See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/358040370

Project: Planning and design of new highway bridge

Technical Report · December 2021

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34536.60162

CITATIONS READS

0 3,457

2 authors, including:

Aminul Islam
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
21 PUBLICATIONS 55 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Aminul Islam on 22 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Project: Planning and design of new
highway bridge

Md. Aminul Islam

Graduate Student
Dept. of Civil and Env. Engg., Auburn University
Email: [email protected]
December 01, 2021
Summary

In this project, a highway bridge is designed on a pre-selected site. A planning is done on

the site regarding the drainage of water as well as the type of bridge e.g. steel (composite
or non-composite), prestressed concrete. Then the bridge is designed according to the
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification.

i
Contents

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

1 General Planning 1
1.1 Selection of Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Hydraulic and Hydrological Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Waterway Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.3 Environmental Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Bride Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Bride Superstructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3.1 Deck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3.2 Steel Girder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3.3 Prestressed Concrete Girder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Selection of Structural Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Material Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2 AASHTO LRFD Design Loads 6

2.1 Dead Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 Live Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.1 Truck Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.2 Tandem Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.3 Lane Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.4 Dynamic Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Application of Design Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3 Preliminary Design 9
3.1 Superstructure Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 Substructure Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4 Final Design 13
4.1 Superstructure Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1.1 Deck Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1.2 Girder Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2 Substructure Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.1 Abutment design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.2 Wing-Wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2.3 Bearing Pad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.2.4 Pier and Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

ii
5 Quantities and Cost Estimation 22
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
List of Figures

1.1 Elevation of the bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Plan view of the bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Different components of the bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2.1 Design Truck Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2 Design Tandem Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Design Lane Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.4 Design Truck and Lane Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.5 DesignTandem and Lane Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3.1 Cross section of the valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3.2 Approach section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Cross section of barrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.4 Cross section of barrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.5 Component of substructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.6 Cross section of pier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.7 Load acting on the abutment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4.1 Reinforcement detailing in deck slab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4.2 Position of Truck and Lane Load for maximum moment . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3 Position of Tandem and Lane Load for maximum moment . . . . . . . . 15
4.4 Position of Truck Load for maximum shear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.5 Position of Tandem Load for maximum shear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.6 Position of Lane Load for maximum shear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.7 Position of wheel load for lever rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.8 Loading to determine deflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.9 Loading acting on the base of abutment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.10 Reinforcement details in abutment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.11 Wing wall cross section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.12 Wing wall cross section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.13 Pier cross section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.14 Pile layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

iv
List of Tables

2.1 Dynamic Load Allowance, IM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.1 Bridge type based on span length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

4.1 Multiple prsence factor, m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4.2 Moment and shear of interior girder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.3 Moment and shear of exterior girder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5.1 Cost of materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

v
Chapter 1

General Planning

1.1 Selection of Location

The loacation and alignment of the bridge will be such that it will satisfy the on-bridge and
under-bridge requirement. The bridge must be designed for the alignment of the roadway.
Cost effective design, construciton, material availability, inspection and maintenance will
be influenced by the location of the bridges. It must also provide minimum level of traffic
services and it must minimize adverse highway impacts. It is better to avoid skewness and
if possible, change the road direction to avoid skewness. Any possible future variations in
the alignment or width of the bridge or waterways must be considerd. Terrain, hydrologic
and hydraulical consideration, environmental impact, clearance are the main features and
must be keep in mind during the selection of the location. Details of these factors are
discussed in the follwoing subsections.

1.1.1 Hydraulic and Hydrological Consideration

For the bridges over the waterway or in a floodplain, hydrological problem must be
considered. The following infomation or data must be collected during the planning state
(Nowak, 2021a).

ˆ Stream cross section

ˆ Data of past floods (historical floods, max. flood record)

ˆ Flood frequency curve for the site

ˆ High water level with date

ˆ Factors affecting water stages

ˆ Distribution of flow and velocity for the flood discharge

ˆ Scour depth estimation at pier and abutment

ˆ Bridge length and selected discharges

ˆ Information on the ice, debris, and channel stability

1
1.1.2 Waterway Consideration
Amount of water flow under the bridge must be calculated. The area required for the
flow of water of a certain catchment area must be calculated. Talbot’s formula is used
in this report to calculate the area required under the bridge to discharge the water of a
certain catchment area. Talbot’s formula,

A = CM 3/4 (1.1)
Where, A is the area required under the bridge f t2 , C is the coefficient due to character
of area drained including shape and M is the area drained in acres.

Based on the given data, A = 1283.423f t2

1.1.3 Environmental Consideration

During the preliminary stages of the bridge design, any environmental considerations
related to the bridge must be considered. For example, the impact of the bridge on the
local community, ecology, wildlife habitats, historic site etc. The Engineer must satisfy
the local law, state and federal laws.

1.2 Bride Geometry

The bridge must also be considered the geometric requirements and all clearance. There
are two type of clearance requirements e.g. vertical clearance and horizontal clearance. In
this project, navigational clearances (both vertical and horizontal) will not be considered.
In practical application, it is recommended to consider the vertical and horizontal clearance.
Vertical requirements are established to prevent the damage to the superstrucute. A
horizontal clearance of 28 ft including two (2) ft edge distance from the curb to the traffic
lane. This will prevent the collisions from the errant vehicles. The roadway width of
the bridge will be the widht of the approach roadways, including shoulders, curbs and
sidewalks. Two lane approach road is considered in this project. Figure 1.1 and Figure
1.2 shows the elevation and plan view of the bridge respectively.

Figure 1.1: Elevation of the bridge

2
 Figure 1.2: Plan view of the bridge

I am planning ot use girder bridge so, the length of the bridge is chosen less than 100
ft based on the long section of the vally which is shown in Figure 1.1. The details of
the span length selection is shown in section 3.1. Total length of the vally is 360 ft. 2
ft clearence is provided at the bottom of the girder. Total area of drainage (2040 f t2 )
which is much more than the calculated drainage area.

1.3 Bride Superstructure

Superstructure consists of deck slab and girder. This will carry the live load (truck load)
and transmit the load to the substructre. The details of the deck slab and girder type is
discussed in the follwing subsections.

1.3.1 Deck
The deck is considered as the roadway surface for bridge. It is supported by the girders
(deep beams) that is supported by the piers. The whole arrangement is supported by
deep foundation. Figure 1.3 shows the cross scetion of the bridge identifying deck and
girders.

1.3.2 Steel Girder

Girder type bridge (girder bridge) is very common because of its simplicity. Various kind
of material (e.g. wood, steel, concrete) and form (e.g. box girder, I section, T section,
truss) are used for the girder. There are two type of bridge girde made by steel, one is
composite and another one is non-composite. The pros and cons of steel girder bridges
are summazied below.

Pros of steel girder bridge:

ˆ High performance steel e.g. special type of steel (weathering steel) for bridge having
greater toughness and weldability

ˆ Lower weight which means lower erection costs

3
 ˆ Less depth than a concrete girder for the same span which means greater vertical
clearance

ˆ Lighter weight of the steel will allow for lighter foundation than for the concrete

ˆ Faster and easy construction

ˆ Reuseable and recycleable, and minimizes negative environmental impact and hence
sustainable

Figure 1.3: Different components of the bridge (Nowak, 2021c)

Cons of steel girder bridge:

ˆ Steel is susceptible to corrosion

ˆ Long term durability problem due to temperature variation

ˆ Local failure of the members (flange and web)

Non-Composite girder: In non-composite girder, the loads are resisted by the steel
and concrete. Concrete slab is treated as a dead load and does not have contribution in
the moment carrying capacity. Analysis is also simple in this case but local buckling and
stability of the compression part is the issue. Compactness of compression flange and
web, as well as lateral stability check must be done.

Composite girder: In comosite girder bridge, slab and its supporting girders are
integrally connected and deflect as a single unit. This action will increase the strength
and stiffness of the member, and decreases the deflection. Shear connector is used to
connect the slab with the girder. Shear connector is fixed in the steel girder and then
embedded in the concrete slab.

4
1.3.3 Prestressed Concrete Girder
Prestressed concrete girders are the leading choice across the world. There are may
reasons behind this which is summarized below:

ˆ Concrete in tension zone does not suffer cracking and hence resists applied load

ˆ Concrete deterioration is declined because the concrete is crakc free

ˆ Have lonngest service life and durable

ˆ Less construction time (in case of precast)

ˆ Increate ultimate load carrying capacity

ˆ Allow longer span beam construction

ˆ Less maintenance require

There are also disadvantages of prestressed concrete which are:

ˆ Require high-quality dense concrete of high strength

ˆ It requires high tensile strength steel

ˆ Prestressing process requires complicated tensioning equipment and anchoring devices

ˆ Construciton requires perfect supervision at all stages of construction and skilled

labor

1.4 Selection of Structural Type

For my bridge design, I have choosen non-composite steel girder. There are many reasons
to chose this type of girder. The calculation is much more easier. So, there is less chance
to mistake. Steel is also reuseable and recycleable but corrosion and local failure of the
member is also need to be care.

1.5 Material Selection

Concrerte and steel are the main material for the any kind of civil constructioin. Concrete
compressive strength is assumed as 4000psi and steel yield strength as 60ksi. The 50ksi
yield strength steel section will be used for the girder bolt.

5
Chapter 2

AASHTO LRFD Design Loads

2.1 Dead Load

AASHTO-LRFD specifications utilizes specific load types. This load type include dead
loads (DL), live loads (LL), wind loads, friction forces, breaking forces. Dead loads include
all loads that are relatively constant over time. In the AASHTO-LRFD bridge design,
there are primarily two type of dead load (M. A. Grubb & Nickas, 2015):

(i) Dead load of the structural and non-structural component designated as DC

(ii) Dead load from the wearing surfaces designated as DW

2.2 Live Load

The design vehicular load currently used by the AASHTO is designated as HL-93 (HL
stands for highway loading and 93 is the year of 1993 in which the loading was adopted).
This loading is based on the static live load applied on the bridge. The HL-93 loading
consist of three different load types (M. A. Grubb & Nickas, 2015) which are discussed
in the follwoing subsections.

2.2.1 Truck Load

The design truck load has three axles. The first axles has a loading of 8 kips and the
second and third have a axles loading of 32 kips. The axle spacing between the first and
second is 14 feet whereas the spacing between the second and third axles varies between
14 ft to 30 ft. The design truck load is illustrated in the Figure 2.1.

2.2.2 Tandem Load

The design tandem load has two axles and each axles have a loading of 25 kips. The axle
spacing for the design tandem is 4 feet. Figure 2.2 illustrated the design tandem load.

2.2.3 Lane Load

The design lane load has a uniformly distributed load of 0.64 kips/ft, and the design
lane load is applied only on the portion of the bridge that adds to the force effect being
investigated. Figure 2.3 shows the design lane load.

6
 Figure 2.1: Design Truck Load

Figure 2.2: Design Tandem Load

2.2.4 Dynamic Load

The design truck or tandem load is considered as a static load on the bridge surface
but in reality, the live load is not static load. Because of the roughness of the roadway
surface, most of the truck react with oscilations and a dynamic load must be considered
with the live load. In AASHTO-LRFD, dynamic load allowance is defined as a increase
in the applied static load effects. AASHTO assigns values to dynamic load allowance as
presented in Table 2.1. Dynamic allowance is not applied to design lane load.

Table 2.1: Dynamic Load Allowance, IM

Limit State Dynamic Load
Allowance, IM
Deck Joint: All Limit States 75%
All other Components: Fatigue 15%
and Fracture Limit State
All other Components: All 33%
other Limit States

7
 Figure 2.3: Design Lane Load

2.3 Application of Design Load

The HL-93 design loading is taken maximum of the following two conditions along the
longitudional direction:

(i) The effect of design truck load and design lane load (Figure 2.4)

(ii) The effect of design tandem load and design lane load (Figure 2.5)

Figure 2.4: Design Truck and Lane Load

Figure 2.5: Design Tandem and Lane Load

8
Chapter 3

Preliminary Design

3.1 Superstructure Design

The preliminary design of the superstructure and substructure is done based on the cross
section of the valley, contour plot, soil data and approach section provided. Figure 3.1
shows the cross section of the valley along with long section of the proposed bridge. If
we do not allow navigation (only 2 feet vertical clearance at the bottom of the girder),
total length of the bridge will 360 feet. This provide a clear opening of 2080 f t2 which
is much greater than calculated area for drainage (Section 1.1.2). Considering the bridge
type (girder bridge) based on the span length which is provided in the Table 3.1 (Nowak,
2021d), our span length will be ≤ 100 ft. Four equal span length, 90 ft each, is taken in
this preliminary design state.

Figure 3.1: Cross section of the valley

Table 3.1: Bridge type based on span length

Short span, 20 - 100 ft Medium span, 100-300 ft Long span, >300ft
Slab bridges Box girder Cable stayed
Girder bridges Arch Suspension

9
The width of the structure is calculated based on the approach section provided (Figure
3.2). Total width of the road is 38 ft. Cross section of barrier is assumed which is depicted
in Figure 3.3. So, total width of the bridge will be 32 ft (curb to curb distance) which
is also illustrated in Figure 1.2. Total five girder will be used as a supporting element of
the deck. So, center to center spacing of the girder will be 8 ft. The cross section of the
bridge is shown in Figure 3.4.

Figure 3.2: Approach section

Deck thickness is calculated based on the AASHTO recommendations for continuous

spans (continuous over more than two supports). Calculated deck thickness is 8.2500
which is calculated using equation 3.1. A 200 asphalt layer is assumed on the slab and a
1/200 by 160 slope is assumed for drainage purpose. Details calculation of deck design using
strip method is shown in the Appendix A. For simply supported spans, deck thickness
will be 10% more.
(
S+10
30
inf t
ts ≥ 00
(3.1)
7.5
where, ts is the deck thickness and S is the girder spacing in ft.

Steel girder will be used and the reasons is mentioned in Chapter 1. For the preliminary
design, a W section with 200 lb/f t unit weight is taken. Details calculation procedure of
the girder (interior and exterior) design is shown in Section 4.1.2 and details calculation
is showin in Appendix A. AASHTO LRFT design procedure and HL-93 loading is used
in the girder design.

Figure 3.3: Cross section of barrier

10
 Figure 3.4: Cross section of barrier

3.2 Substructure Design

The components of the substructure and preliminary estimated dimension is shown in

Figure 3.5. The cross section of the pier and preliminary estimated dimension is shown
in Figure 3.6. Load acting on the closed abutment ( (Nowak, 2021b)) is shown in the
Figure 3.7 and details calculation and final dimension of the abutment is illustrated in
Section 4.2.

Figure 3.5: Component of substructure

Details of the abutment and wing wall design, and load carrying capacity of the pile will
be shown in this report (Chapter 4). The design of the foundation (pile and pile cap)
and pier is not part of this report. Only vertical load on the abutment will be considered
and horizontal loads e.g. braking, creep, shringake, temperatuer will be ignored. Live
load and dead load surcharge will also be ignored. To calculated earth pressure, given
soil profile will be assumed from the top of the abutment.

11
 Figure 3.6: Cross section of pier

Figure 3.7: Load acting on the abutment

12
Chapter 4

Final Design

4.1 Superstructure Design

Elastic analysis will be performed. So, superposition is allowed. The span is simply
supported. The resistance factors for the strength limit is:

For Flexure, φ = 1.0

For Shear, φ = 1.0

For all other limit state, φ = 1.0

Load modifier: ηi = ηD ηR ηI

Where, for strength limit test and all other test, ηD (factor related to ductility) = 1.0,
ηR (factor related to redundancy) = 1.0, ηI (factor related to operational importance) =
1.0. For strength limit state, conventional design, conventional level of redundancy, and
typical bridge is assumed.

Load combinations for the strength limit state:

U = η[1.25DC + 1.50DW + 1.75(LL + IM )]

Load combinations for the service I limit state:

U = 1.0(DC + DW ) + 1.0(LL + IM )]

Load combinations for the fracture limit state:

U = 0.75(LL + IM )]

4.1.1 Deck Design

Deck slab is designed according to strip method recommended by AASHTO-LRFD
design manual. The details of the design is shown in Appendix A. Deck thickness is
calculated according to AASHTO recommended formula and it is 8.25”. 2” asphalt
wearing surface is also taken into consideration. The moments are calculated using the
moment coefficient mentioned in the example problem. All moments are compared with
the cracking moment and any of the moments should not be less than cracking moment.
Distribution reinforcement is taken as a percentage of primary reinforcement as prescribed

13
 Table 4.1: Multiple prsence factor, m
Number of Lanes m
1 1.2
2 1.0
3 0.85
>3 0.65

by AASHTO-LRFD method. Service level check is also conducted. Reinforcement

detailing of deck is shown in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: Reinforcement detailing in deck slab

4.1.2 Girder Design

Interior Girder Design
Multiple presence factor is presented in Table 4.1. Distribution factor for the interior
girder for the moment:

 Kg 0.1
S 0.4 S 0.3


One design lane loaded, DFm = 0.06 + 14 L 12.0Lt3s

S 0.6 S 0.2


 Kg 0.1
Two or more design lane loaded, DFm = 0.075 + 9.5 L 12.0Lt3 s

Kg
For the priliminary design, 12.0Lt3 term is taken as 1.0. Another method of taking the
s
 0.1
Kg
value of 12.0Lt3 from AASHTO-LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.1-2. The value is related to the
s
structural type which is mentioned in Table 4.6.2.2.1-1 and for our case structure type is a.

Distribution factor for the interior beam for shear:

S


One design lane loaded, DFv = 0.36 + 25

S S 2



Two or more design lane loaded, DFv = 0.2 + 12
− 35

14
Moment and shear for interior girder
Moments and shears are calculated due to truck or tandem load (maximum load effect
will be taken) and lane load. The dynamic load factor of 33% is applied only to the truck
or tandem load. The position of the truck or tadem load and lane load for maximum
moment is shown in Figure 4.2 and 4.3.

Figure 4.2: Position of Truck and Lane Load for maximum moment

336
α= 144+0.64L

9 α


Mtruck = P 8
L + L
(21 − 4.5α) − 17.5

Mlane = 0.08 (L2 − 4α2 )

where, P = 16 kip (wheel load)

100
β= 100+0.64L

L β


Mtandem = 50 4
L + L
(2 − β) − 1

Figure 4.3: Position of Tandem and Lane Load for maximum moment

MLL+IM = DFm (1.33Mtruck orMtandem + Mlane )

15
 Figure 4.4: Position of Truck Load for maximum shear

42


Vtruck = P 4.5 − L

Figure 4.5: Position of Tandem Load for maximum shear

2


Vtandem = 50 1 − L

Figure 4.6: Position of Lane Load for maximum shear

0.64L
Vlane = 2

VLL+IM = DFv (1.33Vtruck orVtandem + Vlane )

Details calculation of distribution factors, moments and shear of interior girder is shown
in Appendix A. Summary of the moment and shear are shown in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Moment and shear of interior girder

Load Type Moment (kip-ft) Shear (kip)
DC 1280.81 56.93
DW 189.34 8.42
LL+IM 1558.16 92.85

16
Exterior Girder Design
Distribution factor for the exterior beam for the moment:

Lever rule will be applied for the distrubution factor of one design lane loaded. Figure
4.7 shows the concept of lever rule.

Figure 4.7: Position of wheel load for lever rule

P
S+ P2 (S−6)
One design lane loaded, R = 2
S

R
DFm = 1.2 ∗ 32
, where 1.2 is the multiple presence factor for one design lane loaded.

Two or more design lane loaded, DFm = e ∗ DFinterior

de


where, e = 0.77 + 9.1
and de = 2f eet

Distribution factor for exterior girder for shear:

One design lane loaded, use lever rule (same as moment distribution factor we got).

R
DFv = 1.2 ∗ 32

Two or more design lane loaded, DFv = e ∗ DFinterior

de


where, e = 0.6 + 10

Moment and shear for exterior girder

MLL+IM = DFm (1.33Mtruck orMtandem + Mlane )

VLL+IM = DFv (1.33Vtruck orVtandem + Vlane )

17
Details calculation of distribution factors, moments and shear of exterior girder is shown
in Appendix A. Summary of the moment and shear are shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Moment and shear of exterior girder

Load Type Moment (kip-ft) Shear (kip)
DC 1176.53 52.29
DW 94.16 4.19
LL+IM 1546 74.51

Moment and shear of exterior girder should not be less than interior girder. So, interior
girder is designed and same girder is used for the exterior girder. W 33x387 section is
chosen which have moment capacity of 6500 k-ft. So, the section is adequate to take the
demand. The member property check, compactness check of web and compression flange
are done and the section is compact. The bracing of compression is calculated and it is
15 ft. Shear capacity of this section is greater than the demand. Deflection is calculated
superposing the two lane load (truck load, lane load) including the dynamic impact factor
and multiple presence factor which is shown in Figure 4.8. In terms of deflection, the W
33x387 section is adequate.

Figure 4.8: Loading to determine deflection

4.2 Substructure Design

Substructure composed of abutments, wing-wall, bearing, pier and foundation. The

details of these component is discussed in the following subsections.

4.2.1 Abutment design

The loading on the abutment is shown in Figure 3.7 (Nowak, 2021b). Overturning, sliding
and bearing capacity of the abutment is checked and the selected abutment is adequate.
Details calculation is shown in Appendix A. The reinforcement in the arm is calculated
based on the overturning moment. A uniform distribution of pressure is assumed at the
base of the base slab and designed based on the moment at the critical section which is
shown in Figure 4.9. Primary and Temperature and shrinkage reinforcement is provided
on both face (Figure 4.10).

18
 Figure 4.9: Loading acting on the base of abutment

Figure 4.10: Reinforcement details in abutment

4.2.2 Wing-Wall
The details calculation of the wing-wall is shown in the Appendix A. The cross section
and reinforcement details is shown in the FIgure 4.11 and 4.12 respectively.

Figure 4.11: Wing wall cross section

19
 Figure 4.12: Wing wall cross section

4.2.3 Bearing Pad

Elastomeric bearing is choosen with a thickness of 3.5”. The details calculation and check
for compression stress, compression deflection due to LL, compression deflection due to
DL+LL are shown in Appendix A.

4.2.4 Pier and Foundation

Dimension of the pier is estimated which is shown in Figure ??. Details design of the
pier is not done. The pile foundation is chosen and number of piles is calculated which
is summarize in Appendix A. The layout of the piles is shown in Figure ??.

Figure 4.13: Pier cross section

20
Figure 4.14: Pile layout

21
Chapter 5

Quantities and Cost Estimation

Total cost of the bridge is calculated and it is shown in Table 5.1. Cost per square ft of
the deck is 99 dollar.

Table 5.1: Cost of materials

Deck Volume/Area Unit Cost ($) per unit Total cost ($)
Asphalt 13680.00 ft2 5.27 72048.00
Concrete 9405.00 ft3 12.33 115963.65
Curb 360.00 ft 2.12 763.20
Side walk 1080.00 ft2 7.44 8035.20
Reinf. Steel 52.00 kip 714.30 37143.60
Expansion Joint 190.00 ft 8.23 1563.70
Forms 10000.00 ft2 6.70 67000.00
Shoring 360.00 ft 1.52 547.20
Girder
Structural steel 696.60 kip 803.60 559787.76
Retaining wall
Ret. Walls 116.28 ft2 27.42 3188.40
Reinf. Steel 12.80 kip 714.30 9144.47
Forms 2300.00 ft2 6.70 15410.00
Shoring 152.00 ft 1.52 231.04
WingWall Volume/Area Unit Cost ($) per unit Total cost ($)
WingWall 1000.00 ft3 12.33 12330.00
Reinf. Steel 1.84 kip 714.30 1314.31
Forms 1000.00 ft2 6.70 6700.00
Shoring 160.00 ft 1.52 243.20
Pier
Concrete 6717.00 ft3 12.33 82820.61
Reinf. Steel 100.00 kip 714.00 71400.00
Bearing pad 52.08 ft2 276.00 14372.70
Bolt 50.00 6.75 337.50
Site work
Excavation etc 9448 ft3 1.45 13699.60
sheet piling 3060 ft2 15.3 46818.00
Sum: 1140862
Cost per sq ft of bridge deck: 99

22
 References

M. A. Grubb, C. D. W., K. E. Wilson, & Nickas, W. N. (2015). Load and Resistance

Factor Design (LRFD) For Highway Bridge Superstructures - Reference Manual.
Report No.: FHWA-NHI-15-047 , Chapter 03 , 1-9.
Nowak, A. (2021a). General Consideration. Lecture Slide, 04 , 19-20.
Nowak, A. (2021b). Substructure. Lecture Slide, 07 , 87.
Nowak, A. (2021c). Type. Lecture Slide, 03 , 40.
Nowak, A. (2021d). Type. Lecture Slide, 03 , 62.

23

View publication stats