ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE BOX GIRDER

BRIDGE

A REPORT
Submitted in fulfillment of the
requirement for the award of the degree
of
Master of Technology
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING

By

RAMA CHANDRA BHAIRAVARASU

(21243011)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RAIPUR
RAIPUR - 492010
DECEMBER, 2022

0
 CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the work which is being presented in the report entitled

“ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE BOX GIRDER BRIDGE”, in the partial fulfillment

of the requirement for the award of the Degree of Master of Technology and submitted

in the Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur, is an

authentic record of my own work carried out during a period from July 2022 to

November 2022 under the supervision of Dr. U.K.DEWANGAN, NIT Raipur.

The matter presented in the thesis has not been submitted by me for the award

of any degree of this or any other Institute/ University.

(Rama Chandra Bhairavarasu)

This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best

of my knowledge.

(Dr. U.K.DEWANGAN)

Professor

Department of Civil Engineering

National Institute of Technology Raipur

The M-Tech. 3rd semester examination of Mr. Rama Chandra Bhairavarasu,

Research Scholar, has been held on ………………………

Signature of Supervisor Signature of H.O.D.

i
 ABSTRACT

Box girders are now prominently used in freeway and bridge systems because of its

structural efficiency, better stability, serviceability, economy of construction and

pleasing aesthetics. Box girder bridge in offshore is more complex than onshore in terms

of structural response and its loading system because of the high dependency on the

environment factors that contributes to the complexity of design and construction

process. In this report an overview of the various design loads acting on the box girder,

pier and monopile are discussed. Using the manual calculations, the bending moment

and bending stresses for both transfer and service conditions are calculated for box

girder bridge with 50 m span. Also stresses at the bottom of the pier by various design

loads are also calculated. The box girder is then designed in MIDAS Civil software.

The stress values are obtained from this software. The values of stresses at top and

bottom of the box girder for both support and mid span are compared with values

obtained by manual calculations. The obtained differences are then explained.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Completion of this report was possible with the support of several people. First of all, I

would like to express my great indebtedness to my respected philosopher and mentor,

research guide, Dr. U.K.Dewangan, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,

National Institute of Technology, Raipur, for his valuable guidance and consistent

encouragement, profound advice and persistent encouragement throughout this work. It

has been an excellent learning experience to work under his supervision. I'm also

thankful to Dr. Gangadhar Ramtekkar, Head of the department, Department of Civil

Engineering and Dr. Govardhan Bhatt, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil

Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur, for their valuable insight given

by him during the curriculum.

I sincerely thank all faculty members of the Civil Engineering Department for their

cooperation and valuable support and special thanks to Dr. R. K. Tripathi, Dr. Mohit

Jaiswal, Dr. S.V. Deo, Dr. Alfia Bano and Dr. Meena Murmu, Department of Civil

Engineering, National Institute of Technology Raipur for their valuable guidance.

I take this opportunity to thank every source that has contributed in carrying out this

research work. Last but not the least, I wish to thank all those who have helped me in

all stages of my research work.

(Rama Chandra Bhairavarasu)

iii
 CONTENTS

Page No.
Title page i

Abstract ii

Acknowledgement iii
Contents iv

List of Figures vi

List of Tables vii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 GENERAL 1

1.1.1 SUPER STRUCTURE (PSC BOX GIRDER BRIDGE) 2

1.1.2 SUBSTRUCTURE (PIER) 2

1.1.3 FOUNDATION (MONOPILE) 2

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 3

3 ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE STRUCTURE

3.1 DESIGN LOADS ON SUPER STRUCTURE 8

3.2 ANALYSIS OF PIER 11

3.3 ANALYSIS OF MONOPILE 13

3.4 MANUAL CALCULATIONS USING EXCEL 15

3.5 SOFTWARE MODELS 20

iv
 3.6 LOADS TO BE APPLIED IN SOFTWARE 21

4 RESULTS 22

5 CONCLUSIONS 23

6 FUTURE WORK 24

7 REFERENCES 25

v
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure. No. Details of Figure Page No.

1.1 Components of offshore bridge 1

1.2 Box girder 1

3.1 Continuous span used in analysis 10

3.2 Cross section of PSC box girder 10

3.3 Dead load bending moment coefficients in slab 16

3.4 Position of IRC Class AA load for max. BM in slab 16

3.5 Live load bending moment coefficients in slab 16

3.6 Dead load bending moment coefficients for the girder 17

3.7 Live load bending moment coefficients for the girder 17

3.8 Initial assumption for the prestress cable profile 12

3.9 Final profiles of the cables 12

3.10 Longitudinal view of the bridge 14

3.11 Cross section of the bridge 14

3.12 Temperature gradient from IRC 6-2017 15

5.1 Stress diagrams for the top of the beam 16

5.2 Stress diagrams for the bottom of the beam 16

5.3 Bending moment diagram 16

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table. No. Details of Table Page No.

3.1 Minimum top width of pier (for slab and girder bridges) 7

3.2 Moment and reinforcement values for slab 11

3.3 Bending moment and shear force in web girder 11

3.4 Prestress values 12

3.5 Stress values at transfer and at service loads 13

3.6 Stress values at the bottom of the pier 13

6.1 Comparison between manual and software values 17

vii
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The analysis and design of offshore structures are challenging as these structures are
subjected to extreme environment conditions. Hence the importance of analysis.
The main components of an offshore bridge are
➢ Super structure (Bridge deck)
➢ Sub Structure (Pier)
➢ Foundation (Monopile)

Box girder bridge

Pier

Monopile

Figure 1.1: Components of offshore bridge

Figure 1.2: Box girder bridge

1
1.1.1 Super structure (PSC Box girder bridge)
Hollow Box cross sections are efficient for transverse loads. Hollow box
as compared to solid rectangle of equivalent sectional has greater moment of
inertia. These are strong in torsion due to their closed shape. Hence these are ideal
choice for long span bridges as they have optimal resistance to both bending and
torsion. They are economical.

1.1.2 Substructure (Pier)

It is an intermediate supporting structure of a bridge.
Functions:
a) To transfer the vertical loads to the foundation.
b) To resist all horizontal and transverse forces acting on the bridge.
c) Adding aesthetic value.
Types of piers: Solid, Cellular, Trestle and Hammer head.

1.1.3 Foundation (Monopile)

Monopile foundations are among the most popular offshore wind foundations in
the market and have been used widely in offshore wind over the last few decades.
Monopiles attract high-hydrodynamic loads from the water and, as water depths
and the size of mounted turbines increase, the diameter of pile required to resist
static and dynamic forces from the sea, wind and turbine becomes much larger -
and therefore more awkward to fabricate, transport and install. The monopile is a
construction consisting of a steel pipe with a diameter ranging from approximately
5-6 meters and up to 15 meters in diameter

2
 Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The following literatures are reviewed in this study.

Xin jiang, Lin ma, Xinlin Ban (2022) [1], showed concerns about application of high-
capacity strands in bridges is limited due to concrete cracking, extreme stress and
cambers. In this study, the application of high-capacity strands in the pretensioned box
girder bridge was verified as practicable. The fabrication process, including strand
stressing, concrete casting, and curing and detensioning, was introduced, and this
experience has use for reference. Due to the thermal effect of hydration, the forces in
prestressing strands varied over time, and they stayed close to their initial values after 72
h. To match the high-capacity strands, high strength concrete may be applied; therefore,
the concerns of prestress loss, camber, and concrete cracking are further alleviated. Earlier
detension means a faster and more economical girder production.

Yiming Yang, Huang Tang (2022) [2], proposed a prediction model of long-term
prestress loss considering the combined effect of shrinkage and creep of concrete,
prestressing steel relaxation, and the corrosion of prestressing and non-prestressing steel.
The effect of corrosion on long term prestress losses is basically negligible. It has an
effect on prestressing force and crack resistance of the section. The limitations of the
study is that the effect of corrosion on the bond between strand and concrete is not
considered.

Shubham Sirse, Dr. Kuldeep R. Dabhekar (2020) [3], verified that different codes such
as IRC:21-2000 and IRC:112-2011 come up with different design philosophies for bridge
design. IRC 21 includes WSM whereas IRC 112 includes LSM for both PSC & RCC
structures. It has been found out that deflection in case of LSM(IRC:112-2011) is less or
within limits than that of WSM(IRC:21-2000). Quantity of concrete can be saved upto 20
to 30% by IRC:112-2011.In conclusion IRC:112-2011 is most economical and preferable
design code.

3
Guang-Dong Zhou,Ting-Hua Yi (2013) [4], first proposed the theoretical formulations
and boundary conditions of heat transfer in bridge. And then, the numerical solutions for
temperature distribution in bridge including finite difference method and finite element
method are reviewed. Definition of critical thermal loads varies from region to region,
bridge to bridge, and section to section.

G.Razaqpur, Mostafa Nofal, Saeed M.Mirza (2011) [5], proposed to use the nonlinear
program NONLACS is used in this paper to predict ultimate strength and complete
response of box girder bridges at all stages of loading up to ultimate load. The program
uses an incremental-iterative approach based on tangent stiffness method, to solve
nonlinear problem in a series of incremental linear analyses by dividing total load into a
number of increments. Element stiffness is obtained by summing up the stiffness
contributions of the different layers. The reinforcing or prestressing steel can be idealized
as a steel layer or as a one-dimensional bar. Throughout the analysis, perfect bond is
assumed between the steel and concrete. however, unbonded tendons can be modelled by
a truss element that is attached to two specified nodes in the finite element mesh, thereby
compatibility is enforced only at these nodes. Finally, it is concluded that the nonlinear
finite element method is capable of predicting the full response of single- and two-cell
prestressed concrete box girder bridges over the complete loading range.

Viranjan Verma, K.Nallasivam (2010) [6], proposed an analysis done on a thin-walled

box-girder bridge subjected Indian railway loading using a three nodded one-dimensional
beam element. One-dimensional is favoured over three-dimensional model due to its
simplicity and cost-effectiveness during the initial analysis phase.Torsional warping and
cross-sectional distortion are considered in addition to extension, bending and torsion.
Keeping in mind these complex actions, the beam element incorporates three extra
degrees of freedom in addition to six degrees of freedom per node. MATLAB coding is
done to obtain various response parameters for single as well as double cell box girders.
Obtained values are validated by solving two numerical examples.

4
Mayank Chourasia, Dr. Saleem Akhtar (2015) [7], gave a comparative study between
four cell and single cell pre-stressed concrete box girder Cross-sections. This includes
calculations of bending moment, deflection, concrete consumption, steel consumption,
strand consumption. The study showed that the single cell pre-stressed concrete box
girder was most suitable and economical cross section for 2 lane Indian national highway
bridges.

Muthanna Abbu (2013) [8], proposed the work on 3D FE modelling of composite box
Girder Bridge. The conclusion was interaction between the two parts of the bridge in the
ANSYS analysis model using rigid links to give full interaction between components.
The thickness of precast concrete 15cm was big to simulate using shell elements, so
note-worthy differences were observed (about 2 %) by using 3-D solid elements to
model such thickness. The value of the degree of freedom in coincident with the points
to be coupled, was important thing effects on result of simulation of constrained point
load, big difference appeared (15 %) when the loading simulated by Coupling to force a
set of nodes to have the same DOF value.

P.V. Ramana (2013) [9], used finite strip method for analysis of box girder bridges
subjected to dead load and IRC live load. Impact factor is considered for live load
analysis. The analysis program gives results such as bending moment and stresses, shear
stresses and torsional moments at desired locations. The deck slab must be divided into
finer mesh compared to bottom slab due to presence of concentrated load. In the web one
strip is regarded to save time. The trapezoidal shape of box girder gives lesser deflection
as compared to rectangular section.

P.K. Gupta (2010) [10], used SAP-2000 to carry out linear analysis of these box girders.
Three dimensional 4-noded shell elements have been employed to analyze the complex
behavior of different box-girders. The linear analysis has been carried out for the Dead
Load (Self Weight) and Live Load of IRC Class 70R loading, for zero eccentricity as well
as maximum eccentricity at mid-span. The paper presents an in-depth study for
deflections, longitudinal and transverse bending stresses and shear lag for these cross-
sections. In the paper, results of linear analysis of three box girder bridge cross-sections
namely Rectangular, Trapezoidal and Circular of varying depths have been presented.

5
Mirko Djelosevic, Vladeta Gajic, Dragan Petrovic (2011) [11], proposed a
mathematical model of girder was created to define stress-strain state at a local point. The
methodology carried out in this paper showed that the identification of local stress can be
performed only on a segment of the girder. The procedure of calculation and experimental
determination of the local stress state was thus considerably simplified, without reducing
accuracy. The focal point of research in this paper is definition or identification of the
length of the zone of influence due to local stress so that analysis is carried out in relevant
segment. Mathematical interpretation of deformation and stress values from the aspect of
local stress gives guidelines for the optimum design of box girders.

Rajesh F.Kale, N.G.Gore, P.J.Salunke (2014) [12], presents a cost optimization

approach for superstructures. This optimization is done using MATLAB software.
Design constraints for the optimization are considered according to IRC codes. The
optimization process is done for different grades of concrete and steel. The comparative
results for different grades of concrete and steel are presented in tabulated form. The
function to be satisfied is the cost of R.C.C. T-beam bridge deck whose main components
are cost of concrete and steel. It is assumed that cost of steel, launching and casting
formwork etc. are directly proportional to volume of concrete. Actual percentage of the
saving obtained for optimum design for girder depend upon the deck slab thickness, depth
of girder, grade of steel and grade of concrete.

Jacques Berthellemy (1992) [13], proposed different methods for analysis of box girder
are introduced such as grillage or orthotropic plate analysis. For uniform loading,
elementary beam theory gives useful results but distribution analysis by a grillage or an
orthotropic plate method is needed for more complex loadings. In a simple form of
grillage analysis, each beam is given a torsional stiffness and a flexural stiffness in the
vertical plane. Vertical loads are applied only at the intersections of the beams. The matrix
stiffness method analysis is used by the software to find the rotations about two horizontal
axes and the vertical displacement at these nodes, and hence the bending and torsional
moments and vertical shear forces in the beams at each intersection.

Karthika Santhosh, P. Asha Varma (2017) [14], analyzed box Girder Bridge of single
cell type using SAP2000 V14. Three shapes rectangular, trapezoidal and circular are
considered and the curvature of the bridges varies only in horizontal direction. Moving

6
load of IRC class a tracked vehicle is applied and static analyses under different
loading conditions are performed. From this study it is concluded that the trapezoidal
section is superior to circular and rectangular section. Among rectangular, circular and
trapezoidal box girders of all radii, the torsion is maximum for circular box girders and
least for trapezoidal box girders. The trapezoidal section is the stiffest section and the
most stable among the three sections.

Ajith kumar, Dr.J.K.Dattatreya (2015) [15], used SAP2000 in carrying out linear
analysis using 4-node thin shell element of single cell post-tensioned concrete box girder
with simply supported ends. Longitudinal and transverse bending stress, shear stress,
torsional shear stress are calculated by both software and manually and then compared.
IRC specifications Class A-one lane, Class A-two lane and IRC 70R-one lane loading are
considered in analysis and design. The result concludes that the percentage difference
between results from simple beam theory and finite element method for longitudinal
analysis is 2.95% for top slab and-6.85% for bottom slab. Shear stresses obtained at the
junction of webs and flanges are more compared with stresses in web portions.
Trapezoidal box girder offers more resistance to shear generated.

Chetan T Naik, Dr. M M Achar, K Lakshmi (2015) [16], have done the analysis for
box girder considering two different sheathing pipes (HDPE and corrugated Bright metal
pipes) is done. CSI-bridge modular software has been used for analysis. The design has
been performed along the span so as to consider maximum or critical locations of the PSC
box girder due to various loading conditions. The software is basically finite element
method software, which can easily handle structures of complicated shapes, and boundary
conditions. It involves subdivision of the whole structure into number of small elements.
Before modelling all the parameters of box girder structure has to be decided based on
the IRC standards. The results obtained in girder with HDPE pipes are found to be more
viable than corrugated bright metal pipes since the loss of pre-stress is much less in case
of HDPE pipes thereby increasing the stress levels in the concrete sections.
The cable profile has been determined so as to suit the bending moment diagram and
cable profile adopted in the box girder is found to be most suitable considering the kern
distances of the PSC section.

7
 Chapter 3
Analysis
3.1 Design Loads on Superstructure

3.1.1 Dead Load

Dead Load = Self-weight of super structure

3.1.2 Super-imposed Dead Load

1. Crash barrier (Permanent): They are designed to withstand the impact of

vehicles of certain weights at certain angle while traveling at the specified speed.
They are expected to guide the vehicle back on the road while keeping the level
of damage to vehicle as well as to the barriers within acceptable limits.

2. Wearing coat (Temporary): All bridge decks are provided with some sort of
wearing course, either concrete or bituminous. Wearing coat is provided to protect
the structural concrete of the bridge deck from the damage caused by the moving
vehicles or by rain water. The structural concrete cannot be repaired or replaced
easily. This is possible in case of wearing course.

As per IRC 6-2016 Concrete-asphalt density = 22kN/𝑚3

Assuming thickness of wearing course = 100mm

Wearing course UDL = 16.5kN/m

Assume Crash barrier load = 8kN/m

3.1.3 Live Load

Carriage way live load calculated as per IRC:6-2017

8
3.1.4 Wind Load

Transverse Wind force, 𝑭𝑻 = 𝑷𝒁 𝒙 𝑨𝟏 𝒙 𝑮 𝒙 𝑪𝑫 .

The longitudinal force 𝑭𝑳 = 25% of 𝐹𝑇 for beam/box/plate girder bridges

= 50 % of 𝐹𝑇 for truss girder bridges

An upward or downward vertical wind load, 𝑭𝒗 = 𝑷𝒁 𝒙 𝑨𝟏 𝒙 𝑮 𝒙 𝑪𝑳

Here, 𝑃𝑍 = hourly mean wind pressure in N/𝑚2 ;

𝐴1 = Area of the structure;

G = Gust factor;

𝐶𝐷 = drag coefficient;

𝐶𝐿 = Lift coefficient taken as 0.75 as per IRC:6-2017

3.1.5 Longitudinal Forces

In all road bridges, provisions shall be made for longitudinal forces arising from:

i. Tractive effort caused through acceleration of driving wheels:

ii. Braking effect resulting from the application of the brakes to braked
wheels; and

iii. Frictional resistance offered to the movement of free bearings due to

change of temperature or any other cause.

Braking effect is invariably greater than the tractive effort.

As per IRC:6-2017, in the case of a single lane or a two lane bridge this force is
taken as 20% of live load.

9
3.1.6 Centrifugal Forces

Where a road bridge is situated on a curve, all portions of the structure affected
by the centrifugal action of moving vehicles are to be designed so as to carry
safely the stress induced by the centrifugal force in addition to all other stress to
which they may be subjected.

The centrifugal force shall be determined from the following equation:

𝑾𝑽𝟐
C=
𝟏𝟐𝟕𝑹

C = centrifugal force acting normal to the traffic at the point of action of the wheel
loads in tonnes.

W = live load: in case of wheel loads, each wheel load being considered as acting
over the ground contact length in tonnes,

R = radius of the curvature in m,

V = design speed of vehicles using bridge in km per hour.

The Centrifugal force shall be considered to act at a height of 1.2 m above the level
of the carriageway.

3.1.7 Seismic Forces

The seismic force acts as a horizontal force equal to a fraction appropriate to the
region (zones) as given in IRC: 6-2017. This horizontal force is given by

F = 𝜶𝒉 W

F = horizontal force owing to earthquake

𝛼ℎ = seismic coefficient for the region = (Z/2) x(I)x (𝑆𝑎 /𝑔)

Z = Zone factor; I = Importance factor

W = weight of the dead and live loads acting above the section

10
3.2 Analysis of Pier

The top width of pier may be selected by using the following rules:

• For spans between 5 to 10 m ------------------ span/6

• For spans between 10 to 20 m ----------------- span/7

• For spans more than 20 m -----------------------span/8 to span/10

TABLE 3.1: Minimum top width of piers (for slab and girder bridges)

Span (m) 3 6 12 24 40 50 and

above

Top width of piers 0.5 1.00 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.2

(m)

➢ After deciding the dimensions such as top width and base width, the pier should
be analysed for adequacy of its dimensions.

➢ This can be done by checking the maximum and minimum base pressures
developed at the pier.

➢ Different forces acting on the pier are considered for this.

3.2.1 Stresses on base of pier

3.2.1.1 Stresses due to dead load:

Total dead load = Dead load from superstructure + Self weight of pier.

Stresses at the bottom due to DL = Total dead load/Area at bottom

11
3.2.1.2 Stresses due to buoyancy:

To allow for full buoyancy, a reduction shall be made in the gross weight of the member
affected by reducing its density by the density of the displaced water.

Stress at base of the pier = Weight of displaced water/Area at the bottom

Weight of displace water = Submerged volume of the pier.

3.2.1.3 Stresses due to live load:

Class AA loading is generally considered.

Maximum bending moment at base is calculated next.

Stress = M/Z; here Z is the section modulus = I/y.

3.2.1.4 Stresses due to longitudinal force:

Longitudinal force is taken as 20% of IRC Class AA loading.

Stress is found in similar way as live load.

3.2.1.5 Stresses due to water current:

Water pressure = 52k𝒗𝟐 ; k is a constant depending on cut and ease.

v is the velocity of water.

Force due to water current = Pressure X Area of wetted surface of pier.

as per IRC:6-2017

If the direction of water current is taken as θ,

Force perpendicular to pier = Force X Cos θ.

Stress is then calculated after calculating the moment.

3.2.1.6 Summation of all stresses:

Max and Min stresses are calculated and are then checked whether they are in
the limits provided in the IRC-6:2017 code. Finally, we can conclude whether
the dimensions are adequate or not.

12
3.3 Analysis of monopile:
This includes all the forces/stresses acting on the pier in addition to the
hydrodynamic loading which is specifically added for the monopile

3.3.1 Hydrodynamic Loading:

Waves and current cause the movement of water around the monopile which
results in hydrodynamic loads. Hydrodynamic loading consists of two forces.

➢ The drag force, due to the velocity of the water particles

➢ The inertia force, due to the acceleration of the water particles.

We apply Morison equation to calculate the hydrodynamic load:

𝟏 𝝅𝑫𝟐
𝑭𝑻 = 𝑪𝑫 𝝆𝒘 𝑫𝑽 𝑽 + 𝑪𝑴 𝝆𝒘 a
𝟐 𝟒

Wave Kinematics:

Airy Wave theory is considered in the calculation of Wave Kinematics.

𝑯
➢ Surface Elevation: ζ = 𝟐 cos(kx-𝝎t)

П𝑯
➢ Velocity Potential: Ф= 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝐤𝐱 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝒌𝑻

𝝏Ф П𝑯
➢ Horizontal Velocity: 𝑽𝒉 = - 𝝏𝒛 = 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻

𝝏Ф П𝑯
➢ Vertical Velocity, 𝑽𝒗 = - 𝝏𝒛 = 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻

𝝏𝑽 𝟐П𝟐 𝑯
➢ Horizontal acceleration: 𝒂𝒉 = - 𝝏𝒛𝒉 = 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝒔𝒊𝒏(𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻𝟐

𝝏𝑽 𝟐П𝟐 𝑯
➢ Vertical acceleration, 𝒂𝒗 = - 𝝏𝒛𝒗 = - 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻𝟐

13
Steps taken to calculate hydro-dynamic loading:

Given Values: T, 𝐶𝑀 , 𝐶𝐷 , 𝜌 ,H(wave height), D (Diameter of pile), d (depth in water).

𝒈 𝑻𝟐
➢ Wave length, 𝝀 = 𝟐П

𝟐П
➢ Wave number, K= 𝝀

П𝑯
➢ Velocity, u = 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐜𝐨𝐬 (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻

𝟐П𝟐 𝑯
➢ Acceleration, a = 𝒆𝒌𝒛 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕)
𝑻𝟐

П𝑫𝟐 𝟐П𝟐 𝑯
Inertia Force, 𝑭𝑰 = 𝝆 𝑪𝒎 ( )( ) ꭍ 𝒆𝒌𝒛 sin (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) dz
𝟒 𝑻𝟐

П𝑫𝟐 𝟐П𝟐 𝑯 𝟏
= 𝝆 𝑪𝒎 ( )( ) [𝒌(1-𝒆−𝒌𝒅 )]
𝟒 𝑻𝟐

Drag Force, 𝑭𝑫 = 0.5 ρ 𝑪𝑫 D ꭍu |u|dz

П𝑯 𝟐
𝑭𝑫 = 0.5 ρ 𝑪𝑫 D ꭍ ( ) 𝒆𝟐𝒌𝒛 cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) |cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) | dz
𝑻

П𝑯 𝟐
𝑭𝑫 = 0.5 ρ 𝑪𝑫 D ( ) cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) |cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) | ꭍ 𝒆𝟐𝒌𝒛 dz
𝑻

П𝑯 𝟐 𝟏
𝑭𝑫 = 0.5 ρ 𝑪𝑫 D ( ) cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) |cos (𝒌𝒙 − 𝝎𝒕) | [𝒌(1-𝒆−𝟐𝒌𝒅 )]
𝑻

14
3.4 Manual calculations:
Design of PSC continuous two span cellular Box Girder Bridge

Grade of concrete is M60, Length of each span = 50m

Figure 3.1 Continuous span used in design

Cross-section of Box girder:

span
➢ Overall depth of box girder = =2m
25
➢ Width of roadway = 7.5 m, Width of foot paths = 2.5 m
➢ Total width = 10 m
2 m space between webs 4 cell box girder is used

➢ Thickness of web = 300mm as per Cl.9.3.2.1 IRC :18-2000

➢ Thickness of bottom and top flanges = 300mm
➢ C/s area = A = 1.62𝑚2 , I = 0.94 𝑚4
➢ y = 𝑦𝑡 = 𝑦𝑏 = 1 m
➢ Z = 𝑍𝑡 = 𝑍𝑏 = 0.94 𝑚3

Figure 3.2 Cross section of PSC box girder

15
Design of Slab panel

Figure 3.3: Dead load bending moment coefficients in slab

Figure 3.4: Position of IRC Class AA load for max. BM in slab

Figure 3.5: Live load bending moment coefficients in slab

Table 3.2: Moment and reinforcement values for slab

Total positive bending moment 74.2 kNm

Total Negative bending moment 65.8 kNm

Total maximum shear force 119.3 kN

Effective depth, d 250 mm

Area of steel reinforcement 2074 𝒎𝒎𝟐

Provide 20 mm diameter bars at 150mm center to center distance.

16
Design of web girder

Figure 3.6: Dead load bending moment coefficients

Figure 3.7: Live load bending moment coefficients in slab

Table 3.3: Bending moment and shear force in web girder

Bending Moments
Section DL BM LL BM Service load Ultimate load BM Units
(𝑴𝒈 ) (𝑴𝒒 ) BM (𝑴𝒈 + 𝑴𝒒 ) (1.35𝑴𝒈 +1.5𝑴𝒒 )
Mid-span 7633 4298 11931 16751 kNm
Mid-support 13438 3981 17419 24113 kNm

Shear force
DL SF LL SF Service load SF Ultimate load SF Units
(𝑽𝒈 ) (𝑽𝒒 ) (𝑽𝒈 + 𝑽𝒒 ) (1.35𝑽𝒈 +1.5𝑽𝒒 )
Middle-support 1333 372 1705 2357 kN

𝒁𝒃,𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 0.416*10^9 < 0.94*10^9 𝒎𝒎𝟑 (Section provided)

Hence section provided is adequate.

Prestress Force:
Table 3.4: Prestress values
Prestress force calculated for 700mm eccentricity at support 13110 kN
Force in each cable (anchorage type 27K-15) 5724 kN

So, provide 3 cables

Initial prestressing force for 3 cables 15000kN
Area of each strand 140𝒎𝒎𝟐
Area of each cable (27 strands) 3780𝒎𝒎𝟐
Area of 3 cables 11340𝒎𝒎𝟐

17
 Figure 3.8 Initial assumption for the prestress cable profile

Profiles of individual cables in span:

Figure 3.9 Final profiles of the cables

Stresses in bridge:
Table 3.5: Stress values at transfer and at service loads
Centre of span Transfer 𝜎𝑡 11.67 N/𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝑏 6.84 N/𝑚𝑚2

Service 𝜎𝑡 15.51 N/𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝑏 -0.49 N/𝑚𝑚2

Mid-support section Transfer 𝜎𝑡 6.33 N/𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝑏 12.18N/𝑚𝑚2

Service 𝜎𝑡 -0.098 N/𝑚𝑚2

𝜎𝑏 16.8 N/𝑚𝑚2

All the stresses are well within the maximum permissible limits of 20 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

18
Stresses in Pier:

Table 3.6: Stress values at the bottom of the pier

S.No. Name Force (kN) Moment(kN-m)
Vertical Horizontal Along bridge Along pier

1 Dead Load 2960

2 Buoyancy -105
3 Live load 700 420
4 Braking 280
5 Water current 17.72 31 41.34
23.625

6 Wind force
(a) Superstructure 286 1944
(b) Live load 54 540
© Pier 13 65
Total 3555 674.34 516 2525.34

Stress at the base = 4.6 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 < 20 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 which is max permissible stress

19
3.5 SOFTWARE WORK

Figure 3.10: Longitudinal view of the bridge

Figure 3.11: Cross section of the bridge

20
3.5 Loadings to be applied in software

3.5.1 Self weight: In the software, self-weight is calculated based on section properties
and material density data given in the model.

3.5.2 SIDL (Wearing course and Crash Barrier):

As per IRC 6-2017 Concrete-asphalt density = 22kN/𝑚3

Assuming thickness of wearing course = 100mm

Wearing course UDL = 16.5kN/m

Assume Crash barrier load = 8kN/m

3.5.3 Temperature Uniform – Rise = 𝟐𝟓𝟎 𝑪 (IRC:6-2017, cl 215.2)

Temperature Uniform – Fall = 𝟐𝟓𝟎 𝑪

Temperature Gradient:

Figure 3.7 Design temperature differences for concrete bridge decks

From this we can calculate how the stresses change with respect to temperature along
the cross section of the bridge.

3.5.4 Prestress Forces: These are added by using cable profiles done in excel.

3.5.5 Wind loads: They are calculated by IRC:6-2017.

3.5.6 Moving load: Consists of traffic lines, vehicle loading, moving load cases

21
 CHAPTER 5
RESULTS

5.1 BEAM STRESS DIAGRAMS

Figure 5.1 Stress diagrams for the top of the beam.

➢ Stress at mid span = 14.38 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

➢ Stress at support = 16.3 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

Figure 5.2 Stress diagrams for the bottom of the beam.

➢ Stress at mid span = 17.5 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

➢ Stress at support = 18.4 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

5.2 BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

Figure 5.3 Bending Moment Diagram

Bending moment at Mid-support = 36619 kN-m

22
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS
TABLE 6.1: Comparison between manual and software values

Manual Software

Bending moment at mid support 24113 kNm 36619 kNm

Stress at center 11.67 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 17.5 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

6.84 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 14.38 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐
Stress at mid support 6.33 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 12.23 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

12.18 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐 18.5 N/𝒎𝒎𝟐

Stress and Moment are values are much greater in Software when compared to manual
calculations. While calculating manually we design without using loads such as
temperature load, wind load on bridge and also approximate cross-section is assumed for
the box girder (as slab and web girder). Hence the difference in the values.

23
 FUTURE WORK

➢ Analyse pier using software and validate them with results from manual

calculations.

➢ Analyse monopile using software and validate them with results from manual

calculations

➢ Analyse the superstructure by designing it in MATLAB.

24
 REFERENCES

1. Jiang, X. et al. (2022) “Prestressed concrete box girder with high-capacity strands
monitoring and analysis during fabrication,” Buildings, 12(7), p. 911.
2. Yang, Y. et al. (2022) “Prediction of long-term prestress loss and crack resistance
analysis of corroded prestressed concrete box-girder bridges,” Advances in Civil
Engineering, 2022, pp. 1–16.
3. Sirse, S. et al. (2020) “Review of Design and analysis of box girder bridges and
T-beam bridges using IRC codes,” International Journal of Scientific Research
in Science and Technology, pp. 184–189. https://doi.org/10.32628/ijsrst207332.
4. Zhou, G.-D. and Yi, T.-H. (2013) “Thermal load in large-scale bridges: A state-
of-the-art review,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 9(12),
p. 217983.
5. Razaqpur, A.G., Nofal, M. and Mirza, M.S. (1989) “Nonlinear analysis of
prestressed concrete box girder bridges under flexure,” Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 16(6), pp. 845–853.
6. Verma, V. and Nallasivam, K. (2020) “One-dimensional finite element analysis
of thin-walled box-girder bridge,” Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 5(2).
7. Mayank Chourasia and Dr. Saleem Akhtar (2015),” Design and Analysis of
Prestressed Concrete Box Girder by Finite Element Method”, International
Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering Research ISSN 2348-7607 (Online)
Vol. 3, Issue1, pp: (413-421).
8. Muthanna Abbu(2013),”3D FE modelling of composite box girder bridges”, 2nd
International Balkans conference on challenges of Civil Engineering, BCCCE
9. Ramana P.V. (2013),”FSM Analysis for Box Girder Bridges”, International
Journal of Advanced Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IJAEEE), ISSN
(Print) : 2278-8948, Volume-2,Issue-6
10. Gupta P.K. (2010), “Parametric study on behavior of box-girder bridges using
finite element method”, Asian journal of civil engineering (building and housing)
vol.11, pg. 135-148.
11. Djelosevic, M. et al. (2012) “Identification of local stress parameters influencing
the optimum design of box girders,” Engineering Structures, 40, pp. 299–316.
12. Rajesh F Kale, Gore N G, Salunke P G. (2014) “Applications of Matlab in optimization
of bridge superstructures,” International Journal of Research in Engineering and

25
 Technology, 03(05), pp. 34–39.
13. Jacques Berthellemy (1992),”Advanced calculation methods for box girder
bridges”, Ministère de l'Écologie, du Développement durable, des Transports et
du Logement.
14. Karthika Santhosh, Asha Varma P (2016), “Parametric Study on Behaviour of
Box Girder Bridges with Different Shape Based on Torsion”, International
Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, ISSU August 2016.
15. Kumar R Ajith, Dr. J.K. Dattatreya (2015), "Study on the Structural Behavior and
Design of a Typical Single Cell Post Tensioned Concrete Box Girder Bridge".
Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology, Volume 2, No.11.
16. Chetan T Naik, Dr. M M Achar, K Lakshmi (2015), “Analysis and Design of
Multi Cell Post-Tensioned PSC Box Girder”, IOSR Journal of Mechanical and
Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE), e-ISSN: 2278-1684, p-ISSN: 2320-334X,
Volume 12, Issue 4 Ver. VII, PP 56-64.
17. Srinivasan Chandrasekaran, 2017, “Dynamic Analysis and Design of offshore
structures”, Springer, Volume 9 of Ocean Engineering & Oceanography.
18. N. Krishna Raju,2018, “Prestressed concrete”, McGraw Hill Education; Sixth
edition.
19. IRC:6-2017 Standard Specifications and code of practice for road bridges, Section
II: Load and Load Combinations (Seventh revision), 2019
20. IRC:112-2011 Code of practice for concrete road bridges, Published by INDIAN
ROADS CONGRESS Kama Koti Marg, Sectors, R.K. Puram, New Delhi.

26