BCA COMPOSITE CONCRETE BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURES A. Kumar Be, Phd, CEng, MICE, MiStructEAcknowledgements Jam most grateful to the Prestressed Concrete Association (PCA) of Great Britain who gave permission to reproduce the information in their leaflet, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Beams, in this publication. lam also grateful to the various member companies of the PCA and their representatives for providing some testing facilities and further useful information about the production of precast bridge beams. Tam most grateful to Mr E. M. Jones of Cleveland County Council (formerly of Staffordshire County Council) and MrJ. F. White of Staffordshire County Council for reading the manuscript and making constructive criticisms. |also wish to thank many former colleagues at the Cement and Concrete Association* who have contributed indirectly through their discussions with me. | am particularly indebted to Dr Tom Harrison, Mr Dick Tiller and Dr Bill Cranston for their constant interest and encouragement for this work. My thanks are also due to many bridge engineers with whom I have had discussions during the Association's training courses and seminars. Finally | would like to thank Mr A, E, Brooks for his editorial contribution to the text. Arvind Kumar * Now called the Kumar Associates British Cement Association Beaconsfield 46.505 Published by First published 1988 sh Cement Association ISBN 0 7210 1361 9 Wexham Springs, Slough SL3 6PL Price Group F Telephone Fulmer (028 16) 2727 © British Cement Association 1988 Fax (028 16) 2251 Telex 848352 Al advice or information from the British Cement Association is intended for those who will evaluate the significance and limitations ofits contents and take responsibility for Its use and application. No liability (including that for negligence) for ‘any loss resulting from such advice or information is accepted, Readers should note that all BCA publications are subject. to revision from time to time and should therefore ensure that they are in possession of the latest version.COMPOSITE CONCRETE BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURES A. Kumar 2¢, pnp, cEng, MICE, Mistucte Contents Introduction ‘Standard beam sections . Basic types and dimensions Transport Techniques of deflecting and debonding tendons Deflecting Debonding Manufacture Variations from the standard Hybrid beams Secondary reinforcement Links Torsion Web holes Further detailing considerations Preliminary superstructure design . Typical inverted T-beam superstructures Typical M-beam superstructures Typical U-beam superstructures Typical box. beam superstructures Typical -beam superstuctures Edge beams . Skew-bridge superstructures Continuity Continuity with simply supported span-by-span constru = Embedment of precast beams Bearings ‘Age of beams Hogging moments at the support ‘Sagging moments at the support ‘Alternative construction sequence ‘Span/depth ratios Continuity with overhanging intermediate diaphragms . : Basic structural arrangement Design of transverse diaphragms Construction sequence Span/depth ratios Road alignment Bridge articulation Continuity with tied deck construction 33 Continuity with structurally continuous top slab 34 Continuity with in situ concrete spans 35 Future trends os Design cee eS) Philosophy of design . .... 105538 Probabilistic basis of material strengths and pattial safety factors . Probabilistic basis of loads Load combinations Partial safety factors forloads . Analysis of structure Elastic analysis and redistribution of moments 37 Methods of analysis, eocduooee Basis ofstiffness evaluation ..............39 Composite section properties ..... 2.39 Grillage idealization . 39 Criteria for structural adequacy 241 Serviceability limit state 00.2.0... 2... AT Cracking... eee eeee ee eeeee ences 4 Prestressed concrete : 42 Ultimate limit state ee Verification : GeansosonossaG Otherconsiderations 6.0... see. eee 2 Duetility . 42 42. Partial prestressing cece B The overstress approach of past practice.» - 43 Improvement introduced inthe new Code ...... 43 Inconsistency with reinforced concrete design . . . 43 ‘Swiss experience .... 44 Calibration studies vee ad Advantages . 44 References) eee. eee seer 44Introduction During the last 25 years of expansion of the motorway and trunk road network in the UK the composite bridge superstructure utilizing precast pre-tensioned bridge beams has become a widely accepted alternative to in situ deck construction. The reasons for this are not difficult to discern: they emanate from shape stan- dardization, resulting in five basic types of beam suitable for a variety of bridges up to 35 m span. Such standardization has made possible the adoption of efficient structural forms combined with materials and workmanship of consistently high quality. Repetitive use of forms in the precasting yard, a considerable reduction in site formwork and falsework and rapid speed of construction, all lead to economies resulting in very competitive tender prices for such construc: tion. ‘There are now several thousand bridges of this type in this country. They have performed satisfactorily in carrying the traffic, have exhibited high durability characteristics and required minimal expenditure for maintenance and repair. Despite certain standardized aspects, such constructions offer considerable flexi bility and scope for innovation. This is evidenced by a number of recent applications, some of which are briefly described here. Aesthetically, experience indicates that this stan. dardization of bridge superstructure elements has not limited the scope for variety in the more visible facets of the bridge, such as the finishes on the elevation, the copings, and the shape, form and treatments of bridge piers, abutments and wing-walls. The appropriate parts of the limit state Code of Practice BS 5400 : Part 2: 1978") on Loadings and Part 4 : 1984 on the Design of concrete bridges (hereinafter termed the Code) have now been adopted by the Department of Transport for all concrete bridge design from 1985. The purpose of this handbook is to replace the Association's earlier Table 1 Section properties of inverted T beams Publications®® on this subject, to introduce the limit- state concepts of the new bridge Code and to promote the incorporation of continuity in the superstructure of multi-span composite bridges. Continuity in such bridges offers advantages over conventional simply supported span construction, particularly in the dura- bility of the joint region. A separate publication” illus- trates numerically the design procedures for satisfying the requirements of the Code in a simply supported bridge superstructure and a two-span superstructure providing continuity under live loads. The opportunity has also been taken to incorporate recent develop- ments in this field, and to include comments on sen- sible detailing and construction. The Prestressed Concrete Association (PCA) of Great Britain has re- cently published standardized section and reinforce- ment details for the three most popular types of beam®, extracts from which are reproduced in various Parts of this publication to help the bridge designer achieve economic designs. There are a number of other precast concrete sec- tions, principally the ‘double T’ sections, which are often used for privately owned roads, footbridges and soon, These may offer advantages over the PCA standard sections®, particularly if live loads are rela: tively ight and headroom isnot a constraint. Details of such sections should be obtained from the manufac- turers as they are not discussed further in this publica- tion, Standard beam sections Basic types and dimensions Five standard bridge beams have been developed, to cover a wide variety of applications. Although there is a recognized range of spans for which each standard Height of centroid Section moduli above Second (mm? x 105) bottom moment of Depth Area Y, area Top fibre Bottom fibre Self-welght* Section (mm) (mm?) (mm) (mm*x 10) 4 (kiN/m) 1 380 98 000 140 1.24 5.18 8.89 2.31 T2 420 106 200 160 1.76 6.76 10.98 2.50 3 535 114275, 196 324 957 16.55 2.69 14 575 122.475 220 423 1192 19.23, 2.89 a) 615 130 675, 244 531 14300-2181 3.08 16 655 138 875, 267 650 1673 24.36 3.27 7 695, 147 075, 289 7.79 1920 26.91 3.47 18 735 155 160 312 9:19 21.73 29.46 3.66 19 75 163 360, 334 1.72 2431 32.10 3.85 Tio 815 171560 356 1239 2697 34.82 4.05 “Design self-weight per unit volume has been taken as 23.6 kN/mp. 2