2.8 Use of Design Aids
Many design aids in form of nomograms, Interaction diagrams,
tabulated values of resistances of typical members depending on the
reinforcement percentage etc. have been published for use in the
design offices to reduce the design efforts. While using such ready-
made solutions it is necessary to ascertain that the assumptions
used in deriving the solutions are consistent with the requirements of
the code which is being followed.
(i) General
non-linear all over
σ σ
(m) (m)
(ii) Initial linear elastic
portion followed by
plastic portion
ε (θ) ε (θ)
(a) Linear elastic (σ − ε) & (m - θ) relationship (b) (i) General non-linear (σ − ε),
(m - θ) relationship
(ii) Simplified linear elastic - plastic
(i) With strain hardening relationship
σ σ
(m) (m)
ε (θ) ε (θ)
f cm
0.33 f cm ε (θ)
tan α = E cm
α
εc1 εcu1 εc
(e) Suggested concrete (ε, σ)for non-linear (f) Rigid-plastic for structural (σ − ε),
analysis for concrete. (refer annexure A2-9 (m - θ) steel sections
of IRC:112)
2 2
2 2
dθ θ θ
CURVATURE 1 = dx
R
dθ
∫ dx
dx = θ
and repair. Hence IRC:112 does not permit use of local punching
shear reinforcement.
analysis.
The frictional force ΔPμ (δx) between tendon and the duct, acting on
the structure in direction of decreasing force in the tendon is given by
the expression
(
ΔPμ (δx) = P0 1 − e − ( μθ + kδx ) ) Eq. 7.1
Where
θ Is the sum of the angular displacements over a distance δx
(irrespective of direction or sign)
μ Is the coefficient of friction between the tendon and its duct.
k Is a coefficient for wobble effect (representing angular
displacement per unit length of duct multiplied by μ ).
δx Is the distance along the tendon from the point where the
prestressing force is equal to Po .
Po Force at the side of lower force in the tendon.
The value of μ depends on the surface characteristics of the
tendons and the duct, on configuration on the tendon profile,
and on the presence of rust, if any.
The value k for wobble ( μ times angular displacement per
unit length) depends on the quality of workmanship, the
distance between tendon supports, the type of duct or sheath
employed and the degree of vibration used while compacting
the concrete.
losses is the function of the local initial stress level in steel for the
bonded tendon after grouting, and on the overall initial stress for the
unbonded tendon. Since the effect of shrinkage is to reduce the force
in tendon, and resulting stress in concrete, and creep is proportional
to the stress level in concrete, the actual loss due to combined effect
of creep and shrinkage is less than the sum of the two loses
calculated separately and added. This is further modified by the loss
of force in steel by relaxation. For obtaining theoretically more
accurate estimate of net effect, method of numerical integration
involving small time step will be required, in which each of the effect
will follow its own time dependent function. However in practice such
elaboration is hardly justified, especially as the laws also involve
environmental factors like temperature and humidity time histories,
which cannot be predicted. In fact, even the behaviour of creep,
shrinkage and relaxation are not independently predictable exactly.
Hence the Code has prescribed that these are estimated
independently to be on safe side and added.
and outer surfaces of cylinder are zero, since they are free surfaces,
as shown in Fig.7.6(b).
r p
F
max Po = .T
RT o
Radial Tension
To
Uniform Prestress
Part of Long Cylinder
p F .T
mx Pi = i
RT
r
Ti
F = pr pr =F Radial Compression
R
(a) Half Section Showing (e)
Equilibrium of Prestressing
force & Equivalent Pressure
T = To + T i
To di
do
Ti
F
F F
T R+T R T
(R - d i )
F
(T - d i )
T i
F F(Ti - d i )
(T - d ) = P i (R+d i ) ; Pi = 1
T i i (R - d i )
Po
F (R+do)
(T - d )
T o o
F F(To- d o)
(T - d ) = Po (R+d o) ; Po = 2
T o o (R + do)
L (unit length)
Fr
R
Tj Tj
Vc
(a) Curvature in Plan Notations:
b = Thickness of web
design L = Unit length
force R = Radius of tendon
Fu
φ = Dia of duct
bending
Tj = Combined initial tension
(at stressing) for group of
tendons under consideration
b Fr = TJ / R = Radial force
shear per unit length
Fu = 1.35 Fr
d min Vc
1
(d) Global bending & shear
of web (slab) due to
radial pressure
S
d eff
2 INSIDE FACE Design requirement :
S
d min
Fu ≤ 2Vc
INSIDE FACE
Where Vc = 0.17.φ.b.d eff f ck (in SI units)
S
b b
d eff = lesser of φ
φ d eff = d min +
1 d eff = b − 4
2
φ
2 d eff = d min + + S
4 2
7.8 Bibliography
(1) ‘Theory of Structures’ by Timoshenko and Goodier
(2) Bulletin 51: Structural Concrete, Textbook on behaviour,
design, and performance (Second edition) by FIB 2009
(3) CEB-FIP Model Code 1990
(4) Eurocode ‘Basis of Design’: 1990:2002
(5) Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures: 1992-1-1:2004
(6) Prestressed Concrete, Theory and design by R.H.Evans and
E.W.Bennett
(7) Proceedings of FIP Congress-1994 Article by Prof Breen.
SECTION 8
Pus (k) and Puc (k) are the contributions from steel and
concrete respectively in the ultimate resistance of the section
and can be express as
Pus (k) = Σσs(k) As
and Puc (k) = ∫σ dAc
/2
As
εb
1
1
1
εcu2
N's Nc
A's
ε's
As εs Ns
For equilibrium,
′ ′ ′
where
′
′
1
′ ′
Similarly,
Where
1
′ ′ ′
2 2 2
′
In case both the reinforcing bar yielded ( ,
′
′ ′
2 2 2
β and β are factor given in table 1 and 2.
2 2
Finally with ,
′ ,
′
Compressive force, ,
Liver arm
2
Rearranging:
2
2 0
2
1 1
SECTION 9
This section deals with the design of two & three dimensional
elements subjected to out-of-plane as well as in-plane forces.
Plate bending elements are used to model plate type structures (such as
deck slab), where the thickness is very small compared to the other
dimensions and when the plate structure is subjected to loads which are
normal to its surface. As a consequence of this, flexural effects dominate.
The plate bending elements do not produce any in-plane forces
and have three degrees of freedom per node i.e. one out-of
plane translation and two rotation about two axes perpendicular
to the out of plane (normal to surface) axis. It gives bending
moments about x, y axis i.e.mEdx, mEdy & twisting moment
mEdxy, and out of plane shear forces vEdx and vEdy as shown in
Fig. C9.2.
C9.2 One Way and Two Way Slabs and Walls Cl. 9.2
One way, two way slabs and the retaining walls are the typical
example which are subjected to the out-of-plane forces,
generates the bending moments, out-of-plane shear forces and
not significant membrane forces. Hence “Plate bending”
element is appropriate element for modeling of these
structures. As stated in the code, the ultimate strength
methods based on local yielding (e.g. yield line method) are not
permitted in bridges, except for calculating resistance to
accidental impact loads.
Cl. 9.4 General Solutions for Two way Slabs, Walls and shell
Elements
Since σEdx x σEdy > τ2Edxy and both σEdx & σEdy are compressive,
no reinforcement in both direction is required (provide the
minimum reinforcement is given in section). Also both σEdx and
σEdy are less than fcd, the section is safe.
Now, though both σEdx and σEdy are compressive, σEdx.σEdy (i.e.
20.8) < τEdxy(i.e. 25) ; Hence it is necessary to provide the
reinforcement.
Since σEdx>|tEdxy|
f’tdx = 0
f’tdy = σEdy
σ
.
= 4
.
= 0.81MPa
σcd = σEdx (1 + ( )² )
σ
= 5.2 ( 1 +( )² )
.
= 10.01 MPa
SECTION 10.
DESIGN FOR SHEAR, PUNCHING SHEAR AND TORSION (2nd Draft)
C10.1 SCOPE
The sub clauses given in the code is quit elaborate and the same
can be followed by the designers without any difficulty.
Cl.10.2.
C 10.2.2 Shear design model of members with shear reinforcement
2.1
C10.2.2.1 Zones of Shear design.
The zone adjacent to the support does not develop any crack.
Hence this zone is called uncracked zone (Zone A). The adjacent
zone (Zone B) develops shear cracks but does not develop any
flexural crack. In the next zone (Zone C) both flexural and shear
cracks appear. This zone is further subdivided into two zones as
zone C1 and zone C2. In the zone C1 cracks are parallel, and in
the zone C2 the cracks converge. In zone D only flexural cracks
appear. The appearance cracks in different zones in shear is
shown in Fig 10.1 (a) of the code.
Fig: 10.2 Truss Model and Notation for Members with Shear Reinforcement
In case if the strain in the cable not attaining the 0.87 of yield
strain, then the force in cable shall be assumed corresponding to
the strain attained and the full capacity of the cable shall not be
used.
Conservatively one can ignore this increase in stress in the Cl.10.2.3
prestressing cable and use only the prestress force available after
(4)
accounting all losses. This method of design will lead to slightly
increase in shear steel but it will avoid all complications of
calculating the increase in prestressing force.
For unbonded cable, at the ultimate limit state stage the force in
the cable shall be assumed to be the initial prestressing force less
the losses. Increase in cable force may not be taken. This will lead
to slightly a conservative assumption.
(1) The shear capacity of concrete VRDC should be greater than Cl.10.3.2
VED which is the design shear force in the section considered
(1)
resulting from external loading and prestressing. No relief due
to inclined chord force shall be considered in beams having
variable depth while arriving at VED. For sections having shear
capacity VRDC more than VED. no designed shear
reinforcement need to be provided. However minimum shear
reinforcement need to be provided as per clause 16.5.2. This
minimum reinforcement can be omitted in case of slab
structures.
(2) The formula given for calculating the shear capacity of section Cl.10.3.2
in the code is empirical only. The shear strength depends
(2)
upon the tensile strength of concrete which in turn depends
upon the compressive strength of concrete to the power 1/3 ,
longitudinal reinforcement ratio and depth of section. The
longitudinal reinforcement contributes to the shear resistance
in two ways viz by dowel action and controlling the crack
width which will influence the amount of shear that can be
transferred across the cracks by aggregate interlock. Shear
strength increases with increase in reinforcement ratio but the
rate of such increase reduces, as the reinforcement ratio
increases. Sectional depth also plays significant role which is
called as size effect, on the shear strength particularly for
shallow depth members such as slabs.
(3) The clause places a restriction that the formula given (Eq. Cl.10.3.2
10.4) is applicable only to single span bridges. Reasons are (3)
not clear why this restriction has been placed. For other two
type of construction viz, prestressed continuous and integral
bridges this formula, shall not used and all sections shall be
treated as, cracked sections and shear reinforcement shall be
designed according to codal Eq. 10.7 after verifying the
concrete capacity according to Eq. 10.8.
codal Eq. 10.7 and 10.8 for design of prestressed concrete section
in shear both in continuous and integral bridges.
In case of continuous bridges, sections near the intermediate
support, the bending moment will be very high and the section
would automatically crack. Hence this formula can not be used.
The other sections in these structures are the contra flexure
sections and sections where the reversal of bending moment
takes place. The code drafters might have had reservation with
regard to applicability of this formula, to these regions. Hence
without giving reasons, why this formula can not be applied to the
continuous structures the restriction has been straightway placed.
By the same argument for the single span integral bridge also this
formula is not applicable as these the sections (contra flexure and
reversal) are also present. However the formula can be used in
single span integral bridges.
The other possibility is this formula is applicable only for one way
spanning members because it does not take into account, the
traverse stresses which occurs in the two way spanning members.
2 2
VRDC is the shear Resistance of the concrete in the web from the
shear force required to cause web cracking.
I is the second moment of area of section
is the first moment of area of the concrete above/below the
plane of consideration about the cross section centroid. This has
been taken as S in the code.
Substitute
√
√
√
f 2f
f f σ σ
Substituting for τ
( –
xi is the first moment of area of the concrete above/ below the plane of consideration
about the composite section centroid taken as S in the cede.
I is the moment of Inertia of composite section
b is the breadth of web
x is the first moment area of the concrete above/ below the plane of consideration
in theprecast section about the composite centroid.
The shear capacity of uncracked section = Vc1 + Vc2
Fig: 10.5 Load Transfer Direct to the support when loads are Placed near the support
k =1 1.53
.
C10.3.3.2
C10.3.3.3 Members with Vertical and Inclined Shear Reinforcements
When the shear resistance of the members work out to be less Cl.10.3.3.2
than the shear to be resisted, then the members have to be and
provided with designed shear reinforcement. The required shear
reinforcement shall be worked out using the truss model. 10.3.3.3
Fig: 10.7 Truss Model One Panel Length for Shear Resistance
Eq:10.11)
Asw f yd
For vertical stirrups α = 900 , cot α = 0, sin α = 1 so VRDS = Z cot θ (Codal
S
Eq:10.7)
Fig: 10.8 Compression Strut of Fig. 10.7 Distributed over Panel Length ΔL
It σc is the allowable compressive stress
Total compressive force perpendicular to plane x x = σcbw Δ L sin θ
= σcbw Z (cot θ + cot α) sin θ
Total compressive force in vertical direction = σcbw Z (cot θ + cot α) sin θ x sin θ
= σcbw Z (cot θ + cot α) sin2 θ
1 1 1
sin
1 cot θ 1
σc = αcwv1fcd
VRD max
The maximum effective cross sectional area of shear reinforcement for vertical stirrups can be
found out by substituting θ = 450 as the capacity due to reinforcement can not be exceed the
capacity of concrete.
.
For Vertical Stirrups
.
= (Codal Eq:10.10 )
As θ can not be assumed more than 450,the shear steel area can not exceed the above shown
value in a section. In case if it exceeds, it means, the section has failed in compression and
hence need to redesigned
For θ = 450 cot θ = 1
For Inclined stirrups
.
VRDS = cot 1 sin
VRDma=
VRDS ≤ VRDmax
.
sin
.
( Eq: 10.13 of code)
A sw f yd
At any situation if the provided shear reinforcement bw s works out to be grater
than it can be safely concluded the web has failed in shear and requires redesign.
In case full stress of 0.87 fy is used in the shear reinforcement the 0.6 1 . If the
stress in shear reinforcement is reduced to 0.8fyk then 0.6 for fck less then 80 MPa and
f ck
0.9−
250 for fck grater then 80 MPa.
Fig: Partial Smeared Truss Model for the use of Inclined Shear Reinforcement
Only vertical component will be available from stirrup legs crossing the plane A-A to resist the
shear force.
(1) Length of plane A-A =
sin
sin
No of stirrups =
V = vRDS= sin
This is the equation 10.11 given in the code for the Resistance Capacity with Inclined Stirrups
Substituting α = 900for vertical stirrups cot α = 00and sin α = 1
vRDS= cot This is the same codal equation 10.7
S is the spacing of stirrup in horizontal plane and X is the distance along plane BB
Force from the stirrups
sin 90 sin
sin
cos
No stirrups =
Total force =
= sin
V= tan
sin
cot cot
Substituting for sin in the above equation.
V= cot tan tan
cot cot
1
10.12)
When vertical stirrups are provided α = 900 cot α = 00
vRDS max =
= =
If the reinforcement exceeds the above limitation it means the section has failed in
compression requiring redesign.
In case full stress of 0.87 fy is used in the shear reinforcement the 1 . If
the stress in shear reinforcement is reduced to 0.8fyk then 0.6 for fck less then 80 MPa and
f ck
0.9−
250 for fck grater then 80 MPa.
Fig: Truss Model for Arriving at the Additional Tensile Force in Chords
force shall be added to the tensile force generated due to flexure and the reinforcement to be
provided accordingly. The total tensile force at a section ∆ where MEDmax is
0.135 - (1)
. .
At θ = 21.80 Maximum permissible shear stress = 0.093 - (2)
. .
Applied shear stress should be less than maximum allowable shear stress
. . .
vED = - (4)
Sin 2θ = [ v ED
0.135 f ck ]
If vED = 0.135 fck then θ = 450
−1
[
v ED
]
θ = 0.5 sin 0.135 f = 0.5 sin
ck
[
− 1 Applied shear stress
0.135 f ck ]
θ is the angle of strut for the given problem
The design procedure can be presented in the form of a flowchart for carrying out the shear
design which is given bellow.
Estimate the maximum allowable shear stress for concrete grade less than 80 Mpa and
strut corresponding toθ = 450 which is 0.135
In case of increase in prestressing force is taken into account then the shear reinforcement can
be reduced accordingly.
z=
1570mm
cot
fywd = 0.8 fyk
12 @ 12 12 @ 10 @ 10 @
Providing 200 @220 250 220 300
reinforcement 1.13m 1.13mm 0.90mm2 0.71mm 0.52m
Reinforcement m2/m 2
/m /m 2
/m m2/m
mm2/m
. 072
1.026 10
LHS = RHS
Hence the formula shown for estimating the angle can be used.
.
∴ 2.646 /
. .
The addition longitudinal tensile steel required at various sections for the original calculation.
Using the codal expression
∆ 0.5 cot cot 21.8 90
1.25
∆ 0.5 2.5 0 1.25 3.46 10
415/1.15
Section 1M 2M 5M 6.71M 10M
Addition 4.269 3.709 2.961 2.626 1.882
steel mm2
Additional longitudinal steel over and above that required to resist the moment has to be
provided. It is to be noted that θ becomes shallower, the longitudinal steel will increase. But the
shear steel will reduce.
If θ increases the additional longitudinal steel will reduce and shear steel will increase.
Alternatively following shift rule the additional longitudinal steel requirement can be provided.
Box Section
f ctk.05 2.1
f ctd = = = 1.4MPa
The following are the Design Parameters 1.5 1.5
f ctd.052.1
Allowable tensile stress f ctd = 1.5 = 1.5 = 1.4MPa
Component
of prestressing
force in kN
Cable 0.32 0.5 0.62 0.83 0.9 0.91
eccentricity
from CG of
section in m
Average 3012 3049 3101 4059 4307 4318
compressive
stress P/A in
kn/m2
Zt m3 4.16 4.16 4.16 3.99 3.96 3.96
Zb m3 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.68 2.52 2.52
P Pe 1.41 0.52 -0.09 -0.48 -0.72 -
− 0.78
A Zt
Top fiber stress
due to prestress
in MPa
inkN/m2 .
Note: σcpaxial
stress due to
prestress at CG
Shear capacity 4338 4356 4382 2664
in kN Formula not
applicable
section is
cracked.
In case of section not cracked but shear capacity is less than the applied shear adequate shear
reinforcement to be provided. Which is to be based on codal equation 10.28.
If the section is cracked also shear reinforcement need to be provided as the capacity of section
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter 10 / 30 OF 62
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
to resist the shear without shear reinforcement will be virtually negligible due to absence of
sizable amount of tensile reinforcement.
To calculate the shear reinforcement the most important parameter required is lever arm Z
which is obtained form bending analysis.
Analyzing Section 4 – 4
Assuming the stress in the cable corresponding to the yield strain (Assumption steel yields)
Force in 10 cables of 19T13 = 0.87 x 3492 x 10 = 30380 kN
02 cables of 12T13 = 0.87 x 2205 x 2 = 3837 kN
Total Tensile force = 34217 kN
To balance this tensile force, the NA axis will occur at 0.18M for top
Lever arm = 0.91 + 0.78 - .09 = 1.6M. Note: all cables are provided in one row.
Moment this force can resist = 34217 x 1.6 54747 kNm> 31720M.
For the actual moment the Lever arm will be slightly low. But ignoring this take Z = 1.6 M.
Mean compressive stress at section 4 – 4 4059 kN/m2. Max allowable compression
.
17866 / 1 1.227 1.23 At θ = 45
.
As w 2.97 x 293
= = 1.048 mm 2 /mm 10 @ 150 will give = 1.048mm2/mm
s 0.8 x 415 x 2.5
For section 5.5 mean compressive stress = 4307 kN/m2
.
Allowable compressive stress = fcd= 17866 kN/m2 40000
.
0.25
, 1 0.24 1.25
Max allowable shear force = 1.25 x 0.135 x 40000 x 2 x 0.30 x 1.6 = 6480 kN if θ = 450
It θ = 21.8 = 1.25 x 0.093 x 40000 x 2 x 0.3 x 1.6 = 4464 kN
Shear force at the section = 1750 kN
1750 2
Shear stress = 2 x 0.3 x 1.6 = 1823 kN / m
As w 1.823 x 300 2
Area of shear reinforcement = = = .0 .66 mm /mm
s 0.87 x 415 x 2.5
Adopting 2L10 @ 200 mm 2L reinforcement provided is =
0.7854 x 2 x 100 2
= 0.785mm / mm
200
Hence adopt 10 @ 200: in each web and provide same reinforcement in the next section 6 – 6
also.
other sections provide minimum reinforcement
. . √
Minimum reinforcement = 0.329 /
By examining the capacity at a point 350mm below deck slab. 350 form top (below cantilever)
Prestress effect and Moment effect are shown below.
The section has more shear resisting capacity than at CG of section. Hence the designer has to
check at other location on the cross section if required in case if there is a doubt that capacity
may work out less than the capacity at the CG of section.
tension chord, the joints will open up after the decompression moment is reached at that
section. The depth of opening will depend upon the depth of flexural compression block. The
prestressing force should be assumed constant after the joint opening.
Clause:
10.3.3.
4
Fig: 10.11 Diagonal Stress Fields across the joint in the Web of Segmental Construction
Shear has to be balanced by the reduced depth. In order to avoid crushing of concrete it shall be
ensured that, the compressive stress should be within allowable limit.
Taking equation 10.8 and substituting z = h reduced and αcw = 1.0
(Eq: 10.18)
h reduced arrived form bending analysis shall be substituted and θ shall be evaluated. If θ
works out grater than 450, then h reduced shall be increased by applying additional prestress. In
case if θ works out to be lesser than 450, then the shear reinforcement can be worked out by
substituting the θ angle.
To avoid local failure adjacent to the joint, the reinforcement should be provided within the
reduced length of h red cot θ adjacent to the joint.
Taking equation 10.7
VNS = VRDS = cot
cot
This reinforcement shall be provided with a distance h reduced cot θ but not greater than
segment length. It shall be provided from both the edges of the joint. The opening up of joint
shall be limited to 50% of the depth under the ultimate limit state check for flexure and shear.
In case if the section opens up by more than 50% of the depth, the prestressing force shall be
increased.
M + ΔM
M
Cross Section
Fig: 10.12 Inter Face Shear between Web and Deck Slab N. A axisin Flange
The additional force ΔF has to be resisted by shear stress between the section across the
∆
construction joint:
∆
∆
∆
∆
∴
∆
∆
= Rate of Change of Bending Moment which is equal to shear force VED
∆
V ED
Shear stress v ED= Z b
i
This is true in case of NA axis lies within the flange assuming the construction joint is at the
top of web. In case if the NA axis lies in the web the force diagram will be as follows.
X=
proportionate shear carried by the flange (matching with the construction joint) with respect
total shear. The corresponding shear stress X VED/ Z bi If F2 = 0 then X = 1. Generally the force
contribution by the web in case of T beams or box girder is small and can be neglected. With
the result X can be taken as 1.0. The shear force taken for checking the interface shear is the
net shear at the section multiplied by ratio of longitudinal flexural force above construction
joint to the total compressive or tensile longitudinal flexural force.
The leaver arm to be considered is to be arrived from the actual stress block for the loading
considered. However the lever arm used to compute the sectional resistance may be used to
simplify the computation.
The first term of the codal equation 10.21 represents the frictional force across the inter face
under the action of normal compressive force which is generally 0 except in case of vertically
prestressed sections and the second term corresponds to the mechanical resistance of
Cl.10.3.5
reinforcement crossing the interface . The shear reinforcement provided in the section and
continued across the interface having the adequate anchorage shall be considered for working
out the reinforcement ratio ρ. In case if the additional reinforcement is required over and above
the shear reinforcement, same shall be provided. The minimum reinforcement required to be
provided across the horizontal interface shear will be 0.15% of interface area.
C 10.3.5Shear in the Flange Portion of Flanged Beam and Box Section
Reference shall be made to fig 10.9 of the code. The longitudinal inplane force generated in the
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter 10 / 35 OF 62
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
flange induces shear stress between at the flange and web junction.
∆ ∆
∆
∴
∆
Δx is the length under consideration and ΔFd unbalanced inplane shear force between the
section.
The maximum value of ΔX shall be assumed as the half the distance between the zero bending
moment point and maximum bending moment section. When the structure to subjected to
concentrated loads, the length shall not exceed the distance between concentrated loads.
Alternatively shear stress can be calculated using the formula from the previous section
replacing bi by hf. The shear will be carried by web and also by flanges or either side of web.
As we are interested in the shear transmitted by flange alone the following formula can be used
V ED beff of flange on one side
for calculating the shear stress: v ED= Z h x b totaleffectivewidth flange including web
f
The diagonal compressive strut represents the compressive force in one panel as shown.
Length of the plane Y Y over which the compressive force acting = x cos (90 – θ)
Force the plane can support
= v fcd x cos (90 - θ) hf
Substituting for x
= v1fcd L cot θcos (90-θ) hf = v fcdL cosθhf - (2)
Equating (1) and (2)
cos
sin
vED = v fcdcos θ sin θ
Assuming the reinforcement is spaced at a spacing of Sf Resolving the longitudinal shear along
the reinforcement.
The force along the reinforcement is Ftan θ
(1)
(2) Half the above steel plus the steel required for transverse bending.
The flow chart for the design check is presented below.
START
D
Calculate, the Longitudinal shear stress vED=ΔFd/hfΔxor xRatioeffectivewidthofflanges
Is No
Redesign the section
vRDmax>vED
Yes
Is
The length of flange No Min strut capacity θf = 38.6
under consideration is in VRDmin = 0.130 fck (1 – fck/ 310)
compression 0.6 x 0.67 x 0.67 x 0.782 x 0.624= 0.130
Yes Yes
Is VRDmin> VED
Min strut capacity
θf = 26.50
VRDmin = 0.107 fck (1 – fck/ 310)
`
0.6 x 0.67 x 0.67 x 0.895 x 0.446= 0.107 No
Fig 10.17 Flow Diagram for the design of flange of T beam and Box
girders
C 10.4.1 General
When a slab is subjected to localized concentrated force which acts over a small area the
punchingshear failure can occur. Common examples are, wheel load acting on deck slab, pile Cl.10.4.1
caps over piles open foundations supporting pier and well cap supporting the pier. Punching
shear is resisted by the shear resistance of concrete through the depth of element over a
perimeter. The section covers action of concentrated force over a small area on two
dimensioned elements.
(3) When the loaded area is situated near an edge, or on the edge or at Corner, the control
perimeter shall be calculated based on the Fig 10.11 of code.
(4) The control perimeter should be chosen at a distance less than 2d when the
concentrated force on the loaded area is opposed by high pressure from soil (such as
foundation) or by the effects of a load or reaction with in distance of 2d. The code
suggests that the relief offered by the opposing force should be minimized.
get crushed. Incase if the section is unable to salsify the shear capacity then one of the
following actions is to be taken.
i. Increase the depth of slab.
ii. Increase the perimeter of the loaded area.
iii. Increase the grade of concrete
The reason for checking at the control perimeter is to check whether the section can
carry the load without of punching shear reinforcement.
vED =
Cl.10.4.3(1)
VED = Applied shear force
ui = Control Perimeter
d = depth of element
β = Factor for Accounting Bending Moment
β = 1 For axial load with no bending moment
MEd is the moment and VED is the ultimate shear force on the perimeter.
W1 is the property which corresponds to a distribution of shear as shown in Fig 10.12 of
code andis a function of basic control perimeter u1and axis about which the moment
acts. If the control perimeter change, or the axis about whichthe moment is acting
changes, then the value of W1 will be different.
ui
W1 is defended as W1 = ∫ | e | dl
0
Shear force is dependent on the moment transferred and the distance of the perimeter from
the
loaded area and the shape of the loaded area: The enhancement of shear due to moment
around
the perimeter can be expressed as :
=∆
Substituting in β 1
Cl.10.4.3
(2)
= 2 x C2 2 4 4
/
2d
/
dθ
/
θ
= / / 2d
= CG from axis =
Length =
=4 4
= 2 16
1 1.8
(3) For internal circular column: the value of β can be dived as follows
M ED
As C1 = C2∴ C1/C2 = 1.0 Hence k = 0.6 V = e
ED
1 0.6
dθ
θ Cl.10.4.3
D 2d D
(3)
2d
2d 2d
Control Perimeter
Fig 10.20 Control Perimeter for Circular Column
2 | |
2 /2 sin
2 /2 cos 2 /2 1 1
2 2 /2
4 2 2
2 2 4 2
2 2
4
2 4 2 /2 2 2 /2 4
1 0.6 1 0.6
4 4
(4) For edge columns, when there is no eccentricity the basic control perimeter as shown
shall be used.
Cl.10.4.3
(4)
were u1 = 2C C 2 .
(b) When the edge column is subjected to a moment with respect to an axis parallel the slab
edge (eccentricity perpendicular to slab edge)and is towards the interior and there is no
eccentricity parallel to the edge.
V ED
The punching shear stress can be estimate using v ED= u d where
2
3 2 2
(c) When the edge column is subjected to moment about both axis and the eccentricity
perpendicular to the slab edge towards interior. β shall be determined
=2 2 4
(d) If the eccentricity is towards exterior then the expression for β Eq. 10.25 of code is
valid. However the value of W1 has to be worked out using the eccentricity e measured
from the centroid of the control perimeter.
(5) For rectangular corner column, when there is no eccentricity
V ED
v ED=
u1 d
For rectangular corner column, where the eccentricity is toward of the interior of the Cl.10.4.3
slab, it is assumed that the punching shear stress is uniformly distributed along the (5)
reduced control perimeter.
V ED
v ED=
u 2 d Where u2 = Min of (0.5 C1 + 0.5 C2 + ∏d) or (3d + ∏d)
In the above case if the eccentricity is towards exterior, than the expression for β Eq. 10.25
of code is valid
However the value of W1 will have to be worked out. The eccentricity should be measured
from the centroid of the control perimeter.
VRDC is in MPa.
fck is in MPa.
200
1 2.0
/ /
.02 .031
ρly, ρlz relate to the bonded tension steel in y and z directions. Taking a slab width of 3d beyond
the column face on each side the mean value of ρly and ρlzshall be calculated.
2
σcy and σcz are the axial concrete stress taking compression as positive.
. .
.
NEdy, NEdy are the longitudinal forces. The force may be either due to prestressing or axial
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter 10 / 48 OF 62
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
force.
Acy, Acz are the corresponding cross section area resisting the axial forces.
/
2 2
0.12 80
1 2.0 .
Where k is defined in Eq. 10.25 or 10.30 of code as appropriate and W is similar to W1 for the
control perimeter u.
C 10.4.6 Design of Section for Punching Shear
(1) As it is difficult to provide punching shear reinforcement it is better to avoid this
reinforcement. Hence the capacity of the slab in punching shear should be greater the
applied shear. This can be achieved by ensuring.
Cl.10.4.6
Shear stress connected with punching shear are defined as below: (1)
vED: Punching shear stress along the control perimeter.
vRdc: Shear resistance of slab against punching without punching shear reinforcement.
vRdmax : maximum punching shear resistance of slab.
(2) Checking of punching shear stress around loaded area / column perimeters.
Cl.10.4.6
Punching shear stress vED= (2)
v = 0.6 1
.
vRdmax = 0.5 x 0.6 1
.
=0.132 1
START
vRD.max 0.135fck 1
Yes
Determine
/
2 2
0.12 80
Yes
No shear reinforcement requirement
2 2
= 125± 93.75= 219 kN /m 31 kN/ m
To Resist the bending moment reinforcement provided is : 25 MM @ 200 c/c in both direction.
Reinforcement provided is 24.5cm2/m in each direction:
Effective depth dy = 700 – 50 – 25/2 = 637.5 mm
Effective depth for other direct dz = 637.5 – 25 = 612.5 mm
The effective depth for punching shear calculation
. .
d= 625
= 2 (C1 +C2) + 4 П d
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter 10 / 52 OF 62
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Base Pressure
. .
Average pressure 115.2 /
2450
% Steel in Transverse direction = 612.5 x 1000 = 0.004
200
1 1.562
625
0.18 /
1.565 80 0.00392 35 0.417
0.5
V min= 0.031 x 1.5653 /2 x 351/ 2= 0.359 MPa
4 16 2
2
= 1 4 1 0.625 16 0.625 2 0.625 1.0
.
1
.
The value of Wwhat was estimated earlier can not hold good.
as the plane has come closer: the W applicable for this plane is
1. 0 0.625 0.625 0.625
1 1 4 1.0 16 2 1.0
2 2 2 2
= 0.5 1 1.25 3.125 1.963 6.838
.
= 1
.
. .
= 1
. .
C 10.5 Torsion
C 10.5.1 General
When a concrete element is subjected to Torsion the longitudinal fibers are free to undergo
deformation. Torsion can be of classified into Equilibrium Torsion and Compatibility Torsion.
Equilibrium Torsion is that torsional resistance which is required to keep the structure in
equilibrium and is essential for the basic stability of the element or structure. A few example
are canopy cantilevering off an edge beam, Beams/ Box girders curved in plan Element Cl.10.5.1
subjected to Equilibrium Torsion has to be designed for full torsional resistance in the ultimate
limit state.
Compatibility torsion arises out of compatibility of displacement/ rotations to be maintained in
the connected element. Generally it occurs in monolithic construction. Compatibility torsion
can be released without causing collapse. It is not necessary to consider this torsion at ultimate
limit state. At serviceability cracks may occur in the absence of sufficient reinforcement. The
cracked torsional stiffness of elements subjected to torsion is only about 25% of the uncracked
value. Low torsional stiffness significantly reduce torque resisting ability of the beams. Hence
if one ignores the torsional rigidity in the analysis it would not make much difference. To limit
the crack width under limit state of serviceability, check under clause 12.3.5 of code shall be
carried out and suitable reinforcement as per clause 16.5.3 shall be provided.
When the longitudinal fibers are restrained deformation by an external element warping torsion
arises.
The torsional resistance of a closed section may be calculated on the basis of a thin walled
closed section. The equilibrium is satisfied by closed shear flow. Solid sections can be modeled
by equivalent thin walled sections.
In case of complex shapes such as T section the section shall be divided into series of
subsections. The acting torsional moments over subsections can be distributed in proportion to
the uncrackedtorsional stiffness. Each of the subsections can be modeled as thin walled section
and the torsional resistance can be computed.
When hollow sections are modeled as thin walled section, the thickness of section shall be
Cl.10.5.1
taken as A/U which will be neither less than twice the axis distance of longitudinal bars from
the outer surface nor greater than the actual thickness. For conversion of solid section to
equivalent hollow section fig. 10.25 shall be referred to.
In the analysis the torsional stiffness may be based on uncracked sectional stiffness for
equilibrium torsion and 25% the uncracked sectional stiffness for compatibility torsion to allow
for torsional cracking.
C 10.5.2 Design Procedures:
The shear stress in a wall of section subjected to pure torsional moment can be divide as
follows:
T ED
Ak= hb ∴ q = 2 Area of core
q T ED
Shear stress = t = 2 A t
efi k efi
T
ED
Shear force in a wall = 2 Area of core x Lengthof wall
Ak is the area enclosed by the centre-lines of the connection walls, including inner hollow
areas.
τt,i is the torsional shear stress in wall i
tef,i is the effective wall thickness. It may be taken as A/u, but should not be taken as less
than twice the distance between edge and centre of the longitudinal reinforcement. For
hollow sections the real thickness is an upper limit.
A is the total area of the cross-section within the outer circumference, including inner
hollow areas
u is then outer circumference of the cross-section
zi is the side length of wall I defined by the distance between the intersection points with
the adjacent walls
The shear force generated due to torsion shall be calculated using the following formula θ
angle shall be same as what has been assumed in shear analysis. Cl.10.5.2
T ED (4)
V Torsion= z cot (codal equation 10.7 to get the
2 Ak i Which can be equated to
transverse reinforcement)
∴ whereAst is area of transverse reinforcement in thickness tefi with a spacing
of st.
The transverse reinforcement required shall be arrived based on clause 10.3.3.2 when vertical
strips are provided. It shall be kept in mind that each wall has to be designed separately. The
concrete capacity shall also be checked using the follows equation.
1.0
In the addition Longitudinal steel also need to be provided for resisting torsion. The
reinforcement can be calculated using the expression.
Σ
Cl.10.5.2
Warping Torsion
For closed thin walled sections and solid section warping torsion may be ignored since warping Cl.10.5.
torsion is not necessary for equilibrium. Hence in these sections the torsion is equated to 2.2
St.Venant torsion or circularity torsion. For opens sections having very slender cross section
the warping torsional effects can be evaluated using the reference “Roarks Formula for stresses
and strain” by W.C Young.
VEdi=τti x tefi x Zi
Substituting for τti in the above equation
T ED T ED
Vedi= 2 A t x t efi x Z i= 2 A Z i
k efi k
Longitudinal Reinforcement
5000 10
2.5 2.19 /
2 8.57 10 332
2.19
2 2
on each face 2 = 1.1 mm /mm 12 @ 100 mm c/c will give 1.13 mm /mm
2 sin cos
40 40 8.575 10 600 0.371 0.928
2 0.6 1 1.0 0.67 33077
310 1.5 10
5000 .
0.150
V ED
15% of allowable torsion the section is carrying. Hence V will workout to 0.85. Hence,
RDC
Cross Section
As a first step torsional inertia of each rectangular is to be evaluated. The torsional constant can
be obtain from any standard reference books.
Torsional Inertia of Deck Slab.
b
b = 1500mm t = 200mm t = 7.5 k (torsional construct) = 0.305
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter 10 / 60 OF 62
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
1
I x y = 2 x 0.305 x 1500 x 2003 = 18.3 x 108 mm4
As the deck slab is acting in two directions the torsional inertia has been halved.
Torsional Inertia of Top flange:
b
b = 400mm t = 250mm t = 1.6 k = 0.203
12.68
Top flange TED 148.13 x 50 = 4.28 kNm
63.9
Web TED 148.13 x 50 = 21.57 kNm
53.25
Bottom Flange TED 148.13 x 50 = 17.97 kNm
But this thickness should not be taken less than 2 twice the distance of longitudinal bar from
the surface [effective cover].
Taking cover as 40mm dia for longitudinal and transverse bars of 10mm.
Effective cover 40 + 10 + 5 = 55m.Twice the 110mm.
.
0.102 (ie) 10% has been stressed against crushing strength against torsion.
.
Design of Web:
Thickness 112.5
=155 21.57
Similarly bottom flange can be analyzed.
SECTION 11.
ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE OF INDUCED DEFORMATION (3rd DRAFT)
11.1 GENERAL
(1). This Section deals with structural members and structures whose load deformation
behaviour and ultimate capacity is significantly affected by second order effects.
Second order effects are additional action effects caused by the interaction of axial
forces and deflections under load (Refer Fig. 11-0). First order deflections cause
additional moments which in turns lead to further deflections. Some times these effects
are also called P-Δ effects as they are the products of axial forces and deflections of
the elements or system. Normally second order effects are calculated by second order
analysis.
Second order analysis is not commonly used by engineers due to complexities involved
in the analysis. A significant disadvantage of second order analysis is:
a) The principle of superposition is not valid in second order analysis and all actions
must be applied to the bridge together with all their respective load and combination
factors.
b) The flexural rigidity (EI) of the reinforced concrete structure is not constant. EI
reduces with increasing moment due to cracking
The code has given relaxation in cases where second order effects are less than 10%
of the first order effects. In such cases, second order analysis can be done away with,
to the extent possible by following the alternative methods and provisions as given
below under para (4) & (5) and clause 11.2.1 (in case of isolated members of uniform
cross section).
Second order effects are more pronounced in slender compressive elements. The well
known elastic buckling theory by Euler determines the extent of slenderness and
quantum of second order effects. The elastic buckling itself has little relevance in the
design, however the same gives good indication about the susceptibility to second order
effects and can be used as a parameter in determining second order effects from the
results of first order analysis as explained in section 11.3.2
Majority of commercially available structural softwares has the capability to carry out
second order analysis. In the second order analysis, in addition to the invalidity of the
principle of superposition the flexural rigidity of reinforced concrete structures, EI is not
constant. As the moment increases for the same load, EI reduces due to cracking of
concrete and inherent non-linearity in the concrete stress-strain response also
increases. Thus it involves both geometry and material non-linearity for RC elements
and has to be taken in to account while choosing the method for 2nd order analysis.
The slender piers of the bridges are commonly affected by 2nd order analysis while the
provisions related to same are also applicable to other slender members with significant
axial loads like pylons and decks of cable supported bridges.
(3) Where there are significant second order effects, these must be taken in to account
in the analysis by linear elastic method in conjunction with further maginification of
moments and reduced stiffness properties accounting for cracking and creep.
However, as per the clause 7.3 and 7.2 at the ultimate limit states, section properties
are used similar to that of serviceability limit states. It is interesting to observe that
second order analysis based on nominal stiffness which are considered in Euro and
other codes are not considered in this standard as they are not conservative since they
include cracked section properties for the load cases where there are applied
deformations from temperature, settlement and shrinkage. (Explanation in this para
not clear – Needs further elaboration)
Since a fully un-cracked elastic analysis is generally conservative (as it does not lead to
redistribution of moment away from the most highly stressed, and therefore cracked,
areas), an uncracked elastic global analysis is adequate to comply with the serviceability
limit state as per this standard. This also avoids the need to consider tension stiffening.
While determining the second order effects by simplified methods instead of non-
linear second order computer analysis, the effective length concept can be used to
determine slenderness. On determination of slenderness, the requirement of second
order analysis itself may be deduced. According to clause 11.2.1 (1), the
slenderness ratio is defined as λ= le/i where ‘le’ is effective length and ‘i’ is the
radius of gyration of the uncracked concrete section.
The clause 11.2.1 (2) provides a simplified criteria when second order analysis is
not required by limitation of slenderness value λ as follows:
• there is low creep ( because the stiffness of the concrete part of the member
in compression is then higher)
• there is a high percentage of reinforcement( because total member stiffness
is then less affected by the cracking of the concrete)
• the location of the peak first order is not the same as the location of peak
second order moment.
11.2.2 Effective Length (height) and Slenderness Ratio of Columns and Piers with
Bearings
This clause gives methods for calculating effective lengths for isolated members. On the
basis of end conditions multiplication factors for calculating effective lengths are given
in Table 11.1 of the code. The cases from (2) to (7) assume that the foundations
providing the rotational stiffness at the bottom are infinitely stiff. In reality, the same is
not the case as such the effective lengths for the rigid restraints will always be
somewhat greater. Thus the clause 11.2.2 (1) gives methods of accounting for rotational
flexibility by equation 11.2 and 11.3 in the code which are reproduced here below.
For compression members in regular frames, the effective length le is determined
in the following way:
Braced Members:
⎛ k1 ⎞ ⎛ k2 ⎞
le = 0.5lo ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ * ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟
⎝ 0.45 + k1 ⎠ ⎝ 0.45 + k 2 ⎠
Unbraced members:
⎧ ⎫
⎪ ⎛ k .k ⎞ ⎛ k ⎞ ⎛ k ⎞
le = lo * max of ⎨ ⎜1 + 10. 1 2 ⎟ ; ⎜1 + 1 ⎟ * ⎜1 + 2 ⎟⎪⎬
⎜ k1 + k 2 ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ 1 + k1 ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ 1 + k 2 ⎟⎠⎪
⎪ ⎝
⎩ ⎭
Where
k1, k2 are the relative flexibilities of rotational restraints at ends 1 and 2 respectively.
k=
(θ ) . EI
M lo
θ / M = is the rotation of restraining members at a joint for unit bending moment M
EI = is the bending stiffness of compression member
Io = is the clear height of compression member between end restraints.
For the unbraced members with rotational restraint at both ends, the second equation
above can be used. Quick inspection of this equation shows that the theoretical case of
a member with ends built in rigidity for moment (k1 = k2 = 0), but free to sway in the
absence of positional restraint at one end, gives the effective length l0 = l
It is the relative rigidity of restraint to flexural stiffness of the compression member i.e.
important in determining effective length. Consequently, using the uncracked value of
stiffness for the pier will be conservative as the restraint will have to be relatively stiffer
to reduce the buckling length to a given value. This also is in line with the definition of
radius of gyration, ‘i’, given in the clause 11.2.1 (1) which is based on the uncracked
section. However the note 1 under the clause 11.1.1 (1) requires that the cracking
needs to be considered in determining the stiffness of a restraint, such as reinforced
concrete pier base, if it significantly affects the overall stiffness of restraint offered to the
pier. It is seen that quite often the overall stiffness is governed by the soil stiffness
rather than Reinforced Cement Concrete element.
The second note under the same clause recommends that minimum value of the ‘k’
should be taken as 0.1, even if the joint is fully restrained, since fully rigid restraint is
rare in practice. Example of such application is integral bridges, where the top of the pier
is connected to deck. The value of the end stiffness to use for piers in integral
construction can be determined from a plane frame model by deflecting the pier to give
the deflection relevant to the mode of buckling and determining the moment and rotation
produced in the deck at the connection to the pier. The clause 11.2.2 (2) also provides
for the elastic buckling method described below which could be used to determine the
effective length more directly.
The cases shown in the illustration above do not permit any rigidity of positional restraint
in sway cases. If significant lateral restraint is available, as might be the case in an
integral bridge where one pier is very much stiffer than the other ignoring this restraint
will be very conservative as the most flexible piers may actually be braced by the stiffer
one. In such cases elastic critical buckling analysis carried out by computers give
reduced value of effective length.
Effective lengths can also be arrived at for piers in integral bridges having varying
stiffness. In such cases the buckling load as well as effective length of any of the piers
depends upon the load and the geometry of the other piers too. All piers may sway in
symphony and may act as unbraced or single pier or abutment may prevent the sway
and give braced behavior for other piers (refer Fig 11-1.). The analytical method could
also be carried out for such situations to deduce accurate effective lengths by applying
coexisting loads to all columns and increasing all loads proportionately until a buckling
mode involving the pier of interest is found, then the buckling load is the axial load in the
member of interest at buckling.
(1). For the reasons explained in the clause 11.1 (1) above, it is essential that 2nd
order analysis with axial load for RCC sections realistically models material non-
linearity as well as geometric. This clause provides a general method based on non-
linear analysis, which allows for both these sources of non-linearity.
(2). For the isolated members, the code recognises the method based on nominal
curvature which is explained in detail in the clause 11.3.2. However, the elastic
theory based analysis i.e. nominal stiffness method which has elaborated in other
international standards is done away with in this code.
(3). While the earlier clauses illustrate the structural behaviour in general, it does not
give guidance regarding the material properties to be used in the analysis. This
clause states that only stress-strain curves for concrete and steel should be suitable
for overall analysis and should take creep in to account. The resistance of local
sections are governed by design values of the material strengths while, arguably,
the overall behavior will be most similar to that produced with mean material
strengths. It is normally required that ‘realistic’ stiff nesses are to be used in the
analysis, as described in clause 11.3, and this leads to the lengthy verification
format described therein, which can be used for second-order analysis. An
alternative allowed by clause 11.3.1 (3) is to use design values of material properties
(as given in Annexure A 2.7) throughout the analysis so that, if equilibrium and
compatibility are attained in the analysis, no further local design checks are required.
This is conservative where all applied actions are external forces as the resulting
deflections (and hence P - ∆ effects) will be greater because of the uniformly
reduced stiff nesses implicit in the method. In this case, it will also be conservative to
neglect the effects of tension stiffening. However, the clause is silent on the effects
of tension stiffening.
(4). If design properties are used, the stress-strain relationships given in 6.4.3.5(4)
for concrete and 6.2.2 for reinforcing steel can be used. Creep may be accounted
for by multiplying all strain values in the above concrete stress-strain diagram by a
factor (1 + Øef), where Øef is the effective creep ratio. The analysis would be
performed using the design combination of actions relevant to the ultimate limit
state. When this procedure is followed, no further checks of local sections are
required, as strength and stability are verified directly by the analysis. Care is
needed, however, where there are indirect actions (imposed displacements) as a
stiffer overall system may attract more load to the critical design section, despite the
reduction in P - ∆ effects. A sensitivity analysis could be tried in such cases.
calculate the second-order moment. 11.3.2.1 notes that the method is primarily intended
for use with members that can be isolated from the rest of the bridge, whose boundary
conditions can be represented by an effective length applied to the member. The first-
order moment, including that from initial imperfections, is added to the moment from the
additional maximum deflection according to the expression in 11.3.2.2 (1). (This differs
from the method in BS 5400 where initial imperfections are not considered.)
From the above formula for e2, with c = 8 and lo = 2L, the deflection is:
which is the same result as that in the earlier equation, ∆ = ∫L0 ∫x0 (1/r) dx dx = (1/r) L2 / 2
The value of c = π2 is recommended in 11.3.2.2 (4) but care should again be taken when
reinforcement is curtailed continuously to match the moment capacity envelope. In that
situation, it will be more appropriate to use c = 8
11.3.2.3 Curvature
The value of curvature 1 / r depends on creep and the magnitude of the applied axial
load. For members with constant symmetrical cross-section (including reinforcement) it
can be determined according to 11.3.2.3 (1)
1/r = KrKØ 1/r0
where:
1/r0 is the basic value of curvature, discussed below
Kr is a correction factor depending on axial load, discussed below
KØ is a factor for taking account of creep, discussed below
These requirements are discussed under the relevant clauses. The rules for columns,
in particular, require compression bars in an outer layer to be held by links if they are to
be included in the resistance check. It is, however, not considered necessary here to
provide such links in order to consider the contribution of reinforcement in compression
to the stiffness calculation. This apparent incompatibility is justified by the conservative
nature of the methods of clause 11.3.2 compared to a general non-linear analysis and
the similar approach taken in other codes for composite columns. If there is specific
concern over the adequacy of the restraint to compression bars, the suggested
curvature 1/r0 = (εyd + εc) / h discussed later below could be used as a more
conservative value.
The curvature 1/r0 is based on a rectangular beam with symmetrical reinforcement and
strains of yield in reinforcement at each fibre separated by a lever arm z = 0.9d, where d
is the effective depth (the compression and tension reinforcement thus being considered
to reach yield). Hence the curvature is given by:
1/r0 = εyd
0.45d
This differs from the method in BS 5400 Part 4, where curvature was based on steel
yield strain in tension and concrete crushing strain at the other fibre. Despite the
apparent reliance on compression reinforcement to reduce the final concrete strain, the
results produced will still be similar to those from BS 5400 Part 4 because:
(1) The moment from imperfections has to be added in this code.
(2) The strain difference across the section is less in BS 5400 Part 4, but it occurs
over a smaller depth (not the whole cross-section depth) – thus producing
proportionally more curvature.
For situations where the reinforcement is not just in opposite faces of the section, d is
taken as h/2 + is in accordance with 11.3.2.3 (2) where is is the radius of gyration of the
total reinforcement area. This expression is again only applicable to uniform symmetric
sections with symmetric reinforcement.
No rule is given where the reinforcement is not symmetrical. One possibility would be to
determine the curvature from similar assumptions to those used in BS 5400 part 4.
These are that the tension steel yields at εyd and the extreme fibre in compression
reaches its failure strain εc, so the curvature 1/r0 would be given approximately by:
1/r0 = (εyd + εc) /h
Where h is the depth of the section in the direction of bending (used as an
approximation to the depth to the outer reinforcement layer). The concrete strain can
conservatively be taken as εc= εcu2. If the above expression is used, the factor Kr below
should be taken as 1.0.
Kr is a factor which accounts for the reduction in curvature with increasing axial load and
is given as (nu – n) / (nu – nbal) <1.0.nu is the ultimate capacity of the section under
axial load only, Nu, divided by Acfcd. Nu implicitly includes all the reinforcement area, As,
in calculating the compression resistance such that Nu = Acfcd + Asfyd so that
The clause allows a value of 0.4 to be used for nbal for all symmetric sections. In other
cases, the value can be obtained from a section analysis. Kr may always be
conservatively taken as 1.0 (even though for n < nbal it is calculated to be greater than
1.0), and this approximation will usually not result in any great loss of economy for
bridge piers unless the compressive load is unusually high.
KØ is a factor which allows for creep and is given by 11.3.2.3 (4) as follows:
KØ = 1 + β Øef > 1.0
where:
Øef is the effective creep ratio.
β = 0.35 + fck / 200 – λ / 150 and λ is the slenderness ratio.
For braced members (held in position at both ends) which do not have transverse
loading, an equivalent first-order moment for the linearly varying part of the moment may
be used according to 11.3.3.2 (2). The final first-order moment M0Ed should comprise the
reduced equivalent moment from M0e=0.6 M02 +0.4M01 ≥0.4 M02 (Eq 11.15 in the code)
added to the full first-order moment from imperfections.
The effects of slenderness for columns bent biaxially are most accurately determined
using non-linear analysis, as discussed in section 11.3 of this explanatory note. The
provisions of this clause apply when simplified methods have been used.
The approximate methods described in clauses 11.3.2 can also be used for the case of
biaxial bending. The second-order moment is first determined separately in each
For details of the use of simplified methods for biaxial moment taking second order
deformation into account, reference is made to clause 8.3.2. This allows the interaction
between the moments to be neglected (i.e. consider bending in each direction
separately) if the slenderness ratios in the two principle directions do not differ by more
than a factor of 2 and the ‘relative eccentricities’ satisfy one of the criteria in 8.3.2 (3)
(Eq 8.1 in the code, not reproduced here). Where this is not satisfied, the moments in
the two directions (including second-order effects) must be combined, but imperfections
only need to be considered in one direction such as to produce the most unfavourable
conditions overall. Section design under the biaxial moments and axial force may be
done either by a rigorous cross-section analysis using the strain compatibility method by
simple interaction provided in 8.3.2 (4) (Eq 8.3 in the code not reproduced here).
Where the method of nominal curvature is used (Clause 11.3.2) is used, it is not
explicitly stated whether a nominal second-order moment, M2, should be considered in
both orthogonal directions simultaneously, given that the section can only ‘fail’ in one
plane of bending. M2, however, can be significant in both directions.
From above, a case could be made for considering M2 only in the direction that gives
the most unfavourable verification. For circular columns, it is possible to take the vector
resultant of moments in two orthogonal directions, thus transforming the problem into a
uniaxial bending problem with M2 considered only in the direction of the resultant
moment. In general, however, it is recommended here that M2 conservatively be
calculated for both directions, as was practice in BS 5400 Part 4. Bending should then
be checked in each direction independently, and then biaxial bending should be
considered (with M2 applied in both directions together unless second-order effects can
be neglected in one or both directions in accordance with 11.1 (5) or 11.2, if 8.3.2 (3)
(Eq 8.1 of the code) is not fulfilled. Imperfections should only be considered in one
direction. In many cases, M2 will not be very significant for bending about the major
axis, as the curvature from equation 1/r0 = εyd / 0.45d and hence nominal second-order
moment, is smaller for a wider section.
The clause 11.4.1 (3) defines geometric conditions to be satisfied so that second-order
effects from the above mode of buckling can be ignored. These limits are not applicable
where there is axial force (such as due to external prestressing), as the axial force leads
to additional second-order effects as discussed in section 11.1 (1). It is recommended
that sections are generally designed to be within these limits to avoid the complexity of
verifying the beam through second-order analysis. The limits should be met for most
practical beam geometries used in bridge design with the possible exception of edge
beams with continuous integral concrete parapets. Where such up stands are outside
the geometric limits but have been ignored in the ultimate limit state checks of the edge
beam, engineering judgement may often be used to conclude that the up stand is
adequate. (Some care would still be required in the verification of cracking in the up
stand.)
If the simple requirements of clause 11.4.1 (3) are not met, then second-order analysis
needs to be carried out to determine the additional transverse bending and torsional
moments developed. Geometric imperfections must be taken into account and clause
11.4.1 (2) requires a lateral deflection of l/300 to be assumed as a geometric
imperfection, where l is the total length of the beam. It is not necessary to include an
additional torsional imperfection as well. Any bracing, whether continuous from a deck
slab or discrete from diaphragms, should be included in the model. Such analysis is
complex as it must allow for both the non-linear behavior of the materials and the
geometric non-linearity of the instability type, for which finite element modeling (with
shell elements) would be required.
Regardless of the method used, the supporting structures and restraints must be
designed for the resulting torsion as per clause 11.4.1 (4)
(b) For cantilevers with lateral restraint provided only at the support, the clear distance
from the free end of the cantilever to face of the support should not exceed 25bc
2
100bc
or , whichever is the lesser.
d
The above two simple criteria are chosen from IRC :21 and IS: 456. These two criteria
alone do not necessarily ensure the lateral stability of slender beams, especially for
Prestressed Concrete Slender beams. The lateral stability aspects of PSC slender
beams has been discussed in detail in the IRC paper no.524 ‘Design and Construction
of Pre tensioned Sutlej Bridge in Punjab’. The paper gives guidelines for calculating
Factor of Safeties for lateral stability of slender beams as such the reference may be
made to the paper for ensuring the lateral stability of the slender beams.
A bridge pier with free-sliding bearing at the top is 27.03m tall and has cross-section
dimensions, as shown in Fig :11-5. The pier base has a foundation flexibility (representing the
rotational flexibility of the pile group and pile cap) of 6.976 x 10-9 rad / kNm. The short term E
for the concrete is Ecm = 35 x 103 MPa. Calculate the effective length about the minor axis.
The inertia of the cross-section about the minor axis = 3.1774 m4 so:
At the base of the pier, k1 = (θ / Μ) . (ΕΙ / l) = 6.976 x 10-9 x 4.114 x 106 = 28.7 x 10-3. This is
less than lowest recommended value of 0.1 given in 11.2.2 However, as the stiffness above
was derived using lower-bound soil properties and pile cap stiffness, the stiffer calculated value
of k will be used.
= I x max (1.13;2.06)
= 2.06I
The effective length is therefore close to the value of 2l for a completely rigid support.
The bridge pier in Worked example 1 has concrete with cylinder strength 40 MPa and carries
an axial load of 31 867 kN. Calculate the slenderness about the minor axis and determine
whether second-order effects may be ignored. Take the effective length as 2.1 times the
height.
The inertia of the cross-section about the minor axis = 3.1774 m4. The area of the cross-
section = 4.47 m2. The limiting slenderness is determined from 11.2.1 (2)/Eq. 11.1 as follows:
Since the split of axial load into short-term and long-term is not given, the recommended value
of A = 0.7 will be conservatively used as discussed in the main text. The reinforcement ratio is
also not known at this stage, so the recommended value of B = 1.1. Since the pier is free to
sway, this is an unbraced member and benefit cannot be taken from the moment ratio at each
end of the pier. Hence C = 0.7 (which also corresponds to equal moments at each end of a pier
that is held in position at both ends).
The pier of Worked example 1 & 2 is subjected to a 31 867 kN axial load and a 1366 kN lateral
load about the minor axis at the ultimate limit state. The main vertical reinforcement is 136 no.
32mm diameter bars with yield strength 460 MPa (less than the standard 500 MPa). The
effective creep ratio Øef for this particular load case is 1.0 and Ecm = 35 x 103 MPa. Calculate
the final moment at the base of pier.
Since the section is symmetrical (with respect to cross-section and reinforcement), the method
of 11.3.2 can be used without modification. The radius of gyration, is, of the reinforcement was
found to be 845 mm so the effective depth, d, is found from 11.3.2.3 (2)/Eq 11.18:
Since the relative axial force n = 0.314 (from Worked example 2), which is less than nbal which
may be taken as 0.4, Kr will be greater than 1.0 according to the formula 11.3.2.3 (3)/Eq
11.19and should therefore be taken equal to 1.0.
In order to calculate K , the parameter β must first be calculated taking the slenderness
The effective length for buckling l0 = 2.1 x 27.03 = 56.763m and c = π2 for a sinusoidal
distribution of curvature. From 11.3.2.2 (3)/Eq 11.16
e2 = (1/r)l2o/c = 2.33 x 10-6 x 56 7632 / π2 = 761 mm
The initial imperfection displacement at the pier top is obtained from as l . θi = l . θ0 . h, where
l . θI = 27030 . 1 . 2 = 90mm
200 3
The first-order moment at the base M0Ed = 136 X 27.030 + 31 867 X 0.09 = 39 791 kNm.
The final moment including second-order effects is given by 11.3.2.2 (1)/Eq 11.4
Med = M0Ed + M2 = 39 791 + 24 251 = 64 042 kNm
The pier should also be checked about the major axis for the moments arising from initial
imperfections and the nominal second-order moment. The check of biaxial bending should be
carried out as discussed in section 11.3.4, but imperfections should only be considered in one
direction.
Bibliography
(1) C R Hendy and D A Smith, Designer’s Guide to EN 1992-2, Thomas telford, 2006
(2) CEB-FIP Model code 1990 : Design Code (For concrete structures)
(3) Eurocode 2 : Design of Concrete structures : 1992-1-1:2004
(4) V N Heggade, R K Mehta & R Prakash, ‘Design & Construction of Pre tensioned Sutlej
bridge Punjab’, Paper no.524, volume 67-2, July-September 2006, Journal of the Indian
Roads Congress.
(5) British Standards Institution (1990), steel, concrete and composite Bridges Part 4 : code
of practice for the Design of Concrete Bridges, London, BSI 5400.
SECTION 12
(1) The crack width calculations are based on the basic case of
a prismatic reinforced concrete bar, subjected to axial tension.
With regard to the behaviour under increasing tensile strain
four stages are distinguished (as shown in the Fig 12-1) :
• the uncracked stage,
• the crack formation stage,
• the stabilized cracking stage,
• the steel yielding stage.
(3) This clause elaborates the crack spacing S r .max for various
situations as enumerated below are self explanatory in the
code as such is not reproduced here :
Where:
f ctb is the concrete tensile strength prior to cracking
in a biaxial state of stress in webs.
σ3 is the larger compressive principal stress,
taken as positive.
σ 3 < 0.6 f ck
This tensile strenth f ctb depends upon the
directions.
If the maximum principle tensile stress σ 1 is less than
the above tensile strength f ctb calculated, then the minimum
reinforcement as caculated under the clause 12.3.3 should be
provided in the longiuinal direction.
However, if σ1 ≥ f ctb , the crack width should be
controlled in accordance with 12.3.6 or alternatively calculated
and verified in accordance with 12.3.4 taking into account the
angle of deviation between the principal stress and
reinforcement directions
The clauses 12.3.6 (5) and (6) address the treatment for
combination of prestressing steel and un-tensioned
reinforcement. The prestress can conservatively be treated as
an external force applied to the cross-section (ignoring the
stress increase in the tendons after cracking) and the stress is
determined in the reinforcement, ignoring concrete in tension
as usual. The reinforcement stress derived can then be
compared against the tabulated limits. For pre-tensioned
beams with relatively little untensioned reinforcement, where
crack control is to be provided mainly by the bonded tendons
themselves, the clause permits Tables 12.2 and 12.3 to be
used with the steel stress taken as the total stress in the
tendons after cracking, minus the initial prestress after losses.
This is approximately equal to the stress increase in the
tendons after decompression at the level of the tendons.
Cl. 12.4
Limit state of
deflection
Fig 12-2 Creep effect stresses & strains with time variation
E cm
Ec , eff =
1 + φ (∞, t0 )
Where:
φ (∞,t0) is the creep coefficient relevant for the load and time
interval (as per Clause 6.4.2.7).
RCC deck slab, 350mm thick and with M50 grade concrete, is
subjected to a transverse hogging moment of 144 kNm/m
under the characteristic combination of actions at SLS. This
moment comprises 22.5% from self-weight and super-imposed
dead load and 77.5% Live Load from traffic. The ultimate
design(ULS) requires a reinforcement area of 2513 mm2/m
(20mm diameter bars at 125mm c/c) at an effective depth of
290mm. Carry out the serviceability limit state checks.
Solutions:
= 78.02mm
The cracked second moment of area in steel units from
following equation is:
1 Ec, eff 3
Ι = As ( d − dc ) 2 + bd c
3 Es
1 35
= 2513 × ( 290 − 78.02) 2 + × × 1000 × 78.02 3 = 140.63 × 10 6 mm 4
3 200
σs =
MEd
= 144 × 10 6 × ( 290 − 78.02) /(140.63 × 10 6 ) = 217.06MPa
zs
From clause 12.2.2, the tensile limit = k3ƒyk = 0.8 x 500 = 400
MPa
>217.06 MPa, hence OK.
(b) Stress checks after, all creep effect has taken place :
The creep factor is determined for the long-term loading using
Table 6.9 and is found to be Ø = 2.2. This is used to calculate
an effective modulus of elasticity for the concrete under the
specific proportion of long-term and short-term actions defined
using equation
( Mqp + Mst ) E cm (0.225 + 0.775) × 35
Ec, eff = = = 23.41GPa
Mst + (1 + φ ) Mqp 0.775 + (1 + 2.2) × 0.225
Repeating the calculation process in (a) above, the depth of
concrete in compression is 92.17 mm and the cracked second
moment of area in steel units is 128.9 x 106 mm4.
This concrete stress at the top of the section from following
equation is:
MEd
σs = = 144 × 10 6 × (290 − 92.17) /(128.9 × 10 6 ) = 221.0MPa
zs
< 400 MPa, hence OK
The effect of creep here is to reduce the concrete stress and
slightly increase the reinforcement stress.
valid provided the actual bar spacing is less than 5(c +Ø/2) = 5
x (50 + 20/2) = 300mm, which is OK.
As + ξ12 Ap
By Cl 12.3.4 (2)/Eq (12.7): ρp, eff =
Ac, eff
where As = area of reinforcement = π x 102 / 0.125 = 2513mm2
/ m. Ap = 0 since no prestress.
Ac,eff = effective tension area = bhc,ef with hc,ef taken as the
lesser of:
2.5(h – d) = 2.5 x (350 – 290) = 150mm
or
(h – x) / 3 = (350 – 92.17) / 3 = 85.9mm
or
h / 2 = 350 / 2 = 175mm
Thus hc,ef = 85.9mm and Ac,eff = 1000 x 85.9 = 85.9 x 103 mm2 /
m
2513
Therefore ρp,eff = = 0.029
85.9 ×103
k1 = 0.8 for high bond bars and k2 = 0.5 for bending, therefore:
sr,max = 3.4 x 50 + 0.425 x 0.8 x 0.5 x 20 / 0.029 = 287.2mm
(It should be noted that the concrete cover term, 3.4c,
contributes 170mm of the total 287mm crack spacing here, so
is very significant.)
By Cl 12.3.4 (2)/Eq. (12.6):
fct, eff
σs − kt (1 + αeρp, eff )
ρp, eff σs
εsm – εcm= ≥ 0.6
Es Es
From Worked example above, the reinforcement stress
assuming a fully cracked section is 221.0 MPa, so the minimum
σs
value of 0.6 is 0.6 x 221.0 / (200 x 103) = 0.663 x 10-3
Es
kt = 0.6 for short-term loading or 0.4 for long-term loading, thus,
interpolating for 77.5% transient loading, kt = 0.56. From Table
6.5 for M50 concrete, ƒct,eff = ƒctm = 3.5 MPa. αe = 200 / 35 =
5.714.
Therefore:
εsm–εcm=
3.5
221.0 − 0.56 × (1 + 5.714 × 0.029)
0.029 221.0 − 78.78
= = 0.711×10−3
200 ×10 3
200 ×103
Codal Clauses
Grout Connection
(if required)
Bearing Plate
Threaded PT Bar Spherical Bearing Nut
Figure C13.2.2
Figure C13.2.1 Showing Externally
Showing Partially or Mounted Anchorages
Fully Embedded
Anchorages
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 1 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 4 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Design Example:
This example is provided to understand the design process by which reinforcement of an end block is
calculated with following data.
Nos of Strands per Tendon = 12
Area of Strands = 140 Sqmm
Breaking strength of Strands = 1860Mpa
Dimension of Anchorage , Ypo = 240mm
Tendon 3
Tendon 2
Tendon 1
Calculation of Design Forces:
As per Clause 13.2.3 of code, the design of end block shall be done with 1.10*UTS.
Hence Pk = 1.1*12*140*1860/1000 = 3437KN
Calculation of bursting reinforcement: The bursting reinforcement is to be provided around each
anchorage. The magnitude of these reinforcement depends on the size of the anchorage and the
dimensions of the theoretical prism surrounding the anchorage, as tabulated below:
Cable Prism Dimensions (2Yo) Ypo/Yo Fbst / Pk
Vertically Laterally Vertically Laterally Vertically Laterally
1 400 600 0.60 0.40 0.14 0.20
2 500 600 0.48 0.40 0.176 0.20
3 500 600 0.48 0.40 0.176 0.20
Consider Fy=500MPa reinforcement and clear cover of 50mm, the allowable stress in reinforcement =
0.87*500 = 435Mpa . As explained already, if we design the end block using stress 435Mpa, then a check of
crack width is needed. As per clause 13.2.3 of code, the crack width shall be restricted upto 0.25% under
load of 0.85UTS. To avoid such crack width check, the reinforcement stress should be limited to 300Mpa.
In this design example, reinforcement stress is restricted to 300Mpa.
Areas of steel required vertically:
Tendon 1 : 0.14*3437*10^3/300= 1604mm2
Tendon 2 & 3 : 0.176*3437*10^3/300 = 2016mm2
Areas of steel required laterally:
All Tendons : 0.2*3437*10^3/300 = 2291mm2
Using 16‐mm diameter bar, provide a six‐tum spiral round each anchorage over a distance 2Yo i.e. 600mm
from the loaded face. Area provided = 2413 mm2
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 5 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Calculation of Equilibrium reinforcement: As well as providing primary reinforcement in the immediate
vicinity of the anchorages, it is necessary to consider the overall equilibrium of the anchor block and to
determine any out‐of‐balance forces and moments that may be set up by the anchorages acting
individually or together. Possible stressing sequence is considered as below:
Case Stressed tendons
1 1
2 2
3 3
The point of application of forces are shown in the following figure for Case 1.
C/s area of End block = 1.26sqm p2
Distance of Cg from bottom = 1.014m
MOI = 0.3909m4
Zt= 0.4973m3
Zb= 0.3855m3
M
p1 = 3437/1.26+3437*(1.014‐0.2)/0.3855= 9985KN/sqm V
p2 = 3437/1.26‐3437*(1.014‐0.2)/0.4973= ‐2898KN/sqm
Distributed force at 700mm from bottom,
p700 = 9985 –(9985+2898)/1.8*0.7=4975 KN/sqm
Pk
Hence V = 0.5*(9985+4975)*0.6*0.7= 3142KN
M = 3142*((2*9985+4975)/(9985+4975)*0.7/3)
= 1222KN.m p1
The out of balance moments are tabulated below:
Case Dimension Moment in KN.m
from Bottom Due to Distribution Due to Anchor Net
1 700 1222 3437*(0.7‐0.2)=1719 ‐497
1200 3077 3437*(1.2‐0.2)=3437 ‐360
1400 3908 3437*(1.4‐0.2)=4124 ‐216
1600 4737 3437*(1.6‐0.2)=4812 ‐75
2 700 718 0 718
1200 1911 1719 192
1400 2493 2406 87
1600 3114 3094 20
3 700 213 0 213
1200 745 0 745
1400 1078 687 391
1600 1491 1375 116
Maximum clockwise moment = 745 Knm. Lever arm =block length = 1.8/2 m= 0.9m. Steel force = 828kN.
Required area of steel = 2758mm2.
Using five closed links of 20‐mm dia steel, area provided = 3114mm2 . This reinforcement shall be provided
at a distance 1.8/2=0.9m from the far end.
Maximum anticlockwise moment = 497 kNm.
Required area of steel = 497*1000/0.9/250= 1838mm2, to be provided over the first 1.8/4=0.45 mm from
the loaded end. This is in the same zone as the bursting reinforcement.
Provide 3 Nos closed links of 20 Dia, area = 1885 mm2
Check for Horizontal Shear Capacity:
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 6 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Values of shear at different stages are tabulated below.
Shear due
Dimension from Shear due to
Case to Anchor Net Shear (KN)
Bottom (mm) Distribution (KN)
(KN)
200 1112 0 1112
1112 3437 ‐2325
700 3142 3437 ‐295
1
3142 3437 ‐295
1200 4097 3437 660
4097 3437 660
200 630 0 630
630 0 630
700 1916 0 1916
2
1916 3437 ‐1521
1200 2787 3437 ‐650
2787 3437 ‐650
200 148 0 148
148 0 148
700 690 0 690
3
690 0 690
1200 1477 0 1477
1477 3437 ‐1960
Maximum developed shear = 2325KN
The ultimate shear resistance shall be calculated based on equation 10.8 of code. The developed shear
shall be less than shear resistance.
Flow of Stresses in Flange:
In a flanged member in which the anchorages are in the web, there is a flow of stress into the flange. This
sets up lateral tensile forces which have to be carried by lateral reinforcement. As a simple approach, it is
assumed for design purposes that all the force flowing into the flange is in fact applied at the loaded end of
the member over a width equal to that of the web.
The load in flange is calculated as below.
Dimension p at desired Load on
Case from Bottom section Flange, Pf
(mm) (KN/Sqm) (KN)
1600 ‐1466
1 ‐655
1800 ‐2898
1600 1110
2 250
1800 558
1600 3686
3 1155
1800 4013
Load on flange = 1155KN
Width of web = 0.6m
Width of flange = 1.5m
Ypo/Yo = 0.4; Fbst / Pk = 0.2
Fbst = 231KN
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 7 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Required area of steel = 231*1000/300 = 770 mm2.
This reinforcement shall be provided in both face of flange.
Reinforcement to resist Spalling:
The spalling reinforcement may be provided to withstand a force equal to 0.04 Pk in either direction.
Hence required steel force for spalling = 0.04*3437 = 138Kn.
Required reinforcement = 138*1000/300 = 458 mm2
Provide 2 Nos 20 dia as both vertical & horizontal reinforcemnt, area of steel provided = 628 mm2
DRAFT PREPD BY : AB Chapter 13 / 8 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 1 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 2 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Figure C14.1.
Dependence of permeability on the water cement ratio
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 3 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
• Anode: Fe → 2 e- + Fe2+
(Metallic iron)
• Cathode: ½ O2 + H2O + 2 e- → 2(OH)-
Figure C14.2.1.
Mechanism of corrosion of steel in concrete – schematic
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 4 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 5 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 7 OF 14
DRAFT CO
OMMENTARY
Y OF IRC:112 Februarry 2013
Figure C 14.3.2.1
CX = CS
S [1 – erf --------------]
2 √ (D.t)
Figure C.
C 14.3.2.1. Applicatio on of Fick’s law to chlo
oride ingresss
in concrrete.
Where,
CS = suurface chlorride level,
X = deppth from surrface,
CX = chhloride level at depth, X,
X
t = expo
osure time,
D = chlooride diffusion coefficie
ent, and
erf = errror function.
The stra
ategy to gu uard againsst onset off corrosion is to ensure
that the
e amount of o chloride penetrated d (CX) after the desig gn
service life, t, yearrs is less th
han the threshold leveel of chlorid
de
permitte
ed, at the de epth X, which is the coover thickne
ess.
DRAFT PR
REPD BY : Dr A
A K MULLICK Ch
hapter 14 / 8 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Apart from water / cement ratio and cover, Table 14.2 also lists
two other parameters – minimum cement content and minimum
grade of concrete. Minimum cement content specified is to
ensure adequate workability of concrete. For a given water-
cement ratio, a given cement content corresponds to a
particular water content, which may result in high, medium or
low workability. An appropriate value has to be chosen keeping
in view the placing conditions, cover thickness, and
concentration of reinforcement. For the values of water-cement
ratio and cement content shown in the Table 14.2, the water
content in the concrete mix works out to 140 to 160 litres /m3,
which will generally result in low workability (0 – 50 mm slump).
For higher workability, higher cement content (and higher water
content, maintaining the water-cement ratio) will have to be
adopted or chemical admixtures used. Minimum cement
content, along with the water-cement ratio, is also required to
result in sufficient volume of cement paste to overfill the voids
in compacted aggregates. For crushed aggregate of 20 mm
size, on which the Table 14.2 is based, the voids content is
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 9 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 10 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Vibrator
Rebar
Air
Direction of
water/air
movements
Water
Water collection /
Blowhole formation
Depth of
Effect design w/c ratio +
Figure C.14.3.2.2.
How CPF liners help in improving cover concrete
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 12 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
REFERENCES
--------
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr A K MULLICK Chapter 14 / 14 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
SECTION 15 : DETAILING: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (3rd DRAFT)
Codal Clause
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr AK MITTAL / AB Chapter 15 / 2 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
C15.2.4.3 Design anchorage length 15.2.4.3
C 15.2.6 Additional rules for HYSD Bars Exceeding 32mm in Diameter 15.2.6
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr AK MITTAL / AB Chapter 15 / 4 OF 4
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Codal Clause
bond bars placed in the tension zone outside the links. Other
requirements are :
Two cases are covered for design of corbel using strut & tie
method :
a) ac ≤ h
b) ac > h
Codal Clause
C17.1 GENERAL 17.1
Worked Examples:
ωw,req 0.0539
ωw,min 0.18
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr AK MITTAL / AB Chapter 17 / 3 OF 5
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
C17.2.2 Buckling of Longitudinal Compression Reinforcement 17.2.2
Once the cover concrete in the plastic hinge zone spalls due to
several hysterics of the seismic action, the longitudinal bars are
prone to buckling. The transverse reinforcement shall be
adequate to prevent this buckling by providing transverse
reinforcement at spacing not exceeding 5 times the minimum
diameter of the longitudinal bars.
b
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr AK MITTAL / AB Chapter 17 / 4 OF 5
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
a) Designing the foundation for 25% additional base shear, so
that the weakest link is at the pier base (capacity
protection).
o Top of pile
o Location of maximum bending moment
o Interface of soil layers with marked difference in shear
deformability.
DRAFT PREPD BY : Dr AK MITTAL / AB Chapter 17 / 5 OF 5
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
Codal Clause
The code relies upon BIS codes IS:432 (Part-1)-1982 for Mild
Steel and IS:1786-2000 for HYSD rebars for specification on
reinforcements. Though several grades of Mild Steel and
HYSD bars are specified in Table 18.1 of the code, all the
grades may not be readily available in the market. Availability
of the steel grade shall be ascertained prior to its use.
1) High strength
2) Adequate ductility
3) Bendability, which is required at the harping points
and near the anchorage
4) High bond, required for pre-tensioned members
5) Low relaxation to reduce losses
6) Minimum corrosion.
1) Epoxy coating
2) Mastic wrap (grease impregnated tape)
3) Galvanized bars
4) Encasing in tubes.
available for use, the code permits use of fly ash (byproduct of
coal fired furnaces), Ground granulated blast furnace slag
(non-metallic manufactured byproduct from a blast furnace)
and silica fume (byproduct from the manufacture of silicon or
ferro silicon metal) only.
ANNEXURE A1
ACTIONS, DESIGNS, SITUATIONS AND COMBINATIONS OF ACTION (3RD DRAFT)
Codal Clause
Combination of Action
There are two types of limit states which are to be satisfied. i,e
Limit state of Strength (ULS) and Limit State of Serviceability
(SLS).
Worked Examples
Partial factors are taken from IRC 6: 2010. The examples will illustrate the
methods to carry out the stability check and to work out the Bending
moment for the various combinations.
1) Overturning Check
Overturning moment (for unit length)
1
Earth pressure moment = (1.50) x 2 x 17 x (4.3)3 x 0.33 x 0.42 = 140.50 kNm
2
4.3
Moment of due to surcharge = (1.2) x 10 x 0.33 x 2 = 36.61 kNm
Total overturning moment = 140.50 + 36.61 = 177.11kNm
6kN
4.5m 3.0m
C
-9 kNm
-18 kNm
A B
Fig: 3 Bending moment due to Concentrated Dead Load
15kN/m
A +4.21kNm B-67.50kNm
9kN/m
-20.25kNm
-40.5kNm
9kN/m
+22.78kNm C
A B
Fig: 6 Moment due to Live Load
It is to be noted as the dead load effects oppose the live load effect, the partial
safely factor 1.0 has been used for dead load moment
iii. Maximum (-) moment of Mid Point of AB = {1.35 (-9 + 4.21) – 1.5 x 20.25} = -
36.84 kNm
As the dead load effects add to effect of live load effect the partial safely factor of
1.35 has been used for dead load moments.
(2) Moments under Serviceability Limit State
(a) Rare Combination
Maximum (-) moment at B = -{1.0 (18 + 67.5) + 1.0 x 40.5} = - 126 kNm
+ Moment at Mid Point span of AB = 1.0 (-9 + 4.2) + 1.0 x 22.78 = 17.98 kNm
Maximum (-) moment at Mid Point of span AB = -{1.0 (-9 + 4.21) – 1.0 x 20.25}
= -25.04 kNm
(b) Frequent Combination
Maximum moment at B = -{1.0 (18 + 67.5) + 0.75 x 40.5} = - 115.87 kNm
Max (+) moment at Mid Point of AB = 1.0 (-9 + 4.2) + 0.75 x 22.78 = 12.25 kNm
Max (-) moment at Mid Point of AB = 1.0 (-9 +4.2) – 0.75 x 20.25 = -19.98 kNm
(c) Quasi Permanent Combination
Maximum moment at B = -{1.0 (18 + 67.5)} = - 85.5 kNm
Moment of Mid Point of Span AB = 1.0(-9 +4.2) = -4.8 kNm
Thus it can be Seen that at first the bending moment has to be calculated with the
actions and then the partial factors to be chosen to arrive at the moment for the
different combinations.
5m 5m 5m
A B C D
Fig: 7 Continuity Beam
180.21 180.21
16.35
43.12 43.12
76
64.87 64.87
148.5
8.4 Design Moments for Superstructure and Loads and Moments for Substructure
Example 1:
Another Example of Designs of Bridge Superstructure and substructure will be given
here so that the designers can easily understand the concept of partial factors.
ii. Moment for Frequent Combination check = 3483.0 + 687.0 + 190+ 913 x 0.75
DRAFT PREPD BY : TV Chapter ANNEX-A1 / 13 OF 14
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
= 5044.7 kNm
Moment for frequent combination check, including temperature gradient effect =
5044.7 + 0.5 time the moment due to temperature gradient effect.
iii. Moment for Quasi permanent combination check = 3483 + 687 + 190
= 4360 kNm
Moment for Quasi permanent combination check, including temperature gradient
effect = 4360 + 0.5 time the moment due to temperature gradient effect
C-B-1 Introduction
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 1 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 2 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 3 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 4 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 5 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 6 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 7 OF 8
DRAFT COMMENTARY OF IRC:112 February 2013
DRAFT PREPD BY : UKR ANNEX – B1 / 8 OF 8