Analysis and design of prestressed concrete box girder bridge

Posted in Prestress Engineering, Project Reports, Research Papers |

Email This Post |

By
Miss.P.R. Bhivgade
Abstract: Bridge construction today has achieved a worldwide level of importance. Bridges are
the key elements in any road network Use of box girder is gaining popularity in bridge
engineering fraternity because of its better stability, serviceability, economy, aesthetic appearance
and structural efficiency. The structural behavior of box girder is complicated, which is difficult
to analyze in its actual conditions by conventional methods. In present study a two lane simply
supported Box Girder Bridge made up of prestressed concrete which is analysis for moving loads
as per Indian Road Congress (IRC:6) recommendations, Prestressed Code (IS: 1343) and also as
per IRC: 18 specifications. The analyzed of box girder using SAP 2000 14 Bridge Wizard and
prestressed with parabolic tendons in which utilize full section. The various span/ depth ratio
considered to get the proportioning depth at which stresses criteria and deflection criteria get
satisfied.
Keywords: Concrete Box Girder Bridge, Prestress Force, Eccentricity, Prestress Losses,
Reinforcement, Flexure strength, shear strength, SAP Model.
I. INTRODUCTION
Prestress concrete is ideally suited for the construction of medium and long span bridges. Ever
since the development of prestressed concrete by Freyssinet in the early 1930s, the material has
found extensive application in the construction of long-span bridges, gradually replacing steel
which needs costly maintenance due to the inherent disadvantage of corrosion under aggressive
environment conditions. One of the most commonly used forms of superstructure in concrete
bridges is precast girders with cast-in-situ slab. This type of superstructure is generally used for
spans between 20 to 40 m. T or I-girder bridges are the most common example under this
category and are very popular because of their simple geometry, low fabrication cost, easy
erection or casting and smaller dead loads. In this paper study the India Road Loading considered
for design of bridges, also factor which are important to decide the preliminary sizes of concrete
box girders. Also considered the IRC:18-2000 for Prestressed Concrete Road Bridges and
Code of Practice for Prestressed Concrete Indian Standard. Analyze the Concrete Box Girder
Road Bridges for various spans, various depth and check the proportioning depth.
II. FORMULATION
A. Loading on Box Girder Bridge
The various type of loads, forces and stresses to be considered in the analysis and design of the
various components of the bridge are given in IRC 6:2000(Section II. But the common forces are
considered to design the model are as follows:

Dead Load(DL): The dead load carried by the girder or the member consists of its own weight
and the portions of the weight of the superstructure and any fixed loads supported by the
member. The dead load can be estimated fairly accurately during design and can be controlled
during construction and service.
Superimposed Dead Load (SIDL): The weight of superimposed dead load includes footpaths,
earth-fills, wearing course, stay-in -place forms, ballast, water-proofing, signs, architectural
ornamentation, pipes, conduits, cables and any other immovable appurtenances installed on the
structure.
Live Load(LL): Live loads are those caused by vehicles which pass over the bridge and are
transient in nature. These loads cannot be estimated precisely, and the designer has very little
control over them once the bridge is opened to traffic. However, hypothetical loadings which are
reasonably realistic need to be evolved and specified to serve as design criteria. There are four
types of standard loadings for which road bridges are designed.
i. IRC Class 70R loading
ii. IRC Class AA loading
iii. IRC Class A loading
iv. IRC Class B loading
The model is design by considering IRC Class A loading, which is normally adopted on all roads
on which permanent bridges and culverts are constructed. Total load is 554, the Fig.1 show the
complete details of Class A.

Other information regarding Live load combination as per IRC:6 2000 Clause No.207.1 Note
No.4
B. Thickness of Web
The thickness of the web shall not be less than d/36 plus twice the clear cover to the

reinforcement plus diameter of the duct hole whered is the overall depth of the box girder
measured from the top of the deck slab to the bottom of the soffit or 200 mm plus the diameter of
duct holes, whichever is greater.
C. Thickness of Bottom Flange
The thickness of the bottom flange of box girder shall be not less than 1/20th of the clear web
spacing at the junction with bottom flange or 200 mm whichever is more.
D. Thickness of Top Flange
The minimum thickness of the deck slab including that at cantilever tips be 200 mm. For top and
bottom flange having prestressing cables, the thickness of such flange shall not be less than 150
mm plus diameter of duct hole.
E. Losses in Prestress
While assessing the stresses in concrete and steel during tensioning operations and later in
service, due regard shall be paid to all losses and variations in stress resulting from creep of
concrete, shrinkage of concrete, relaxation of steel, the shortening (elastic deformation) of
concrete at transfer, and friction and slip of anchorage.
In computing the losses in prestress when untensioned reinforcement is present, the effect of the
tensile stresses developed by the untensioned reinforcement due to shrinkage and creep shall be
considered.
F. Calculation of Ultimate Strength
Ultimate moment resistance of sections, under these two alternative conditions of failure shall be
calculated by the following formulae and the smaller of the two values shall be taken as the
ultimate moment of resistance for design:
i. Failure by yield of steel (under-reinforced section)
Mult = 0.9dbAsFp
Where,
As = the area of high tensile steel
Fp = the ultimate tensile strength for steel without definite yield point or yield stress or stress at 4
per centelongation whichever is higher for steel with a definite yield point.
db = the depth of the beam from the maximum compression edge to the centre of gravity of the
steel tendons.
ii. Failure by crushing concrete
Mult = 0.176 bdb2fck
Where,
b = the width of rectangular section or web of beam
fck= characteristics strength of concrete

G. Calculation of Section un- cracked in flexure

b = width in the case of rectangular member and width of the rib in the case of T, I and L beams
d = overall depth of the member
fcp = compressive stress at centroidal axis due to prestress taken as positive.
III. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF POST-TENSIONED DECK TYPE BOX-GIRDER
BRIDGE
A post- tensioned deck type Box Girder
Bridges of clear span 30m and width of roadway is 7.5m. Assume Live Load as per IRC: 6-2000
vehicle is passing over deck given in chapter 4 and table no. 4.2. The Bridge analysis for
different L/d ratio starting from 15 to 20 and different L/d ratio considered are as follows:
Case 1 L/d= 19, d = 1.6
Case 2 L/d =18, d = 1.7
Case3 L/d = 17, d = 1.8
Case4 L/d= 16, d= 1.9
Case5 L/d= 15, d=2.0
Preliminary data
Clear span = 30m
Width of roadway = 7.5 m
Overhang from face of girder = 1.2m
Deck thickness = 0.2 m
Bottom slab thickness = 0.2 m
Girder thickness = 0.3 m
The tendon profile is considered as parabolic in nature.
As per IRC:18-2000
fck= 50 Mpa, fci = 0.8fck = 40 Mpa,
fct = 0.5fci = 20 Mpa, fcw = 0.33fck = 16.5 Mpa ft = 1/10fct = 2.0 Mpa, ftw = 0
As per IS:1343-1980
Ec = 5700fck1/2 = 40.30 kN/m2
fp = 1862 Mpa, n = 0.85, E = 2105 Mpa

Validation of Resuts
The bending moment, shear force and deflection result obtained by SAP 2000. The bending
moment and shear force are calculated by considering different loading condition such as dead
load, live load and superimposed load. Same as deflection calculated. This results are the Case:1.
Table.1 Deflection
Load Case DL +
Live Prestressing
SIDL
Load Force
Deflection (at
midspan)
30.8 mm 25.2 -14.36 mm

mm
Table.2 Bending Moment(t.m)
Span 0.0
0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L
(m) L

DL 0.00 353.56

628.5 824.9 942.8 982.1

6
8
4
2

LL 0.00 218.76

381.6 494.1 564.8 587.8

3
0
5
2

SIDL 0.00 53.46 95.04

Total 0.00 625.78

124.7 142.5 148.5

4
6
0

1105. 1443. 1650. 1718.

23
82
26
45

Table.3 Shear Force (t)

Span
0.0L
(m)

0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L

DL

130.9 104.7 78.57 52.4 26.3

0.0

LL

32.92 23.29 14.27 7.42 2.62

0.0

SIDL 19.80 15.84 11.88 7.92 3.90

0.0

Total 183.6 143.9 104.7 67.7 32.8

0.0

Table.4 Calculation of Prestress Force

Table.5 Calculation of Eccentricity

Eccentricity (mm)

Prestressing Force (kN)

440

21617.96

548

19380.69

650

17655.06

731

16489.15

The eccentricity which give

minimum prestressing force (e) =
731mm

Table.6 Calculation of Prestress Losses

(As per IS:1343-1980)

Span
^S ^C ^E ^A ^F ^R Total

(m)

0.0L

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

90

90

0.95

0.1L

2.6 2.3 78

9.7

90 182.6 0.9

0.2L

2.6 2.4 39

22

90 155.8 0.91

8E05
0.3L

2.6 2.4 26 36.7 90 157.7 0.91

0.4L

2.7 2.5 20 54.3 90 169.0 0.9

0.5L

9.1 8.3 16 171 90 294.0 0.85

Where,
^S = Shrinkage
^C= Creep
^E = Shortening of concrete
^A = Slip in anchorage
^F = Friction
^R = Relaxation
n= Efficiency
After Losses, effective Prestressing Force
(P) = P (1-Losses) = 14011.51 kN
Table.7 Calculation of Stresses at top and bottom fibre
At Transfer
Span
(m)

Top
Fibre

Bottom
fibre

At Service Load

Top
fibre

Bottom
Fibre

0.0L

4.16

4.16

4.16

4.16

0.1L

2.98

5.48

6.35

0.00

0.2L

1.91

6.67

8.37

0.00

0.3L

2.112

6.44

7.46

0.00

0.4L

2.24

6.29

6.88

0.00

0.5L

3.00

6.24

6.42

0.00

Compressive Stress at
Transfer = 6.66 < 0.5 fcj = 20 mpa
Service = 8.367 < 0.33 fck = 16.5 mpa
Tensile stress at
Initial Stage = 2.979 < 3mpa
(As per IS:1343 1980)
Working Stage = No tensile stress
Table.8 Calculation of Ultimate Flexure Strength
Failure by
Failure by
Ultimate Moment
crushing
Span
yielding of
Mu = (1.5DL +2.5
of
(m)
steel
LL) (kN.m)
concrete
(kN.m)
(kN.m)

0.0L

0.00

0.1L

11574.43

340578.53 5970560

0.2L

20394.85

0.3L

26598.28

0.4L

30402.45

0.5L

31654.88

Table.9 Calculation of Ultimate Shear strength

Span
(m)

Ultimat Shear Balance Spacing

e
capacity Shear (mm)
Moment Vcw
(kN)
Vu =
(kN)
(1.5DL
+2.5
LL)
(kN.m)

0.0L

3084.27 363.85 2720.43

55

0.1L

2391.35 419.97 1971.38

75

0.2L

1713.50 432.54 1280.96

100

0.3L

1089.90 470.56

619.34

200

0.4L

517.85

492.95

24.90

300

0.5L

0.00

0.00

0.00

Design of Reinforcement in Box Girder Bridge

P =14011.51 kN, d = 1350 mm, bw = 200 mm
Assume 150 mm wide and 150 mm deep distribution plate, located concentrically at centre.
ypo /y0 = 75/150 = 0.5 ,
As per IRC:18-2000, From table value of Fbst/ Pk = 0.17 and Fbst = 452.753 kN
Using 12 mm diameter links, area of steel links are,
Ast = 1254 mm/2
Providing 24 bars of 12 mm dia, 750mm also bar of 12 mm dia @ 110 mm c/c horizontally to
form mesh.
Side Face Reinforcement
As per clause 18.6.3.3 of IS:1343-1980
Ast = 0.05 x 1350 x 300/100 = 202.5 mm/2
Provide 6 12 mm dia on each face of web
Design of Deck Slab
Using M30 grade concrete and Fe415
Total moment due to DL+SIDL+LL = 1427.0 kN.m
Depth required = 150.4 < 250 mm
Main Reinforcement
Ast = 3192.6824 mm/2
Providing 16mm bars dia 100 mm c/c
Design of Transverse Reinforcement
M = 0.3ML + 0.2(MDL + MSIDL)
M = 324 kN.m
Ast = 724.74 mm/2
Providing 12 mm dia bars @ 160 mm c/c

IV. COMPARSION OF RESULT FOR VARIOUS SPAN/ DEPTH RATIO

The comparison of prestress force, deflection and stresses values are obtained for various
span/depth ratio ( table no. 10 & 11) for box girder bridge. The values are calculated as per
IS:1343-1980.
Table.10 Comparison of Deflection for various span/depth ratio.
Deflection
Prestre
Span/De ss Eccentric
DL
pth
Force ity (mm) DL- +LL
Prestre
(kN)
Prestre
ss
ss
Force
Force

1.6

16.48

731

11.2

36.4

1.7

15.66

777

11.4

33.6

1.8

14.83

829

30

1.9

14.02

886

6.6

26.6

2.0

13.20

950

5.6

25.3

Note: All dimension in tonnes and mm.

Permissible (DL-Prestress Force) = 12 mm
Permissible (DL-LL-Prestress Force)= 85.7 mm
Table.11 Comparison of stress for various span/depth ratio
Stress at mid span
(N/mm2)
Eccen
Span/
Depth

Prestres
Tricity
s Force
(tonne)

At
At Transfer Workin
g
(mm)

Top

Botto
m

Top

1.6

16.48

731

3.0

4.1

6.74

1.7

15.66

777

2.8

3.8

6.33

1.8

14.83

829

2.6

3.6

5.91

1.9

14.02

886

2.4

3.4

5.48

2.0

13.20

950

2.2

3.2

5.08

Note: Stress at mid span at working bottom = 0

V. CONCLUSION
This paper gives basic principles for portioning of concrete box girder to help designer to start
with project. Box girder shows better resistance to the torsion of superstructure. The various trail
of L/d ratio are carried out for Box Girder Bridges, deflection and stress criteria satisfied the well
within permissible limits. As the depth increases, the prestressing force decreases and the no. of
cables decrease. Because of prestressing the more strength of concrete is utilized and also well
governs serviceability.
VI. REFERENCES
1. IRC: 18 2000 DESIGN CRITERIA FOR PRESTRESSED CONCRETE ROAD BRIDGES
(POST TENSIONED CONCRETE) THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS.
2. IRC: 6- 2000 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND CODE OF PRACTICE FOR ROAD
BRIDGESTHE ROAD CONGRESS.
3. IS: 1343 1980 CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PRESTRESSED CONCRETE INDIAN
STANDARD.
4. Andre Picard and Bruno Massicotte, Member SERVICEABILITY DESIGN OF
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING /
FEBRUARY 1999
5. Ferhat Akgul and Dan M. Frangopol Lifetime Performance Analysis of Existing Prestressed
Concrete Bridge Superstructures JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASCE /
DECEMBER 2004
6. James H. Loper,1 Eugene L. Marquis,2 Members and Edward J. Rhomberg Fellow.
PRECAST PRESTRESSED LONG-SPAN BRIDGES JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERING ASCE
7. John R. Fowler, P.Eng, Bob Stofko, P.Eng. Precast Options for Bridge Superstructure
Design Economical and Social Linkages Session of the 2007 Annual Conference of the
Transportation Association of Canada Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
8. Krishna Raju DESIGN OF BRIDGES OXFORD & IBH PUBLISHING CO. PVT. LTD.
9. Prof. Dr.-Ing. G. Rombach Concepts for prestressed concrete bridges Segmental box girder
bridges with external prestressing Technical University, Hamburg-Harburg, Germany.
10. Tushar V. Ugale, Bhavesh A. Patel and H. V. Mojidra (2006).
We at engineeringcivil.com are thankful to Er. Priyanka Bhivgade for submitting her research
on Analysis and design of prestressed concrete box girder bridge to us. We are hopeful that
this will be of great use to all civil engineers who are willing to understand the design of
prestressed concrete box girder.