HA and HB Type Loading

(Code: BS 5400 Pt.2 & BD 37)

History

The first standard vehicle load for highway bridges in the UK was introduced in 1922.
British Standards introduced a traffic live load requirement in BS 153 Part 3 in 1923,
which was later revised in 1925 and 1937. The Type HA uniformly distibuted loading
was introduced in 1945 and the concept of a Type HA and HB load was included in the
1954 edition of BS 153: Part 3A. In 1961 the HB load was specified in terms of units
and varied depending on the class of road, with 45 units required for Motorways and
Trunk Roads and 37.5 units for class i and class ii roads. A requirement for all public
roads to be designed for at least 30 units of HB was introduced in 1973.

HA Loading

BD 37/01 Appendix A of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges says that Type HA
loading is the normal design loading for Great Britain and adequately covers the
effects of all permitted normal vehicles other than those used for abnormal indivisible
loads. Normal vehicles are governed by the Road Vehicles (Authorised Weight)
Regulations 1998, referred to as the AW Vehicles and cover vehicles up to 44 tonne
gross vehicle weight. Loads from these AW vehicles are represented by a Uniformly
Distributed Load and a Knife Edge Load. The loading has been enhanced to cover:
i) impact load (caused when wheels 'bounce' i.e. when striking potholes or uneven
expansion joints).
ii) overloading
iii) Lateral bunching (more than one vehicle occupying the width of a lane).
The magnitude of the Uniformly Distributed Load is dependent on the loaded length as
determined from the influence line for the member under consideration. For simply
supported single span decks this usually relates to the span of the deck.

HA UDL+KEL loading on one notional lane.

The UDL (W kN/m) is multiplied by a lane factor β to obtain the value to be applied to
each notional lane. If the UDL is required in kN/m 2 then W will need to be divided by
the notional lane width bL.
The knife edge load (KEL) is also multiplied by the lane factor β. The KEL may be
positioned anywhere along the loaded length in order to obtain the worst effect in the
member being considered.
A single wheel load of 100 kN also needs to be considered as an alternative to the UDL
and KEL as part of the HA loading design. The wheel load can produce more severe
effects than the UDL+KEL on short span members.

HB Loading

BD 37/01 Appendix A of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges says that Type HB
loading requirements derive from the nature of exceptional industrial loads (e.g.
electrical transformers, generators, pressure vessels, machine presses, etc.) likely to
use the roads in the area.
The vehicle load is represented by a four axled vehicle with four wheels equally
spaced on each axle. The load on each axle is defined by a number of units which is
dependant on the class of road and is specified in BD 37/01 Chapter 4 as follows:
Motorways and trunk roads require 45 units, Principal roads require 37.5 units and
other public roads require 30 units. One unit of HB is equal to 10kN per axle. There are
five HB vehicles to check although most vehicles can be discounted by inspection. The
spacing between the inner two axles of the vehicle has five diffent values which
produces the range of HB vehicle to consider.

1 unit of HB loading.

Only one HB vehicle is considered to load any one superstructure. The vehicle is
positioned within one notional lane or straddles two notional lanes in order to obtain
the worst effect on the member. HA loading is placed in any remaing lane not
occupied by the HB vehicle. Also, if the deck is long enough, the HA UDL only is placed
in the lanes occupied by the HB vehicle, but is omitted from the length of lane within
25m from the front and back of the HB vehicle.

Design

The design procedure is to analyse the bridge for HA and HB load effects applying the
appropriate load factors. The member is then deisgned for the worst effects of HA or
HB loading.

HA & HB Loading Example

BS 5400 Part 2 : 2006 Clause 6.2 Type HA Loading
Problem:
How do you work out the HA loading and bending moment for a bridge deck ?

Example:

Carriageway = 6m wide
Deck span = 34m (centre to centre of bearings for a simply supported single span)

Design for a metre width of deck :

Cl 3.2.9.3.1.

Number of notional lanes = 2

Notional lane width = 6.0/2 = 3.0m
Cl 6.2.1.

Loaded length = 34m

W = 336(1/L)0.67 kN/m (per notional lane)
W = 31.6 kN/m (per notional lane)
Cl 6.2.2.

Knife Edge Load = 120 kN (per notional lane)

Cl 6.4.1.1. Table 14.

α2 = 0.0137[bL(40-L)+3.65(L-20)]
α2 = 0.0137[3.0(40-34.0)+3.65(34.0-20)] = 0.947
Note: For loaded lengths less than 20m the load is proportioned to a standard lane
width of 3.65m, i.e. 0.274bL = bL/3.65.
For a metre width of deck :
W = (31.6 x 0.947)/3.0 = 10.0 kN/m
KEL = (120 x 0.947)/3.0 = 37.88 kN

Maximum mid span Bending Moment with KEL at mid span:

M = (10.0 x 342)/8 + (37.88 x 34)/4 = 1767 kNm
Cl 6.2.7.

γfL = 1.20 (Serviceability limit state - combination 1)

γfL = 1.50 (Ultimate limit state - combination 1)

Design HA moment for a metre width of deck :

Msls = 1767 x 1.2 = 2120 kNm
Mult = 1767 x 1.5 = 2650 kNm

Note: Use of γf3

BS 5400 Pt.3 & Pt.5 - γf3 is used with the design strength so Mult = 2650 kNm.
BS 5400 Pt.4 - γf3 is used with the load effect so Mult = 1.1 x 2650 = 2915 kNm.

Clause 6.3 Type HB Loading

Assume the road over the bridge is not a Principal Road then we need to check for
30 units type HB loading (see BD 37/01 Chapter 4).

Cl 6.3.1

Nominal load per axle = 30units x 10kN = 300kN

The maximum bending moment will be achieved by using the shortest HB vehicle
i.e. with 6m spacing (see BS 5400-2:2006 Fig 12).
The maximum moment for a simply supported span occurs under the inner axle
when the vehicle is positioned such that the mid span bisects the distance
between the centroid of the load and the nearest axle.
With a 34m span and the 6m HB vehicle with equal axle loads, the inner axle is
placed at 1.5m from the mid span.

RL = 300(10.7+12.5+18.5+20.3)/34 = 547 kN
RR = 4x300-547 = 653kN
Moment at X = 547x15.5 - 300x1.8 = 7939kNm
Cl 6.4.2

The HB vehicle occupies one lane with HA load in the adjacent lane. Assume for
the example that the HB load is carried by a standard lane width of 3.65m.

Hence the moment per metre width of deck = 7939/3.65 = 2175kNm

Cl 6.3.4.

γfL = 1.10 (Serviceability limit state - combination 1)

γfL = 1.30 (Ultimate limit state - combination 1)
Design HB moment for a metre width of deck :
Msls = 1.1 x 2175 = 2393 kN/m (compared to 2120 for HA load)
Mult = 1.3 x 2175 = 2828 kN/m (compared to 2650 for HA load)
Hence in this case HB load effects would govern although a grillage or finite
element type distribution would reduce the HB moment considerably.
 Load Models & Groups to UK National Annex
(Code: BS EN 1991-2:2003 + UK NA.)
Index
1. Load Model 1

2. Load Model 2

3. Load Model 3

4. Load Model 4

5. Group gr1a

6. Group gr1b

7. Group gr2

8. Group gr3

9. Group gr4

10. Group gr5

11. Group gr6

1. Load Model 1 (LM1) - Clause 4.3.2 + NA.2.12

A double-axle load (called the Tandem System) is applied in each traffic lane in
conjunction with a uniformly distributed load (called the UDL System).

The UK use a 300kN axle load with a uniformly distributed load of 5.5kN/m 2. If there is
more than one lane of traffic then the axle load is reduced in adjacent lanes (200kN in
lane 2, 100kN in lane 3 and 0kN in other lanes).
This loading covers most of the effects of the traffic of lorries and cars.

2. Load Model 2 (LM2) - Clause 4.3.3 + NA.2.15

A single-axle load is applied anywhere on the carriageway.
The UK use a 400kN axle load which includes a factor to allow for dynamic
amplification effects. When the action is applied within 6m of an expansion joint then
an additional dynamic amplification factor is applied. This load model is more
predominant on short span members up to about 7m; and includes members such as
deck slabs spanning between main beams. Effects under one 200kN wheel load should
also be considered.

3. Load Model 3 (LM3) - Clause 4.3.4 + NA.2.16

If the structure is to be designed for abnormal loads then vehicles from Load Model 3
will need to be considered.
The UK National Annex describes two groups of vehicles, SV and SOV vehicles.

i. SV model vehicles (SV80, SV100 and SV196) are in accordance with the Special
Types General Order (STGO) Regulations
Highways England's Document BD100/16
(http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk) recommend that the levels of SV
loading are as follows:

a. Motorways & Trunk Roads = SV80, SV100, SV196

b. Principal Roads = SV80, SV100

c. Other Public Roads = SV80

 These represent vehicles with nominal axle weights not exceeding 16.5 tonnes.
SV80 has a maximum gross weight of 80 tonnes with a maximum basic axle
load of 12.5 tonnes.
SV100 has a maximum gross weight of 100 tonnes with a maximum basic axle
load of 16.5 tonnes.
SV196 has a maximum gross weight of 196 tonnes with a maximum basic axle
load of 16.5 tonnes.

ii. SOV model vehicles (SOV250, SOV350, SOV450 and SOV600) in accordance with
the Special Order (SO) Regulations.

Vehicle

Max. total weight of trailers

Trailer Bogie - 1

Trailer Bogie - 2

SOV-250

250 tonnes
 6 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

5 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

SOV-350

350 tonnes

8 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

8 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

SOV-450

450 tonnes

10 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

10 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

SOV-600

600 tonnes

14 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

13 axles x 225kN @ 1.5m

Each axle of the SV and SOV vehicles has to be multiplied by a Dynamic Amplification
Factor (DAF) which varies from 1.2 to 1.07 for axles loads from 100kN to 225kN
respectively.

Only one SV or SOV vehicle is applied to the structure. Load Model 1 is applied in
combination with the SV or SOV vehicle loading. The "frequent" value of LM1 is used
and positioned in adjacent lanes and within 5m of the front and rear axles of the SV or
SOV vehicle.

4. Load Model 4 (LM4) - Clause 4.3.5

A uniformly distributed load of 5kN/m2 used to represent crowd loading and may be
applied to both road bridges and footway/cycleway bridges. Unless specified otherwise
the ULD load may be reduced for footway/cycleway bridges with loaded lengths
greater than 10m. The UK NA also applies this reduction to crowd loading on road
bridges with loaded lengths greater than 30m.

GROUPS OF TRAFFIC LOADS (UK National Annex Table NA.3)

Load Models 1 to 4 may be combined to form 'Groups' of traffic loads. The Groups are
referenced gr1a, gr1b, gr2, gr3, gr4, gr5 and gr6 and the load models used in each
group are listed in Table N.A.3 of the UK NA (this overwrites Eurocode EN1991-2 Table
4.4a).

5. Group gr1a
Load Model 1 is combined with footway loading. The footway loading is reduced to
3kN/m2 (0.6 x 5kN/m2).

The diagram above illustrates Group gr1a for a single span two lane carriageway with
two footways. The Tandem Systems can be positioned anywhere along the length of
the traffic lane so as to produce the worst load effect. The position shown above will
produce the worst effect for the mid-span bending moment. If the worst shear in the
deck is required then the Tandem Systems will need to be positioned adjacent to the
support.

When analysing for global effects the tandem systems are positioned in the centre of
the notional lanes (0.5m from each edge of a 3.0m lane).

When analysing for local effects then the two tandem systems are positioned so that
the minimum distance between them is not less than 0.5m [see Fig. 4.2b) and clause
4.3.2(5) of EN 1991-2:2003].
6. Group gr1b
This consists of the 400kN axle shown in Load Model 2 and is not combined with any
other load model.

7. Group gr2
The 'Frequent' value of Load Model 1 is combined with Braking and Acceleration
Forces (Clause 4.4.1) and Centrifugal (Clause 4.4.2) and Transverse Forces (Clause
NA.2.20). The Frequent value of Load Model 1 is obtained by multiplying axle loads
and UDL by 0.75 (Ψ1 = 0.75 from Table NA.A2.1 in NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005).

The diagram above illustrates Group gr2 for a single 10m span deck with a two lane
carriageway. Although the axle loads and UDL values have been shown as reduced by
Ψ1 it is usually more convenient to apply the 0.75 factor to the load effects rather than
the loads. The longitudinal force can be reversed; similarly for the transverse force.
From Clause 4.4.1 the longitudinal force = 0.6 x 1 x 2 x 300 + 0.1 x 1.0 x 9.0 x 3.0 x
10.0 = 387kN.
Note: UK NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003 Table NA.1 contains a note which says α q1 = 1.0.
From Clause NA.2.20 the transverse braking force = 50% of the longitudinal braking
force = 194kN.
The deck shown above is straight, therefore there will be no centrifugal force.
Group gr2 will generally be required for design of the bearings and substructure, and
will not usually have a significant effect on the design of the deck.

8. Group gr3
This consists of Load Model 4 and is applied to the footways only; it is not combined
with any other load model. The UDL may be applied to one or both of the footways so
as to achieve the worst load effect.

9. Group gr4
This consists of Load Model 4 and is applied to the footways, carriageways and central
reserve; it is not combined with any other load model.
10. Group gr5
The 'Frequent' value of Load Model 1 (LM1) is combined with Load Model 3 (LM3). The
Frequent value of LM1 is obtained by multiplying axle loads and UDL by 0.75 (Ψ 1 =
0.75 from Table NA.A2.1 in NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005). Tandem Systems (TS1
and TS2 shown below) can be interchanged if a worse load effect is achieved. Loading
from LM1 is omitted from the Lane, or Lanes, occupied by LM3 for a distance within 5
metres of the front and rear axles.

The diagram above illustrates Group gr5 for a single span two lane carriageway with
two footways. The SV80 vehicle has been shown to represent the Special Vehicle for
LM3 for the purpose of this example. Although the axle loads and UDL values for LM1
have been shown as reduced by Ψ1 it is usually more convenient to apply the 0.75
factor to the load effects rather than the loads.

11. Group gr6

Load Model 3 (LM3) is combined with Braking and Acceleration Forces (Clause
NA.2.18.1) and Centrifugal (Clause NA.2.18.2) and Transverse Forces (Clause NA.2.20).

The diagram above illustrates Group gr6 for a single span two lane carriageway with
two footways.
Vehicle SV80 has been shown to represent the Special Vehicle for LM3 for the purpose
of this example.
From Clause NA.2.18.1 the braking force for each axle = Q lk,S Hence total force = 6 x
0.5 x 130 = 390kN.
From Clause NA.2.18.1 the acceleration force = 10% x 6 x 130 = 78kN < 390kN Hence
longitudinal force = 390kN.
From Clause NA.2.20 the transverse braking force = 50% of the longitudinal braking
force = 0.5 x 390 = 195kN.
The deck shown above is straight, therefore there will be no centrifugal force.
Group gr5 will generally be required for design of the bearings and substructure, and
will not usually have a significant effect on the design of the deck.
Eurocode Traffic Loading Idealisation for Grillage Analysis of Bridge Decks
Index
LM1 (TS + UDL) | LM3 (SV100) | Footway Loading | Accidental Vehicle Load on Footway |
Collision Forces on Vehicle Restraint System

Using a prestressed Y4 beam with reinforced concrete deck slab as the deck example
as shown in Fig.1; the deck having a 10° skew, a span of 20m and carrying a 7.3m
carriageway with two 2m footpaths.

EN 1991-2:2003 Cl.4.2.3
7.3m carriageway has 2No. 3m notional lanes with remaining area width of 1.3m UK
NA Cl.2.16 The deck shall carry STGO vehicle SV100 UK NA Cl.2.30.1 Assume bridge
requires high containment metal parapets : Class C collision loading needs to be
considered.
LM1 (TS +UDL)
The UDL can be applied to each longitudinal member as a uniformly distributed load,
the intensity of the load is proportional to the width of the lane directly above the
longitudinal member, for example:

EN 1991-2:2003 Cl 4.3.2(1)(b) UDL = αqqk kN/m2 of notional lane.

EN 1991-2:2003 Table 4.2 qk (kN/m2) = 9 (lane 1) & 2,5 (all other lanes and remaining
area).
UK NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003 Table NA.1 αq = 0,61 (lane 1) & 2,2 (all other lanes and
remaining area).
UDL/m width = 9 x 0,61 = 5,5 kN/m (lane 1)
& 2,5 x 2,2 = 5,5 kN/m (all other lanes and remaining area).
UDL on member 2 = 0.15 x 5,5 = 0,83kN/m
UDL on members 3 & 4 = 1,0 x 5,5 = 5,5kN/m
UDL on member 5 = 0,85 x 5,5 = 4,68kN/m

UDL applied to each longitudinal grillage member to represent UDL in lane 1.

Alternatively, if the program has the facility of applying patch loads then a patch width
equal to the lane width and length equal to the loaded length may be applied. The
patch load is usually positioned by the centroid of the patch area in relation to the grid
co-ordinates.

A line beam analysis is useful for determining the critical positions of the TS system
before carrying out the grillage analysis. This can reduce the number of load cases
required; particularly if the deck has several continuous spans. The tandem system
(TS) can be applied as point loads to the grillage to represent the wheel loads. As
loads are initially proportioned to the adjacent members and joints then the worst
effects will always be achieved by positioning one of the axles directly above a
transverse member. If the deck is skewed then the postion of the TS to give the worst
effect will be different to a square deck and two or three positions may need to be
checked to find the critical case.

It is therefore useful to separate the UDL and TS systems into different load cases to
avoid repeating the calculation for the effects of the UDL. The UDL and the various
positions of the TS can be added together in different combination cases in the grillage
program.
Similar load cases are produced for the UDL and TS systems in the second lane.
Group gr5 also contains the UDL and TS loadings in combination with the SV or SOV
vehicles. All these variations in load cases can be developed in the combination cases
in the grillage program.
LM3 (SV100 vehicle)
The SV100 vehicle consists of six axles with two wheels on each axle and is applied to
the grillage as a series of point loads.
Each axle load is multiplied by a Dynamic Amplification Factor of 1.12 and the load
shared equally between the wheels. Figure NA.1 of the UK NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003
allows the wheel loads to be applied as patch loads however there is little to be gained
in a global analysis by applying this refinement and point loads will be a suitable
representation for the wheel loads.

Each axle is to be multiplied by the Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF = 1.12 for a
basic axle load of 165kN)

There are three variations of the inner axle spacing for the SV vehicle that can be
applied to the deck. A line beam analysis incorporating moving point loads will indicate
the positions of the critical SV vehicle to achieve the design moments and shears. An
Excel spread sheet using moment distribution to carry out a line beam analysis of
standard moving vehicles can be purchased by clicking here.

The result of the line beam analysis shows that the maximum sagging moment occurs
at 10.3m from the end of the deck with the leading axle at 12.7m from the end.

As the loading is symmetrical and both ends of the single span deck are simply
supported then the position of maximum moment can be measured from either end of
the deck.

The transverse position of the SV vehicle for the worst effect will depend on which
member is being considered, however it is usual to design all internal beams for the
critical loading condition for vehicles on the carriageway. The SV vehicle can encroach
up to 500mm into the adjacent lane before any reduction is made to the associated
Load Model 1 loading in the adjacent lane. The edge beams will require special
consideration to support the additional loading from the cantilever.

The diagram shows one of the wheels on the critical axle positioned over the nearest
transverse member at 10.0m from the support.

This would produce the critical loading condition for the bending moment on the
internal beam for an orthoganal deck, however other positions need to be considered
to take account of the skew effects.
As a check on the data, the total of the reactions should equal the total load of the
vehicle = 6 x 165 x 1.12 = 1108.8kN. Also the line beam analysis gives a total sagging
moment of 4551kNm; so as there are approximately four longitudinal members

4551 / 4 ≅ 1140kNm in the longitudinal member.

supporting the vehicle, then the moment from the grillage should be in the order of

Footway Load
EN 1991-2:2003 Clause 5.3.2.1(1) states that the pedestrian live load shall be taken as
5.0 kN/m2, but reduced to 0.6 x 5.0 = 3.0kN/m2 when used in combination with load
system LM1 for load group gr1a. The UDL can be applied to members below the
footways in a similar manner to the UDL described in Section 1. above. However, as
there is no barrier between the carriageway and footway, Clause 4.7.3.1(2) requires
that the footway members are designed for one Accidental Axle Load (200kN) which is
generally more onerous than the pedestrian live load.
Accidental Axle Load
Accidental Axle Loading consists of a two wheeled, 200kN axle and is applied to the
grillage as two point loads. The wheel loads may be applied as patch loads (400mm x
400mm) however there is little to be gained in a global analysis by applying this
refinement and point loads will be a suitable representation for the wheel loads.
Similarly as with the TS system and SV vehicle a line beam analysis incorporating
moving point loads will indicate the critical positions of the accidental axle load to
achieve the worst moments and shears. An Excel spread sheet using moment
distribution to carry out a line beam analysis of standard moving vehicles can be
downloaded by clicking here. The Abnormal Load facility may be used in the line beam
proforma to input the accidental axle load.

There are two orientations shown for the accidental axle load, however as the beams
are closely spaced then the condition with both wheels sitting on one beam will
produce the worst load effects for that beam and the second option need not be
considered for this example.

The result of the line beam analysis shows that the maximum sagging moment occurs
at 10.5m from the end of the deck under the leading wheel.

The axle will be positioned over the parapet beam as shown for Load case 1 to obtain
the critical loading condition for bending in this member. This may also be the critical
position for the design moment in the main edge beam, however the axle needs to be
positioned as shown for Load case 2 to confirm the critical case.

Other positions on adjacent transverse members need to be considered to take

account of the skew effects.
As a check on the data, the total of the reactions should equal the total load of the
axle = 200kN. Also the line beam analysis gives a total moment of 902.5kNm; so as
there will be some distribution to adjacent members then the moment from the
grillage should be in the order of (but less than) 900kNm in the longitudinal member.
Parapet Collision Load
Loads due to collision with parapets need to be considered in a grillage analysis in
accordance with NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003 clause NA.2.30.1 and Table NA.6.

For very high containment metal parapets Class C loads are to be applied to the top of
the parapet over a 3.0m length.
The point loads need to be transferred down to the datum level of the grillage, which
is at the centroid of the deck slab, and distributed over a 3.0m length.
The high containment parapet is 1.5m high above the back of footpath level. The
centroid of the deck slab is about 0.3m below the back of footpath level, consequently
the two horizontal loads will induce moments on the grillage with a lever arm of 1.8m.

The 400kN horizontal load will produce a moment of 720kNm at the centre-line of the
deck. This moment is distributed along a 3.0m length giving 240kNm/m moment to be
applied to the grillage.

The horizontal load of 133kN/m will be taken into the deck which, as it is very stiff
axially compared to bending, will distribute evenly between all longitudinal members
and therefore have negligible effect in the grillage.

The 175kN vertical load can be idealised as a uniformly distributed load 58kN/m along
a 3.0m length of the parapet beam.
The 100kN horizontal load acts in the plane of the parapet and there is an argument
that the load will be resisted by the framing effect of the parapet rails with the posts
and will therefore be transferred to the deck as a series of horizontal and vertical loads
at the base of the posts.

As the loads are to be applied over a 3.0m length then the moment of 100kN x (1.5 +
0.3) = 180kNm can be represented by a vertical couple of 60kN x 3.0m.
The horizontal load of 100kN will be taken into the deck which, as it is very stiff axially
compared to bending, will distribute evenly between all longitudinal members and
therefore have negligible effect in the grillage.

The three loads can be combined in one load case.

The 3.0m length can be positioned anywhere along the parapet beam and positions
are generally chosen to coincide with the critical positions for the accidental wheel
load.
The parapet collision load case acts together with 0.75 times the loading from LM1 and
the Accidental Axle Load. It is convenient to obtain the effects from each load case
separately rather than lump all the loads together in one load case. A combination
case can then be used to sum the effects at the member you are considering.

Load Models 1 & 3 Example

BS EN 1991-2:2003 & UK National Annex
Clause 4.3.2 Load Model 1 & Clause 4.3.4 Load Model 3
Problem:

How do you work out the mid span bending moment by hand for a bridge deck
under LM1 and LM3 loading for Groups gr1a and gr5 ?

Example:

Carriageway = 6m wide
Deck span = 34m (centre to centre of bearings for a simply supported single span)

Design for a metre width of deck :

Cl 4.2.3. Table 4.1
Carriageway width 6m ≤ w
Number of notional lanes n1 = Int(w/3) = 2
Notional lane width = 3m
Cl 4.2.4.(4)

Analyse for worst condition under Lane 1

Clause 4.3.2 Load Model 1

Cl 4.3.2 Table 4.2.

Each axle load of TS = αQ1Q1k = 1,0 x 300 = 300kN

The maximum moment for a simply supported span occurs under the axle when
the vehicle is positioned such that the mid span bisects the distance between the
centroid of the load and the nearest axle.
With a 34m span and the axles spaced 1,2m apart, the leading axle is placed at
0,3m from the mid span.

Right hand reaction = 300 x (17,3 + 16,1) / 34,0 = 294,7 kN

Moment under leading axle = 294,7 x 16,7 = 4921,5 kNm
Moment on 1m width of the lane = 4921,5/3,0 = 1640 kNm
Cl 4.3.2 Table 4.2.

UDL system = αq1q1k = αq1 x 9 kN/m2

Cl NA2.12 Table NA.1

αq1 = 0,61
Hence UDL system = 0,61 x 9 = 5.5 kN/m2

Maximum mid span moment on 1m width of lane = 5,5 x 34 2/8 = 795 kNm

Although the positions of the maximum moment due to the TS system and the UDL
system are in different positions it will give a suitable approximation for the total
maximum bending moment to add the two effects together.

Total maximum moment due to LM1 = 1640 + 795 = 2435 kNm per metre width
of lane.
(This is confirmed by a line beam analysis which gives a value of 2435,1 kNm at
17,205m from the left hand support.

Clause 4.3.4 Load Model 3 Loading

The UK National Annex Clause NA.2.16 and Figures NA.1 & NA.2 describe
configurations for Special Vehicles for LM3 loading.
For this example we shall check for the load effects of the SV100 Vehicle.
All the axles will fit on the deck with any of the three options for the centre axle
spacing (1.2, 5.0 or 9.0m). The worst mid span moment will be produced with the
highest concentration of load at the centre of the deck therefore, by inspection,
the SV100 vehicle with a centre axle spacing of 1.2m will produce the worst mid
span moment.

The maximum moment for a simply supported span occurs under the inner axle
when the vehicle is positioned such that the mid span bisects the distance
between the centroid of the load and the nearest axle.
With a 34m span and the SV100 vehicle with equal axle loads, the inner axle is
placed at 0,3m from the mid span.

RR = 165(19,7+18,5+17,3+16,1+14,9+13,7)/34 = 486,3 kN
RL = 6x165-486.3 = 503,73kN
Moment at position of max moment = 486,3x16,7 - 165(1,2+2,4) = 7527kNm
UK NA Clause 2.16.3

A Dynamic Amplification Factor needs to be applied to the Basic Axle Loads.

From Table NA2 for a 165kN axle load the DAF = 1.12
Hence the moment on 1m width of the lane = 1.12 x 7527/3,0 = 2810 kNm

UK NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003 Table NA3 Groups of Traffic Loads

Group gr1a
Table NA 3 shows that the characteristic values of Load System LM1 is considered
to act with 0,6 x characteristic value of the Footway Loading.
As we are considering a 1m width of deck then the footway load will not affect the
magnitude of the load effects in Lane 1. In practice there will be some effect from
the footway loading on deck members under Lane 1 due to the transverse
distribution through the deck slab. There will also be a reduction in the magnitude
of the load effects from the LM1 System due to the same distribution effects. There
will be a net reduction in the load effects in Lane 1 if distribution effects are
considered therefore the unit strip method will tend to overestimate the magnitude
of the load effects.
Hence the Characteristic Value of the mid span moment for a 1m width of deck
from Traffic Group gr1a = 2435 kNm.

Group gr5
Table NA 3 shows that the Frequent value of Load System LM1 is considered to act
with the Characteristic values of Load System LM3.
NA to BS EN 1991-2:2003 Figure NA.4 shows how the TS and UDL systems of LM1
are to be arranged. The Lane numbers are interchangeable and the TS 300kN
axles (for Lane 1) may be positioned adjacent to the SV vehicle instead of in the
same lane.
As we are considering a unit strip then the 300kN axles will produce the worst
effect in the same lane as the SV vehicle. However if transverse distribution is
considered (as for a grillage analysis) then the 300kN axles may have a more
onerous effect next to the SV vehicle in the adjacent lane.

RR due to UDL = 5,5(8,72/2 + 9,3 x 29,35)/34 = 50,3kN per metre width

RL due to UDL = 5,5(8,7 + 9,3) - 50,3 = 48,7kN per metre width
RR due to TS = 300(24,7 + 25,9)/34 = 446,5kN per 3 metre width
RL due to TS = 2 x 300 - 446,5 = 153,5kN per 3 metre width

Moment at mid span due to UDL = 50,3 x 17 - 5,5 x 9,3 x 12,35 = 223,4kNm per
metre width
Moment at mid span due to TS = 153,5 x 17 = 2609,5kNm per 3 metre width
" " " " " " " ≡ 2609,5/3 = 869,8kNm per metre width
Total mid span moment due to LM1 = 223,4 + 869,8 = 1093,2kNm per metre
width of deck.

The Frequent value of LM1 is obtained by multiplying by ψ 1

NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 Table NA.A2.1 gives the frequent value factor
ψ1 = 0,75 for both the TS and UDL components.

Hence the combined effect of LM1 and LM3 for the mid span moment for a 1m
width of deck from Traffic Group gr5 = 2810 + 0,75 x 1093,2 = 3630 kNm.
Note: Although the position of the maximum moment for LM3 is not exactly at mid
span the accuracy of the combined result with LM1 will be sufficient for a metre
strip calculation.

Assuming that traffic loading is the leading action Q k,1 (which is usually the case)
then:
SLS Characteristic combination moments are:
gr1a = 2435 kNm
gr5 moment = 3630 kNm

ULS moments are:

gr1a moment = 2435 x 1.35 = 3287 kNm
gr5 moment = 3630 x 1.35 = 4900 kNm

Hence the critical traffic loading for the mid span moment is from the Group gr5
combination.
Although it is not usual to use the unit strip method to design deck members it is a
very useful exercise to obtain an approximate value of the load effects to enable a
check to be carried out on the results of a grillage or finite element type
distribution program.

Combinations of Actions to UK National Annex

(Code: BS EN 1991-2:2003 + UK NA.)

Index
1. Introduction

2. Serviceability Limit State

3. Ultimate Limit State

1. Introduction
For the benefit of those who are making the transition from BS5400 to the Eurocodes

i. dead loads become 'permanent actions' (Characteristic value = 'Gk')

ii. imposed loads, snow loads, thermal loads and wind loads are collectively called
'variable actions' (Characteristic value = 'Qk')

iii. load combinations become 'combinations of actions'.

 In its simplest form a combination is Gk + Qk
For prestressed structures the effect of the prestressing action has been classified as a
permanent action and identified separately by the variable P.
Thus the combination becomes Gk + P + Qk
The permanent actions Gk can comprise of several elements (weight of the beams and
deck slab, weight of the parapets, weight of the road surfacing, weight of the footway
construction, differential settlement, concrete shrinkage, etc.). Each of these elements
are referenced by a suffix and given the variable letter ' j'.
Similarly the variable actions Qk can comprise of several elements (traffic loads,
temperature effects, wind loads, snow loads, etc). Each of these elements are
referenced by a suffix and given the variable letter ' i'.
The combination of all these different actions is ΣG k,j + P + ΣQk,i

The chance that the maximum design loading for each of the variable loads will occur
all at the same time would be extremely unlikely during the 120 year design life of a
bridge. Consequently the Eurocode sets out a series of reduction factors to enable
realistic combinations to be used for design. Unless stated otherwise the variable
action which produces the largest design load effect is identified (for road bridges this
is usually one of the groups of traffic loads) and given the ' i' suffix 1 (i.e. Qk,1). This is
called the 'leading variable action'. The other representative values of variable
actions are reduced by a factor (ψ) and are defined as follows:

i. The combination value (ψ0 Qk) of an action is intended to take account of the
reduced probability of the simultaneous occurence of two or more variable
actions.

ii. The frequent value (ψ1 Qk) is such that it should be exceeded for only a short
period of time.

iii. The quasi-permanent value (ψ2 Qk) may be exceeded for a considerable
period of time.

Tables NA.A2.1 and NA.A2.2 of the NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 list values of ψ 0,

ψ1 and ψ2 for each type of variable action.

A summary of the design situations and the respective representative values which
can be used at ultimate and serviceability limit states are shown in the table below:

Combination Factors for Appropriate Design Situations

Ultimate Limit State (ULS)

Combination Value Combination Value Combination Value

Design Situation
ψ0 ψ1 ψ2

Persistent & Transient Non- leading — —

Accidental — Leading Leading & non- leading

 Seismic — — All variable actions

Serviceability Limit State (SLS)

Characteristic Non- leading — —

Frequent — Leading Leading & non- leading

Quasi- permanent — — All variable actions

2. Serviceability Limit State

Serviceability limit states are concerned with the functioning of the structure under
normal use, the comfort of people, and the appearance of the structure. Serviceability
limit states may be reversible (e.g. deflection) or irreversible (e.g. yield).
At SLS there are in principle three combinations of actions to consider:

 Characteristic ~ used for checking that no inelastic response occurs (allowable

stresses are not exceeded)

 Frequent ~ used if deflection needs to be checked (this includes evaluation of

dynamic response to ensure that users do not experience discomfort). Also used
for decompression and crack width checks in prestressed concrete members.

 Quasi-permanent ~ this relates to long-term effects and is used for checking

crack widths in concrete.

3. Ultimate Limit State

Ultimate limit states are concerned with the safety of people and the structure.
Examples of ultimate limit states include loss of equilibrium, excessive deformation,
rupture, loss of stability, transformation of the structure into a mechanism, and
fatigue.
Four Ultimate Limit States are considered in BS EN 1990, namely EQU, STR, GEO and
FAT which are concerned with equilibrium, strength, ground and fatigue.
For persistant and transient design situations under the STR limit state, the Eurocode
defines three possible combinations which are given in expressions (6.10), (6.10a) and
(6.10b). However NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1 Clause NA.2.3.7.1 A2.3.1(1) says that for
the design of bridges the combination of actions should be based on equation 6.10.

............ (6:10)

The leading variable action Qk,1 is multiplied by its appropriate safety factor γ Q,1 .
Other variable actions Qk,i , for i> 1, which may act simultaneously with the leading
variable action Qk,1, are taken into account as accompanying variable actions and are
represented by their combination value, i.e. their characteristic value reduced by the
relevant combination factor Ψ0, and are multiplied by the appropriate safety factor
γQ to obtain the design values.

The appropriate safety factors γQ are obtained from NA to BS EN 1990:2002+A1 Tables

NA.A2.4(A to C) & 5 as follows:

 Static equilibrium (EQU) should be verified using Table NA.A2.4(A).

 Design of structural members (STR) not involving geotechnical actions should be

verified using Table NA.A2.4(B).

 Design of structural members (STR) involving geotechnical actions and the

resistance of the ground (abutments, wing walls, piers etc.) should be verified
using Tables NA.A2.4(B) & NA.A2.4(C) using Approach 1.

 γ = 1.0 for the design values of actions given in Table NA.A2.5