Caltrans Aids PDF

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS • DECEMBER 2008
LRFD SUPERSEDES BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS SECTION 14 DATED AUGUST 2008
14-1 HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD

Introduction
Bridge Design Aid 14-1 provides a simplified method for designing cable restrainers for bridges.
It is based on a research study using a simplified two-degree-of-freedom linear analytical model.
Twenty six different earthquake records were utilized and verified through non-linear analysis
using ground motion records scaled to 0.7g 1. Some of the advantages of this method are:
• Uses a simplified two-degree-of-freedom linear analytical model
• Single-step process - no iterations required
• No modal analysis required
• Conservative for most known earthquake ground motions
• Simplified ground motion period (Tg ) determination compatible with the Seismic Design
Criteria (SDC) soil types
Assumptions:
• The effects of friction are negligible
• The skew is < 30 degrees. For bridges with skews > 30 degrees, the lead office should
consult with the Office of Earthquake Engineering (OEE) for guidance.
• The hinge is represented by a linearized model as shown in Figure1:
Linearized
Restrainer Stiffness
X1 X2
Force
Kr
Restrainer
m1 m2 Stiffness
(only in tension)
(s) Deformation (x 1 x2)

K1 K2
Linear Analytical Model

Stiffness
in Compression
Linearization of Hinge
Figure 1
1.
UC Berkeley Report No. UCB/EERC 97/12. "New Design and New Analysis Procedures for
Intermediate Hinges in Multiple - Frame Bridges."
INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.1

LRFD
Definitions of Variables
A = Restrainer cross-sectional area
c = The effective modal damping factor
cavg = The average effective modal damping factor of frames 1 and 2
ci = The effective modal damping factor for frame i
D1 = The displacement demand of the less flexible frame
D2 = The displacement demand of the more flexible frame
Deq0 = The unrestrained relative hinge displacement
Di = The spectral displacement demand of frame i
Dia = The spectral displacement of frame i adjusted by a damping reduction factor Rdi
Dr = The restrained relative hinge displacement
Dy = The yield (max) elongation the restrainer is expected to experience in a seismic event
E = Restrainer modulus of elasticity
f = An effective stiffness adjustment factor
F = Adjusted effective stiffness factor
Feff = Effective stiffness factor
Fyi = Yield force of frame i
G = Soil shear modulus
Gmax = Maximum soil shear modulus
H = Soil depth
K1 = The stiffness of the less flexible frame
K2 = The stiffness of the more flexible frame
K1eff = The effective stiffness of the less flexible frame
K2eff = The effective stiffness of the more flexible frame
Kieff = The effective stiffness of the frame i
Ki = The stiffness of the frame i
Kmod = The reciprocal of the sum of flexibilities of frames 1 and 2
Kr = The restrainer stiffness
14-1.2 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

LRFD
Krmin = The minimum restrainer stiffness required if unseating is possible during the elastic
stage
l = Length of restrainer
L = Relative hinge displacement limit
mi = Mass of frame “i”
N = Number of restrainers
r = An adjustment factor for R
R = Restraint level factor
Rd = Displacement reduction factor ( SDC 2.1.5 )
Rdi = Displacement reduction factor for frame i ( SDC 2.1.5 )
s = Restrainer slack
T1 = The fundamental (natural) period of the less flexible frame
T2 = The fundamental (natural) period of the more flexible frame
Tg = The ground period
T1eff = The effective fundamental (natural) period of the less flexible frame
T2eff = The effective fundamental (natural) period of the more flexible frame
Tieff = The effective fundamental (natural) period of frame i
Ti = The fundamental (natural) period of frame i
Vs = The shear wave velocity
β = The effective period ratio T2eff / T1eff
Δyi = Yield displacement of frame i
μd = The expected displacement ductility demand, default = 4.0
μavg = Average displacement ductility demand of frames 1 and 2
ρ12 = Modal cross-correlation coefficient

LRFD
Design Theory:
The restrainer stiffness, Kr required for controlling the unrestrained relative hinge displacement
Deq0, may be determined by:
Kr = R F Kmod. Eq. (1.1)
The value of the restrained relative hinge displacement, Dr should be selected based on the
purpose of restrainers such as:
• Protect the bearings and seals of the bridge in a moderate event,
• Prevent unseating from a short seat where seat extensions are not practical,
• Control the response of the structure in a major event.
This method utilizes the effective stiffness concept to determine the effective period and spectral
displacements of the yielding frames:
For Keff (effective stiffness), see Figure 2
Fy
K
Force
K eff = K/ μ
Displacement
Δy Δ max = μ Δ y
Figure 2

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS DECEMBER 2008
LRFD
Hinge Restrainer Design Procedure

Determine N
1) Determine Deq0 :
For all frames i determine
mi (slugs)
Ki (kips/in)
Ti = 2Q mi / K i
(sec) Eq. (1.2)
Δyi (in)
μd
F yi (kips)
For all frames i calculate effective values:
Kieff = Ki / μd Eq. (1.3)
Tieff = 2Q m / K
i ieff
Eq. (1.4)
Note: if μd is not known use a default value of 4.0
For all frames i determine Di (from ARS curves 2), ci , Rdi , and Dia :
Di = Spectral Displacement based on (Tieff )
c = 0.05 + [1- (0.95/ μ ) - 0.05 μ ] /π (See Figure 3) Eq.(1.5)
Rdi = [1.5 / (40 c + 1)] + 0.5 (See Figure 3) Eq. (1.6)
Dia = Rdi Di Eq. (1.7)
For adjacent frames 1 and 2 determine:

β = T2eff / T1eff Eq. (1.8)
8cavg (1+ β )(β )
2 3/ 2
ρ12 =
(1− β ) + 4c
2 2
avg
2
β (1 + β )
2 (See Figure 4) Eq. (1.9)
2
ARS curves are for 5% damping. Spectral displacements should be adjusted for other values.

LRFD
1.1
Displacement Reduction Factor, Rd v.s. µ

1
Damping Factor, c and Displacement Reduction Factor, Rd
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Damping Factor, c v.s. µ
0.2
0.1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Displacement Ductility Factor, µ
Figure 3

LRFD
0.8
µ =1
Cross-Correlation Coefficient, ρ12
µ =2
µ =4
µ =6
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1 2 3 4
Effective Period Ratio, β = T2eff / T1eff
Figure 4

LRFD
1.6
1.4
The ratio of unrestrained relative hinge displacement to the large
rρ12 = 0
1.2
0.2
adjusted displacement, Deq0 / D2a
1 0.4
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.4
1.0
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Smaller to larger adjusted frame displacement Ratio, D1a /D 2a
Figure 5

LRFD
Calculate Deq0 :
Deq0 = (D 1a
2
+ D2 a − 2ρ12 D1a D2 a )
2
(See Figure 5) Eq. (1.10)
2) Determine R
Find the allowable or desired restrained relative hinge displacement, Dr
Dr = Dy + s Eq. (1.11)
Calculate the displacement limit, L
L = Dr /Deq0 Eq. (1.12)
Calculate r,
r = -L +1.5 Eq. (1.13)
Calculate R,
R = r ( 1-1.66L + 0.67/L) (See Figure 6) Eq. (1.14)

LRFD
10
8
Restraint Factor, R
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Displacement Limit, L = Dr / Deq0
Figure 6

LRFD
3) Determine F
Determine Tg ,
Tg = 44HH //⎡⎣⎡⎣VVss ((GG//GG ))⎤⎦⎤⎦

max
max (See Figure 7) Eq. (1.15)
Calculate T2 / Tg
Determine Feff (See Figure 8)
Determine the adjustment factor, f (See Figure 9)
Calculate F = f x Feff
3
E
2.5 H = 100 feet

G/G = 0.5
Ground Period, Tg (sec)
max
G/G max = 0.2
2
ARS Soil
Types
1.5
D
1
C
0.5 B
A
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Shear wave velocity, Vs (ft/s)
Note: G/Gmax varies inversely to ground motion

intensity
Figure 7

LRFD
1.8
1.6
T1 / T2 = 0.3
1.4
Effective Stiffness Factor, Feff
1.2
T1 / T2 = 0.4
1
0.8
T1 / T2 = 0.5
0.6
T1 / T2 = 0.6 - 1.0
0.4
0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ratio of the more flexible frame period to the

ground motion period, (T2 / T g )
Figure 8

LRFD
3.5
2.5
Adjustment Factor, f
1.5
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Average Design Ductility, μ avg
Figure 9
4) Determine Kmod
Calculate Kmod = K1K2 / (K1+K2 ) (See Figure 10) Eq. (1.16)

LRFD
1
K mod / K 2
0.8
Kmod / K2 v.s. K2 / K1
0.6
0.4
K mod / K1
Kmod / K1 v.s. K2 / K1
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
K2 / K 1
Figure 10
5) Calculate the required restrainer stiffness Kr using Eq. (1.1)

6) Check if Krmin requirement applies

LRFD
If Deq0 - Dy > Δy2 then continue, otherwise, proceed to Step 7 Eq. (1.17)
Calculate Krmin = Fy2 / Dy

If Krmin > Kr calculated in step 5 above then Krmin controls and
use Kr = Krmin
If Kr > Krmin then use Kr
7) Calculate the number of restrainers, N

N = Kr l / EA Eq. (1.18)

LRFD
Restrainer Design for Multi-Span Simply Supported

Bridges
The simple supports of multi-span simply supported bridges (SSB) can be modeled similar to in-
span hinges of multi-frame structures. The required restrainer stiffness may be determined using
the same method.
To model a simple support of a SSB, each joint should be considered individually (Note that every
internal support contains two joints, one for each simple span it supports). Assume that the
selected joint is the only joint that allows movement (hinge) while all other joints act as pins. This
results in two frames, one to the left, and the other to the right of the selected joint (hinge). This
will include several scenarios, with frames defined on either side of the hinge. The number of
spans and columns included in each frame is determined by the joint modeling procedure shown
in the next section.
For typical bridges assume it is not necessary to consider more than two spans and two columns
on either side of the hinge for any particular scenario (see Figure 11). This results in a maximum
of four scenarios for every hinge. For each scenario, the stiffnesses, periods, displacement
demands, hinge opening and the corresponding required restrainer stiffness are determined in
the same manner as for in-span hinges. The scenario that results in the largest hinge opening
will control. If the hinge opening demand is greater than or equal to the available seat length,
restrainers must be provided as required or may be added for performance3. The same procedure
is repeated for the second joint of the same support and the required restrainer stiffness is
calculated. Apply the same procedure to all other supports. Abutments should be considered
fixed.
3.
Memo to Designers 20-4 requires retrofit for all seat lengths < 12 inches.

LRFD
Joint Modeling Procedure Illustration:

The structure in Figure 11 illustrates the joint modeling procedure:
Restrainer
H D B F
G C A E Abut
Figure 11
1.) For retrofits, if the support is a pin then the strength of the bearing must be evaluated and if
the strength is greater than the earthquake force then no restrainers are required to prevent
unseating. Restrainers may be added if performance or bearing protection is required. If the
support bearing strength is less than the seismic force then it should be treated as a roller.
2.) To design restrainer AD consider the two frames:
Scenario 1:
Frame AB (column A and span B) moving right
Frame CD (column C and span D) moving left
Calculate the periods of both frames AB and CD and the required restrainer stiffness
utilizing the same method for intermediate hinges of multi-span bridges.
Similarly check other scenarios for tension and compression models (no need to check
more than two columns and spans on each side of the joint)
Scenario 2:
Frame ABEF moving right
Frame CD moving left
Scenario 3:
Frame AB moving right
Frame CDGH moving left

LRFD
Scenario 4:
Frame ABEF moving right
Frame CDGH moving left
The situation that results in the most restrainers controls the design at that particular joint
(hinge)
3.) To design restrainer AB investigate the two frames:
Frame AD (column A and span D) moving left
Frame BE (column E and span B) moving right
Calculate the periods of both frames AD & BE, the required restrainer stiffness and check
other tension and compression models similar to restrainer AD.
4.) Repeat steps 2 and 3 for all intermediate supports.
5.) For Abutment supports (end spans):
Always model the abutment as fixed and T1/T2 may be assumed to be 0.3 for simplicity
since it represents a relatively very rigid frame (abutment like) adjacent to a flexible frame
and the charts will be applicable without further analysis.
Scenario 1:
Frame 1 = Abutment (fixed)
Frame 2 = Frame EF (moving left)
Scenario 2:
Frame 1 = Abutment (fixed)
Frame 2 = Frame EFAB (moving left)
6.) For the restrainer EF, the frame consisting of span F and the abutment shall be considered
fixed and treated as the Frame 1 above.
Scenario 1:
Frame 1 = Abutment + span F (fixed)
Frame 2 = Frame EB (moving left)
Scenario 2:
Frame 1 = Abutment + span F (fixed)
Frame 2 = Frame EBAD (moving left)

LRFD
Example Calculation for In-Span Hinges:

Determine the number of restrainers required for the following structure:
Z
Y X
Concrete Barrier
Type 732 (Mod) Profile Grade
-2% & varies +2% & varies
CIP/PS Box Girder

LRFD
Given:
The structure is in a 0.7g seismic zone with a type C soil as described in the Caltrans Seismic
Design Criteria (SDC). The structure has 6 inch hinge seats with a 4 inch allowable movement.
The following sketch summarizes additional given information for each frame:
Hinge
W1 = 10,670 kips W 2 = 9,704 kips
K 1 = 1,089 kips/in K 2 = 248 kips/in

Frame 1 Frame 2
1) Determine Deq0:
For all frame, determine: mi , Ki , Ti , Di (ARS curves), Δyi , μd , and Fyi

m1 = 27.61 slugs m2 = 25.11 slugs
K1 = 1089 kips/in K2 = 248 kips/in
T1 = 2 π 27.61/1089 =1 sec T2 = 2 π 25.11/248 = 2 sec

Δy1 = 3.36 inches (given) Δy2 = 4.17 inches (given)
μd1 = 3.59 (given) μd2 = 5.34 (given)
Fy1 = 1089(3.36) = 3,659 kips Fy2 = 248(4.17) = 1,034 kips
Apply Eq. (1.3) calculate Kieff

Apply Eq. (1.4) calculate Tieff
K1eff = 1,089/3.59 = 303.3 kips/in
T1eff = 2π (27.61/303.3) = 1.9 sec

K2eff = 248/5.34 = 46.4 kips/in
T2eff = 2π (25.11/46.4) = 4.6 sec

LRFD
For all frame "i" determine Di (ARS curves), ci , Rdi ,and Dia :
D1 = Spectral Displacement ( at 1.9 sec ) = 21 in
D2 = Spectral Displacement ( at 4.6 sec ) = 32 in
Apply Eq. (1.5) in Figure 3:
= 0.05
c11 = 0.05 +
⎣ ((
+ ⎡⎡⎣11 −
− 0.95
0.95 // 3.59
3.59 −))
− 0.05 3.59 ⎤⎤⎦ // ππ == 0.18
0.05 3.59
⎦
0.18
⎣ ((
0.05 + ⎡11 − 0.95
c22 = 0.05 0.95 // 5.34 ))
5.34 − 0.05 5.34 ⎤ // π = 0.20
0.05 5.34
⎦ 0.20

Rd1= [1.5 / ( 40(0.18) + 1 )] + 0.5 = 0.68
Rd2= [1.5 / ( 40(0.20) + 1 )] + 0.5 = 0.67
Apply Eq. (1.7):

D1a = 0.68 (21) = 14.3 in
D2a = 0.67 (32) = 21.4 in
For adjacent frames 1 and 2 determine β and ρ12

Apply Eq. (1.8):
β = 4.6 / 1.9 = 2.42
Calculate cavg:
cavg = (0.18 + 0.20) / 2 = 0.19
8(0 .19 ) 2 (1 + 2 .42 ) ( 2.42 )

3/2
ρ12 = = 0.134
(1 -2.42 2 ) 2 + 4 (0.1 9) 2 (2 .42 )(1+ 2.42) 2

LRFD
Calculate the unrestrained relative hinge displacement, Deq0

Apply Eq. (1.10), Figure 5:
(14.3 ) + (21.4 ) - 2 (0.134)(14.3)(21.4) =24.1 in

2 2
Deq0 =
2) Determine R:
Calculate Dr , L, r, and R
Apply Eq. (1.11):

Dr = 3 + 1 = 4 in
Apply Eq. (1.12):

L = 4 / 24.1 = 0.166

r = -0.166 + 1.5 = 1.33

R = 1.33 (1 - 1.66(0.166) + 0.67/0.166) = 6.33
3) Determine F:
Determine Tg, Feff, f, and F:
From Figure 7 (assume high ground motion intensity G/Gmax = 0.2):
Tg = 0.5 sec
Calculate T2 / Tg and T1 / T2:

T2 / Tg = 2 / 0.5 = 4
T1 / T2 = 1 / 2 = 0.5

LRFD
Determine Feff :
From Figure 8, Feff = 0.68
Determine f:
Average μd = (3.59 + 5.34) / 2 = 4.47 > 4.0
From Figure 9, f = 1.0
Calculate F:
F = f × Feff = 1.0 × (0.68) = 0.68
4) Determine Kmod
Kmod = 1089 (248) / (1089 + 248) = 202 kips/in
5) Determine the required restrainer stiffness, Kr

Apply Eq. (1.1):
Kr = 6.33 (0.68)(202) = 870 kips/in
6) Check if Krmin requirement applies

Apply Eq. (1.17):
Deq- Dy = 24.1 - 3 = 21.1 > Δy2 = 4.17
∴ Krmin applies
Calculate Krmin = Fy2 / Dy

If Krmin > Kr calculated in step 5 above then Krmin controls
Krmin = 1034 / 3 = 345 kips/in < 870 ok use Kr

LRFD
7) Determine the required number of restrainers, N

Apply Eq. (1.18)
N = 870 kips/in (240 in) / 14000 ksi (0.222 in2) = 67.2 say 68 cables
References:
1. California Department of Transportation, Bridge Memo to Designers 20-3 and 20-4
2. UC Berkeley Report No. UCB/EERC 97/12 - "New Design and New Analysis Procedures
for Intermediate Hinges in Multiple - Frame Bridges."
3. California Department of Transportation, Seismic Design Criteria

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
14-1A RESTRAINER MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND DESIGN

Introduction
Bridge Memo to Designers (MTD) 20-4 requires hinges to remain seated during seismic events.
In order to meet this requirement hinge restrainers are often used. An ideal restrainer should
possess material properties that allow it to resist applied forces, restricts the movements of
bridge segments, dissipates energy, and returns the structure segments to their relative pre-
earthquake positions. However, in order to ensure proper functioning of the restrainers and to
prevent their premature failure, all of the components in the restrainer system must be designed
and installed properly.
The restrainer design method described in Bridge Design Aids (BDA) 14-1 requires the restrainer
to remain within the elastic range utilizing only the restrainers spring-like ability while seismic
energy is dissipated by the plastic hinging of the columns. These criteria make cables more
practical than bars because the cable has a longer elastic range and thus, shorter restrainers can
be used. However, bars may be considered in some situations when improved serviceability or a
high initial stiffness is required. Therefore, the stress-strain properties of both bars and cables
are useful for developing practical systems.
Design of Retrofitting Devices

Earthquake restrainer devices should fail in a ductile rather than brittle manner when subjected
to ultimate loading. Therefore, non-ductile components such as brackets, connections, and
anchorages should be at least 25 percent stronger than the ductile cables or rods. In addition,
brackets and connections should be designed so that they will not fail if some of the restrainer
cables or rods in the unit are misadjusted or fail prematurely.
Restrainers at hinges and bearings should also have redundancy to account for possible defects
in some of the units (faulty fabrication, installation, adjustment and maintenance, etc.) that may
cause them to fail sooner than expected.
Impact design considerations become more significant when shorter bar restrainers are used
due to the bars high initial stiffness. This characteristic is effective in protecting the bearings
during moderate events. The anchorages and superstructure should be investigated due to the
stiffness of bar restrainers, their shorter length and the impact nature of seismic forces.
RESTRAINER MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND DESIGN - ATTACHMENT A 14-1A.1

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
The following ultimate strengths should be assumed for designing connections and determining
the adequacy of supporting members:
¾ inch cables Fu = 53 kips
11/4 inch H.S. rods Fu = 188 kips
(use 53 x 1.25 = 66.2 kips and 188 x 1.25 = 235.0 kips per cable and rod, respectively)
Bolted connections shall be designed as a bearing type connection:
H.S. Bolts Allowable Shear Allowable Tension

(A325) (Fv = 0.6Ft) (Ft = f Fu )
3
/4" 20.5 kips 34.1 kips
7
/8" 28.3 kips 47.1 kips
1" 37.1 kips 61.8 kips
11/8" 40.1 kips 68.1 kips
Table A-1
Combined tension and shear: Fvc = (Fv ) − (0.6 ft )

2 2
Fvc = Allowable shear per bolt for combined shear and tension
φ = Reduction factor = 0.85
Fv = Allowable shear per bolt (kips)
t = Applied tension per bolt (kips)
Fu= Ultimate tensile strength based on lab tests
The following allowable stresses should be used for designing ASTM A-36 steel brackets for
ultimate conditions:
Tension or compression 36,000 psi
Shear 26,000 psi
14-1A.2 RESTRAINER MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND DESIGN - ATTACHMENT A

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
0 .85 w Fu
Bearing or 3 x Fu whichever is smaller
t
Where:
t = thickness of plate
w = dimension of plate
Fu 58,000 psi
Groove welds 36,000 psi
Fillet welds 26,000 psi
Bearing plates for restrainer end anchorages should be sized to satisfy both bearing against the
concrete surface and punching shear of the concrete member. The bearing resistance should be
determined by the following expression:
B = φ x 0.85´ f´c x An
Where:
B = the calculated restrainer force
φ = 0.9 (seismic)
f 'c = 4,000 psi
An = net bearing area (excluding the cored hole )
Punching shear plate size can be selected from the chart in Figure A-1.

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Figure A-1 Resistance of Concrete Wall to Punching

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Restrainer Materials Data

Three quarter inch cable, galvanized: See Standard Specifications, Section 75-1.035 - Bridge
Joint Restrainer Units, for a full description.
Minimum ultimate tensile breaking strength = 46 kips.
As = 0.222 in2
E = 14,000,000 psi (minimum specified before yielding)
E = 18,000,000 psi (after initial stretching)
Load Factor Design: Assume yield strength = 85% x 46 = 39.1 kips
High strength bars, galvanized: Use ASTM A7-22 with supplementary requirements (the
minimum elongation is 7 percent in 10 bar diameters).
Diameter Cross Sections Ultimate Strength Yield Strength Yield Strength

Inches Area Inches (ksi) (ksi) (kips)
1" 0.85 150 120 102
1 1/4" 1.25 150 120 150
1 3/8" 1.58 150 120 190
Table A-2
E = 30,000,000 psi
Galvanizing may result in installation difficulties for high strength rods. Three types of rods are
currently used - Dywidag rods, K&M smooth rods, and Mukosil rods. Dywidag rods are galvanized
after being threaded. Therefore, the rod ends must be hot-brushed immediately after galvanizing.
Even after this operation, placement of end nuts is difficult. K&M smooth rods are threaded
after being galvanized. The ends are coated with zinc-rich paint after installation. If any damage
to the galvanizing occurs, zinc-rich paint must be applied to the affected area.
Standard locking devices may not be effective on Dywidag or Mukosil rods. Set bolts positioned
properly must be applied to prevent lock nuts from vibrating off rods.
Rods should be no longer than 30 feet. This is the standard stock length and galvanizing tanks will
not accommodate lengths greater than this.

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Bar Versus Cable Stress-Strain Properties

The load-elongation curves for bars and cables are shown in Figure A-2. The curves were
obtained by tensioning specimens from near zero stress to the specified minimum yield stress
(0.85 times the minimum breaking strength for cables) for 14 cycles and then to failure.
Figure A-2

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Stress Versus Strain Curves for 1-1/4" Bar and 3/4"

Cable
300
250
3/4" Cable
200
STRESS (ksi)
1-1/4" Bar
150
100
50
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
STRAIN (in/in)
Figure A-3
The stress-strain properties shown in figure A-3 of cables and bars were obtained from the load
enlongation curves in Figure A-2.
The area under the respective stress-strain curve up to the desired strain level represents the
strainenergy dissipated by each material at that strain level. However, it should be noted that
cable restrainers are designed to remain in the elastic range and the comparison with bar restrainers
beyond the cables yield strain should be avoided.

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Comparison of Stiffness' of 1-1/4" Bar and Multiple

3/4" Cable
700
12-Cables
600 Cable Yield
LOAD LEVEL (kips)
500
400
6-Cables
300
4-Cables One Bar

200
100
1-Cable
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
STRAIN LEVEL (in/in)
Figure A-4
In Figure A-4 it can be seen that four 3/4" cables provide a force level at yield approximately
equivalent to one 1-1/4 bar. However, since restrainers should be designed to remain elastic,
they should not be used to dissipate seismic energy. Comparisons between bars and cables are
only significant at strains below the cables yield strain.
Figure A-4 (Figure A-5 is an enlargement of Figure A-4 showing the cables elastic range)
shows load-strain curves for several combinations of cables and a single bar. From the figures,
it can be seen that the elastic stiffness of one bar is equal to that of twelve cables, while the
bar yields at a strain approximately 33% to that of a cable. In addition, four cables have a
stiffness equivalent to the secant stiffness of a bar at the cables yield strain. The relatively
high stiffness of a bar allows it to provide a significant force at small displacement levels
making them more efficient than cables in limiting relative hinge displacements. Furthermore,
bars have a higher compression stiffness than cables, making the bars more resistant to
kinking. The higher compression stiffness will also allow the bars to slide across the hinge
more easily when it closes during a seismic event.

LRFD ATTACHMENT A
Comparison of Stiffness' of 1-1/4" Bar and Multiple 3/4"

Cables in the Cable Elastic Range
500
Cable Yield Strain 0.0126

450 12 Cables
Bar Yield Strain 0.0042

400
350
LOAD (kips)
300
250
6-Cables
200
1-Bar
150
4-Cables
100
50 1-Cable
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014
STRAIN (in/in)
Figure A-5

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS 14-2 • NOVEMBER 2011
LRFD
14-2 STEEL COLUMN CASING DESIGN AND DETAILS

Steel column casings are the most common column retrofit method used in California. They
are effective for enhancing shear capacity, confinement, and preventing slipping of lap splices
commonly found at the base of columns constructed prior to 1971.
Upon completion of the diagnostic analysis of the As-built structure as described in Memo to
Designers (MTD) 20-4, the engineer must determine if column casings are required and the
type to use. There are two types of casings, Type F and Type P/F. The Type F casing
provides fixed end conditions, while the Type P/F casing provides a fixed condition at the top
of the column and a pinned condition at the bottom. The pin for the Type P/F casing is
detailed by placing polystyrene around the bottom of the column and allowing the lap splice
to slip thus forming a pin. For both the Type F and P/F column casings, it is necessary to
provide a minimum of 2-inch clearance between the casing ends and the bent cap soffit and/
or footings. The gap prevents the casing from bearing on the attached member. Bearing
would increase the effects of the plastic moment and thus the demand in the footing or bent
cap.
Charts have been developed to give casing dimensions and thicknesses for common sizes of
rectangular columns. These charts (Figures 3 and 4) give curve data used to produce the
most efficient casing around the given column. The curve data should not be listed on the
contract plans. This information is for design, detailing and estimation purposes only. The
only dimensions that should be listed on the contract plans are the “x” and “y” dimensions as
well as the casing thickness.
When determining casing thickness requirements, Type F casings can be read directly from
the charts shown in Figures 3 and 4. Note that casing thicknesses may not exceed 1-inch. If
the casing thickness required exceeds 1 inch the engineer is referred to Note 5 on Figure 2.
The column casing thicknesses for Type F shells were developed using thin wall pressure
element theory shown on Figure 1. The required shell thickness is directly related to the
radius. For rectangular columns, the shell is made up of partial circles using two different
radii. The engineer may use the average of the two radii to determine the casing thickness.
The engineer may encounter a situation where the charts are not applicable. For example,
the engineer may need to provide more clearance or a shorter radius to reduce shell thickness
requirements. In these situations, the engineer may use the design formula for an ellipse
given on Figure 2. The casing is then made from partial circular shapes that will most closely
match the design ellipse. For the casing thickness, the engineer should use the formula on
Figure 1. The engineer should coordinate with the specification engineer on the following:
a. When the minimum spacing between the column and the casing is equal to or greater
than ¾-inch, the grout mix should contain pea gravel.
14-2 STEEL COLUMN CASING DESIGN AND DETAILS 1

LRFD
b. If a pea gravel grout is used for elliptical shells, injection ports may be needed on four sides
due to restricted clearances at column corners. A similar detail may apply if elliptical jackets
are used for rectangular columns with round ends and tight clearances.
c. For Type P/F shells, the polystyrene insert should have a 1-foot gap at the vertical seam of
the casings. This is to prevent the polystyrene from burning during the welding process.
d. For tall casings, measures should be taken to prevent the casing from bulging due to large
hydrostatic head during the grouting operation. One solution is to pump the grout in lifts,
allowing each preceding lift to set, in order to reduce the hydrostatic head. Another solution
is to add temporary stiffeners around the casing to provide extra confinement and strength
while placing the grout.
The column casing design aids attached (Figures 1 to 4), together with the column casing Standard
Detail Sheet XS7-010, should apply to most situations where steel casings are needed. For
columns with non-standard shapes or any situation where the design charts do not apply, the
engineer should develop project specific design criteria per MTD 20-11.
References:
2. California Department of Transportation, Bridge Standard Detail Sheets XS7-010
3. UCSD SSRP-91/06 “Flexural Retrofit of Circular Reinforced Concrete Bridge Columns
by Steel Jacketing”
2 14-2 STEEL COLUMN CASING DESIGN AND DETAILS

LRFD
CASING THICKNESS:
TWO CONTROLLING CRITERIA:

A) Thin Walled Pressure Element (TWPE)
B) University of California San Diego Tests (UCSD Test)
A) FROM TWPE:
t
f LONG f TRAN p
+ =
R LONG R TRAN t
p
NOTES:
t fs t fs f LONG = Sigma (stress) Longitudinally

f TRAN = Sigma (stress) Transversely
FOR COLUMN CASING: R LONG R LONG = Radius Longitudinally
R TRAN = Radius Transversely
f TRAN p p = Internal Pressure
= = Thickness of Material
R TRAN t t
t fs = Thickness x Steel stress
B) FROM UCSD TEST: 1
At the point when a plastic hinge formed in the lap splice region, the strain in the
steel casing was equal to 0.001 inch. The steel casing must be designed such that
it produces 300 psi of confining pressure at this measured strain.
E s = 29,000,000 psi
fs = εs E s = 29,000 psi for lap-splice condition (assume 30,000 psi).

fs = [ Full Yield ] = 36,000 psi for continuous reinforcement.
t LAP-SPLICE = Radius in feet ( Average ) (12) (casing thickness in inches when longitudinal reinforcement is lapped)
100
t CONT REINF = Radius in feet ( Average ) (12) (casing thickness in inches when longitudinal reinforcement is continuous)
120
Figure 1 Elliptical Steel Casing Thickness Requirement for Plastic Hinge Zones
1
Flexural Retrofit of Circular Reinforced Concrete Bridge Columns by Steel Jacketing - UCSD SSRP-91/06

LRFD
cL COLUMN
cL COLUMN
a
19
CHAMFER
.1m
(TYP)
CL
"Y"
m
R
COLUMN "X"
By
b CASING
ss
"
"L2
~ "L1"
ELLIPSE ~
EXISTING Bx
COLUMN EXISTING
LS COLUMN
COLUMN CASING
NO SCALE
LS
a2 ASR = ASPECT RATIO =
BY = 2
b+( 2
SS
ASR ) LS = LONG SIDE
BX = BY × ASR SS = SHORT SIDE
ELLIPSE GEOMETRY
NO SCALE
General Notes for Design & Analysis:
1. "X" & "Y" Dimensions are to be shown on the Contract Plans.

See Figure 3 & 4 for location of "X" & "Y" dimensions.
2. Required casing thickness in the plastic hinge zone shall be

the dimension shown in the tables on the following pages.
3. Type "P" casing shall be 3/8" thick unless otherwise noted on plans.
4. Maximum plate thickness shall be 1" and minimum plate thickness

is 3/8".
5. If 1" maximum is exceeded, use of anchor bolts, stiffening

channels, etc., must be incorporated to adequately confine the columns.
6. UCSD Tests were conducted using a 20 d b lap length of 40 ksi yield

strength rebar.
7. The Office of Bridge Architecture and Aesthetics shall be consulted to

obtain a workable and aesthetically pleasing solution when different
plate thicknesses are joined, exterior stiffeners are attached, or through
bolts are installed.
Figure 2 Ellipse Geometry

LRFD
COLUMN CASING DATA CASING THICKNESS
CURVE DATA (L 1) PLASTIC HINGE
CURVE DATA (L 2) ZONE
COLUMN
SIZE Curve Chord
Radius Delta Length Tangent Length X* Y* t**
lap splice t cont
** reinf
1
2' -1 /2" 59º 59' 00" 3' - 1 1/8 " 1' - 8 1/2 " 2' - 1 1/2 " 3/ 3/ 3/
2' 0" × 3' -0" 7 16 " 5 5/8" 8" 8"
1' -27/ 8" 60º 00' 30" 1' - 3 5/8" 0' - 85/8" 1'- 2 7/8"
5' - 3/4" 45º 47' 04" 4'- 1/ "
2 2'-1 5/8" 3' -111/4 " 11/
8 3/16" 5 3/ 3/
2' 0" × 4' -0" 16" 8" 8"
1' - 2" 57º 06' 28" 1'- 4 1/2" 0' - 91/4" 1' -3 1/2 "
7' -9 1/4" 36º 58' 14" 5' - 1/8" 2' -7 1/8 " 4' -111/8 " 13/ 3/ 5/
2' 0" × 5' -0" 9 3/8" 5 16" 4" 8"
1' - 1 5/8" 71º 30' 53" 1' - 5 5/8 " 0' -9 3/4" 1' - 4"
11' -1" 30º 59' 00" 1' - 5 5/8" 0' -10 1/4" 1' - 4 3/8 " 1 1/
2' 0" × 6' -0" 1' - 17/8" 10 /2" 1/
2" 2"
1' - 1 1/2 " 74º 30' 30" 1' - 5 5/8 " 0' -10 1/4" 1' - 4 3/8 "
15' -0 " 26º 39' 26" 6' -11 3/4 " 3' - 65/8 " 6' - 11"
2' 0" × 7' -0" 9 13/16" 5 7/8" 1" 7/
8"
1' -1 3/8" 76º 40' 17" 1' - 5 7/8 " 0' -10 5/8" 1' - 45/8"
19' -6 1/8" 23º 23' 14" 7' -115/8 " 4'- 1/2" 7' -107/8 " 13/ *** Use
2' 0" × 8' -0" 10" 5 16" other means 1"
1' - 1 1/4" 78º 18' 23" 1' - 6 1/8" 0' -10 3/4" 1' - 4 3/4"

COLUMN
SIZE Curve Chord
Radius Delta Length Tangent Length X* Y* t**
lap splice t cont
** reinf
3' -7" 67º 34' 34" 4' - 2 3/4 " 2' - 4 3/4 " 3' - 1 7/8 " 1/ 3/ 3/
3' 0" × 4' -0" 1/ 10 16" 8 1/2 " 8" 8"
1' -10 7/ 8" 56º 12' 43" 1' - 10 1/2 " 1' - 1/4" 1'- 9 2"
1 54º 52' 08" 5'- 13/4"
5' - 4 /2" 2' - 91/2 " 4' - 111/2" 3/ 1/ 1/ 3/
3' 0" × 5' -0" 11 16" 8 8" 2" 8"
1' - 9 5/16" 52º 33' 55" 1' - 111/4" 1' - 1" 1' -10 1/8"
7' -7" 46º 07' 38" 6' - 1 1/4 " 3' - 23/4" 5' -113/8 "
3' 0" × 6' -0" 1' - 3/16 " 83/16" 5/
8"
1/
2"
5/
1' -5 8" 55º 56' 11" 2' - 1/8" 1' - 1 5/8 " 1' -105/8 "
10' -2 1/4" 39º 45' 48" 7' - 7/ "
8 3' - 8 1/4" 6' -111/8 " 3/
3' 0" × 7' -0" 1' - 15/16" 8 16"
3/
4"
5/
8"
1' - 81/8 " 59º 33' 47" 2' - 5 7/8 " 1' - 4 3/8 " 2' - 41/2 "
13' -2 1/2" 34º 55' 50" 8' - 3/8" 4' -1 7/8" 7' - 11/8"
3' 0" × 8' -0" 1' - 1 1/2 " 85/16" 1" 3/
4"
1' -7 15/16 " 72º 32' 05" 2' - 1 1/4 " 1' - 2
5/
8" 1' - 15/8"
16' -7 1/2" 31º 08' 17" 9' - 3/8" 4'- 7 5/8" 8' -111/8 " 3/ use other
3' 0" × 9' -0" 1' - 2" 8 8" 1"
13 3 means***
1' - 7 /16" 74º 25' 51" 2' -1 /4 " 1' - 3" 2' - 0"
17' -5 9/16 " 33º 00' 13" 10' -11/16" 5' - 21/16" 9' -111/16" use other use other
3' 0" × 10' -0" 1' - 1 11/16" 9 9 /16" means*** means***
1
2' - 23/4 " 69º 20' 22" 2' - 8 3/8" 1' - 6 /2 " 2' - 6
1/
2"
24' - 8" 25º 34' 28" 11' -1/8 " 5' - 7 1/4" 10' -11" 1/ use other use other
3' 0" × 11' -0" 5/ 1' -2 13/16 " 8 2" means***
1' - 7 5/8" 77º 12' 46" 2' - 2 1/2" 1' -3 8" 2' - 1/2" means***
29' - 3 1/4" 23º 28' 30" 11' -117/8" 5' -1" 11' -107/8" use other use other
3' 0" × 12' -0" 7 1' -2 7/8 " 8 5/16"
1' - 7 /8 " 78º 15' 45" 2' -2 7/16" 1' - 3 3/4" 2' -7/16" means*** means***
Notes:
* Dimensions to be shown on plans. Dimensions should be rounded up as approved by Engineer.
** Shell thickness to be used in plastic hinge zones. For Type P Casing, use minimum t = 3/ " .
8
*** See Note 5 on Figure 2.
Figure 3 Casing Thickness and "X" and "Y" Dimension Chart 1

LRFD
COLUMN
SIZE Curve Chord
Radius Delta Tangent Length X* Y* t**
lap splice t cont
** reinf
Length
3' -7 " 67º 34' 34" 4' - 2 3/4 " 2' - 4 3/4 " 3' - 17/8 " 7/ 3/ 3/
4' 0" × 3' -0" 1/ 10 16 " 8 1/2 " 8" 8"
1' -107/ 8 " 56º 12' 43" 1' - 101/2 " 1' - 1/4" 1'- 9 2"
1/ 360º 00' 00" 18'- 3/ " – –
2' -10 2" 4 1 1 3/ 3/
4' 0" × 4' -0" 10 /2" 10 /2" 8" 8"
– – – – –
4' -23/4 " 72º 06' 38" 5' - 3 7/8 " 3' - 7/8" 4' -117/8 " 3/
4' 0" × 5' -0" 1' - 1/2" 10 9/16" 1/
2" 8"
3/
2' -6 4" 53º 56' 41" 2' - 4 7/8" 1' - 3 5/8 " 2' - 3 7/8"
5' -101/2 " 60º 52' 26" 6' - 2 7/8 " 3' - 5 3/8 " 5' -113/8 " 1 1/
4' 0" × 6' -0" 1' - 17/8" 10 /2" 1/
2" 2"
2' - 43/4 " 59º 33' 47" 2' - 5 7/8 " 1' - 4 3/8 " 2' - 41/2 "
7' -10 " 52º 36' 43" 7' - 2 1/4 " 3' -10 1/2" 6' - 111/4" 5/
4' 0" × 7' -0" 1' - 3 1/16" 10 9/16" 8"
1/
2"
2' -33/4 " 63º 41' 38" 2' - 6 3/4 " 1' - 5 1/4 " 2' - 51/4"
10' -11/4 " 46º 17' 51" 8' -2" 4'- 3 7/8" 7' -113/8 "
4' 0" × 8' -0" 1' - 4 1/8 " 10 3/4" 3/
4"
5/
8"
3 3
2' - 3 /16" 66º 51' 05" 2' - 7 /4 " 1' - 6" 2' - 6"
12' - 8" 41º 19' 16" 9' - 1 5/8" 4' - 91/4 " 8' -111/4"
4' 0" × 9' -0" 1' - 4 15/16" 10 13/16" 1" 3/
4"
1
2' - 23/4 " 69º 20' 22" 2' - 83/8 " 1' - 6 /2 " 2' -
1
6 /2 "
1/
15' -6 4" 37º 18' 08" 10' - 11/4 " 5' - 7 7/8 " 9' -111/8 "
1' - 5 7/16"
use other
4' 0" × 10' -0" 10 11/16 " 1"
2' - 5/
2 16" 71º 20' 56" 2' - 8 3/4" 1' - 7" 2' - 6 3/4" means***
18' - 81/4 " 33º 59' 24" 11' - 1" 5' - 81/2" 10' -111/8 " use other use other
4' 0" × 11' -0" 1 1
1' - 6" 10 3/4"
2' - 2 /8 " 73º 00' 18" 2' - 9 /4 " 1' - 7 1/4 " 1
2' -7 /8 " means*** means***
7 1
22' - 2" 31º 12' 54" 12' - /8 " 6' - 2 3/8 " 11' -11 /8" use other use other
4' 0" × 12' -0" 1' - 6 5/8" 10 15/16"
2' - 21/8 " 74º 23' 33" 2’- 10 " 1’- 7 7/8 " 2' -
5
7 /8 " means*** means***
5
25' - 11" 28º 51' 52" 13' - /8 " 6' - 8" 12' - 11" use other use other
4' 0" × 13' -0" 7 7 1 1' - 6 13/16" 10 11/16 "
2'- 1 11/16 " 75º 34' 04" 2' - 9 /8 " 1' - 7 /8 " 2'-7 /2" means*** means***
30'- 0" 26º 49' 41" 14' -5/8 " 7' - 1 7/8 " 13' - 11/8" use other use other
4' 0" × 14' -0" 1' - 7 5/16" 10 15/16"
2'- 1 13/16 " 76º 35' 10" 2' -101/2" 1' - 8 3/8 " 2' - 8" means*** means***
15
34'- 4 1/4 " 25º 03' 53" 15' - 3/8" 7' - 7 5/8" 14'-10 /16" use other use other
4' 0" × 15' -0" 1' - 7 7/16" 10 3/4"
2'- 11/2" 77º 28' 03" 2' -101/2" 1' -87/16" 2' - 715/16" means*** means***
39'-
1/
2" 23º 31' 06" 16' - 1/4" 8' - 11/2" 15'-11" use other use other
4' 0" × 16' -0" 5/
1' - 7 7/8" 10 15/16"
2'- 1 8" 78º 14' 27" 1' - 11" 1' - 8 7/8" 2'-8 3/8" means*** means***
Notes:
* Dimensions to be shown on plans. Dimensions should be rounded up as approved by Engineer
** Shell thickness to be used in plastic hinge zones. For Type P Casing, use minimum t = 3/ " .
8
*** See Note 5 on Figure 2.
Figure 4 Casing Thickness and "X" and "Y" Dimension Chart 2

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS • JULY 2008
LRFD SUPERSEDES BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS SECTION 14 DATED OCTOBER 1989
14-3 FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER (FRP)

COMPOSITES COLUMN CASING SYSTEMS
Introduction
Several advanced composite column casing systems have been tested and are approved for use
in limited situations as explained below. Advanced composite column casing thicknesses, as
shown on the Standard Detail Sheet XS7-210, are designed to enhance both the shear capacity
and increase the lateral confinement of the plastic hinge zone for bridge columns with poor
transverse reinforcement details. E-glass and carbon fiber composites have been appoved for
use in limited situations. Materials testing standards and provisional specifications have been
devloped for these systems.
Advanced composites systems may be specified as an alternative to steel colum casings if the
conditions specified below are satisfied. For situations not meeting these criteria the Office of
Earthquake Engineering (OEE) should be consulted for possible exceptions.
1. The displacement ductility demand μp is not more than 6 for circular columns and not more
than 3 for rectangular columns.
2. For rectangular columns, the longest side dimension is limited to a maximum of 3 feet and the
aspect ratio may not be greater than 1.5.
3. For circular columns, the diameter is 6 feet or less.
4. Lap splices are not present in the expected plastic hinge zones.
5. Composites shall not be used for structures with single column bents.
6. The total axial load (dead load + overturning) on the column is not greater than 15% of its
axial capacity.
7. The column longitudinal reinforcement ratio is not greater than 2.5%.
8. The bridge does not require flame-sprayed plastic.
9. The columns are prismatic in shape.
10. The extent of the region designated as t1 shown on the Standard Detail Sheet XS7-210 is not
less than 1-1/2 times the column diameter and includes the portion of the column where
reinforcement is 75% (or greater) of the maximum moment.
FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER COMPOSITES COLUMN CASING SYSTEMS 14-3.1

LRFD
A “push-over” analysis should not be performed on columns retrofitted with FRP, as this
would over estimate the strain of the advanced composite material and the results would
not be accurate. In these situations, the engineer should consult with OEE for guidance.
A list of currently approved systems may be obtained from the OEE. Refer to Standard Detail
Sheet XS7-210 for design instructions.
Casing Thickness:
The thicknesses shown on Standard Detail Sheet XS7-210 were derived from the following
procedure.
Based on laboratory testing, it is necessary to provide a confining stress of 300 psi at a radial
dilating strain, f1 = 0.004 in regions within a plastic hinge zone. For regions outside the plastic
hinge zone, the criteria may be reduced to a confining stress of 150 psi at a radial dilating strain
of 0.004.
Note: since advanced FRP composite materials do not typically exhibit a yield stress (linear
elastic strain to failure) and since the strains are limited to the radial dilating strain, the developed
hoop stress (fh) may be defined as follows:
fh = αf Ef εj
Where:
fh = Hoop stress developed in the composite jacket (psi)
Ef = Modulus of Elasticity (psi) of the composite jacket material fiber
αf = Reduction factor for fiber Modulus of Elasticity = 0.90
εj = Dilating strain as defined above
From equilibrium of the column jacket:
2fhAj = f1Ds
Where:
Aj = tjs = cross sectional area of the jacket (in2)
f1 = the concrete confining stress (psi)
D = the column diameter (in.)
tj = Composite jacket thickness (in.) based on the dry fiber thickness
tf = layer thickness of dry fiber
s = unit height of jacket (in.)
14-3.2 FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER COMPOSITES COLUMN CASING SYSTEMS

LRFD
Figure 1
Therefore, solving for composite jacket thickness tj: tj = f1D
2αfEfεj
The number of layers (N) of the FRP column casing is then:
N = tj/tf (Note: round up to the next number of full layers)
Example Calculation:
The required jacket thickness for a 48-inch diameter column inside the plastic hinge zone is as
follows:
tj = f1D
2αfEfεj
Where D = 48 in.
Ef = 29,200,000 psi
εj = 0.004
f1 = 300 psi
=> tj = 0.06849 in.
Therefore, with a dry fiber thickness of 0.0065 in./layer,
The total number of layers = 0.06849 in. = 10.5 layers or 11 layers
0.0065 in/layer
FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER COMPOSITES COLUMN CASING SYSTEMS 14-3.3

LRFD
References:
1. California Department of Transportation, Standard Detail Sheet XS7-210
14-3.4 FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER COMPOSITES COLUMN CASING SYSTEMS

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS •AUGUST 2008
LRFD SUPERSEDES BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS SECTION 14 DATED OCTOBER 1989
14-4 JOINT SHEAR MODELING GUIDELINES FOR

EXISTING STRUCTURES
Introduction
Since the early 1990’s, greater emphasis has been placed on joint shear considerations in the
seismic design of bridges. While damage associated with joint shear may not necessarily create
a collapse mechanism, a large number of adjacent joints that form pins could lead to instability of
the structure. In these situations, the engineer is referred to Memo to Designers (MTD) 20-4 for
policy guidance.
As a joint is cycled during a seismic event it may degrade and lose its ability to carry moment.
The procedure shown below provides an approximate method for determining if such degradation
could occur during the design event, and guidance for developing the analytical model accordingly.
Generally, this procedure applies to structures designed between 1971 and 1994. Bridges designed
prior to 1971 typically have minimal steel in the joints, and will likely degrade to the point where
it loses its moment resisting capacity at small deformations. Bridges designed after 1994 have
joints that should be detailed to resist joint shear under design loads resulting in full fixity in the
joints.
Research has shown that the minimum displacement capacity of a poorly detailed shear capacity
protected element is approximately 2.0 times its yield displacement (ΔYcol ). In those cases where
the displacement demand is less than 2 x ΔYcol, the column/cap joint may be assumed to remain
essentially elastic, and a joint shear analysis is not required.
Joint Classification
The following procedure may be used to estimate joint shear capacity and its effects on the
column/joint displacement capacity.
The joints are classified using the following criteria:
3.5 ffcece'' (psi). This classification typically

• Weak joint – nominal joint shear strength vvnn = 3.5
applies to joints that were designed prior to 1971. Typically, these joints have no or minimal
amounts of transverse reinforcement in the joint. Once the cracking strength is reached the joint
has minimal reserve capacity.
'
• Moderate joint – nominal joint shear strength vn = 5.0 f ce (psi). Joints falling into this
classification have a nominal amount of transverse reinforcement (satisfying minimum
requirements of the time, but not satisfying current design requirements), and are able to provide
JOINT SHEAR MODELING GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES 14-4.1

LRFD
some moment resistance after cracking occurs. This joint shear reinforcement may be provided
in the form of column transverse steel or exterior transverse reinforcement located in the effective
joint region of the bent cap shown in Figure 7.7 of the Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). The
example problem included in this Bridge Design Aid (BDA) shows the calculation for joint shear
reinforcement. The column transverse reinforcement may be in the form of tied column
reinforcement, spirals, hoops, or intersecting spirals or hoops. The joint shear reinforcement ratio
rsj may not be less than 0.25% and is calculated as:
ρ sj1 + ρ sj 2 + ρ sj 3
, where
3
1) rsj1 is the volumetric lateral reinforcement ratio provided for confinement of the column
longitudinal reinforcement inside the cap region as defined in SDC Section 3.8.1. This ratio
is taken as zero in the case where column transverse confinement is discontinued in the cap
region.
2) rsj2 is the ratio of rebar area crossing (or penetrating) the effective joint horizontal plane in
Figure 7.7 of the SDC over the area of the plane Ajh .
3) rsj3 is the ratio of rebar area crossing (or penetrating) the effective joint vertical plane with a
length of 2 times the column depth in direction of bending and height equal to the height of
the bent cap over the area of the plane Ajv (see SDC Section 7.4.4.1).
• Intermediate joint – nominal joint shear strength vn = 7.5 f ce' (psi). This classification
applies to joints that have a nominal amount of transverse reinforcement (satisfying minimum
requirements of the time, but not necessarily satisfying current design requirements). It is sufficient
to maintain integrity of the joint past cracking, but not sufficient to sustain large deformations
near yielding of the framing members. Beam-column joints where bars are unable to develop
their yield strength are in this category.
Bar development may be precluded by the lack of standard hooks, or by insufficient anchorage
length for column bars passing through the joint. The minimum joint shear reinforcement may be
provided in the form of column transverse steel or exterior transverse reinforcement continued
into the bent cap. The column transverse reinforcement may be in the form of tied column
reinforcement, spirals, hoops, or intersecting spirals or hoops. The joint shear reinforcement ratio
rsj may not be less than 0.4% and is defined the same as for a moderate joint.
• Strong joint — nominal joint shear strength to be calculated from the Caltrans Seismic Design
Criteria limits on tensile (vn = 12.0 f ce' psi) and compressive (vn = .25 f 'ce psi) principal
stresses. This classification typically applies to beam-column joints designed after the early 1990’s.
These joints typically contain significant amounts of horizontal and vertical reinforcement in the
joint to provide adequate confinement of the joint core and the necessary mechanisms for force
14-4.2 JOINT SHEAR MODELING GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES

LRFD
transfer and bar anchorage. These joints are expected to be able to sustain large inelastic
deformations of the framing members without significant loss in joint panel strength or stiffness.
Joints classified as “Strong” are typically associated with new design and are not included in the
procedure given below.
Joint Shear Modeling Procedure

Given a classification for a joint, the engineer should evaluate the joint shear stress demand
compared to the capacity using capacity design principles per SDC.
After the joint classification is determined, the engineer should perform the following steps:
1) Calculate the tensile force Tc in the column section, and the joint vertical shear stress demand νjv
v jv = T c (See SDC Figure 7.6)

A jv
where
A jv = l ac × Bcap
A jh = The effective vertical joint area
Bcap = Bent cap width
H= Height of column
l ac = Length of column reinforcement embedded into the bent cap
col
Tc = The column tensile force defined as M o h , where h is the distance from
c.g. of tensile force to c.g. of compressive force on the section, or alternatively,
Tc may be obtained from the moment-curvature analysis of the cross section
M 0col = The overstrength column moment capacity (SDC Section 4.3.1)
vn
M pr = ⋅ M 0col = Reduced moment capacity of hinge model
v jv
2) Using the joint classifications as defined above, compare the joint vertical shear stress demand
νjv to the nominal joint shear strength νn and select one of the following:
a) If νjv < νn then consider the superstructure joints to be essentially elastic and may be
modeled as "rigid". The joint is capable of developing a plastic hinge in the column.
b) If νjv > νn then the rigid joint superstructure in the demand model needs to be modified to
account for the joint degradation. This may be accomplished by using a modified effective

LRFD
column stiffness 1 ( E I ) for the demand model 2 to determine the revised

c eff mod
displacement demand.
(E I ) = 0.85 ( E I )( v / v )
c eff mod c eff n jv
The engineer then determines the displacement capacity of the combined column/joint element
as follows:
The displacement capacity of the column/joint element of the bridge is considered to be the sum
of the elastic displacement capacity and the plastic displacement capacity3. The elastic
displacement capacity (using E c I eff and Mpr instead of M 0col ) is calculated by the procedure
specified in SDC Section 3.1.3. It includes the column elastic displacement in addition to any
elastic displacement attributed to superstructure or foundation flexibility. The plastic displacement
capacity is determined based on a plastic hinge rotation model θpj that is a function of the joint
classification and is calculated as follows:
1) For a weak joint:
θpj = θ yc + 0.007
2) Moderate joint:
θpj = θ yc + 0.015
3) Intermediate joint:
θpj =θyc+ 0.020
where θ yc is the column yield rotation calculated based on a rigid joint model using
( E c I eff ).
θ yc = Δ Yco l H
1
(EcIeff )mod approximates with a single element the combined stiffness of the various components of the
column-joint system. It is used to simplify the secant stiffness demand analysis and is applied to the
entire column. However, it should not be considered an actual structural characteristic. A more refined
demand analysis may be performed when necessary. Guidance from the Office of Earthquake Engineering is available.
2
In the demand analysis a linearized effective secant stiffness method is used, not an equal displacement
method as described in MTD 20-1.
3
The example calculation shown at the end of this BDA provides an illustration of the demand and capacity
models for a three-column bent (See Figures 3 and 4).

LRFD
In the case of rotational demand exceeding capacity, full degradation of the hinge model's moment
resisting capacity may be assumed. The joint is not a seismic resisting element and the Engineer
should adjust the global demand model accordingly.
Example Calculation:
The example calculation shown below illustrates the joint shear modeling procedure for a transverse
bent column frame. The column-cap joint is moment-connected while the column-footing joint is
pinned. The frame's details are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
The goal of this procedure is to determine whether a beam-column joint is capable of sustaining
the rotational demands obtained from an elastic analysis. The rotational capacity of a joint is
calculated based on its classification. If the rotational demand is greater than the capacity, then
the expected degradation in the joint should be placed in the model by assuming the joint is
pinned.
Given:
Expected concrete compressive strength, f 'ce= 5,000 psi
Superstructure depth, Ds = 54 in
Column diameter, Dc = 48 in
Column height = 20 ft
Column nominal moment = 6258 k-ft
Column axial force including the effects of overturning = 1440 k
Effective flexural stiffness E c I eff 6.73 x 108 k-in2
Column overstrength plastic moment, Mo =1.2 x 6258 = 7510 k-ft
Column axial force (including the effect of overturning) equal to 1440 k
Longitudinal column reinforcement: #11 bars, total 32
Transverse column reinforcement: # 5 spiral @ 4 in pitch
Effective flexural stiffness Ec Ieff = 6.73 X 108 k-in2
Concrete cover = 2 in
Column main reinforcement embedment length into the bent cap, l ac = 45 in
Bent cap width, Bcap = 60 in

LRFD
Three Column Bent

Figure 1
Bent Cap Section

Figure 2

LRFD
Dead Load
D cap /2
Joint
( E c , Ieff )mod
Column
Three Column Bent Demand Model

Figure 3
Dead Load
D cap /2
Joint
( MPr , θ PJ )
( E c , I eff )
Column
Three Column Bent Capacity Model

Figure 4

LRFD
Determine the Joint Classification

1) Calculate lateral reinforcement ratio in the joint provided for confinement of the column
longitudinal reinforcement
4 Ab 4 ( 0.31)
rsj1 = = 0.006458 = or 0.65%
Dc sh ( 48" )( 4" )
2) Calculate ρ sj 2 for area of rebar crossing horizontal plane Aph defined by Fig 7.7 of the SDC:
2
44 legs
legs ⎞ ⎛ 0.44
0.44 in
in2 ⎞
Ass = ⎛⎜
A ⎟⎜ ⎟ (13
( sets)) = 22.88
13 sets in22
22.88 in
⎝ set set ⎠ ⎝ legleg ⎠
As 22.88 in2
rsj2 = A =
ph (96 in)(60 in) = 0.003972 or 0.4%
3) Calculate rsj3 for area of rebar crossing vertical plane A pv with length of 2 DC and height
equal to the height of the bent cap:
legs⎞⎞ ⎛⎛ 0.44
⎛⎛ 22 legs in22⎞⎞
0.44 in
A =
Ass11 = ⎜⎜⎝ ⎟⎟⎠ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ((13 sets))==11.44
13 sets in22
11.44 in
set
⎝ set ⎠ ⎝⎝ leg ⎠⎠ leg
leg⎞⎞ ⎛⎛ 0.44
⎛⎛11leg in22⎞⎞
0.44 in
AAss22 == ⎜⎜
⎝⎝ set ⎟⎟ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ (( sets))== 3.96
99 sets in22 Assume #6@12 in
3.96 in
set ⎠⎠ ⎝⎝ legleg ⎠⎠
Total A = A + A = 15.4in 2
scol s1 s2
Ascol 15.40 in2

rsj3 = A =
pv (96 in)(54 in) = 0.002674 or 0.27%
Calculate joint shear reinforcement ratio rsj :
ρ sj = (ρ sj1 + ρ sj 2 + ρ sj 3 ) / 3 = (0.65 + 0.4 + 0.27 ) / 3 = 0.44%
Based on rsj equal to 0.44%, the joint is classified as “Intermediate”. Therefore, the nominal joint
shear strength is equal to 7.5 f ce' = 530 psi.

LRFD
After the joint classification is determined, the engineer should perform the following
steps to determine the displacement capacity of the column joint element:
1) Calculate the over-strength moment capacity of the column in the transverse direction, the
tensile force Tc in the column section, and the joint vertical shear stress demand νjv
col
Tc = The column tensile force defined as M o h , where h is the distance from c.g. of
tensile force to c.g. of compressive force on the section. Alternatively, Tc may be obtained
from the moment-curvature analysis of the cross section
A jv = l ac × Bcap = 45 × 60 = 2700in 2
2544000
vvjvjv == Tcc
T 2544000
= = 942
AAjvjv = 2700 = 942
psipsi
2700
Av = The effective vertical joint area
Bcap = Bent cap width
l ac = Length of column reinforcement embedded into the bent cap
Effective flexural stiffness E c I eff = 6.73 x 108 k-in2.
2) Given a joint classification as defined above, compare the joint vertical shear stress demand
νjv to the nominal joint shear strength νn .
Since νjv > νn , the rigid joint superstructure model should be modified as follows:
use a modified effective stiffness ( E c I eff ) mod in the demand model shown in Figure 3.
where (E c I eff )mod
(
= 0.85(E c I eff )(vn / v jv ) = 0.85(E c I ff ) 530
942
) = 0.48E I
c eff
3) Determine the displacement capacity of the column/joint element as follows:

The displacement capacity of the column/joint element of the bridge is considered to be the
sum of the elastic displacement capacity and the plastic displacement capacity. The elastic
displacement capacity includes the column elastic displacement in addition to any elastic
displacement attributed to superstructure or foundation flexibility. The column's plastic
displacement capacity is based on a plastic hinge rotation model θpj that is a function of the
joint classification and is calculated as follows:
θ pj = θyc + 0.015
where
θyc is the column yield rotation calculated based on a rigid joint model using effective section
properties.

LRFD
3 Ec I eff 3 6.73 108

K 146 kip / in
L3
3
20 12
7510 k - ft
Fy = = 376 kips
20 ft
Fy 376
ΔYcol = = =2.6 in
K 146
2.6 in
θyc = = 0.011 rad
20 × 12 in
Therefore, θpj = θyc + 0.015 = 0.011 + 0.015 = 0.026 radians
Calculate the reduced moment capacity of hinge model, Mpr ,
530 psi
Mpr = 7510 k-ft x = 4225 k-ft
942 psi
The plastic rotation capacity of the joint, θpj and the flexural plastic strength of the as-built joint
Mpr , are incorporated in the “push over” capacity model in order to determine the overall
displacement capacity Δc (See Figure 4).
The revised displacement demand ΔD is then compared to Δc and the revised joint properties are
applied to the global demand model.
References:
1. California Department of Transportation, Seismic Design Criteria

Caltrans Aids PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caltrans Aids PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS • DECEMBER 2008

LRFD SUPERSEDES BRIDGE DESIGN AIDS SECTION 14 DATED AUGUST 2008

14-1 HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD

(s) Deformation (x 1 x2)

Linear Analytical Model

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.1

14-1.2 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.3

14-1.4 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Hinge Restrainer Design Procedure

Note: if μd is not known use a default value of 4.0

For adjacent frames 1 and 2 determine:

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.5

Displacement Reduction Factor, Rd v.s. µ

14-1.6 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.7

14-1.8 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.9

14-1.10 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Tg = 44HH //⎡⎣⎡⎣VVss ((GG//GG ))⎤⎦⎤⎦

2.5 H = 100 feet

Note: G/Gmax varies inversely to ground motion

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.11

Ratio of the more flexible frame period to the

14-1.12 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.13

5) Calculate the required restrainer stiffness Kr using Eq. (1.1)

14-1.14 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Calculate Krmin = Fy2 / Dy

7) Calculate the number of restrainers, N

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.15

Restrainer Design for Multi-Span Simply Supported

14-1.16 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Joint Modeling Procedure Illustration:

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.17

14-1.18 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Example Calculation for In-Span Hinges:

CIP/PS Box Girder

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.19

K 1 = 1,089 kips/in K 2 = 248 kips/in

For all frame, determine: mi , Ki , Ti , Di (ARS curves), Δyi , μd , and Fyi

T1 = 2 π 27.61/1089 =1 sec T2 = 2 π 25.11/248 = 2 sec

Apply Eq. (1.3) calculate Kieff

T1eff = 2π (27.61/303.3) = 1.9 sec

14-1.20 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

Apply Eq. (1.5) in Figure 3:

Apply Eq. (1.6) in Figure 3:

Apply Eq. (1.7):

For adjacent frames 1 and 2 determine β and ρ12

8(0 .19 ) 2 (1 + 2 .42 ) ( 2.42 )

INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES 14-1.21

Calculate the unrestrained relative hinge displacement, Deq0

(14.3 ) + (21.4 ) - 2 (0.134)(14.3)(21.4) =24.1 in

Apply Eq. (1.11):

Apply Eq. (1.12):

Apply Eq. (1.13), Figure 6:

Apply Eq. (1.14), Figure 6:

Calculate T2 / Tg and T1 / T2:

14-1.22 INTERMEDIATE HINGE RESTRAINER DESIGN METHOD FOR MULTI-FRAME BRIDGES

5) Determine the required restrainer stiffness, Kr

6) Check if Krmin requirement applies

Calculate Krmin = Fy2 / Dy