Professional Documents
Culture Documents
IRC Sp.037.2010 Load Test On Bridges
IRC Sp.037.2010 Load Test On Bridges
IRC Sp.037.2010 Load Test On Bridges
GUIDELINES
FOR EVALUATION OF LOAD
CARRYING CAPACITY
OF BRIDGES
(First Revision)
https://archive.org/details/govlawircy2010sp37_0
IRC:SP:37-2010
GUIDELINES
FOR EVALUATION OF LOAD
CARRYING CAPACITY OF BRIDGES
(First Revision)
Published by:
NOVEMBER -2010
Printed at Aravali Printers & Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi-110 020
(500 copies)
IRC:SP:37-2010
CONTENTS
Page No.
1. Introduction 1
2. Scope 2
4. Traffic Factors 10
9. Bridge Posting 34
Annexes
1. Permissible Stresses In Different Materials 40
3. Sharma, Arun Kumar Chief Engineer (B) S&R, Ministry of Road Transport &
(Member-Secretary) Highways, New Delhi
Members
4. Agrawal, K.N. Director General (W), CPWD (Retd.), Ghaziabad
5. Alimchandani, C.R. Chairman & Managing Director, STUP Consultants Ltd.,
Mumbai
6. Banerjee, A.K. Member (Tech.) NHAI (Retd.), New Delhi
12. Chakraborty, Prof. S.S. Managing Director, Consulting Engg. Services (I) Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi
14. Dhodapkar, A.N. Chief Engineer, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways,
New Delhi
17. Joglekar, S.G. Director (Engg. Core), STUP Consultants Ltd., Mumbai
18. Kand, Dr. C.V. Chief Engineer, (Retd.), MP PWD, Bhopal
19. Koshi, Ninan Director General (RD) & Addl. Secy., MOST (Retd.), Gurgaon
20. Kumar, Prafulla Director General (RD) & AS (Retd.), MORT&H, Noida
22. Kumar, Dr. Ram Chief General Manager, NHAI, New Delhi
23. Kumar, Ashok Chief Engineer, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways,
New Delhi
24. Manjure, P.Y. Director, Freyssinet Prestressed Concrete Co. Ltd., Mumbai
25. Mukherjee, M.K. Chief Engineer (Retd.), MORT&H, New Delhi
26. Narain, A.D. Director General (RD) & AS (Retd.), MORT&H, Noida
31. Roy, Dr. B.C. Executive Director, Consulting Engg. Services (I) Pvt.
Ltd., New Delhi
33. Sharan, G. Director General (RD) & SS, (Retd.), MORT&H, New Delhi
34. Sinha, N.K. Director General (RD) & SS, (Retd.), MORT&H, New Delhi
35. Saha, Dr. G.P. Executive Director, Construma Consultancy (P) Ltd.,
Mumbai
36. Tandon, Prof. Mahesh Managing Director, Tandon Consultants (P) Ltd.,
New Delhi
37. Velayutham, V. Director General (RD) & SS, (Retd.), MORT&H, New Delhi
38. Vijay, P.B. Director General (W), CPWD (Retd.), New Delhi
40. Addl. Director General Directorate General Border Roads, New Delhi
Ex-Officio Members
1. President, IRC Liansanga, Engineer-in-Chief and Secretary, PWD,
Mizoram, Aizawl
2. Director General (RD) & (Sinha, A.V.) Ministry of Road Transport &
Spl. Secretary Highways, New Delhi
Corresponding Members
1. Merani, N.V. Principal Secretary (Retd.), Maharashtra PWD, Mumbai
2. Bagish, Dr., B.P. C-2/2013, Opp. D.P.S., Vasant Kunj, New Delhi
(ii)
IRC:SP:37-2010
1 INTRODUCTION
1 .1 Revision of IRC:SP:37 "Guidelines for Evaluation of Load Carrying Capacity
of Bridges" has been under the consideration of Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Committee, then named as B-9 Committee, since December, 2004.
1.2 In the recent past, several mother Codes and Supplementary Guidelines
have either been revised, modified or are under revision.
The Motor Vehicles Act and Regulations 1988, revised the limit of axle loads, GVW
and new dimensional limits for actual vehicles. Also with the increasing cost of fuel,
POL, the tendency of transport operators has been to carry increased freight resulting
in the overloading. This has been observed and measured in a number of surveys
IRC:6 "Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section - II"
In view of the changes and modifications in the associated Codes and Motor Vehicles
Act, it has became necessary to revise IRC:SP:37.
Members
Bagish, Dr. BP. Koshi, Ninan
1
IRC:SP:37-2010
Ex-officio Members
President, I.R.C. (Liansanga)
Director General (RD) & (Sinha, A.V.)
DG(RD) MORTH
Secretary General, IRC (Indoria, R.P.)
1 .4 The erstwhile B-9 Committee could discuss the revision and finalized only a
few clauses. The newly constituted B-8 Committee thereafter took up the assignment
afresh, discussed clause by clause and finalized the revised draft for the entire
Guidelines, including live load analysis for simply supported spans ranging from 10 m
to 75 m in increments of 5 m in span length, with 1 -lane to 4-Lane carriageway, showing
B.M. at mid span and S.F. next to support, as per IRC Loadings, GVW loading moving
case and GVW crowded case. These were prepared and presented in the form of
Graphs and Tables by a Sub-group comprising of Convenor Shri A.D.Narain, Members
S/Shri S.G.Joglekar, D.K.Kanhere & Dr. B.P.Bagish and S.Rastogi (as invitee). The
Committee after due consideration has recommended the finalized Guidelines for its
placement before the Bridges Specifications and Standards Committee and Council.
1.5 The revised draft was approved by B.S.S. Committee in its meeting held on
01.5.2010 and the Executive Committee in its meeting held on 10.5.2010 authorized
Secretary General IRC to place the same before the Council. The revised document
was approved by the IRC Council in its meeting held on 22.5.2010 at Munnar (Kerala)
for printing.
2 SCOPE
2.1 These guidelines and suggested methods are applicable for all types of
bridges which are covered by IRC bridge codes, except for the old steel bridges where
materials used are different from those being used now and where the existing strength
of connections between members affected by deterioration or by fatigue cannot be
established by any rational method, as also timber bridges.
2
IRC:SP:37-2010
and users and the army officers in-charge of movement of military vehicles. Guidelines
also include recommendations for dealing with over-dimensioned and overweight
vehicles. The terms rating, posting and over dimensioned/over weight vehicles have
the following meaning:
a) Rating of a bridge:
The safe permissible load carrying capacity of the bridges in terms of
standard IRC loadings.
b) Posting of a bridge:
The limitations of dimensions and weight of vehicles, axle loads
or train of vehicles commonly used in the country, which can be
permitted to ply without requiring specific permission or escorted by
traffic controllers belonging to concerned authorities.
2.3 Rating and posting of a bridge are desirable for all old and new bridges.
It becomes essential to do so when:
a) The design live load is less than that of the heaviest statutory
commercial vehicle plying or likely to ply on the bridge
b) The design live load is not known
c) Where records and drawings are not available
2.4 The rating and posting of a bridge is a complex procedure involving subjective
decisions in certain cases. As such, needs to be carried out by bridge engineers with
it
3
IRC:SP:37-2010
Detailed guidelines and a strong data base are essential in order to make a scientific
assessment of the condition of the bridge. IRC has published following guidelines to
which reference may be made:
vii) iRC:SP:78-2008 Specifications for Mix Seal Surfacing (MSS) Close-Graded Premix Surfacing
(CGPS)
viii) IRC:SP:80-2008 Guidelines for Corrosion Protection, Monitoring and Remedial Measures for
ix) Special Report 17 State of Art: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques of Concrete Bridges ;
Where there is a reliable and complete documentation on the design and construction
of the bridge, field investigations will be oriented primarily towards identifying the
effect of any deterioration, damage or settlement that has taken place. Where such
documentation is lacking then in addition to the above field investigations, dimensions
4
IRC:SP:37-2010
of all the structural members should be taken to prepare a complete set of as-built
drawings showing the geometric dimensions only. However, where details of the
reinforcement and pre-stressing cables cannot be ascertained to a degree of accuracy
required for preparation of as-built drawings or for structural calculations, it will become
necessary to resort to intrusive investigations at few critical sections combined with
desk study using parametric variation of the likely ranges of the estimated data,
including error estimation of the capacity thus calculated.
For all these bridges identified for detailed investigation, field and laboratory testing
may be required to an extent, which would depend on the degree of deterioration of
the structure.
The present guidelines provide the assessment of the load carrying capacity of the
bridge keeping in view its structural scheme and behaviour.
Deficiency regarding the hydraulic parameters of the bridges also need to be assessed
for which guidance should be taken from recorded and observed data, local enquiry,
changes in the hydraulics of the river and the hydrology of the river basin. For this
purpose, a separate study need to be undertaken as per relevant guidelines.
stream flows should also be taken into consideration for evaluating the safety of
ix) Details of all repairs/strengthening work carried out till the date of
investigations
5
IRC;SP:37-2010
Assessment of structural condition of bridge will take account of the following information
which has to be collected during the detailed field investigation:
iv) Effectiveness and condition of structural joints viz. bolted, riveted and
welded connections for steel bridges
The list is not comprehensive but includes majority of factors likely to influence load
carrying capacity of the bridge.
Preliminary assessment of the structural condition can be made by observing for visible
deterioration in the form of extensive cracking, spalling of concrete, large deflections
and excessive vibrations. In such distressed bridges, there will normally be time for a
preliminary assessment of the distress and its likely effect on load carrying capacity.
6
IRC:SP:37-2010
The decision to go for detailed investigation may be taken on the basis of preliminary
investigation of some of the spans and/or on the basis of visual inspection alone.
The detailed structural assessment should include a careful inspection of full bridge
using techniques appropriate to the kind of deterioration or damage. Since all structural
inadequacies that adversely affect strength or serviceability arise from:
State of the Art Methods of Non-Destructive Testing of Bridge Structures should also
be studied in this respect to take benefit of the development in this newly developing
technology. The possible assessment methods and tests for such cases have been
indicated in IRC:SP:35, IRC:SP:74 and IRC:SP:80.
However, all methods are not essential for the assessment. Selection of
the testing
tests may be made based on the specific requirement of the structure and distress
condition. Further reliability of the results in ascertaining the exact extent of distress
in the structure should also be given due weightage while drawing conclusions from
the same.
In-situ testing at selected locations normally produce results with some degree of
divergence due to variability of materials, methods of sampling, inherent dispersion
in measured properties to the desired value of target properties (e.g.
co-relation of
rebound hammer test measures surface hardness, and strength is indirectly derived
there from).
8
IRC:SP:37-2010
Usually, it would be necessary to establish upper and lower probability limits for the
material properties under examination obtained by use of such indirect methods.
members
Cutting of samples for assessing the material strength of concrete or steel
should be carried out only when essential, as such sampling may entail some risks
to the structure. Samples cut from steel structures may lead to fatigue weakness
while cores drilled in weak concrete members may act as crack inducers. Therefore,
such work should be carried out under close supervision and only after obtaining
approval from the Design Engineer with respect to the location and details of proposed
sampling.
When reinforcement details are not known, position of reinforcement close to the
surface may be determined by covermeter (electromagnetic reinforcement detectors)
or making incision at selected locations, taking care not to endanger the safety of the
structure.
This equipment would also give an approximate indication of bar sizes and spacing.
For reinforcement at depth greater than 120 mm, it will be necessary to use other
methods such as radiography subject to availability of such equipment, although this
observed.
Invasive investigations at few locations by cutting out a chase in cover region (e.g.
at mid-span bottom and side of bulbs, or vertical groove in web areas at one or two
locations). This will also help to establish the cable-profile in vertical planes.
A survey should be carried out on the deck along the bridge centre line and on either
ends of carriageway and the profile plotted to reveal any untoward sag or kink. Levels
shall be taken at intervals of about 5 meters; levels should also be taken on top of
9
IRC:SP:37-2010
each pier cap at the four corners in order to determine any differential settlement of
foundations.
one metre.
This has been dealt with separately in Section 8 Reference is also made to IRC:
SP:51.
4 TRAFFIC FACTORS
4.1 Bridge design standards and specifications determine, in principle, the load
carrying capacity of bridge ensuring that it can safely carry the anticipated motorized
vehicular traffic. The design live loads are standardized trains of axle loads or other
equivalent loads which lead to load effects at various sections covering and enveloping
the effects of actual loads. This allows the bridges to support such traffic with the
required factor of safety.
The Motor Vehicles Act and regulations, limit the axle load the Gross Vehicle Weight
(GVW) and impose a number of dimensional limits on actual vehicles.
and to establish an approximate correlation with the standardized design live loads as
specified in IRC:6.
Motor Vehicles Act 1988 classifies motor vehicles into (i) Motor Cycle (ii) Light Motor
Vehicle and (iii) Medium & Heavy Motor Vehicles. However for purpose of bridge
design, the first two types of loads which may be predominant in urban/city areas
are not important. In third type also, the passenger vehicles are lightly loaded as
compared to the commercial vehicles. Hence this guideline covers only commercial
vehicles with GVW more than 16 Tons.
10
IRC:SP:37-2010
Maximum safe axle loads specified in Motor Vehicles Act (MVA) are further augmented
by data taken from manufacturers for special purpose vehicles plying on Indian roads.
This is produced below in Table 1 and 2.
Multi-axle fitted with 4 tyres on each axle 10.2 (on each axle) Non-standard vehicle
The laden weight of vehicle, including multi-axle vehicles, must not be more than the
sum total of all maximum safe axle weights. Thus for the four axle semi-articulated
vehicle shown at item Sr. no. 6 - Table 2, comprising of tractor with two tyres on front
axle and four tyres on the rear axle, and trailer having tandem axle with eight tyres on
the rear could carry maximum of 35.2 tonnes, (6+10.2+19 tonnes).
The vehicles commonly plying on Indian roads shown in Table 2 giving types of
vehicles axle position, axle weight and GVW.
It is possible for a specific bridge location to have different and heavier traffic due
to nature of local industry, predominance of certain type of heavy vehicles (e.g. for
mining industry, petroleum industry, steel mills, etc.). Hence for such location it is
11
IRC:SP:37-2010
WGOJJGHT
COiiHSRCWl
VBflO-E
T)m2
i I
-O 1 1.4 0.32
4^7
I:
tocao HEAVY
4 couaotcaAL
Ax!*; 1
Tyrxi: 2 -o 1.4 0.29
H tSriBg-
©heavy
VEHICLE
Axle t J
fV HBHS-
1.4 0.32
.AjTODUlAinS
B HEAVY
VEWOJE
Tyres: 1
Ax>>:1
Tjt»>;4
Axle! fV 1.4 0.55
•JIACTOH-XA
«££!L
D HEAVY
vaacte
nucrron^A
TyrasZ Tyres: <
AxW:J
Tjrp«--
12 •
—
"J
^
r
•
•• ^ ^^^^ 1.4
XUSTTUJUDR)
-SSL
MOtCULAtE
Axto:^
AIM: 1 Aatm; 1
1.4
Iyr»c 0.28
Tyrawl Tyres: I
ASHJL
MaMsd
HULIMU
HEAVY Ariel 14T.4
Tyre»:I
Note :
12
IRC:SP:37-2010
a) Height
According to the MVA 1988, the maximum height of vehicle other
than a double-decker is 3.8 metres unless it is carrying an ISO series
1 Freight Container, in which case the height must not exceed 4.3
metres. A double-decker vehicle must not exceed 4.75 metres.
b) Width
A public service vehicle or transport vehicle other than a motor cab,
must not exceed 2.5 metres in width.
c) Length
A rigid truck must not exceed 11 On routes or in areas
metres.
approved by the State Government, buses may go upto 12 metres
in length. Articulated vehicles must not exceed 16 metres whereas
trucks/trailer combinations have a maximum limit of 18 metres.
The general speed limits on National and State Highways as defined by MVA for
various types of vehicles are given below. For the full list reference may be made to
MVA.
• Medium/heavy goods vehicle (Rigid) : 65 km/hr
• Medium goods vehicle with not more than one : 50 km/hr
trailer or heavy articulated goods vehicle
• Heavy goods vehicle with not more than one trailer : 40 km/hr
13
!RC:SP:37-2010
However, as discussed above under special circumstances, the actual upper fractile
Section 1 1
If such survey data are not available, it may be necessary to carry out special traffic
studies in the following manner:
a) Manual vehicle counts (per hour and category, per traffic direction)
The last type of survey involves sophisticated measuring equipment, but enables
determination of statistical distribution of axle loads and other parameters such as
vehicle speeds, spacing between vehicles, spacing between axles of the same vehicle,
etc.
14
IRC:SP:37-2010
The following three methods may be followed for rating of bridge structures using IRC:6.
Loading Standards and relevant codes covering the type of bridge under review.
Even in this case, it is necessary to know the differences and relative deterioration of
the structures under review vis-a-vis the details of those structures whose safe carrying
capacities are known, so that proper assessment by correlation and factoring the
known differences and relative deterioration can be made. This presumes, however,
that the physical condition of the bridge under review is otherwise satisfactory. The
method is not further discussed in these guidelines.
The rating methodology for existing bridges will be that the bridges would be rated
for standard IRC live loads as specified in IRC:6 (Section II), and/or for the modified
loading suitable for local conditions as directed by IRC:5. Therefore, for new bridges
and un-deteriorated recently built bridges, the highest class of design live load as
envisaged in the original design shall be taken as the load for rating of the bridge.
15
IRC:SP:37-2010
Thus the description will be rated for highest loading of Class-AA, Class-A, Class-B
or one of the classes such as 70R, 40R etc., as described in Appendix-I of IRC:6
(Section II). The requirements of the design codes covering the type of bridge under
review have to be fully satisfied.
In case of recently built bridges, some local defects such as honeycombing, spading
of concrete, onset of corrosion, local deep scour etc. may become apparent during
routine and/or special inspection. Such defects can be taken care of by localized repair,
and is not necessary to re-evaluate the rating of bridge due to the same. It should
it
be realized that all codes have built-in margins for time dependent loss of strength,
and for localized reduction of strength at sections, which are not critical. These are not
explicitly stated in the codes. However, local reduction up to 10 percent estimated on
the basis of calculations need not call for re-rating of the entire bridge.
Rating of old bridges for which original designs are not available, and the re-evaluation
of previously rated structures in situations where bridge had suffered deterioration of
strength of any of the main components from superstructure to foundations, requires
careful and detailed evaluation of many complex factors and conditions. Items that
need to be included in this evaluation are briefly discussed below:
5.3.1 Loads
The loads to be considered in analysis of bridge for rating purposes, are of three
types:
iii) Changes in other loads in loading standard IRC:6 (e.g. wind and
seismic loads)
iv) Changes in other loads based on field observations such as design
flood level
5.3.2 Stresses
The allowable stresses are to be taken as per the relevant IRC Codes, governing the
type of structure under review.
The allowable stresses normally take into account the long terms effects. However,
these may need to be downgraded in case of specifically observed deterioration of
materials as discussed below.
16
IRC:SP:37-2010
The changes in the design codes from the time of original design also need to be
taken into account.
5.3.3 Materials
5.3.4 Fatigue
17
IRC:SP:37-2010
as cracking of welds, loosening of bolts, extent of corrosion etc., for assessing these
items.
Till now (i.e. 2009) IRC Bridge codes are based on the working load/allowable
stresses philosophy of design. The loads arising from natural phenomena are taken
into account by specifying loads arising from infrequent events, as in case of wind
(50 years return period); either of maximum observed flood irrespective of return period,
or estimated flood of 50 years return period. Earthquake loads are taken from the
IS 1893, which are based on a method explained in foreword of IS1893. Reference to
the same is made for details. These loads are combined directly by superposition in
For each of the combination, permissible stresses in materials are stipulated. In case
of rare combinations of maximum live loads and design flood, taken together with
maximum wind or earthquake, a lower factor of safety may be allowed within elastic
limits, taking into account the condition of the bridge (refer IRC:6)
For working stress design, the allowable stresses to be considered will be the higher
value of (i) and (ii), but limited to the value prescribed under (iii), as follows :
(iii) Allowable stresses obtained from strength tests by field and laboratory
investigations.
Limit State Design Philosophy based on defining various "limits" which should
not be exceeded by the structure during the expected design life of the structure
when exposed to loading from usage, and loads arising from natural environment.
The deteriorating effect of aggressive elements of the environment in which the
structure is situated are also controlled. The risk of exceeding the limits cannot
18
IRC:SP:37-2010
generally be made zero, but is kept very low. The risk is assessed in terms of
probability that is and acceptable without making the structure
sufficiently small
uneconomical or unaffordable. Many countries of the world has based their design
codes on this approach and IRC has incorporated some of the concepts in their
working stress methods indirectly. However new design codes based on limit state
philosophy are under preparation. These methods are very useful in assessing the
suitability of existing structures in a rational way examining the same in light of the
increased risk that can be taken while continuing the use of the structures instead
of replacing it at high cost.
The details of this method are covered by the new design codes which are under
preparation. Till such time, working stress design as above may be adopted. This
is specifically relevant for the assessment of effects of over-dimensioned/overweight
The loads and load combinations should be as per requirements of IRC:6. For
assessment of live load to be used, attention is brought to the changes in design
practices over the time, especially with respect of use of Class AA and Class 70R
load. Design for both Class AA & 70R, or design for one of Class AA or Class 70R
only, or total design for one and checking of superstructure (or deck slab) only for
the other may have been adopted in the original design. The design of road slab for
girder bridge had been governed by Class 'AA', but while using 70R only for design,
the deck-slab may or may not have been checked for Class AA. The method actually
used in the original design needs to be established, either by records or through fresh
calculations.
19
IRC:SP:37-2010
The working load allowable stress method shall be used for the computation of rating
of existing bridges, except for the bridges designed on limit state design philosophy.
3) From the total defects noted under (2), remove those defects which
can be covered normal maintenance to establish the remaining defects
which are likely to affect the load carrying capacity.
4) From the list as arrived under (3) above, for each of the group of
foundation/pier/bearing/superstructure elements identify the critical
20
IRC:SP:37-2010
4) Carry out analysis and establish strength demands using the then
IRC:6 design loads. This may have to be done for the desirable level
of live load rating (70R, Class A, etc.), and if the same is not satisfied,
for the next lower level of design live load.
6) If not, repeat step (5) for the next lower Class and so on till the results
satisfying requirements of that class.
7) For rating as per latest IRC:6, the iterative process may be resorted
to, - for arriving at the safe load commensurate with strength worked
out as per (3)
21
IRC:SP:37-2010
c) Slab Bridges
For determination of strength of old or deteriorated slab bridges, more
accurate analysis should be carried out. Table-3 can be used to arrive
at the safe axle loads at primary evaluation.
22
IRC:SP:37-2010
375 19.0
200 11.5
400 24.0
3
225 15.5 _ —__—__—
250 20.0 325 9.0
275 25 5 350 11 5
375 14.0
225 9.5 7 400 17.5
250 13.0
4 425 21.0
275 17.0
300 21.5
Notes:
i) Slab thickness includes a cover of 25 mm
ii) A 75 mm thick wearing coat is assumed over the slab
iii) No separate allowance for impact need be made on the safe axle loads as the same has already been accounted for.
iii) The allowable axle loads and thereby the rating shall be arrived
at from the provisional axle loads obtained above, by multiplying
23
IRC:SP:37-2010
iv) For plain concrete arches, the material factor of 1 .5 shall be used
in the analysis.
for re-rating.
3. Foundation Condition
This is also possible in case of piles where bottom of pile has not been
24
IRC:SP:37-2010
B
ARCH SPAN METERES TOTAL CROWN
18m THICKNESS (h + d) mm
1800
15m 1600
PROVISIONAL AXLE
1400
LOADING TONNES
12m 1200 45
40
1000
900 35
9m
800 30
700.— 26
600 — 23
6m — 500
20.
18
18
400
14
12
300
10
9
3m 8
200
7
Example
Span = 9 Meters Width Factor = 0.90
Span/Rise Ratio = 4 Depth Factor = 1.00
Span/Rise Factor =1.0 Mortar Factor = 1.00
Shape Factor = 0.8 Joint Factor = 0.9 x 1 x 1 = 0.90
Profile Factor '(1 1 x 0.8 = 0.8 Support Factor = 0.90
Crown, Thickness d M 400 mm Aburment Faullt
Ring Factor = 1 .20 Factor = 0.80
Fill Factor = 0.90 Reduction Factor
Fill Depth h = 250 mm For Impact = 0.90
1.2x0.4x0.9x0.25
Material Factor = = 1.085
0.65
The porvisional axle loading for an arch. 9 m span with total crown thickness of 650 mm is,
Fig. 1 Nomogram for Determining the Provisional Allowable Axle Loading of Exisiting
Masonary Arch Bridges before Applying Factors (to be used only for
Rating and not for Design Purposes)
Note: This would mean that the arch under consideration is safe for 12T standard truck
25
IRC:SP:37-2010
properly cleaned before concreting and pile has settled through this
material and then has come to rest on good sound strata.
The second type is of foundation in clayey soil which have not reached
stable condition and settlements may continue. In such cases, if any
foundation treatment is not feasible, the only option is to de-rate the
The rating of the bridge based on the hypothetical trains of live load cannot be directly
For this purpose, the maximum effects of loads plying on bridges need to be calculated
instead of IRC:6 Live Loads, and combined with loads from other sources (flood,
wind, etc.). These effects can then be compared with the 'rating capacities' obtained
from Section 6 or with the directly assessed strengths based on actual observations
(Section 9).
* (3 \)
For this purpose the live loads to be considered are described below:
2) The data of actually plying vehicles in the country has been presented
in Table 2 of Section 4. The 'design train of vehicle' to be considered
is based on the following considerations:
a) Bridges should be posted for one of the Nominal GVW Classes
shown in Table 2, except over dimensioned vehicles.
26
IRC:SP:37-2010
27
IRC:SP:37-2010
It is important to note that this overload factor is taken only for the
purpose of checking structural safety of a bridge, and is not to be
construed as an official recognition, or license for overloading vehicles.
The laws of the country will govern in these matters.
Fig. 2 & Fig. 3. The design of road slab supported between webs, or
cantilever slab should be verified considering the effect of rear axle
loads of the design GVW vehicles Hus impact factor. The concept of
effective width as per IRC:21 can be used for the same as a simplified
method, in lieu of exact analysis made of full span using grid analysis
Q G
Single axle 2 tyre Single axle 4 tyre Tandem
axle 8 tyre
1500 3000 4700 1400 Varying
9100
o Direction of Motion
11
o
LO
o
o O
O
CN
oi u
o
z
J L
28
IRC:SP:37-2010
2.50m.
jf
m m
'i
L r
0.15m 0.2m for carrinangeway of 5.5m 2.50m. 0.15m.
-»5
Increasing uniformaly to 1 .2m
upto carrageway of 6.5m. and
1.2m (min) eyound
29
IRC:SP:37-2010
As a general design philosophy, GVW loading replaces only the IRC:6 live loads.
As such, other load and load combinations should be used as per IRC:6 and the
relevant design codes. Exceptions to above may be considered in the following
situations.
ii) If the heaviest GVW load which superstructure can carry is considered
to be plying very infrequently, the substructure and foundations can
be checked on the basis similar to (i) above. Full combination as per
IRC:6 and the design code may be made for the frequently plying
GVW only.
iii) For old bridges, which are assessed as due for replacement, in the wind
and seismic combinations lower values of wind loads reduced upto
50 percent may be used. Seismic checks may be omitted altogether.
Load test for rating purposes and load test for posting purposes are required to be
carried out in the following circumstances:
Load Test for posting is done when details required for verifying the
strength of all elements of existing structure by analytical methods is
30
IRC:SP:37-2010
Rating is essentially done to verify which of the Standard IRC loadings described in
IRC:6 in combination with other loads can be assigned to the bridge. Use of mobile test
vehicles duplicating the axle loads for various classes of loadings should be preferred
as compared to the use of equivalent static load which are difficult, time consuming
and needs longer closure of traffic on the bridge. The advantage of using such mobile
vehicles is that they can be quickly positioned in the exactly required locations. Also
being rolling loads, all cross-sections of superstructure are tested without having
to workout special loading patterns to represent envelope diagrams of the span
for bending and shear. In exceptional cases if commercial vehicles as specified in
Table 2 are used, the number and spacing of such vehicles need to be worked out
so as to produce equivalent B.M. and shear at critical sections on those due to the
The test vehicles will be from amongst those commercially available as specified in
Table-2. The test vehicle chosen will be the next heavier vehicle than the predominant
heavy vehicles presently plying over the bridge. The second next heavier vehicle may
be considered for testing, if required, after the load testing with the first vehicle is
The test vehicle used for purpose of posting shall ailow for appropriate overload factor
8.4.1 General
location on the deck, these will preferably be moved from both directions leading to
their final positioning.
For posting purposes, the response of the structure to loading may be checked at a
few critical selected locations. Usually the following checks may be considered as
adequate:
a) Mid-span region and 1/4 th span for sagging B.M. for slabs/girders/ box
section bridges.
31
IRC:SP:37-2010
For arch bridges, the rear axle of a standard truck shall be placed on the crown and
in the case of twin tandem rear axle, the rear twin tandem axles shall be placed
symmetrically about the transverse centre line of the bridge.
The test procedure in general shall be as per IRC:SP:51 - "Guidelines for Load Testing
of Bridges".
8.5.1 For concrete girders prior to load testing, observations shall be made for
any crack in the structure. The cracks, if measured for their width and
any, shall be
marked. The external dimensions of the concrete sections and properties of concrete
may be used for computation of theoretical deflection.
8.5.2 Prior to testing a whitewash shall be applied at the critical sections for ease
of observation of behaviour of cracks and their new formations during the test.
8.5.3 The load test shall be done during such period of the day when the variation
in temperature during test is low. Preferably, the testing could be done in early hours
of morning or late evening.
8.5.4 The test load shall be applied in stages following the given values 0.5W,
0.75W, 0.90W, 1 .OW, where "W" is the gross laden weight of the test vehicle.
8.5.5 For each stage, the correspondingly loaded test vehicle shall be brought to
the intended/marked position and observation of deflections shall be made immediately
on loading and after five minutes.
The test vehicle should be taken off the bridge and instantaneous deflection recovery
and deflection recovery 5 minutes after the removal of the load should be noted.
8.5.6 After the load placement, observation shall also be made for development
of any new crack and widening of the existing ones.
32
IRC:SP:37-2010
8.5.7 Prior to starting of testing, the theoretical deflections for various stages of
loading shall be calculated and plotted at points of interest. On this graph, the actually
observed deflections shall be plotted during the progress of testing.
The linearity of load deflection should be generally obtained in the test. If two successive
readings show excessive deflection of more than 10 percent from the extended linear
behaviour, can be due to onset of non-linear (plastic) behaviour. The test shall be
it
discontinued, temporarily and reference made to the design office for review of the
entire procedure. However, deflections shall be continued to be marked for next
24 hours.
Next stage of load increment should be stopped under any of the following
conditions:
Where no crack is observed, the load for rating shall be taken as the least of:
level.
The load for rating shall be taken as half the axle load at which a new visible crack or
33
IRC:SP:37-2010
The load for rating shall be taken all the least of:
girders for simply supported spans OR for cantilever spans the load
causing a deflection of 1/800 of the cantilever span in any of the main
girders. The rotation of pier should be accounted for while calculating
the deflection.
ii) The load causing tension cracks of width more than any
0.3 mm in
of the girders for normal cases and 0.2 mm for structures exposed to
very severe and adverse conditions.
iii) The load causing appearance of visible new diagonal cracks of width
more than 0.3 mm for normal cases and 0.2 mm for structures exposed
to very severe and adverse conditions or opening/widening of existing
cracks close to the supports in concrete girders.
iv) The load at which recovery of deflection on removal of test load
is not less than 75 percent for R.C.C. structures, 85 percent for
pre-stressed concrete structures. Temperature correction be
considered as per provisions contained in IRC:51.
9 BRIDGE POSTING
9.1 General
All postings for bridges shall be made as shown in Fig. 4, in terms of equivalent axle
loads and/or gross vehicle weights (GVW) of the commercial vehicles plying on Indian
roads and satisfying provision of the Motor Vehicle Act as shown in Table 2. For
overall dimensioned/overweight commercial vehicles the limits shall also be indicated
as per Section 11
Bridge structure rated for vehicles classes as per IRC: 6 will be posted for the
Annex 3 shows comparison of some of the IRC:6 standard loading, for 1-lane, 2-lane,
3-lane and 4-lane superstructure with simply supported spans from 1 0 to 75 m vis-a-vis
GVW vehicles. Only the main total span moments and shears are presented. These
can be used as guidance. The transverse distribution, load and resulting increase in
different girders or portions of slab bridges has to be done for each bridge as per its
geometry.
34
IRC:SP:37-2010
Depending upon the assessment of the bridge condition. The rating/posting engineer
would decide the necessity of the following traffic restrictions on the bridge from safety
considerations till the exercise of posting is completed.
Postings for bridges shall be made as shown in Fig. 4, on both sides of the bridge. The
load regulatory and advance warming signs as shown in Fig. 4, shall be installed on
both sides of the bridge on the approaches from the bridge abutments and at all road
junctions leading to the posted bridge.
This will be placed at a sufficient distance (not less than 100 m) from the abutment, on
both ends of the bridge so that truckers can make arrangements to use detours or to
For all bridges to be posted, an advance warning sign indicating a "Load Limit Bridge
Ahead" will be placed at least 200 m from the abutments on both ends of the bridge
and at all road junctions leading to the posted bridge starting from the earliest major
junction.
35
IRC:SP:37-2010
9.5 Enforcement
36
IRC:SP:37-2010
9.5.2 The options available to the rating engineer as alternatives to bridge load
posting are as follows:
Lane limits
Repair
Strengthening
9.5.3 In addition to the posting sign at the distressed bridge site, the following
methods may be considered by the enforcing authority for notifying public of the bridge
posting to be suitably located at a number of road junctions leading to the posted
bridge:
News release
The posted bridges are required to be inspected thoroughly and frequently, at least
once a year.
The technical scheme for repair and strengthening of distressed bridge would
depend on the nature and extent of the distress in the bridge superstructure,
substructure and foundations. The objective must not always be to restore the original
condition of the bridge. It can be quite sufficient both economically and technically to
provide proper strengthening whilst, at the same time, derating the safe load carrying
37
IRC:SP:37-2010
capacity. In this respect cost analysis can be of help. An estimate can also be obtained
by studying the risks involved and giving consideration to the life of the structure as to
11.1 General
Due to industrialization of many parts of the country, heavy loads much in excess
of the capacities of IRC:6 loads and GVW49 T vehicles need to be carried on
existing bridges. These loads shall be carried over the bridge with the specific
permission of the Authorities. The checking of bridge components to carry such
loads and the load combinations as required by IRC:6 need to be reviewed for
their suitability by the bridge authority/owner. The following provisions cover the
aspects to be reviewed and the possible deviations that can be permitted from the
normal design rules.
For these loads, the physical dimensions of the consignment should be such as not
to damage any permanent part of the bridges such as handrails, or any structural part
for through type bridges. The over-dimensioned vehicles be allowed only with a pilot
vehicle and at that time no other vehicle be allowed to ply on the bridge.
the trailor and the load itself, apart from the location of load. Some
carrier trailors are hydraulically controlled to spread the load equally.
If not, loading of trailors should be symmetrical with reference to all
38
IRC:SP:37-2010
transportation.
39
IRC:SP:37-2010
Annex 1
(Clause 5.3.5.1)
40
!RC:SP:37-2010
Annex 2
(Clause 5.3.3)
Fp = F S r
X Fs
Where FS r
- the span/rise factor and F s - the shape factor, shall! be as given in
Table - 4
SI. No. Span/Rise Ratio Span/Rise Factor (FS,) Remarks
1 For L/R upto 4 1.0 For a given load, flat arches are weaker than
For L/R over 4 1.0 those of steeper profile although an arch with a
obtain factor from to very large rise may fail due to the crown acting
aa a a B • aa iiiimm
1.0
.<• • i
a• mmm mm* a • aaaaa a
m *m mm mmm mmm a •
Bl
aai
•i
0.9
LL
CO
O aaaaaaaa aa a aaaaaaaaa
aaaaaa
H lailiaaaaiiBaaBBiBRaiaaaaaa
O
0.8
LU
CO •• a a aa a a * aaaa iitaaii a a a a a » nmm a
•IIIBIIIIII
z
I
iiiiniiiti a
laaaaaaaaaaa
CO ••a a a v a aaaaaaaa
0.7 aaaaaaaa
aa a a aa aiaaiiaina
aaaaaaaBaaaaa^a aaaaaaaa
namit
naanaa
aiaaaaama
a a a aiaaii a a a a a w aaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaa
ra aaaaaa a aa m a a a a a aa aaaaaaaa
mik^aa
laMatai aaaaaak^
laaaaaaa
0.6 taatiuff mt
4 5 6 7
Span/Rise Ratio L/R
Fig. 5 Span rise factors for masonry arch bridges
41
IRC:SP:37-2010
1.0
iSMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiaiiiiii
iiiiismiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Where
or iiiiiiiikuiiiiiiiiiiiii R - RISE AT QUARTER
O IIIIIIIIIIIISHIIIIIIIIII q
h- POINT
o lllllllllllllllkMIIIIIII
< 0.5-
R- RISE AT CENTRE
LU
lllllllllllllllllkMIIIII
Q_ IllllllllllllllllllkUIII
<
X IllllllllllllllllllllkUl
(f)
llllllllllllllllllllfllH
0 4
111111111111111111111111?
0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00
R q /R
Fig. 6 Shape factors for masonry arch bridges
B. Material Factors
The material factor of an arch F
m
shall be arrived at from the expression.
(F d
r
+ F h)
f
P m=
(d + h)
Where d is the arch ring-thickness h is the depth of fill F - the arch ring factor and F, - the fill factor shall be as in
r
Tables 5 & 6.
Table 5
Masonry (of any kind) or brick work in poor condition (many voussoirs flaking or 0.70
badly spalling, shearing, dilapidation is only moderate)
Table 6
42
IRC:SP:37-2010
C. Joint Factors
The joint factor of and arch, F. shall be arrived at from the expression.
F. = F FH F
j w d mo
Where F w the width factor F the depth factor and F the mortar factor shall be as given in Tables 7,8 and 9.
d mo
Table 7
Table 8
Unpointed joints, pointing in poor condition and joints with upto 1 2 mm from the 0.9
|
Joints with widths from 12 mm to one tenth of the thickness of the ring 0.8
insufficiently filled
Joints insuffidiently filled for more than one tenth the Thickness of the ring At the discretion of the
Engineer
Interpolation between these values is permitted, depending upon the extent and position of the joint deficiency.
Table 9
43
IRC:SP:37-2010
Rating of Bridges
D. Support Factor
3. Both abutments unsatisfactory 0.90 (i) The bridge is on a narrow embankment particularly
4. Arch carried on one abutment and 0.90 (ii) The bridge is on an embarked curve.
one pier
5. Arch carried on two piers 0.80 (iii) The abutment walls are very short and suggest
E. Cracks Factor
1. Longitudinal cracks within 0.6 m of the edge of Due to an outward force on the spandrel
the arch; if wider than 6 mm and longer than walls caused by lateral spread of the fill
2. Longitudinal cracks in middle third of the 1.0 Due to varying amount of subsidence
shorter than 1/10 of the span the arch ring has broken up into narrow
44
IRC:SP:37-2010
3 Lateral and diagonal cracks less than 3 mm 1.0 Lateral cracks, usually found near the quarter points, are due
wide and shorter than 1/10 of the arch width to permanent deformation of the arch which may be caused by
partial collapse of the arch or abutment movements
A
Ldleldl dllU UldyUlldl UdLKb WIUcI Uldll 0 lllill
5 Crack between the arch ring and spandrel or 0.9 Due to (I) spreadeing of the fill pushing the wall outwards.
parapet walls greater than 1/1 0th of the span Fig. 8 or (I) movement of a flexble ring away from a still fill
due to spread of the Gil so that the two act in dependently. This type of failure often
produces cracks in the spandrel wall near the quarter points
Fin 9
F. Deformation Factors
If the deformation is limited so that Discard the profile factor alredy Arch ring deformation may be due to (1) Partial
the rise over the affected portion calculated and apply the span/ failure of the ring, observable in the ring itself and
is always positive rise ratio of the affected portion often accompauied by a sag in the parapet over
to the whole arch approximately the same length. Fig. 10 or (II)
1 Inward movement of the abutment 0.75 shown by hogging of the arch ring and parapet
a) Old movement with well consolidated fill the at the crown and possibly open cracks in the
slight hogging of the arch ring. intrados between the quarter points and the
b) Recent movement or poor fill 0.50 springing
2 Outward spread of the abutments. If movement has 1.00 Usually cause change in the profile
been small and appears to have ceased, apply factor
to
based on typeand condition of fill.
0.5
3 Vertical settlement of one abutment. Apply factor 0.9 The nature of the back fill and foundations can
varying from 0.9 for slight movement to 0.5 where to
be discovered only by probing, but this shoud
the materials under each abutment are dissimilar be necessary only on important routes when the
0.5
strength of the bridge is in doubt
General Note on Crack = Old cracks no longer operating and which probably occurred soon after the bridges was built can
be ignored. Recent cracks usually show clean faces with perhaps small loose fragments of masonry. Although cracks may
shear through bricks or stone, they normally follow an irregular line through the mortar. Care must be taken not to confuse
such cracks with mere deficiences of the pointing material.
45
IRC:SP:37-2010
THRUST DUE TO \
* LATERAL SPREAD
RING
LATERAL MOVEMENT
Fig. 7 Longitudinal Cracks in an Arch Ring Fig. 8 Cracks Between the Arch Ring and
the spandrel or Parapet Wall
Fig. 9 Movement of the Arch Ring Away from Fig. 10 Deformation of the Arch Ring
a Stiff Fill
46
IRC:SP:37-2010
Annex 3
(Clause 9.2)
1 GENERAL
Live load analysis has been done for simply supported spans ranging from 10 m to
75 m with an increment of 5 m in span length showing BM at mid span and shear force
next to the support.
The following conditions have been taken into consideration for preparing the Tables
and Graphs for bending moments and shear forces.
• For GVWs in moving traffic case, BM and SF are inclusive with impact
factor, lane reduction factor as per IRC:6 and an over load factor of
1.4 Results are also furnished for GVW 49.00 T with an over load
factor of 2.0.
47
IRC:SP:37-2010
5.3 m to 9.6 m), IRC results are based on governing effect from 2-Lanes
CI. A, 1-Lane CI. 70R Wheeled and 1-Lane CI. 70R Tracked.
Overweight consignment (OW/OD vehicles) produces very severe effects than any
other GVW class load, as well as the IRC loading, and as such this type of vehicle,
needs to be analysed under special load combinations as discussed in Section 9.
As the impact factors for concrete bridges (reinforced and prestressed) are different
from the steel bridges. Accordingly two sets of tables and curves have been prepared as
indicated in the tables giving the MB, SF for varying bridge spans and lane widths.
48
IRC:SP:37-2010
27kN 27kN 114kH 114kN 68kN 68kM S8kN 68kN 27kN 27kN 114kN 114kN
G
MMMMifflW
80kN 120kN 120KN 170KN 170kH 170kN 170kN 80kN 120kN 170kN 170kN
3.96m 1.52m 12.13m 1.37m b.05m I 1.37m 30.00m (Win.) 3.96m f 1.52m 2.13m
()
0 m
(3) IRC Class 70R Tracked
700kN 700kM
efi
\
}
35kN 70kN 70kN 70kN 70kJi 70kN 70kN 70kN 70kN 70kN 3SkN 3BkN
Q.457m |0.457m 0.457m 0.457m I 0.457m 0:457m 0.457m I 0.457m 1 0.457m 0.457m | 30.00m (Hln.)
m m
Leading Equi. Axle' of tlrid Train
Minimum spacing between rear and front axles of two successive vehicles
For moving traffic condition = 20.0 m (with impact)
For crowded/Traffic Jam condition = 4.0 m (without impact)
49
IRC:SP:37-2010
60kN 102kN sokH som 80kH SOkN 102kN SOkN 80kN SOkN
Minimum spacing between rear and front axles of two successive vehicles
For moving traffic condition = 20.0 m (with impact)
For crowded/Traffic Jam condition = 4.0 m (without impact)
(3) GVW Class 35.2 Ton Vehicle
Minimum spacing between rear and front axles of two successive vehicles
For moving traffic condition = 20.0 m (with impact)
For crowded/Traffic Jam condition = 4.0 m (without impact)
/
SOkN S6kN 95kN 'fiOkN %m 9SkN
1
3.683m 1.40m Kin. Spacing 3.683™ 1.40m
iUmmSLmm
Minimum spacing between rear and front axles of two successive vehicles
For moving traffic condition = 20.0 m (with impact)
For crowded/Traffic Jam condition = 4.0 m (without impact)
ludeglMfefc
102(cN 102kN
2.515m Bm. Spacing * Z515m
iliiiiiiiiiyii
Minimum spacing between rear and front axles of two successive vehicles
For moving traffic condition = 20.0 m (with impact)
For crowded/Traffic Jam condition = 4.0 m (without impact)
Fig. 12 Type of GVW Class Loads (Adopted in Comparison)
50
IRC:SP:37-2010
Maximum Bending Moment at Mid Span and Shear Force Supports Due at
to IRC Loads and GVW Class Loads for Simply Supported Spans
(from 10 m To 75 m)
Nos. of BMfor BM for Crowded/ Shear Force for Shear Force for Remarks
Lanes moving Traffic Traffic Jam Moving Traffic Crowded/Traffic Jam
Condition (t-m) Condition Condition Condition (tonne) For Concrete For Steel
l-Lane IRC loading is IRC load governing IRC loading is IRC load is governing Tables 10 Tables 18
governing for all for spans < 45 governing for all for spans < 40 m. and 11. and 19.
spans from m. GVW 25.0 T spans from 10 m GVW 25 T load is Fig. 13, 14, Fig. 29, 30,
10 m -75 m. load governing for -75 m. governing for spans
15 & 16. 31 & 32.
spans > 50 m. > 45m.
2-Lane GVW 49.0T IRC load governing GVW 40.2T load IRC load is governing Tables 12 Tables 20
loading is for spans < 15 m. is governing for for spans = 10 m. and 13. and 21.
governing for GVW 40.2 T load spans < 15 m. GVW 49 T load is Figs. 17, 18, Figs. 33, 34,
all spans from governing for span GVW 49.0 T load governing for span
19 and 20. 35 and 36.
10 m -75 m. = 20 m. GVW is governing for = 15m. GVW 40.2 T
25.0 T load spans > 20 m. load is governing for
3-Lane GVW40.2T load IRC load governing GVW 40.2T load IRC load is governing Table 14 and Tables 22
is governing for for spans < 15 is governing for for span = 10 m. GVW 15. and 23.
spans < 20 m. m. GVW 40.2 T spans < 15 m. 49T load is governing
Figs. 21 ,22, Figs. 37, 38,
GVW 49.0 T load governing GVW 49.0 T load for spans = 15 m. 23 and 24. 39 and 40.
load governing for span = 20 m. is governing for GVW 40.2 T load is
for spans > GVW 25.0T load spans > 20 m. governing for span =
25 m. governing for 20 m. GVW 25.0T load
spans > 25 m. is governing for spans
> 25 m.
GVW 49.0 T governing for span GVW 49.0 T load for spans between 27 and 28. 43 and 44.
load governing = 20 m. GVW is governing for
15 m to 25 m.
51
IRC:SP:37-2010
p
OHtt. ii
|
_1
o en O oo o
i>-
CM
GO
o CM T— 1057 1359 1669 2385
2803
CO
CO
CO CM CO CO
2004
CM 0696
O £
=S CO
Absolute
Governing
Moment
cd co
CO
CO
CD
o
co CD CD
o
CM 1048 1215 1459 1747 2049 2366 2715
Condition
CM CO LO CO 1^ CD
T3
© to T CD OO OO oo o
Jam
Due
GVW 49.0
OO
CO CD o
CO
co
"3-
CO
LO
-3-
r-~
LO
CD
1169 1403 1669 1962 2263 2583
ic
> ff
O T
CO to
CO oo •*3- CD
-a wded/Tra
Due
GVW 40.2
oo
CO
"!t
CM o
CM
o
co
oo
LO
CO
r--
LO
CD
1180 1420 1671 1971 2294 2628
Cro\ to T CD CM CM O CO LO oo
Due
GVW 35.2 co O
CM
r-~
CD
CM
CO
*sr
CD
LO
CD
r-
CO
CD
1179 1426 1704
CD
CD 2315 2649
c For E
o a>
cz
(t-m) to T O
o
a Due
GVW 25.0
CO
CO
LO r--
CD
LO
CO
I--
<*
-3"
CD
LO
CD
r~~
CD
CD
1215 1459 1747 2049 2366 2715
CM
az in
B.M.
to T O
ac GVW 16.2
o
LO
CO
O CM
OO
LO CD
CD
CD
CD
CD
OO 1093 1323 1574 1839 2139 2455
Due CM CO LO CD 00
as O
ZD
o
€>3
a to Load
o o OO CD o
Governing
cd CO
CO
CO
CD CO CO CD CM o oo 1320
O
LO
co
r~-
OO
CD 2247
Due CM CO LO CO CD
IRC
With
GVW
OJ CM o T— CD CO
O CO CO CO CD CO
OO
CD
CS
to Ton OLF=2
CM CD CD
CM
CM LO
LO
r-
CD oo
CO
CD o •a-
CM s oo
CM
Due 49
cs
> CD CO CD o o OO "*
OO
O
CM
CD
O "=3"
CO
o
CO
Absolute
Governing
moment
CO
CM
CD
CO
CO
LO
CD
CO
CD
r--
CM
CD o co LO h~ CD 2247
dition
Con to T <3- CD CD LO CO CM
Due
GVW 49.0
LO
OO co o
CM
CD
CM
oo
co
CD
LO
LO
co
LO r~-
00
1013 1154 1320 1539
Traffic
to T LO CO CO CM CO CD ^3- CM o CM
GVW 40.2 OO CD CO CO oo h- oo CD 1046 1242 1440
Due CM CM co ^3- LO LO CO r» OO
Dving
Mi
to T CO LO OO CO CD LO
For
Due
GVW 35.2
-3-
CO O
CM
CD
CM
CO
CO
CD
CO
LO CM
LO
O
CO
o
r~-
r-~
CO
OO
1001 1180 1373
n)
(t-r
to T CD CD CM f- CM h- LO "*
in
Due
GVW 25.0
oo CM h» CM
CM
co
CM CO
LO
CO
o
^t-
CD
LO
CO r-
00
1017 1160
M.
CD
to T — O CD CD r- oo oo co CO oo
Due
GVW 16.2
oo
LO
t
CD CM LO o
CM
co
CM CM
LO
CO
LO
LO
CO
CO
CM
r--
CM
OO
to Load
CD CD CD O o oo
"* OO
o
CM
=3"
CO
o
oo
r--
Due
Governing CO
CM
CD
CO
CO
LO
co
CO
CD CM
CD o CO
605
1 CD CM
CM
IRC
1 ! !
Span 10.0 45.0 75.0
Length
(m) 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0
52
IRC:SP:37-2010
OHI.
o —J
CD
to
so
if- ^3)
O
ass
as*
0^
S3 o
c U-
:=
co
co
CD
m
CD
CD
CD
CO
CD o CM
co
CO
co
o
O < <s ay
£
CO
LO co
CM o co
3=
co
Z CD
T3
CD
o = > CM
CO
O o
in
CD
in
co
co oo
LO
o CO
CM
CM
o
O —o CO CM
CU CD CD 0O CO co LO CM co -si-
3 CO -3" .LO CO oo CD
o
c
o s' > o
CO
CD
CO
oo oo
oo
oo
CD
CO
CO
CO
-3-
LO
LO
to CU > CM LO o
CO
CD
CO
OO CD
£ CD £
.E co
c o
"~ o CO CO o
cD CD OO CD CD CD
> o
CD —
£3 c? o
c 1-1
E U.
>— *— o co co co
o o
CM
oo
CM
o
o OO oo CD CD CD
1 s s
c
< cd *n
oo
o 2 > o
3=
CO
CD OO co oo co
3 7g O CO <a- LO LO CD
2 %
+* => I—
CD
CO
LO oo CD CO
LO
O
OO
o
3 CD
o
> CO
CO
oo
CO co co
CO CD -3-
LO
CD
LO
CO
CO CO
CO
CO
>
cu cnj CO co LO o CO LO CD CD CM LO o co
Zo»
CM CM CM CM co CO CO CO CO LO LO
O •— CO
*- c o CO o
CM
oo
CM co
o
CD CD
a—
Q
53
IRC:SP:37-2010
3000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 13 Comparison of BM for IRC One Lane (For Moving Traffic Condition)
4000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 14 Comparison of BM for IRC One Lane (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
IRC:SP:37-2010
Fig. 15 Comparison of SF for IRC One Lane (For Moving Traffic Condition)
225-
200-
-0- IRC Loading
55
IRC:SP:37-2010
CA
> m
CM OO 9
w sib
• 1— o
00 1241
CD 2114
CM CO
4769
3
LO CO
7380
O
Q 3m
<m
>
> o <y> co CD "3-
Absolute
Governing
Moment
co CM CD 1187 1559 1981 2430 2917 3493 4098 4731 5429
CM CO CO
o
CO
Condition
.5
"EI
t=
a(0 to T
s o Jam CO
CO
CO
LO
CD
CO CD
CO
i,
_i GVW 1135 1480 1903 2337 2806 3339 3924 4526 5166
o
49,0
Due CM co CO OO
co fic
>
©
O «*—
CO
to T OO
CO CD CM r--
tr GVW 40.2 CO co 1163 1528
CD 2361 2839 3343 3942 4588 5256
Due CM CO CO
CU
1
to o
S
C\l
o to T CO CD co CO
o o
Factor
GVW 35.2 CM CO CD CO 1179 1532 1929 2359 2852 3408 3997 4629 5299
Due CM <r LO 00
>n o
**—
4— ;w
W.
•V e" to T
u 3
"O Due
GVW 25.0
LO
CM CO
CM
CD
CO
CD
CM
CO
**
CD
OO
1187 1559
OO
CD 2430 2917 3493 4098 4731 5429
(1)
CO
-1
cu
fZ
CQ
to T oo
LO
to
=8
Due
GVW 16.2 ° o
CM
*sj-
CD
CO
LO
LO
CD
r~-
1081 1398 1778 2187 2646 3147 3678 4279 4909
© T3
C
to
O
< 3
"o
to
a.
O •—
•-co CO
CO CO o o CM CM
O OO OO CO CM
k.
c +-> S - 1 CO CD CO CD CD CM LO
o CO CO 2199
S»
§o
c5 CM CO LO CO CD CM CO LO r--- CD
a m0
(0
j= o
o—
CO a 'i
3
CO
> e <m
CO
"55
3 O H U.
© U s ™o 1 §
ort
c s 8 CM CM
CD
Q.
CO
CO
oS
oner cu
Sup _3
(0 r~
o > c
Absolute
Governing
Moment
CD
CO 1
CO
CO
CD
CO r LO 1129 1306 1502 1745
CM
O 2309 2641 3078
CM LO CD
a o
%_ o si" r~-
CM
E 4— ^c
CO oo to T CO
CO
CO
o CD
CO LO
o Due
GVW 49,0
CM "3- LO CD
1129 1306 1502 1745 2027 2309 2641 3078
o CO
Tr
•+-« to T CO co CO
c GVW 40.2 OO CO co
CM
1023 1167 1344 1559 1783 2092 2483 2881
© loving
Due CM LO CO
E £ IU
o CO
O) for
to T co oo CO CM o
o Due
GVW 35,2 >a- CD
CM
o CO
LO
CD
CD
CD
r~- .... CD
1053 1218 1414 1669 2001 2360 2745
:-m)
O) E
c CO
T
m to
LO
CD
LO
CM
LO
LO
CO
LO CO o
LO
CD
OO
n Due
GVW 25.0
CM CO -3- LO
CM
CD OO CD
1463 1749 2034 2320
CQ
to T LO o CD LO LO CM
CM Due
GVW 16.2 OO
CM
o
co
LO
CO
LO
LO
o
CD
1087 1272 1457 1642
Vy
.Q to Load
o o CM CM OO OO CO CM
Governing
OJ CO
CO
CO
CD CO CO CD CM LO
O o
CM
CD
CO LO
"3- CD
CD 2199
|2 rriaaewav
Due CM CO LO CD CD
IRC
Ca
43) o o <n> (O) CD 0 o
If s
s
For
O 20,0 25,0 30.0 35.0
o LO
tc
OO
LO
55.0
O
CD 6§
70.0 LO
56
IRC:SP:37-2010
C CM
O
out II
>
as
o to
CM CM m
co) CD CO
o coj
CM CM cm CO CO :
co
o
O 5
"o <» c
o
-*— LO o
o LO
CO
s-
LO co
co
co
LO
CM CM
CD
o co oo I
CO oc I
5 § .E
O
s CM CM CM CM CM
LL.
Tf o
u
< C5to
CO
o E
.2. CO lo CD co co o CD LO CM
O
> u > s CO oo CD co LO
CM
CM
CM CM
co
CM
oo
CM CO
O St
CO
u o 2& h o CO LO CO o cd CD "3" CM
o co LO CM
r--
CD CO O
Q0
cu CM CM CM CM CM CO
•a
m
i
o
CO
o
UL o
w « > LO
CO LO
CM o OO
CM
CO
co
LO
CO
^1-
o
c O CM CM CM CM CM co
o
o
2 S
T3
CD o
s
** ~» I—
> <=> o oo
CO LO
CD
r--
LO
CD
LO co
co
co
LO
CM CM
CD
CC 3 rn CO CM CM CM CM CM
Q 53 IT)
CM
cu
O
T3
CO CM CO o oo
CO
CD
LO
CO oo
o LO
CM
CO o
CD
OO
C LO CM CM CM CM <M
CO
o
CO
Q O -— CO
*- C O o LO -3"
-3-
CO oo co
CO
CD
LO
CD
CO
CD
co
CD o CM
u o
o—
oc
s LO
CD
CM o co
o CM
CM
CD
LO
O CO
CD
CM CM CM CM CM CM CM
G3
CO a> c
:>
O *- *- oo
o o
CM CM O
c 1 5 s CM
o
<o to
o
u CO o -s- CO CD CD O CD r-
o
o CD C\] CM CO LO CD OO OO CD
CM
£
CO
O) 25 i-
CO co o CM
>c CD CD
o Du -=r
E
so
3> H-
1^-
en
a>> *>! o
a c
c
O co
S o
CO CD
LO a> o O
c
g
u_ Q
CD CO
3
% CM CO t— CD CD O
O
QQ LO LO CD CD CD
£a£
a
o - o CO
CO
3
—CJ co
o
00
CO
CD
LO
O CM
OO
-3"
01 > O
o oc
JE
°s i
a—
CO
a O O o o o o o o o
©
CM §5 3 LO
"3-
d
LO
LO
in
o
57
IRC:SP:37-2010
(H i r , ,
r , , , , , , . , 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 17 Comparison of BM for IRC Two Lanes (For Moving Traffic Condition)
Span (m)
Fig. 18 Comparison of BM for IRC Two Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
58
IRC:SP:37-2010
IRC Loading
-S-GVW16.2t
T*-GVW25.0t
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 19 Comparison of SF for IRC Two Lanes (For Moving Traffic Condition)
500
-
450
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 20 Comparison of SF for IRC Two Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
59
IRC:SP:37-201 0
|
Ton
to
49 OLF=2
co
o
CD
CM
CO 1189 1676 2189 2854 3669 4508 5411 6439
7568
8729 9963
Due CM r-~
With
Gvw
Absolute Moment
LO
OJ
LO CD
LO
o
LO 1207 1603 2104 2674 3281 3938 4716 5532
r-~
oo 7329
Governing
co LO OO co
Condition
CO
Jam
to T CM CO CM
GVW 49.0 co CM CO co 1173 1533 1998 2568 3155 3788 4507 5298 6110 6974
Due CO LO OO
ffic
Tra
/ to T CO CD CO
GVW 40.2 CO LO CM 1130 1570 2063 2589 3187 3833 4513 5321 6194 7095
Due CO LO OO
ded
Crow
to T to CM LO CM
Due
GVW 35.2 CD CM
CO
"3-
LO
o
OO
1165 1592 2069 2605 3185 3850 4601 5396 6249 7153
for
(T-M)
to T CD CM o CD
GVW 25.0 CO CO LO 1207 1603 2104 2674 3281 3938 5532 6387 7329
Due co LO OO
in
—
B.M.
to T CO CD CO OO
OO
GVW 16.2 CO CD •"3" 1077 1459
OO 2400 2952 3572 4249 4965 5776 6628
•a Due CM r~-
S
DC
CU
C
„ra
r
to load
LO LO CM co
LO co
o
CM
S3 Due
Governing CD
co LO
CD
co
o-
OO o CM 1623 1847 2090 2354 2648 2969
c IRC
es
"C
cc
a,,
r-* IB
8 to ^= $ ss s
11
CO ** LO
Absolute
Governing
Moment
co OO OO CD 1041 1284 1524 1763 2027 2356 2736 3117 3565 4156
CM co LO
dition
Cor to T
—
CM CM LO
GVW 49.0 CO CO LO CD 1041 1284 1524 1763 2027 2356 2736 3117 3565 4156
Due CM co LO
affic
Tr
to T CD *d- OO OO
GVW 40.2 CO OO oo OO OO 1185 1381 1576 1815 2105 2408 2824 3352 3889
Due CM CO LO r- CD
loving
hi
to T o co OO LO CD
for
GVW 35.2 o CM
CD
CM CD 1*
CD CO
o CO
CM
CM
">* co
O
CD 2253 2701 3186 3706
Due CM CO LO I*-. OO
(T-M)
in
to T CM CD CO o CM CO
Due
GVW 25.0
CM CO
o
CO
CM
r^- oo
CD
CD
1098 1283 1605 1975 2361 2746 3132
B.M.
to T CO co CD LO CO o OO
Due
GVW 16.2 LO
•xT
«»
CM
CM
CO
o OO
"St
CO
LO
5-
co
LO CD
CD
1217 1467 1717 1967 2217
to Load
CM CO o CO r—
t
Due
Governing CD ^
CO
xj
LO
CD
CD oo
LO
o CO
CM
CM
"Sfr
CM
CD oo 2090 2354 2648 2969
IRC
o o o o o <S! CD O o o o
If t o u-> d
CM
LO
CM
o
cSy
to"
oo
CD
«*
45.0
o
ud
55.0
o
CO
LO"
CD
o 75,0
IRC:SP:37-2010
Si 8 p <so>
£1
> 8 CO tej
c
o = E CM CO CO o CM CD
o *- »— CD CO co CD co CD
8 » « CO CM CM CM CM CO co co •5-
oo <o to
E o
T3 re *3- CD "3" CD CO co CO
O a»
3
CO
CO CO
CM
LO
CM
0O
CM
O
CO
CO
CO
LO
co
CO
CO
o
-3-
3= Q
re
o5 CD > tM 00
o co
co
CD
O co
CO
LO 0O
CD
o CO
CO
CO
LO 0O
CO
o
a> CM CM CM CM CO CO CO CO
a T3
o
o CO
o CM
CO lo
CM
CO
CO
O CM
CO
CO
LO
CO
CO
CO
o -3-
co
CD
LO
"3-
CO
o
00 CM CM CM CM CO CO CO CO 5
s CM 00 CO o CM CD
s> > 00 CM
CO
CM
CD
CM
CD
CM CO
CO
CO
CD
CO 5"
CM
o T3
at
o .
cc
S5H
CD
C >«
<u
o CO co CO LO 00 o CM
LO
&_
O 3 re
Q3 W
0 co
T-
CM CM CM CO CO co
© t3
.5 re
re
£ O o
o CD
O LO
CM
CO
CM
"3-
LO
</)
a > o
>_ O DC
—
O
o.
3
(0
Q)
+»
0 O
1 «
3 o = E u.
co o CD
O 00
CM
CO
"3-
CO
LO
CO
CO CD
O
CO
CM
CD
00
CM
CM LO
LO
CD
CD
o
00
> i.
re
> 8 S S
Sol CM CM CM CM CM
a£ C5 c/>
oo CO co CD CO O CO CM LO CD o
u
3=
2 > CM LO CD CD CO CM
CM CM
LO
CM
CD
CM
00
CM
re
I—
O) CD
O CD O O O
>c LO O CM CO CO
o O"o
3 CM CM CM CM CM
CU>™ CO
O CD
CO
O w CO CM CM CM CM
3
e
CP
CO > "=»
"3-
CM
O
<d- -3-
0O
LO
o
3 CD
a*
Q0 rrj in
CM
CD CO
o
=4—
CD CO
i > CM
CD CD o -3-
£O•
CO
g
CO CD .
O = re
o o
o CD
O CM LO 00 CM CM
5 - 1
CD CM CM CM CO LO
CO
O o
>
—
CC
a C5
o
O <a> o o
o useS to
CM -3-
o
LO
LO
10
o
CD co
10
61
IRC:SP:37-2010
0 -I . ! . . . . . . . . . <- . . . 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 21 Comparison of BM for IRC Three Lanes (For Moving Traffic Condition)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 22 Comparison of BM for IRC Three Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
62
IRC:SP:37-2010
Fig. 23 Comparison of SF for IRC Three Lanes (For Moving Traffic Condition)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Span (m)
Fig. 24 Comparison of SF for IRC Three Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
63
IRC:SP:37-2010
Ton
to 0LF=2
49 CM LO CO
Due CO
>*
LO
o
CD
1409 1986 2595 3383 4349 5342 6413 7631 8969 10345 11808
With
GVW
CO LO CO
o Condition
Absolute
Governing
Moment
co
CM
CM CO
CO
1007 1430 1900 2494 3169 3888 4668 5589 6557 7570 8686
<0
1_
(0
Jam
to T CD CM co
oo CO oo
O Traffic
Due
GVW 49.0
CM CO CO CD
1390 1816 2368 3044 3740 4489 5342 6279 7242 8266
</>
d>
/ to T OO
c GVW 40.2
CD
CM
oo
CD
CO
CO
CO
CO
r-
CD
1339 1860 2445 3069 3777 4543 5348 6307 7342 8409
Due
(0
-J
—1
a.
Crowded
to T CO CM in
GVW 35.2 CD OO LO, 1381 1887 2452 3087 3774 4563 5453 6395 7407 8478
Due CO co CD
for
to T CD ^_
d (t-m)
GVW 25.0 O CO co 1007 1430 1900 2494 3169 3888 4668 5589 6557 7570 8686
o in
Due CM CO co
Ui
_i B.M. to T o CM
a> CO CO OO CO 1277 1729 2237 2845 3499 4234 5036 5885 6846 7855
i_ GVW 16.2
in Due CO LO oo
© 3
*->
+-» O
ro 3 to Load
CO LO oo OO CO CM CO "3-
LO CO CO CM
c CO Due
Governing
CO
CM
CM
ST
CO
co CO o CM CO CD 2189 2477 2789 3139 3519
(0 k. IRC
Q. o>
CO a
TJ Su Ton
to
49
0LF=2
O
CD
CM
CO
in
1763 2174 2581 2985 3989
CD Due CO CO CD cS 3432 4633 5277 6036 7036
T-
od ret GVW
With
a u
3 C
CO O CO OO CO CM
>» o Absolute
Governing
Moment
CM
LO CD
CO CD
1234 1522 1807 2089 2402 2792 3243 3694 4225 4925
Q. o Condition
E to T CO CD CM
to GVW 49.0 CM LO "* 1234 1522 1807 2089 2402 2792 3243 3694 4225 4925
Due CM co CD
Traffic
-l->
to T CO oo co
LO CD co
c Due
GVW 40.2
CM CO CD
1171 1405 1637 1867 2151 2495 2853 3347 3973 4609
© Moving
E to T CD CD
o for
GVW 35.2
r-~
CO
CD
CM
CM CO
LO LO
o CO
CM
CD CO
CO CD 2263 2671 3202 3776 4392
Due CM co oo
(T-M)
a)
c
Mi in
to
co O
o CO
o O
CM
CM
O
DC Due
GVW LO
CM 5-
co
in
LO
oo o CO in CD 2341 2798 3255 3712
B.M.
<D
CQ to T Jt
1 LO
OO
CD
OO
CO
oo s r~~
CD
Oi
CO
oo
CO 1147 1443 1739 2035 2331 2627
GVW .
CO Due C
i
CM co "J- LO CD r-- oo
t-
0)
to Load
oo CO CM CO
CO LO OO LO CD oo CM
|2 Due
Governing CO
CM
CM
"=3"
CO
CO CO o CM CO CD 2189 2477 2789 3139 3519
IRC
O O © o O © o
Span
Length (m) o to
^
20.0
to
o3
ej
CO
in
CO
©' 45.0 :; 55,0
8
65.0 70.0 75.0
64
IRC:SP:37-2010
S
O ™H
36 o> -J CO CM CM CD CD CO CO
5 Si
I-
s
CM CO
LO
CO
CD
CO
CO CM
LO
CD
LO
o
CD
a | i
© :5
c o
= LL.
>»
o CD
LO
O
CD
o
CM LO
CM
oo
CM -3-
I
s -
LO
o LO
co
(0 CM CM CM CO co co "3-
oo I o11
< CO
E
m
w —» 2 s» >-
O - -
> o
s s
CD CD LO -=1-
o a> LO -
s
o
I I
co CD CD CM
Q3 °
I
tan CM CM CM CO co CO CO
/ ri CT>
i_ »:
m
IW TO
w
( \
-551
-a OO CD CO s - -
s
CD
O CD CD LO LO
w
r-"
to
T3
a>
a > o eg lo CO
I
CM
"3-
CM
I
CM
-
s
CO
CO
CO
CD
co co
CM
<D ft- T3 ^9-
c o 3
m o
w o
k.
*v
1 UL o <U > ^ CD
CD
CD CD LO
s -
CD
O co
CO
LO
CD
CD
CD
LO
CM
n3 U m
I
c ft—
o ( ri IT) CM CM CM CO CO CO CO -3"
o O
3 -*-»
oo O o CM CM "3- LO LO
»2
"O
m c LO CD CM LO OO -
s
O CO
o a>
Q OLO
I
m CM
CM CM CM CO CO CO
o
(1) -55
_J
9 =» I—
OO CD CD LO CO o OO
CO O 13 co CO CD CD CM
CM
I -
s
o
CO
CO
CO
CD
CO
OO
CO
—J l. C
« £ « £ CM CM
3
p
o
4-i
U
o
(0
Q. O -— «>
3 c O o
s_
+->
go-
O g
1
co
o CD CD
-3"
CM
LO
CO
CM
c
(/)
i_ O £
—
aa
(0
CO 3
CO
T3
o +-»
0
o j_
a. O a>
Cor CD
CM
co OO
CD
CO CO
CM
CD o-
I
s
I
JOO
-
s
CM
O
Sup CM CM CM CM CM CO
>»
i_ < o co
o
a Oo 9 ~» i—
CO LO CO OO CO OO CD O- I -
s
CM
O
I -
s
OO
E o
s OO CTJ CM I
ij= Q U T CM CM CM CM CM CO
CO as
> CD OO CD ^3" OO O CO
£ >
« CM CD
CM
CO
•CM CM
CD
CM
s
I
CM
-
o E
o
o
w o <3-
O OO CD O CD
o as
> ^ C\J
CM CM
CM
CM CM
LO
CM
UL o
>' a
E c
o
a) OO CM LO
eo » > LO O
CM CM
CO c
in
T— 1 LO
CM
OO O
£ O <£
IB
3
£ > o -i=
*- c o CD CD CD
LO
OO
CD
co
1 "SI-
<u
o
>
o O CM
.2 —
a ec
On O o o o o
© LO o
CM
LO
CM 8 to
M5
65
IRC:SP:37-2010
Span (m)
Fig. 26 Comparison of BM for IRC Four Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
66
IRC:SP:37-2010
Fig. 27 Comparison of SF for IRC Four Lanes (For Moving Traffic Condition)
Fig. 28 Comparison of SF for IRC Four Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
67
IRC:SP:37-2010
o^^ co O CM O I -
s CD
m CD
CO
"3-
o m
CO
CO
o CO
CO
o
CD
CD CO
CM ^3"
CM
CD O
IT)
CO CO o CO CO CM CO
HO
(U
CM CM CM CO CO
>»
C e m
.E
T3
C
ts
2 Q) CD CO CM CD m CO CD
m
s
I - CD CD m
o o S E -3-
CM
CM
m
I
s - o- s CO
s-
I
CD
in
CM O CD
CO I -
s
o S2 > o I
CM CM CM
.2 E <a
°?=, CO
s=
(0
o CO CD co
CD
co
O CO
CO
CD
o m
CD
CD
co
o CD
CD
CM
CD
CO
CD
CO
oo
CD CD CD CM LO
e > «:
CO a5 CO in r- CD CM CM
<D o o
P >
_ -
s "5f oo
C cd
3 > CM CO CM o
I CD
o co
CO co
CD
m co CM s - s - CD CM
o
I I
09 T3
> CM CO 5- in s - CD CD CD CM CD
_| o <d
T3
I
CM CM
TO
•T3
o
I— cg CD CM
O I
s - CM o CD m CD
s -
CD
CM o- co
CD
LO CD
1- o in
co
CM
CD
CM
CO CD
in
CD
r--
CD
CD
I
I
s
CD CO
CM
CD
CM
£ o
o
o a
a CO I -
s
I
s - CD o m CD
in
I
s - CD CD
CD
<d u_
CD
CD CD CD
in
r-
s -
CD
CD
-v|-
I
s - O CO s
I -
(0 s: Q I
CM CM CM
—1 .2
<—
o CM o co
o CM in CD o CD CD CO CO CD CD LO
in CD
m- CO
s
CM CO LO
CO m co s
I - CD
m
"St- CD CO CO CO
I
co
o
+-«
SI*
"a
CD Q «-» T-
CM CO CD CO CM
k.
3 as
o .—
+j
U
fZ
eo
co
o CD CO CM CD m co LO o o
o CD
O CO
J CD s
I
- CM
m o- s
I - in
CM
CO
CD
CO
CO
oo
CO
a "a
eo
s 1° CM I
s
co CD CM CM
(0 (/)
o
O co
Q
/i*
QJ
^ a
3 CM I
s - CO
m in oo
m CD co
co
CM
CM
CD
CO
CD
O CM
CO
O CM CD CD CM oo co m -
s
O CO
a C/)
CD —
I O CO in s
I - co CD I
CM CM
"aS
4->
o
>»
ID lis S= CD CD CO CM CD in co m
m o
o o
o CD
O CO
o o o CDE -3- s
I
CM
- CM
m-
s
I o- s
co
s
I - CM CD
CO
oo 1
co
CO
c 13 > o I CD C\J CM
c © m
Cs
o o
(/)
O in ^3- o CO
o CD LO
oo
oo
co
CO oo
o o CM
CD
CD
CD
LO
CM o-
s
I CM
CM
o CO
CD
a o 5 CO 5- LO CD CD s
I - CD
c O) CD -
s
0O
a>
> CD > in
co
I
•vi-
-
s
co
CM
CD
CD
CD
CD I
CM
-
s
CD O I
co
CM
LO
o CM CO LO CD CO CD
£ Q "*
o
o oo s-
I LO CM oo oo CD o in CD in
CD
LO
D)
Li-
r- co
CM
oo
CM
in
co
CM oo LO
LO CD
LO
s
I -
oo
oo o CM "Sf
C 's
_l_
o
> o O
-> O
CO oo CD s- CD -
s CD
c CD -
oo CO co CO
I
oo CO oo CO o CO s
I -
I
CM o-
s
I CO
CM
0 w CM
CM CM CO CO LO CD I
s - CD
CO
00 >
CD oo CO CD
CM
CM
CD
CM
CD
CO
CM
CO
in CD
o
oo
co
s -
CD
s - -
s
CO
s - -
s
in CD I I I I I
T— ^o CM CM CM CO LO CD I -
s oo
0 CO CD -a
•3
co o -E co
c o LO O o CD co
|2
at
«3 93
CD
-1
CD co
s
I -
CM
CM I
s -
CD
O- LO oo
I -
s LO
CM
O o
CD
CO
CO
o oo
CO
> o CM LO I
s
co CD CM CM
oo cc
—
c 4=
o C3 CD
to o»-=>
Q.
C/) CD
E
c — "
o \0> o
68
IRC:SP:37-2010
CO OJ CO
O
to
CO
(0
CD
ay o
c8 CD CM
c J2.
o
2 E °
re o 11-g "3-
CD
CM
CO
CO CO
CD
O
O CM
o CO
o CD
O CD CO
CM
CO
CO
CD
o |
5
s>
E
re
< oo w
-E
O) o
CO
o CM
CO
CM
"3"
o
LO
CD
LO
CO
CD
CO
CO
CD
CD
LO
o CO
CM
CO
CO
CM
s- 3= 3 1-^
TO
re
Q
o
0 a
cu
CM
CO
O o
LO
CD
LO
co
CD
1^-
CO
CD
CD
LO
o CO
CM
CO
CO
CM
T3
5 a
_| o
2=
o
i
T—
o a>
3
cd
CO
CD CO
LO
co
CD
CO
CO
LO
CD
LO
o CM
CO
CO
CM
3_ o Q
o 2 =» i—
O
CO
co CD
LO
CD
CD
co co
CO
CO
CD o CM
CD
CO
CD
6
0 o
4—
> CD CO CM CD co h~ LO o CO o
CO
_J r1
CM CO LO CD CO CD
Qa^
"NT
p 0
1_
cn
o 3 o •—
- T3
re
*• c o O
O CM
o CO
O CD
O oo CD CM
< uct
CD
CM
CO
co
CD
CO
CD CM CO
c
re (A a—
Q. i_
CO 0
Q.
TJ 3
rte CO
o 0
Q. 0
up CO
CO CM CO CO O
O CM
o CO
O CD
O CO CD CM
o •a
CD CO CD CD CM CO
>»
a oo
E *" sK O
to
3=
re
CD
CO
co co
LO
CM
CD
LO
CD
CD
CD
LO CO
CO
CD
CO
LO
CD O o
Q <J
2
tt >
s> i-
CM CD co CD O
0 >
o ^ > O
cd
CO
CD
LO LO
CO
LO CD
CM CM
CO co CD
CD
CD
O
o o
LL 01 cd
CO
CD
^1-
o
LO
CM
LO
CO
LO LO
CO
CO
co
CD
CM CD
1^-
o
co
LO
CO
E a6£
re C
0 o o O LO CO LO
sz >
a> CD
CO
CD
CO
CD CO
LO LO LO
CM
CO CD
(0 ^OS
o CO
O
~ CM CD r-- CD CM Lo r-- co CM LO co o CO
^o-
<U LO LO
CM CM CM CM CO CO CO co
0
JQ
P o .— re
*- c o CM CO CO O
O CM
o CO
o CD
o oo
CM
CD
CO
CM
co co CD CD
O
o£
—
cS
€3
CM 4 CD
69
IRC:SP:37-2010
3000
n 60
4000
W 2$ 28 £8 49 41 SS
70
IRC:SP:37-2010
179
1«0
»12S
e
1 166
71
5 16 15 20 25 30 55 40 45 50 55 60 '
65 70 75 80
Spin (m)
71
IRC:SP:37-2010
OS
o CO
CM
CM
CO
I
3 to CM CO
CM I
o
o
«*
o Q3
DM
re =
.£
o
>
> C CD CD CO CM C7>
oo
05
LO co CO
CO
CD
CO
CD CO
"5
o o
CO %
£ -3-
CM
CM CM
CO co LO CD CD O
0)
o 5s O CM CM co
re
s
o E <o
(0 CO
LL
u CO LO CD LO
CO
o
co
CO
o co
CD
o CD
CO
"3-
CM
CO
CM
re •a co CO CD CO CD CO CO CO CD LO
o .
to
J
CO
CM CO co co CM CM CO CO
u CO
c m CD CM co co CD CM CO
(0 O
& T3
CD % > CM
o co
CM CO
co
co
co CM
LO CD
CO
CO
CM
CO
CO
CM
co
CO
CD
CO
CO
LO
"3-
-1 CO T3
1
V M O CD CM CD CD CM CO CD
s_ o CD
CO
CM
CD
CO
co
o CD
CO
co CO
LO
CM
CD
LO
CO
LO
CO
O CD
CD
CM
CO
CM LO CO
o o
CM CM CO CO
o o lo CD CD o CO CO
0 CM CO
CM
CD
CO
CM
CO
CD
CO
oo LO
LO
CO
CD
CO
"ST CD
CD CD
O CO
CO CM CM CM CO ^1-
-J o CO co co co CD
iq CD > ^ o CD LO
co
CD co
o CD
CO 1^
CO
CD CD CM
©
+» a> DC
03 CD
Q CM CO LO CM co ^3-
V. 0) '3
re 3 s o -- m
*j so
© LO CM CD
c U _l
~ CD
CD CO CM
CM r-
CD
o LO co
CM
LO
CO OO
CO
O
Q3
CD
re 3
Q. I— E >
O o CM LO co CD CM
CO
4-» 03
C3 —
QC
U
ca
uper
Q o n
rted
o
*= en
i— u.
LO
o § O5*
3 SI CO
i
a CO
Q|£ CO
a
3 O9
0
CO +» OS
CO E c o
>* lb.
o -CO) LO ^1- CO
O CO
CO
CD LO LO
CD
o
Q. o
CT5 CD CO CM
CO O CM CO LO CO CO
M— 1 § EI CM CO CM CM
E TO 55
CO
3
© oo o CD -3- CO o CD
n o £D
CD LO
CO
^1-
CO CM o o
CM
co
CO
CD
LO
LO
CO
LO o
co
a 3
QO5
>> it CM CD CO CM CM
CO
+->
c e CO CD CM -3-
to CM LO T— CD LO co
O)
c
"> O CD CD CM CO CO co
o CO
CM
CM LO
CO
CD
CO CM
CO
co
cm CO CD CM CM
E o o
o E o o
co « > CM co
"3-
co GO
CM
o LO CO CM
CD o CM
CM
CO
o
CM LO co CD CM LO LO
O) Ui CO CM
c c
CD
o CO CD co o CM CO
o CD
CM
LO
LO
LO
co
LO
c i LO
LO CO
CM
!-~-
co LO
co
CD
CO
1^-
CD
CO o CM LO CO
o EO
h:
CM
CD x: m O
o CO LO
o
<N 5
CD
3
CD
LO
CM
CM
CO
LO
CO
CO
LO LO
o
LO
CD
CO
LO
CO
CD
LO
CD
LO
CD
-3-
CO LO
<d
>. o
TO
3 g>T5
CD O —
*- c o
CO
LO CM CD
Oi CD CO CM CD LO CO
.2 §> CD
-« CM o CM
LO
"3- CD co
CO
o
Q >o O
u CM LO r- co CD CM
O CO
o—
cc
o o
o LO o
CM
LO
CM
o
CO
LO
CO
o LO o
LO
LO
LO
o
CD
LO
CO
o
72
IRC:SP:37-2010
.o u
O H- U.
>
** o» -*
a> o 1
o CM
CM o-
8
s
TO
CM
I
<*
-
s
O CO
m o co
CM CM CM CO CO CO CO
CD Q^£
o © st
33 c U-
o
o »- *- I
s- LO o
o cd oo
CO
I
LO
s- co
s -
m
CD
LO co
co
co
uo
CM
s-
CM
CD
o s § s CO I I
o O o -s=
CM cm CM <M CM CO
CO
E
CO
O CO
-a ©
co
o o 0} CO LO CD cd s-
I
co
co co
I -
s
CM
CD
o CD
CM
I
s - LO
CO
-3-
co
CM
O
CO CO CD
CD
CO O5 CM CM CM CM CM CO
>
O o o OO CO LO CO o CD s - CO CM
•>2 co oo o CO LO s-
I CM
I
CO oo o
o CD
q ^ CM CM CM CM CM CO
CO
o o
&»
o CM CO co CO LO *3- CM
s-
o OO I
s- CO
CO
LO
OO o
o cd
3 CO CD CO LO I
CM
CM
CM CM CM CM CO
CO
a
o CD
o CD CD OO s-
I CO LO LO CO CO CM CM
o c CD
co CD CO LO s
I - CD CO LO s
I - CD
CM CM CM CM CM CO
o
CD
CM CO CD CO o CM
OO
CO
CO
LO
CO
s-
OO
o LO
CM
CO O
CO
CO
s-
CO LO CO OO I
CM CM CM CM
I
CM
co
o g ^
1
O — co
CO
o
*- c o
— s-
I CM CO OO O
O CM
O
"3"
O CM
CO
CD
"3"
co
LO
CO § «5 1
co CO CD CD
Q *— O rr
1
—
O
£ CM
CD
o
**
U_
— CO
> o> 1 CO CO LO CM LO CO CO CM CO
'to
Ta-
ct CO CO s
I - CO CO o
CM CM
CO
CM
LO
CM
r-
CM
CO
CM
CD
CM CO
_2
o
_c
<d
O CD
CO f- Q
w 3 I £ LO CD CM CM LO CD O O CD O
CD *- *=
«-» CD
s -
OO
CD CM CM CO LO CO s
I - CD O O CM
CO T3
C 1 § s I
CM CM CM
<oo
oo
2 > H- LO CD CM CM LO CD O O CD o
3= <»>S co
s -
co
CD CM CM CO "3- LO CO s
I
- CD O O CM
£og CM CM CM
I
co
O) o
CD CO CM CM CO LO LO CO CM
E > Oi
CM
O
CD
s
I -
OO
CD O CM CO LO CO s
I - CO CD O
CM
CO
o o
CD
O o B > i- O -3" LO LO LO CM CD o- CM
OO
I -
s
co
CD O o o CM CO LO LO I
s CD
Q« co
LO 2 > H-
o o LO LO "3- CM CD CO
CD
CM
s
I -
I
I
s
s
-
- OO oo
CD
OO
OO
CD O CM CO LO
CD
CD
CQ CO CO "3- s-
I LO o- -
co co o CO o
o CO
o
I -
LO LO LO LO CO s s s oo
I I CD CD
>,
CO o .E co
CD
c o
a> 1— I
s-
I CM CO CO o
o CM
o "3-
o CM
CM
CO
CD co
LO
CD co CO CD CD
eg
> o
CO
O c 5 ^ o o o o o o o o
o a. c fc o in o LO o LO o LO CD LO CD LO o- LO
CO 0} CM C\J CO CO LO LO co CO I
s s
I -
73
IRC:SP:37-2010
5000
45QS
--IRC Lading
-•-3VW182I
4000
3500
1 2500
5:
»
1 2S2S
r
1500
1000 >
500 » 1
0
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 4§ 70 39
7500 r
3
-»-lRLLi>a*ng
7000
£500 -*-9WV25to
-
6000
5500
r
54000 \
1,3500
I
1 3000 -I
ID
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
33 40
spun (mj
74
IRC:SP:37-2010
400
$00 t
75
IRC:SP:37-2010
Ton
to
49
0LF=2
co
o
CD
CM
CO 1189 1676 2189
LO
CD
CO 5411
Due OJ r-~
CO CO 4508 6439 7568 8729 9963
43 CM CO
With
GVW
o
>*
CO
T3
C o
o CD
CD
LO
o
LO
m Absolute Moment
oo
Governing
1207 1603 2104 2674 3281 3938 4716 5532 6387 7329
OJ CO LO CO
m
CO E
CO
-3 to 49.0T
CM CO CM
co GVW co CM CO CO 1173 1533 1998 2568 3155 3788 4507 5298 6110 6974
O Due CO LO CO
ru
to
c O "S GVW
40.2T
CO
CD
CO
CD
LO
CO
CM 1130 1570 2063 2589 3187 3833 4513 5321 6194 7095
03 n m Due CO LO OO
_J ™"
CO O to 35.2T
CD OJ LO CM
o Due
GVW CD OJ
CO LO
o
OO
1165 1592 2069 2605 3185 3850 4601 5396 6249 7153
O
o to 25.0T
CD CM o
GVW CD CO LO 1207 1603 2104 2674 3281 3938 4716 5532 6387 7329
CO O Due CO LO CO
™ to 16.2T
CD CD CO oo
in CO CD 1077 1459
CO 2400 2952 3572 4249 4965 5776 6628
GVW oo
o <D 01
m Due CM
L. c
m
to
c O Load
o
o CD LO
CD oo
CO
GO
OJ
CD CM
CM
CD
LO
a 3s_
2217 2496 2809 3149
CO
Due
Governing
OJ CO LO CD CO 90SL
CD
*-> IRC
CO (/)
uper Ton
rted
to
49
0LF=2
CD CM o
o CM CO 1222 1595 1959 2317 2670 3071 3569 4146 4722 5402 6297
a CO Due
With
CO LO oo
Q. G)
GVW
3 CD
+»
CO
CO
> CO
CO
CD
CO CD
LO
Q. o Absolute
Governing
Moment
CM CO
CM
CD oo
1116 1371 1622 1869 2150 2499 2902 3306 3781 4408
E ac
CO oo
o to 49.0T
CM CO CD CD
CO
GVW CO r- co LO 1116 1371 1622
oo 2150 2499 2902 3306 3781 4408
Due CM co LO oo
c
to 40.2T
CO CO CD CD
LO
CO
co
CD
CD
o LO
CM
CD CO "> Due
GVW CO
CM
CD
CO
OJ
CO oo o CM -3-
r--
co CD 2233 2554 2995 3556 4125
E o o
o to
£ o GVW
35.2T
O
O CO h-
s -
LO
r--
CD
LO 1139 1317 1507 1745 2025 2390 2865 3379 3931
(£> u_ Due CM CO
I
LO CD
a>
c c E
to to 25.0T
CM CD r» co
c
a>
I Due
GVW
CM
LO
CO
o
LO CO
o
CD
1026 1164 1360 1702 2095 2504 2913 3322
CD
ED
CO to
CM GVW
16.2T
CD
LO LO
r
CO
o
CM o CM
oo
LO
CD 1026 1291 1556 1821 2086 2351
CM Due OJ CO LO CO CD h»
©
to
0) Load
O
o CD LO
cd
«*
oo
CO
CO
CM
CD CM
CM
CD
LO 2217 2496 2809 3149
CO CD
I
Governing
CO Due CM CO LO CD 90S
IRC
CO
O
10.0 15.0
Length
(m) 20.0 25,0 30.0 35,0 40.0 45.0 50,0 55,0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0
76
IRC:SP:37-2010
C CM
O II
o *— uu
o
o> -J CM CO CD co co CM CO
C5 © o CM CD o> CM
CM
CO
CM
o
CO
CO
CO CO
o LO LO
O 3*
55 E °
T3
C fit O LO
oo CD
CO
oo
CM oo
CO
CO
CO
O
CD
LO CM
co CD
O cd CM CM CM CM CO co co OO
O 111
E < C3 <*>
re
-3
U LO
^1-
oo
O
CO
"3-
oo co
CD
LO oo
CD
O CO
CO
OO
LO
CO
oo
5= oo CM CM CM CM CO CO OO CO
re Q *-* "*
oo LO CD CO CD OO -3" CD OO CO
"O 3 >o CO
oo o CO LO OO O
CM
co
CM
LO
CM
OO
CM
O
CO
OO
OO
LO
CO
CO
CO
«3"
o
o CD
O CXI CM CO
O CM OO OO OO
O CD
0) ? <M "3-
oo CO LO OO
CM
CO
CM
LO
CM
oo
CM CO
CO
CO
LO
CO
oo
co
O^
Q <-> CO
aT
c o
c >
CD CM OO CO LO CM
CD CD
o Sj in CO CO CO OO
CM
CO
CM
CO
CM
CD
CM CO CO CO CO
T3
a>
-J
on
> CM OO CO o
^3- CD CO
o CO LO CO o CM LO
Sj CO CD CM CM CM CM CO CO CO
o
© 3 _J
-a
c .E re
03
ucf re
0)
c o
>— _j o "3"
o CD
CM CO CO
CO
CO
o o
LO
CO
CO
OO
CD
CM
o
3 Of CD
c in
4-*
o
re
o,
Q >O O —
DC
CM
03
a iff
\m
C3
w o
Q. JQ (I
~o 3 *O -J CO CM
CM
o CD LO
LO
CO
CD
CD LO
CO
CO
CO
CM
o
rte
CO CM CM CM CM CM CM CO CO co CO "3-
o a
a <D
*-»
o^
w ^ o
up CO c 3 i l£
w L_ .2 O CO
o CM LO oo CD
o CO CM o CM
o CO at re
> a>
CO LO CO 1^- CD
CM
CM
CM CM
LO
CM CM
OO
CM
Dl
^, o x:
C <o
a oo
«e
E o O LO oo CD -3- CO CM o CM
w St
3
oo
CD CO LO CO CD o CM -3- LO OO
to.
re
Qa5 CM CM CM CM CM CM
o O
CO CM oo LO oo CD CM CO CD
a> o CO LO LO CD CD o CM CO LO
u CO
o a 0§ CM CM CM CM CM
o 5> h- LO LO CD o CM CD CM LO LO CD LO
LL
w E 3 o CM OO LO CO OO CD O CM
03 CO
O£ CM CM CM CM
e
cri
c o 2 & !- OO oo o CO CM CD co OO CM CM
o O o CM CO LO CO CO CD O
(0
CO B
£08 CD CM
OS!
©
CD co CO CO CM CD CO CO
0) 3
CM CD
CO
CM OO OO
CO
LO
CD
CD
CD O CM CM CO
a <3 52
> o .— re
re ** c o O cS £ CO
CM CO co
CD
CO
O o
LO
CO
CD
OO
CD
CM
O
a>
S> 53 CD CM
o Q O —
.22
a—
O DC
re
O O o o o o C3
if £ o LO o
CM
LO
CXI 8 LO
CO
o LO o
LO LO
LO
co
CZ)
77
IRC:SP:37-2010
6SC0
Span(m)
78
IRC:SP:37-2010
600
5S0
-*-lRCUsding
500
-*-flVW18 2i
450
— aw/260i
™GVW3S2<
-*-OVvV 40 2t
400
-*-GVVV490(
-«-QVW490twUlOLF = 20
|350
$300
§250
200
150
100
50
0
10 16 20 25 30 38 40 45 60 85 60 86 70,.
Span (m)
79
IRC:SP:37-2010
With
CO GVW
i
> to 0LF=2
CM LO CO
o 1409 1986 2595 3383 4349 5342 6413 7631 8969 10345 11808
Ton CO LO cry
e
O
5?
Q3 cr>
CO CO CO
Absolute Moment
CO CO 1007 1430 1900 2494 3169 3888 4668 5589 6557 7570
oo
Governing CD
o CM •<a- co OO
u O
£
u. m to 49.0T
CD CM CO
re
o o GVW
CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CD
1390 1816 2368 3044 3740 4489 5342 6279 7242 8266
Due
3=
m
k.
0)
I— to
o>
40.2T
CD oo CO oo
GVW CD CO 1339 1860 2445 3069 3777 4543 5348 6307 7342 8409
0)
Due CM CO CO CD
T3
5 to
o 35.2T
CD CM LO
o Due
GVW CD CO
CO CD
LO
CD
1381 1887 2452 3087 3774 4563 5453 6395 7407 8478
S3
to 25.0T CO CD
CD
O Due
GVW O
CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
1007 1430 1900 2494 3169
CO
CO 4668 5589 6557 7570
OO
CD
CO OO
to
T3
GVW
16.2T
CO
o
CO
CM
oo GO 1277 1729 2237 2845 3499 4234 5036 5885 6846 7855
cc Due CO LO oo
to Load
T3 CO r»- CO CO
C Due
Governing
CO
CM
co
co CD
1135 1352 1566 1785 2041 2322 2627 2959 3329 3732
o
to
IRC
a
Ton
to
49
0LF=2
O
CD
o
CO
LO
CD 1449 2322 2746 3164 3640 4230 4914 5597 7463
,15
>
Due
With
CO CO CD
0681-
1
GVW
55
CM
,.15
r.=
O Absolute
Governing
Moment
CO
i-»
oo
CO 1014 1323 1625 1922 2215 2548 2961 3440 3918
OO 5224
-3 *=t
CM Sj-
(A
U c
I
re
Oo to LO CM CM
u 49.0T
oo CM CM OO
3=
cc
Due
GVW
CM
5-
"<*
CD
CO o 1323
CD CD 2215 2548 2961 3440 3918 5224
E
CO to 40.2T
CO OO CO
o CO
LO
o
o o
OO
O)
> Due
GVW
CM "*
CO o CM LO r~- CD 2281 2646 3026 3550 4214 4889
o o
to
E 35.2T
r- CM •si- CO
i— GVW co oo 1136 1350 1560 1786 2068 2400 2833 3396 4005 4659
Due CM CO CO
CD CO
C
to CD CM
T3 25.0T
CO LO CO
C 0
Due
GVW LO
CM
CM
"St"
o
CD
CO
CD
1068 1215
CO CD 2018 2483 2967 3452 3937
<D
o
ta to 16.2T
LO oo co CD CO CO CM
CN Due
GVW CO CD
CM 5- LO CD
o
CO CD
1216 1530 1844 2158 2472 2786
OS
>
n I to Load
oo l< CD CO LO
CL>
CO CO r- co
O Due
Governing
CM CO CD
1135 1352 1566 2041 2322 2627 2959 3329 3732
TO
"s— IRC
i—
CO
O
o o o o o o o o o o o © o o
111 o LO o
CM
LO
CM
o
CO
LO
co
o
-t
o
LO
LO
LO
o
CO
o
r-
LO
80
IRC:SP:37-2010
(0
a CM
II CO CM CM CD CD co CO CD O
> 2 t-§ c\j
CO
LO CD
CO
CO CO CM CO o
CD CD
cd
a co
CM CM CO "3- "3- LO LO CD
D ) a-
o O "
CO o LO
CO
cd
LO
o
cd
o
CM LO
CM
CO
LO
o LO
CO CD CT>
<D
CO
o >
O
o>
JC
CM CM CM CO CO co "3"
o E
(0
O CO
—3 o
.5 _o
CD O LO
CO
CO
LO
o
CD
CD O
LO o co
CD
CO
LO
CD
^3-
CM
^3-
LO
co
CO
s= 3 CD CM CM CM CO co CO CO
(0
co Q
> CM GO CD CO CO CO CO LO LO LO
o T3 « > O o CD LO co
5O o
CM LO CO CO CD CM
o o
<3>
CM CM CM CO CO CO CO "3- "3-
c CO
"O s
E o h-
a
co
o CM
in
CD
CD
LO
CM LO
CO
CO
to
CM
CO
CM
LO
CM
CD
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
LO
CD
CO
CO
CD
CO
LO
CM
-3-
co
LO
CD
CO
eo
o & o co o o CM CM ^1- LO LO
c
CO
LO
CO
CD CO LO CD CM
CM
LO
CM
CO
CM CO CO co
o CO CD CD
6 o o CM
<i>
a
CO CM "* oo
CO
CO
CD
"51-
CD CM
CD LO
o CO
CO
o
CO
co
CO
CD
_J CD CO CM CM CM CO CO CO CO -3-
cc
o tfi
o 3 T3
CO
o
+» o
_J o CM
CO
CD
"* LO
o
CO
CM
CO
CO
CO
CD
CO
CO CO
CD
CO
CM
CD
CO LO
CO B 0)
3
pn
l.
TO
Q o
cc
CM CM CM
an •*-> c>
(A CO
Q. s_ Q
CO CD
13 3
a. C5 « CM CD o CO LO op CD "2
0)
CO S o .11 CD
SI
CO
CM CM
CD
CM CO
CM
CO CO 6 s
LO
0) 5
o "5
CL CO _3
+->
u
3
CO
CO
£ ill CD
CM LO CO
CD
CD o CM
CM co
CD
CO
LO
o o
CM
"3-
co
CM
LO
>» (0
e
o
|ll
<
CM CM CM CM CM CM CO CO CO CO
a (A
®
_3 o
C5 <»
E TO
> CD -3- CD CM CD LO o -3- CM
5= CD
3 LO CO CD o CM CD CO o CM co LO
CO
aa5 CM CM CM CM CO CO CO CO
CO CM CM
E
a to
a» >e CD
CM LO
"3-
co
5J-
CD
CD
CM
CO CO
CD
CD CD
co o CD
CM
CD o CM CM CM CM CM CO CO
o ©
o £ o
14. CD
CM CM
CO
CD
CD
CD
CO
CD
CM
CO
o
o CO
CO
"vl-
LO
LO
o
CD
1^
o
co CM CM CM CM CM CM CO
i- a>
C0
T— e
a>
E o
co CO CM co CO LO CD CO CD CD
® a> CM CM CM "3- LO CD CO CD CM CO "3-
3 OLO CM CM CM CM
CO
5 a CM
lO 03
CM CO
>^
CD CM LO CD CM
"3-
o CM CM
CM
CO
CO
CO
LO CO
CD
CD
o
CO
CO CO CO CD
CO
3§£
n >
£ CO
.E
£ O
co
CM CD o CM CO CO CO CO CD CD o
o> CO
CD
- 1 o CO -3- LO CD CD CO CD CD CM CO LO
TO > o CM CM CM
I
TO oO DC
—
o
o o o o o o o
& ft
CD
.9 o lO o
CM
LO
CM
CD
CO
LO
CO
o o
LO
LO o
CD
o LO
81
IRC:SP:37-2010
12000
Fig. 42 Comparison of BM for IRC Four Lanes (For Crowded/Traffic Jam Condition)
82
IRC:SP:37-2010
l i i i i i i i i I r i i I I l
0 8 10 15 20 26 30 38 40 45 80 55 60 66 70 T8 80
Span (m)
Fig. 43 Comparison of SF
Four Lanes with Steel Superstructure
for
(For Moving Traffic Condition)
Span (m)
83
BOOTES
84
NOTES
85
NOTES
86
(The Official amendments to this document would be
published by the IRC in its periodical, 'Indian Highways
which shall be considered as effective and as part of the
code/guidelines/manual, etc. from the date specified therein)