Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
AASHTO LRFD
RM Bridge V8i
June 2013
RM Bridge
Composite Bridge- Steel Design AASHTO LRFD
Copyright
This document is integral part of the program package RM Bridge. Duplication and dissemination is only allowed with explicit permission of Bentley Systems or authorised agents.
2012, Bentley Systems, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Contents
Contents
1
Introduction .....................................................................................................................1-1
1.1
Background ..............................................................................................................1-1
1.2
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.5
2.6
2.7
Materials ................................................................................................................2-11
3.2
3.2.1
Dead Load..........................................................................................................3-14
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.3
General...................................................................................................................5-23
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.2
5.2.1
Bentley Systems
RM Bridge
Contents
II
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.4
5.4.1
General...............................................................................................................5-27
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.4.4
Assessments ........................................................................................................5-34
5.5
5.5.1
Definitions ...........................................................................................................5-34
5.5.2
5.6
5.7
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Introduction
1-1
Introduction
1.1 Background
This training and demonstration example is used to show the application of RmBridge on a
composite bridge with concrete slab and welded I-girders as main girders. This example is
also used as a verification example for the RM Bridge functionality for steel design in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-2
Structural Data
The bridge is a continuous road bridge with 3 spans and 2 welded I-shaped main girders. The
roadway has 2 traffic lanes with 3.5 m width, and lateral strips of 2 m on each side.
12.0 m
7.0 m
2.5 m
0.307 m
0.109 m
2.8 m
1.0 m
1.2 m
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-3
The longitudinal overhang at begin and end of the bridge is assumed 0.8 m.
The model has been prepared with the wizard functionality of RM Bridge, which allows for an
easy and straightforward definition of the structure. However, model preparation could also
be done directly in the standard RM Bridge GUI.
In plan the structure is straight and abutments and piers are orthogonal to the longitudinal direction of the superstructure. The piers are drop cap piers with bearings under each main girder of the superstructure.
Default pier dimensions of the wizard have been used without consideration of actual feasibility, as the focus of this example is just on superstructure design and not on substructure design.
Longitudinal fixation is assumed at the left abutment, bearings over the piers and the right
abutment are assumed free to move in longitudinal direction.
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-4
sion point. It depends on the distance of such a point from the regular subdivision points
whether a new point is inserted or the nearest regular point is moved into this position.
Note that the program does not check the actual change of a cross-section parameter, but just
whether there is a constraint point in the variation diagram. I.e. the user may enforce the program to create a subdivision point at a certain position by assigning a Variation to one parameter (e.g. the web width) and specifying the value in this position no matter whether the value
before or behind this point is the same.
Note also that the program does not automatically create additional subdivision points at positions of cross-frames, bracings or stiffeners. Those are always eccentrically connected to the
nearest subdivision point on the main girder. If the user wants to have subdivision points at
the positions of cross-frames, he must place at this position a variation constraint point as explained above.
In our example we have in the first and last span a cross-frame distance of 7.5 m which is 1/8
of the the span length. I.e. cross-frame positions automatically coincide with regular subdivistion points. However, in the center span we have cross-frame distances of 8.0 m (1/10 of the
span length). Therefore, in order to have subdivision points in these positions, we defined
respective variation constraint points in the variation of the web thickness (see variation
tw_S02 in the wizard). As a consequence, we have in the center span 30 elements in longitudinal direction instead of 24.
Table 2-1: Numbering scheme
Item
Node numbers (MG1)
Element numbers (MG1, steel)
Element numbers (MG1, concrete)
Element numbers (MG1, composite)
Node numbers (MG2)
Element numbers (MG2, steel)
Element numbers (MG1, concrete)
Element numbers (MG1, composite)
Abutments/Piers (left)
Abutments/Piers (right)
Span 1
101-125
10101-10125
20101-20125
101-125
401-425
10401-10425
20401-20425
401-425
80001, 80002
80003-80025
Span 2
201-230
10201-10230
20201-20230
201-230
501-530
10501-15230
20501-20530
501-530
80003-80025
80027-80049
Span3
301-325
10301-10325
20301-20325
301-325
601-625
10601-10625
20601-20625
601-625
80027-80049
80051, 80052
Part/Soil
Elem
Type
Abutment 1
Pier 1
1
2
1
2
Soil
80001
80002
80009
80010
80012
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Bentley Systems
C-X
C-Y
C-Z
C-MX
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
C-MY
1e+008
C-MZ
1e+008
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
Pier 2
Abutment 2
Soil
Soil
80017
80022
Spring
Spring
1
2
Soil
Soil
Soil
80033
80034
80036
80041
80046
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
1
2
80051
80052
Spring
Spring
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
2-5
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008 1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
1e+008
Figure 2-3: Structural steel distribution for Upper and Lower main girder flanges
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-6
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-7
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-8
Figure 2-12: Cross frame arrangement over the first and also third span
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-9
At each cross frame position stiffeners are present on both sides of the main girder.
Element 50001
Element 50091
Element 50191
E lement 50261
Cross frames in span have a spacing of 7.5 m in the first and last span, respectively 8 m in the
central span. The numbering is:
Left Span
Central Span
Right Span
Slab reinforcement:
For both reinforcing steel layers, the transverse reinforcing bars are placed outside the longitudinal reinforcing bars, on the side of the slab free surface.
Transverse reinforcing steel
At mid-span of the slab (between the main steel girders)
o High bond bars with diameter = 20 mm, spacing s = 170 mm in upper layer
o High bond bars with diameter = 25 mm, spacing s = 170 mm in lower layer
In the slab sections supported by the main steel girders
o High bond bars with diameter = 20 mm, spacing s = 170 mm in upper layer
o High bond bars with diameter = 25 mm, spacing s = 170 mm in lower layer
Longitudinal reinforcing steel
In span
o High bond bars with diameter = 16 mm, spacing s = 130 mm in upper and
lower layers (i.e. in total s = 0, 92% of the concrete section)
In intermediate support regions:
o High bond bars with diameter = 20 mm, spacing s = 130 mm in upper layer
o High bond bars with diameter = 16 mm, spacing s = 130 mm in lower layer
o (i.e. in total s = 1, 19% of the concrete section)
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-10
Figure 2-14: Location of mid-span and support sections for longitudinal reinforcement
Figure 2-15: Green lines representing longitudinal reinforcement in w1_deck Cross section
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Structural Data
2-11
Figure 2-16: Composite and shear stud elements with element numbers
The spring elements modelling the shear studs can be input under Structure Elements Element Types and Nodes.
Figure 2-17: Composite and shear stud elements with element numbers
2.7 Materials
Bentley Systems
Reinforcement: AASHTO_LRFD_RGr75
o Yield Strength:
5.171e+05 kN/m2
o Modulus of Elasticity:
200E+06 kN/m2
Concrete: AASHTO_LRFD_C35MPa
o Compressive Strength:
3.497E+04kN/m2
o Modulus of Elasticity:
3.127E+07 kN/m2
Structural AASHTO_LRFD_STGr50
o Yield Strength:
3.447E+05 kN/m2
o Modulus of Elasticity:
2.0000E+08 kN/m2
Austria
RM Bridge
3-12
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
3-13
Figure 3-1: Active structure after installing main and secondary steel members
Stage Slab
Activate concrete elements, shear studs and composite elements
Composite elements: 101-125; 201-230; 301-325; 401-425; 501-530; 601-625
Concrete slab elements: 20101-20125; 20201-20230; 20301-20325; 20401-20425;
20501-20530; 20601-20625
Shear studs: 30101-30125; 30201-30230; 30301-30325; 30401-30425; 3050130530; 30601-30625
Further Stages
All further stages in the schedule dont contain new activations but are just defined to group
the different categories of actions.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
3-14
Self-weight (concrete):
Self-weight (steel):
Additional dead load (asphalt, traffic barriers...):
23.56 kN/m3
76.97 kN/m3
3.0 kN/m2 over roadway surface
3.13 kN/m on each side
Design Vehicular Live load in accordance to AASTHO 3.6.1.2, designated HL-93, and shall
consist of a combination of the design truck or design tandem and design lane load.
Design Truck -specified in figure 3.6.1.2.2-1 of AASHTO code.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
3-15
Design Tandem consists of two 110-kN axles spaced at 1.2 m from centre.
Design lane load is equal to 9.3 kN/m per lane (3.1 kN/m2) and emulates a caravan of trucks.
3.2.3 Braking Load
The braking load is calculated according to AASHTO 3.6.5
The load is considered to be applied uniformly distributed in longitudinal direction along the
roadway axis acting at the finished roadway level and in case of grillage modeling distributed
proportionally to all applicable main girders.
There is no influence line evaluation made for the braking load, but the whole braking load is
applied in one loadcase w1_brake as distributed load over the whole roadway surface. The
total line load intensity is calculated and then distributed to the different girders.
Wind loading is defined in accordance with AASHTO 3.8.1. The LRFD Specification provides wind loads as a function of base design wind velocity, VB equal to 160 km/h.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
3-16
2.4 kN/m2
4.116 m
Base pressure(Pd)
Height(h)
Line load(ll)
Eccentricity(ecc)
2.46 kN/m
1.8 m
0.96 kN/m2
3m
Pd-up
Ecc up
Downward wind
Pd-down
Ecc up
0 kN/m2
3m
TN,neg = Te,min T0
TN,pos = Te,max T0
-24
+15
RM calculates 2 load cases w1_T-const1 (TN,pos) and w1_T-const2 (TN,neg). Both load cases
are based on a load set with unit load 1.0 C, which is factorized by the relevant T value.
Temperature gradient:
According to AASHTO 3.12.3-1 there are four Temperature zones which provide a linear
relationship for the temperature gradient in steel and concrete and allow you to change the
temperature of the top and bottom independly: T1=23o C , T2=6o C, T3 shall be taken 00 C.
Negative temperature gradient factor: -0.3 negative temperatures values shall be obtained by
multiplying the values by this factor.
Vertical temperature gradients in concrete and steel superstrucures
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
A-top
A
A-bootom
3-17
0.1
0.3
0
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
3-18
STRENGTH - Combinations XI to XV
Comb.XI: STRENGTH I
Comb.XII: STRENGTH II
Comb.XIII: STRENGTH III
Comb.XIV: STRENGTH IV
Comb.XV: STRENGTH V
EXTREME - Combinations XVI to XVII
Comb.XVI: EXTREME I (earthquake)
Comb.XVII: EXTREME II (collision by vessels)
Wind and Braking loadings are not mentioned in the Setra documentation, but for completeness of the generated model they are treated here.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Analysis results
4-19
Analysis results
Figures below illustrate a few results of internal forces and moments coming from the global
analysis of the deck in the design example.
All diagrams below are related to the first main girder MG1. Due to the symmetry conditions
there is no difference between the 2 girders and assessing just 1 of them is sufficient.
Bending moments: Figure 4-1 below shows the extreme bending moments of the main girder
due to traffic. The comparison with the Setra results is shown in Figure 4-2. We see that the
minimum moment due to traffic is -15779 kNm compared to (15720+6190=21910) kNm
from the Setra document. In fact traffic load prescription in Eurocode are much higher than in
AASHTO LRFD and the ratio between 21910 and 15779 approximately corresponds to the
ratio between the design traffic load intensities to be used in the different codes.
Referring now to the ultimate state design moments presented in Figure 4-3, we see that maximum hogging moments are about 102425 kNm and the maximum positive moment in the
center is about 45510 kNm. Here we see that the difference is smaller than for traffic loads,
this is likely caused by the fact that Setra used stiffness reduction in the pier region to cater
for caracking of the concrete slab. The reported values in the Setra document are shown in
Figure 4-4.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Analysis results
4-20
Figure 4-2: Moments for traffic loads (UDL and TS) - Setra document
Figure 4-3: Moments of final ULS and characteristic SLS combinations RM results
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Analysis results
4-21
Figure 4-4: Moments of final ULS (comb. 11) and characteristic SLS (comb.6) combinations - Setra document
Shear forces (Figure 4-5 and Figure 4-6): The maximum value of the shear-force over the
piers is some +7080/-7020 kN. When we compare this with the results given in the Setra document we see maxima of some 7450 kN, what is again caused by the lower traffic load.
Figure 4-5: Shear forces for ULS and characteristic SLS combinations RM results
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
Analysis results
4-22
Figure 4-6: Shear forces for ULS (comb. 11) and characteristic SLS (comb. 6) combinations Setra document
Displacements: We can observe that the largest value of the vertical displacement is situated
at mid span of the second span with an approximate value of 125 mm caused by Ultimate
Limit State actions.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-23
5.1 General
5.1.1 Design Calculation Actions
Steel design checks in RM Bridge are performed in 2 steps:
1. Calculation of design resistances (Schedule action UltRes)
2. Actual proof check using interaction formulas (Schedule action ResChk)
The relevant design resistances can be stored in superposition files like normal impact envelopes. This allows viewing them in the GUI in the same way than viewing structural analysis
results, with the full functionality of graphic presentation.
Plotting the resistances into the same diagram together with the relevant ULS combination
allows for direct graphical assessment of the results as shown in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4.
Note that the calculation of basic resistances without consideration of locked-in force effects
is based on the presumption of sufficient stress redistribution capacity by plasticization. I.e. in
theory this is only allowed for class 1 and 2 cross-sections. These resistances must be compared with so called Joined forces, i.e. fictitious internal forces on the composite section
which are equivalent to the combined effect of forces acting on the steel girders only (self
weight, wet concrete) and forces acting on the composite section (SDL, traffic, ).
RM Bridge also allows taking locked-in forced into account by specifying the load case containing the relevant forces acting on the steel part only. In that case the capacity factor is related to the additional forces acting on the composite section. These results are described in
chapter 5.6, Consideration of locked-in stresses.
5.1.2 Relevant additional input parameters
Two additional input parameter sets must be specified to be able to perform steel checks:
1. The definition of Slender cross section parts to check for local buckling phenomena in the cross section plane (buckling of cross-section plates), and
2. The definition of Characteristic lengths (buckling lengths) for buckling phenomena in longitudinal direction of the members.
Austria
RM Bridge
5-24
ent rules are given in the different design codes for defining the relevant width of slender
parts.
5.2.1 Definition of Slender parts
In the RmBridge database Slender parts are defined as Reference Sets of the crosssection. These reference sets have the type Steel slender part. The definition of these reference sets may be done either in the RmBridge Modeler during graphic definition of the section, or in the RmBridge Analysis GUI in the function for cross-section definition and modification (Properties > Cross-sections > Reference Sets).
One slender part is defined as a line segment with a start point and an end point. As long as
the material is the same, an arbitrary number of such slender parts (line segments) may be
arranged in one common reference set. In case of hybrid sections (e.g. steel grade of the web
lower than grade of flanges), slender parts of the cross-section parts with different material
have to be defined in different reference sets.
One slender part is defined as a line segment with a start point and an end point. As long as
the material is the same, an arbitrary number of such slender parts (line segments) may be
arranged in one common reference set. In case of hybrid sections (e.g. steel grade of the web
lower than grade of flanges), slender parts of the cross-section parts with different material
have to be defined in different reference sets.
In addition to the slender parts themselves the reference set may contain stress points to be
used for calculating the minimum elastic section modulus. This is just required if other than
start and end points govern the calculation of the minimum section modulus, because start and
end points of the slender parts are automatically checked whether they become decisive.
The individual slender parts consist each of a start point of the type POINT and an end point
of the type LINETO. In slender parts with free ends (outstand flanges or ribs) the free point
must essentially be the end point (i.e. the slender part must be a line from the restraint point to
the free point). For slender parts with restraints at both sides (webs) the sequence of the 2
points is arbitrary, however, we recommend to use a unique definition throughout the project
(e.g. bottom-up for vertical lines which is also the wizard convention).
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-25
The subtype of the individual slender parts in a reference set is defined as a flag assigned to
the start point. The following subtypes are allowed:
W Web Webs of I Girders, Channels or Box Girders ( 2A)
F Flange Outstand Flanges of I Girders, T-Girders, Channels, etc. ( 1A)
B Box Flanges of box girders (restraint on both sides) ( 2B)
R Rib Outstand rib e.g. stems of T girders, ribs or stiffeners ( 1B)
Like the subtype, the effective thickness of the slender part is also a parameter assigned to the
start point. For calculating the slenderness of the part the program calculates the length of the
line between the start and end point and divides it by the effective thickness.
5.2.2 Slender parts in the current example
In our example we use SlenderF and SlenderW as reference sets in definition of the main
girders, and SlenderF and SlenderR in the definition of secondary members (cross frames and
stiffeners).
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-26
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
No L-lt defined:
hazard
5-27
Profile type information can be defined in Rm first in Modeler in the Cross-Section window
by clicking on the arrow button of Parts.In the part definition window the respective part
has to be edited.There is a drop-down menu Profile where the respective type has to be selected.
In the Analyzer this data is stored in the menu Properties/Cross-Section/Parts->edit part in
bottomwindow->option Part-class.
5.3.2 Buckling Lengths in the current example
Table 5-1
Elements
L-rx
L-ry
L-rz
L-loc
L-lt
101
102-125
201-230
301-324
325
401
402-425
501-530
601-624
625
10101
10102-10125
10201-10230
10301-10324
10325
10401
10402-10425
10501-10530
10601-10624
10625
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
60.0
80.0
60.0
0.8
0.8
60.0
80.0
60.0
0.8
0.8
60.0
80.0
60.0
0.8
0.8
60.0
80.0
60.0
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
0.8
7.5
8.0
7.5
0.8
Austria
RM Bridge
5-28
stresses or by specifying the relevant locked-in stressing state (load case) as additional
resistances (forces which can be applied on the composite section in addition to the locked-in
forces in the individual elements).
In order to distinguish between the 2 situations in composite elements we speak of total
resistances if locked-in stresses are not considered and of additional resistances if they are
considered. The total resistances must be compared with the joined ULS forces, i.e. we assume that in the ultimate state the locked-in stresses will be redistributed to the composite
section. Note that the total resistances are not correct for slender cross-section, because local buckling failure will occur before redistribution due to plasticization can take place.
5.4.2
RM Bridge calculates the resistances for all element start and end points with the respective
switch in the element table set to Yes. This allows presenting diagrams along the bridge as
shown in Figure 5-3: Bending resistances and ULS bending moments along the main girderand Figure 5-4: Shear resistances and ULS shear forces along the main girder. Only resistances for bending moments Mz and shear forces My are shown here, because these are the
design relevant quantities.
For comparison a hand-calculation is made for 1 typical section:
5.4.2.1 Hand calculation for a Cross Section over Pier1: element 10125:w1_Deck:005:2
Classification compression and bending(ANSI/AISC 360-05, Table B4.1)
Table 5-2
c/t
y1
y2
2.540
0.026
97.690
-3.086
-0.546
flanges_top
0.5
0.120
4.167
-0.476
-0.476
flanges_bot
0.6
0.120
-3.156
-3.156
ey_el
ey_pl
-1.913
-2.278
Web
Eccenter
Bentley Systems
Yield strength
4
E
= 0.405
24.086; kc =
fyc
h /tw
Compression
Austria
RM Bridge
5-29
Table 5-3
c/t
case
class
97.690
10
1.12*
=26.978
1.49* =35.88
SL
flanges_top
4.167
0.38* = 9.15
0.64* kc * =9.81
flanges_bot
0.38* = 9.15
0.64* kc * =9.81
Web
Bending +z
P =
hc /hp *
* =78.52; r =5.70 * =137.2
(0.54*Mp/My 0.09) 2 = 3.316
Bending -z
tensile resistance
Web is in class SL => normally reduction of web, but preliminary we dont reduce webs
Nc = Ac * fyc * c = 0.3308 * -344738 * 0.900 = -102635.4
compressive resistance
Bending resistance +z
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-30
3 * v = 14131.455
plastic
E*k
= 1.12 * 53.858 = 62.703; 1.40 * 53.858 = 78.379; D / tw = 97.692 => 97.692 >
fy
78.379 =>
1.12 *
reduction factor
design
=>
d0 = 7.5
reduction factor
Vn = Vp * C = 9386.4
Moment of Inertia I
Buckling length L
Bentley Systems
0.001234
0.027284
0.507905
7.500
7.500
60.000
Austria
RM Bridge
5-31
Radius of Gyration r
1.272
0.287
1.239
Elastic Slenderness
0.006
0.11925
0.4095
Reduction factor
0.997
0.952
0.84351
-102327.4938
-97708.9
-86573.986254
Nominal Resistance Pn = Nc *
Iy Iz
= 1.272 ; ry =
Ax
rx =
Nb=
Iy
= 0.287 ; rz =
Ax
Iz
= 1.239
Ax
*Nc = -86573.986
Lateral-torsional buckling
Iy = 0.027284; Iz = 0.507905
=>
Top (+Mz)
Bottom (-Mz)
134818.468
-94372.928
8.000
8.000
Compression web Dc
1.367
1.173
1.2
rt
0.2754
0.334
6.632
8.063
24.904
30.276
0.9857
1.000
132898.15
-94372.928
gyration
(6.10.8.2.3-1,2)
Design LTB resistance Mb
tfc = 0.120 ; tw = 0.026, Ltop = 0.5 ; Lbot = 0.6
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-32
E
fyc
E
; with fyr = 0.7 * fyc = 234500 => for Mz+: Lp
fyr
Lp
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-33
The table contains the relevant resistance, if the effective cross-section has been changed for
accounting for local buckling hazard. For lateral torsional buckling only the negative moment
is relevant (bottom flange in compression) as the top flange is laterally fixed by the concrete
plate. I.e. lateral torsional buckling needs not be considered in the centre span.
Table 5-6: Element resistence table
Elem
N+
My+
Mz+
N-
My-
Mz-
Mx
Qy
Qz
10125
108324.2
9707.5
132898.2
-86564.3
-9707.5
-134818.5
0.0
9386.5
42702
125
114497.3
273903.2
188693.9
-142964
-99085.1
-147920.3
0.0
9386.5
42702.3
Figure 5-3: Bending resistances and ULS bending moments along the main girder
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-34
Figure 5-4: Shear resistances and ULS shear forces along the main girder
5.4.4 Assessments
Figure 5-3 shows that the bending resistance is sufficient throughout the whole girder length.
Resistance values are in the relevant points typically 30-50 % higher than required.
Figure 5-4 shows that over the piers the relevant design shear force exceeds the shear capacity
by a small amount.
Austria
RM Bridge
5-35
stress
N / Mx
My / Mz
Qy / Qz
-28.04/ 80.64
-18.50/ -48.79
-1134.12 / 23.52
-28.15/ -274.78
-20.39/ -83.47
-1198.21/ 4.00
Class Mz-, N
SL
Composite
CS Resistance
BucklingResistance
Residual Resistance
Mz+
67025.202
Mz-
-54742.296
Qy
1970.152
Nc
-105917.562
Calculatedvia fy_eff
Nt
48870.682
Bentley Systems
67025.202
Calculated via fy_eff
1970.152
67025.202
Calculated via fy_eff
-2414.703/ +4801.972
Austria
RM Bridge
5-36
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-37
Figure 5-9: Normal force resistance due to locked in stresses on composite section
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-38
Tension force capacity is not influenced by locked in stress as you can see in the above Figure.
Figure 5-10: Bending moment resistance due to locked in stresses on composite section
Bending capacity is increased when the primary state has a deloading effect but decreased
when it has the same sign. When we look at the hogging moment over the piers we see that
the residual resistance for negative moment is lower than the total resistance, due to the
locked-in moment being negative. On the contrary, the resistance against positive moments is
increased.
When we look at the end of element 125 we see that we have a locked in bending moment of 31133 kNm. We find that value as joined result value of the load case SUM-SW in the results
GUI.
The residual capacity in this point is -116787 kNm (envelope uresprimLC in the example).
Those two added together will give a similar value to the maximum design bending resistance
without locked-in forces of -147920 kNm as shown in Figure 5-3. Similar checks have been
done for the entire bridge length but not documented here.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-39
A shear resistence check for end of element 125 gives us a Qy from SUM-SW locked in state
of 2439 kN and adding this with the residual resistance of 6946 kN will get a resistance of
9385 kN which is similar to the resistence without locked in state.
Bentley Systems
Austria
RM Bridge
5-40
If we look at the capacity factors we see, that the factors are lower than those calculated for
total loading situation. The reason for that is that in the joined load approach the locked-in
part is also multiplied by the relevant load factor for self weight (1.25 respectively 1.5),
whereas in the approach with separate consideration of locked-in forces this part is not increased with the safety factor.
Various result plots were added in the Steel design check schedule to have a better comparison with Setra document and for locked-in stress presentation values. For the last one a superposition file was created: uresprimLC that uses the internally generated load case SUM-SW
for defining the lock-in state. Afterwards 3 new RM sets were made (PrimLC_MZ for bending
moment; PrimLC_N for tension force; PrimLC_Qy for shear force) defined on elements representing the entire bridge length of Girder1. Result of SUM-SW Load case (join) to be added
plus normal results from envelopes uresPrimLC and w1_SteelRes that will show min/max
values in the final diagram. In the last stage DgmSets having the same name as the RM sets
are added in the schedule that will show the needed results.
Similar approach is made in the case of DgmSet: UDL-TS; ULS-SLS-MZ; ULS-SLS-Qy;
displ_Vy, first the corresponding Rmset is created and then added in the schedule.
RF (MaxNx) =
RF (MinNx) =
Bentley Systems
1
2(1+)
=
2(1+)
48870.6821.11514.417
1.21730.422(1+1.3)
= 9.883829
83623.6721.1(1490.361)
1.2(1722.294)(1+1.3)
= 17.247
Austria
RM Bridge
5-41
RF (MaxNx) =
RF (MinNx) =
Bentley Systems
1
2(1+)
1
2(1+)
48870.6821.1696.004
1.2784.382(1+1.3)
= 22.22
83623.6721.1(757.487)
1.2(856.584)(1+1.3)
= 35.018
Austria
RM Bridge
5-42
Bentley Systems
Austria