Considerations For Development-High-Speed Rail Bridge Design Standards PDF

CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
HIGH SPEED RAIL BRIDGE DESIGN STANDARDS
Y. Edward Zhou
URS Corporation
4 North Park Drive
Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030
Telephone: 301-820-3539
Fax: 301-820-3009
Email: ed.zhou@urs.com
Suoting Hu
China Academy of Railway Sciences
No. 2 Daliushu Road, Haidian District
Beijing, China 100081
Email: tinghs@163.com
Zaitian Ke
Email: kezt@263.net
Bin Niu
Email: niubin@rails.com.cn
Submitted to: AREMA 2012 ANNUAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
Word Count: Text (including Abstract and References): 4,017

Figures and Tables (equivalent 13 x 250): 3,250
Total: 7,267
© 2012 AREMA
ABSTRACT
Compared with conventional railways, high speed rail (HSR) has stricter requirements on bridge
structural stiffness to minimize deformations and avoid excessive vibrations or resonance due to
train crossings at high speeds. Bridge design for HSR requires a good understanding of train-
track-structure dynamic interactions, requirements for deflections, rotations, and natural
frequencies of bridge spans, as well as continuous welded rail (CWR)-structure interactions. A
review of China’s recent developments in HSR can benefit the development of HSR bridge
design standards in North America. In China, commercial operation of passenger trains up to 250
km/h (155 mph) began in 2007 on existing rail lines that serve mixed passenger and freight trains.
After 2007, construction of commercial passenger dedicated lines (PDL’s) started since further
upgrading of mixed-traffic rail lines for higher speeds was considered unpractical and
uneconomical. China released its Code for Design of High Speed Railway in late 2009 for
passenger train design speed between 250 km/h (155 mph) and 350 km/h (217 mph). The
Chinese HSR code is based on the UIC (International Union of Railways) code with adjustments
derived from their own research. The document contains 22 chapters, including Alignment,
Bridges and Culverts, Tunnels, Tracks, Stations, Traction and Power Supply, etc. This paper
provides an overview of the Chinese HSR bridge design standards and three research projects
behind the development of the standards, as well as comparisons to the UIC code where possible.
KEY WORDS
High Speed Rail, HSR, Bridge Design, Girder Deflection, Girder Vibration, Girder Natural
Frequency, Continuous-Welded-Rail, CWR, China, UIC
© 2012 AREMA
INTRODUCTION
UIC (International Union of Railways) defines high speed rail (HSR) as systems of infrastructure
and rolling stock which operate at speeds of 250 km/h (155 mph) or higher on specially built
new lines, or the order of 200 km/h (124 mph) on specially upgraded existing lines (1). It is
commonly recognized that the first modern commercial HSR was Japan’s Shinkansen between
Tokyo and Osaka, which started operation in 1964 with a top speed of 256 km/h (159 mph). In
Europe, regular HSR services started in the 1970’s in France, Italy, Germany, Spain, and the
Great Britain.
China began research and planning on high speed rail (HSR) feasibility and technologies
in early 1990’s. A long debate was held over the type of technology to be employed for large
scale application: conventional rail vs. magnetic levitation (maglev). Finally in 2006, the
government decided to adopt the conventional wheel-rail technology for China’s HSR network.
Nevertheless the 30 km (18.6 mi) long Shanghai Maglev Demonstration Operation Line began
public service in January 2004 with a top operational speed of 431 km/h (268 mph), making it
the world's fastest train in regular commercial service as of today.
The first HSR in China was a 404 km (251 miles) section of Passenger Dedicated Line
(PDL) from Qinhuangdao to Shenyang in Northeast China, constructed between 1999 and 2003.
Known as the Qin-Shen PDL with a design speed of 200 to 250 km/h (124 to 155 mph) and test
speed up to 300 km/h (186 mph), it served as the research base for development of HSR
technologies in China. From 1997 through 2007, six rounds of speed-lift campaigns were carried
out across the country, increasing the passenger train top speed from the original 60 km/h (37
mph) to a range varying from 120 km/h (75 mph) to 250 km/h (155 mph) on multiple existing
rail lines that served mixed passenger and freight trains. Development of commercial passenger
© 2012 AREMA
dedicated lines (PDL’s) started after 2007 since further upgrading of mixed-traffic rail lines for
higher speeds was considered unpractical and uneconomical.
China's HSR network consists of upgraded conventional rail lines and newly-constructed
PDL’s. As of June 2011, China has the world's largest in-service HSR network totaling
approximately 9,700 km (6,027 miles), including approximately 3,500 km (2,175 miles) with top
speed of 300 km/h (186 mph) or 350 km/h (217 mph). The best-known section of PDL is the
Beijing-Shanghai High Speed Railway that opened to the public in June 2011 with a design top
speed of 380 km/h (236 mph). The Chinese made CRH380 train-sets operate on this line.
Bridges account for approximately half of the total length on China’s PDL’s. Prior to
opening a line for service, the bridges are usually tested with a special train at a range of speeds
up to 110% of the design speed. The primary purpose of the test is to verify the traction and
power system and collect wheel-rail interaction data. Acceleration data is often collected from
these tests for characterizing the fundamental dynamic behavior of bridges.
KEY ISSUES IN HSR BRIDGE DESIGN
Compared with conventional railways, HSR has stricter requirements on bridge structural
stiffness to minimize deformations and avoid excessive vibrations or resonance due to train
crossings at high speeds. Bridge design for HSR requires a good understanding of the following
subjects:
• Requirements for vertical deflections and rotational deformations of bridge spans
• Requirements for natural frequencies of bridge spans
• Train-track-structure dynamic interactions and coupling vibrations
• Continuous welded rail (CWR)-structure interactions
© 2012 AREMA
In addition, HSR lines require smoother geometrical alignment for horizontal curves and vertical
profiles to ensure safe and comfortable operation of trains traveling at high speeds.
HSR BRIDGE DESIGN CODES
UIC Code Leaflet 776-2 Design requirements for rail-bridges based on interaction phenomena
between train, track and bridge (2) provides HSR bridge design requirements specifically for
serviceability limit states concerning deformation and vibration. The UIC Code has other leaflets
that contain provisions for HSR bridge design, including Leaflet 776-1 Loads to be considered in
railway bridge design (3) and Leaflet 774-3 Track/bridge Interaction Recommendations for
calculations (4). European standards BS EN 1990:2002 Eurocode – Basis of Structural Design
(5) establishes principles and requirements for structural design and is intended to be used in
conjunction with EN 1991 to EN 1999 for the design of various types of civil structures. For
example, BS EN 1991-2:2003 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on
bridges defines loads and their dynamic effects for road, pedestrian, and railway bridges (6).
China released its Code for Design of High Speed Railway (7) on December 1, 2009, for
passenger train design speed between 250 km/h (155 mph) and 350 km/h (217 mph). The
document contains 22 chapters, including Alignment, Bridges and Culverts, Tunnels, Tracks,
Stations, Traction and Power Supply, Communications, Signaling, Rolling Stock Equipment,
Environmental Protection, and more. China’s HSR design standards were developed upon
reviewing those of UIC (International Union of Railways), Germany, Japan, etc., and
incorporating research results of their own.
AREMA has no specific HSR bridge design standards as of today.
© 2012 AREMA
HSR TRACK ALIGNMENT REQUIREMENTS
For track horizontal curves, the Chinese HSR code provides radius requirements for different
design speeds in the form of: “recommended radius”, “minimum radius – general”, “minimum
radius – special” (requiring technical and economical comparison as well as approval by the
Ministry of Railway), and “maximum radius”. Table 1 lists the Chinese HSR horizontal curve
radius requirements for main lines for different design speeds in Metric and US Customary units.
Also provided in the table are the degrees of curve corresponding to the radius requirements. The
Chinese HSR Code also has detailed requirements for horizontal transition spirals.
TABLE 1. Main Line Horizontal Curve Radius and Degree Requirements from Chinese HSR
Design Code.
350/250 km/h 300/200 km/h 250/200 km/h 250/160 km/h

Track Type \ Design Speed
(217/155 mph) (186/124 mph) (155/124 mph) (155/99 mph)
Radius (m) 8,000 - 10,000 m 6,000 - 8,000 m 4,500 - 7,000 m 4,500 - 7,000 m
Recomm'd Radius (ft) 26,247 - 32,808 ft 19,685 - 26,247 ft 14,764 - 22,966 ft 14,764 - 22,966 ft
Degrees 0.22 - 0.17 deg. 0.29 - 0.22 deg. 0.39 - 0.25 deg. 0.39 - 0.25 deg.
Radius (m) 7,000 m 5,000 m 3,500 m 4,000 m
Ballasted
Min. Gen. Radius (ft) 22,966 ft 16,404 ft 11,483 ft 13,123 ft
Track
Degrees 0.25 deg. 0.35 deg. 0.50 deg. 0.44 deg.
Radius (m) 6,000 m 4,500 m 3,000 m 3,500 m
Min. Spec. Radius (ft) 19,685 ft 14,764 ft 9,842 ft 11,483 ft
Radius (m) 8,000 - 10,000 m 6,000 - 8,000 m 4,500 - 7,000 m 4,500 - 7,000 m
Recomm'd Radius (ft) 26,247 - 32,808 ft 19,685 - 26,247 ft 14,764 - 22,966 ft 14,764 - 22,966 ft
Radius (m) 7,000 m 5,000 m 3,200 m 4,000 m
Ballastless
Track
Radius (m) 5,500 m 4,000 m 2,800 m 3,500 m
Radius (m) 12,000 m 12,000 m 12,000 m 12,000 m
Maximum Radius Radius (ft) 39,370 ft 39,370 ft 39,370 ft 39,370 ft
© 2012 AREMA
For main line track vertical profiles, the Chinese HSR code specifies a maximum gradient of 20‰
(2%) in normal condition and 30‰ (3%) in difficult condition pending technical and economical
comparisons. In sections that are for trainsets made of motorized cars, the maximum allowed
gradient is 35‰ (3.5%). The Chinese HSR Code also has detailed requirements for gradient
changes and vertical curves.
OVERVIEW OF CHINA’S HSR BRIDGE DESIGN STANDARDS
The Chinese HSR bridge design specifications are similar to UIC’s with adjustments made for
specific situations in China based on results of analytical and field experimental research
conducted in the past two decades. In the Chinese Code for Design of High Speed Railway (7),
Chapter 7 Bridges and Culverts consists of the following sections:
7.1 General provisions
7.2 Design loads
7.3 Limits for structural deformations, displacements and natural frequencies
7.4 Structural analysis and construction details
7.5 Bridge deck arrangement and auxiliary facilities
7.6 Elevated station structures
7.7 Junctions to other structures and facilities
Design Loads
Design loads for HSR bridges and culverts in China are specified as combinations of the loads
listed in Table 2.
© 2012 AREMA
TABLE 2. Design Loads for Bridges and Culverts.
Loading Types Loading Description

Selfweight of strutural components and auxiliary facilities
Prestressing forces
Effects of concrete shrinkage and creep
Permanent
Earth pressure
Static water pressure and buoyancy
Effects of foundation movements
Vertical train static live loads
Primary
Vertical highway static live loads (as applicable)
loads
Vertical dynamic impact of train loads
Longitudinal and flexural interaction forces with CWR
Transient Centrifugal forces
Lateral oscillation forces
Train live load induced earth pressure
Pedestrian and railing loads
Aerodynamic loads
Train traction and braking forces
Wind loads
Flow pressure
Secondary loads
Ice pressure
Effects of temperature changes
Freezing expansion pressure
Train derailment load
Collision forces from ships and barges
Collision forces from automobiles
Special loads
Construction loads
Earthquake loads
Rail-break forces from CWR (continuous-welded-rail)
Train Live Load and Impact
China’s train live load for HSR bridge design consists of the ZK Standard Live Load and the ZK
Special Live Load, as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively (7). The ZK Standard Live
Load is identical to the UIC Load Model 71 multiplied by a factor of 0.8 (3).
© 2012 AREMA
FIGURE 1. China HSR ZK Standard Live Load.
FIGURE 2. China HSR ZK Special Live Load.
Train load vertical dynamic impact for bridge structures is specified as (1 + µ), where
1.44
. 0.18 0.0
0.2
where, Lφ = loading length in meters ≥ 3.61 m (11.84 ft). For simple spans, Lφ is the span length.
For continuous spans, Lφ is the average span length times (1 + n/10) where n is the number of
spans (2 ≤ n ≤ 5). For continuous superstructures of more than five spans, Lφ equals to the
average span length times 1.5.
Requirements for Vertical Girder Deflections
Under the ZK design live loads without dynamic impact, vertical deflection limits for double-
track simple-span concrete girders shorter than 96 m (315 ft) are specified as in Table 3 (7). For
© 2012 AREMA
continuous superstructures of three or more spans, the limits in Table 3 are to be multiplied by a
factor of 1.1. For continuous or simply spans of two or less, the limits in Table 3 are to be
factored by 1.4. For single-track simple or continuous spans, the limits in Table 3 are to be
factored by 0.6.
TABLE 3. Vertical Deflection Limits for Double-Track Simple-Span Concrete Girders of Span
Lengths less than 96 m (315 ft).
Design Speed Span Length Range, m (ft)

km/h (mph) L ≤ 40 (131) 40 (131) < L ≤ 80 (262) L > 80 (262)
250 (155) L/1,400 L/1,400 L/1,000
300 (186) L/1,500 L/1,600 L/1,100
350 (217) L/1,600 L/1,900 L/1,500
For arch and rigid frame bridges, structural deflections must also take into consideration
of temperature effects, in addition to live load actions. For prestressed concrete bridges, creep
induced residual deformations are also to be taken into account.
Requirements for Vertical Girder End Rotations
Limits for vertical girder end rotations, as depicted in Figure 3, are listed in Table 4 for double-
track simple-span concrete girders shorter than 96 m (315 ft) under the ZK design live loads
without dynamic impact (7).
FIGURE 3. Definitions of Vertical Girder End Rotations of Simple Spans.
© 2012 AREMA
For girder ends at piers, the rotation (θ1 or θ2) of each girder end needs to satisfy the limit
for the girder end at abutment (θ) in addition to the requirements for the sum of girder end
rotations in adjacent spans (θ1 + θ2).
TABLE 4. Limits for Vertical Girder End Rotations.
Track Type Location Limit (rad) Girder End Cantilever, Lc, m (ft)
between abutment and span θ ≤ 2.0‰
Ballasted
between adjacent spans θ1 + θ2 ≤ 4.0‰
θ ≤ 1.5‰ Lc ≤ 0.55 m (1.80 ft)
between abutment and span
θ ≤ 1.0‰ 0.55 (1.80) < Lc ≤ 0.75 (2.46)
Ballastless
θ1 + θ2 ≤ 3.0‰ Lc ≤ 0.55 m (1.80 ft)
between adjacent spans
θ1 + θ2 ≤ 2.0‰ 0.55 (1.80) < Lc ≤ 0.75 (2.46)
Requirements for Vertical Natural Frequencies of Girders
Requirements for dynamic characteristics of bridge spans are established based upon criteria in
consideration of dynamic responses of the structure, safety of crossing trains, as well as ride
comfort of passengers. For simple-span concrete girders no longer than 96 m (315 ft), vertical
vibration natural frequencies are limited to no lower than the following values (7):
n0 = 80/L, for L ≤ 20 m (66 ft)
n0 = 23.58 L-0.592, for 20 m (66 ft) < L ≤ 96 m (315 ft)
where, n0 = vertical natural frequency (Hz); and L = simple span length (m)
These requirements are based on UIC’s specifications developed primarily for train
speeds below 250 km/h (155 mph). For design speeds between 250 km/h (155 mph) and 350
km/h (217 mph), Table 5 provides the vertical vibration natural frequency lower limits for
concrete girders of common span lengths that do not require train-structure dynamic analysis (7).
© 2012 AREMA
TABLE 5. Vertical Vibration Natural Frequency Lower Limits for Double-Track Simple-Span
Concrete Box Girders of Common Lengths Not Requiring Dynamic Analysis.
Span Length Design Speed, km/h (mph)

m (ft) 250 (155) 300 (186) 350 (217)
12 (39) 100/L 100/L 120/L
16 (52) 100/L 100/L 120/L
20 (66) 100/L 100/L 120/L
24 (79) 100/L 120/L 140/L
32 (105) 120/L 130/L 150/L
For bridges that are beyond the coverage of Table 5, dynamic analysis for train-structure
coupling vibrational responses is required based on the actual condition of train crossing and a
maximum train speed of 1.2 times the design speed. The following requirements must be
satisfied :
Wheel-climb derailment factor: Q/P ≤ 0.8
Axle weight reduction ratio: ∆P/P ≤ 0.6
Wheel lateral force: Q ≤ 10 + P0/3
Vertical acceleration of train body: az ≤ 0.13g (half-peak value)
Lateral acceleration of train body: ay ≤ 0.10g (half-peak value)
Sperling ride comfort index: W ≤ 2.50 excellent
2.50 < W ≤ 2.75 good
2.75 < W ≤ 3.00 acceptable
Bridge deck vertical acceleration: ≤ 0.35g for ballasted track
(due to an excitation of ≤ 20 Hz) ≤ 0.50g for ballastless track
© 2012 AREMA
where, Q = lateral wheel load on rail, kN (1 kN = 225 lbs force); P = vertical axle load, kN; P0 =
static axle weight, kN; ∆P = reduction of vertical axle load due to dynamic action; g = standard
gravity = 9.81 m/s2 (32.174 ft/s2 ).
Requirements for Longitudinal Stiffness of Piers and Abutments
For simple-span concrete girders located in the fixed zone (no longitudinal rail movements due
to temperature) of ballasted continuous-welded-rail (CWR) track, longitudinal stiffness at the top
of piers and abutments must be no lower than the limits listed in Table 6 (7).
TABLE 6. Longitudinal Stiffness Limits for Top of Piers and Abutments.
Span Min. Longitudinal Stiffness, kN/cm (kip/in)

Type
m (ft) Double-Track Single-Track
≤ 12 (39) 100 (57) 60 (34)
16 (52) 160 (91) 100 (57)
20 (66) 190 (108) 120 (69)
Pier 24 (79) 270 (154) 170 (97)
32 (105) 350 (200) 220 (126)
40 (131) 550 (314) 340 (194)
48 (157) 720 (411) 450 (257)
Abutment 3,000 (1,713) 1,500 (857)
For areas within the departing and approaching limits of elevated stations, the stiffness of
the piers and abutments are limited to no lower than 2.0 times the values in Table 5.
RESEARCH BEHIND CHINA’S HSR BRIDGE DESIGN STANDARDS
Significant amounts of research have been conducted in China for the development of the HSR
bridge design standards. The following paragraphs briefly discuss three subjects.
© 2012 AREMA
Girder Vibration Frequency Requirements
Crossing trains act as vibration excitation sources to bridge girders. The excitation frequency
varies with train speed. As the excitation frequency approaches the natural frequencies of the
structure excessive vibrations or even resonance may occur. These dynamic responses can cause
damages to the track system and the structure, or even threaten the safety of the crossing train or
the bridge. Factors affecting train-bridge dynamic responses include natural frequencies of the
girder, damping ratio of the structural system, train speed, car length and truck spacing, track
irregularities, flat wheels, etc.
Previous research suggested that the primary factors affecting the vertical excitation
frequency of train loading are the train speed and car length. The effects of other factors such as
the axle spacing and truck spacing are secondary because their repeated actions are not
continuous. Thus the excitation frequency is simply:
where f = frequency of vertical excitation, V = train speed, and Lv = car length. This conclusion
has been supported by analytical and experimental research results in China. Figure 4 shows test
data that demonstrates a consistent correlation between field measured vertical excitation
frequency and train speed for two different types of train sets and two different span lengths (8
and 9).
© 2012 AREMA
(a) 32 m (105 ft) Box Girders (b) 24 m (79 ft) Box Girders
FIGURE 4. Field Measured Correlation between Vertical Excitation Frequency and Train Speed.
UIC’s requirements for bridge girder natural frequencies consist of the upper bound and
lower bound for varying span lengths. The lower bound is to control excessive vibration or
resonance due to train crossings; and the upper bound is to limit train-track dynamic responses
due to track irregularities. For bridge girders of natural frequencies within the required envelope
stipulated in design specifications, structural design can be based on the static design loads
amplified by the dynamic impact.
Experience and research in Europe and China have suggested that the UIC lower bound
cannot eliminate excessive vibration or resonance due to dynamic train loads at high speeds (8
and 9). The main reason is that the original UIC requirements were developed primarily for train
speeds below 250 km/h (155 mph). As a result, extensive analytical and experimental research
was conducted in China to develop limits for vertical vibration natural frequencies of bridge
girders of varying span lengths for train speeds between 250 km/h (155 mph) and 350 km/h (217
mph). Table 5 is the result of the research and provides girder natural frequency lower limits that
are higher than those of UIC’s. It was found that an upper limit is not necessary considering the
© 2012 AREMA
high magnitudes of these lower limits for actual girders and the low magnitudes of track
irregularities permitted by inspection requirements.
Figure 5 shows comparisons between computed and field measured dynamic impact for
32 m (105 ft) simple-span concrete box girders due to the CRH2 train sets (8). The figure clearly
demonstrates that girders not satisfying the natural frequency requirements in Table 5 (≥130/L at
300 km/h, ≥150/L at 350 km/h) can be subject to excessive dynamic response or resonance at
train speeds higher than 300 km/h (186 mph).
Computed (natural freq. = 150/L)

Computed (natural freq. = 120/L)
Dynamic Impact (1+µ)
Field Measured (loaded trains)

Field Measured (empty trains)
Speed (km/h)
FIGURE 5. Comparison between Computed and Field Measured Dynamic Impact for 32 m (105 ft)
Simple-Span Concrete Box Girders.
Girder Stiffness Requirements
Design limits for bridge girder stiffness serve to ensure the safety of crossing trains at high
speeds as well as ride comfort of passengers. Live load induced girder deflection is the most
commonly used parameter for specifying the stiffness limit. Typically, bridge structural stiffness
is controlled through specifying limiting values for the span to deflection ratio (L/δ) based on
limiting the vertical acceleration to values that ensure passengers ride comfort, say 1.0 m/s2 (3.28
© 2012 AREMA
ft/s2), for varying train speed. However, different countries use different live loads for the
calculation of maximum girder deflection (δ) for double-track bridges. For example, UIC uses
single-track design live load with dynamic impact; Japan uses single-track operating live load
including dynamic impact; China uses the standard ZK design live load on both tracks but not
including dynamic impact.
Comprehensive comparative studies were made in China for varying span lengths
considering factors such as single-track vs. two-track loading, variation of design live load
among different countries, tolerances for track irregularities, etc. Figure 6 depicts computer
models used for calculating static and dynamic responses of concrete box girders to crossing
train loads. Such research yielded Table 3 as the result.
A Simple Span Girder Half of a 3-Span Continuous Girder
FIGURE 6. Computer Models for Dynamic Responses of Concrete Box Girders.
Girder end rotation is another design parameter that needs to be subjected to limiting
values in order to ensure the stability of ballast for ballasted tracks and the performance of the
fasteners and slab systems for ballastless tracks. As illustrated in Figure 7, live load induced
© 2012 AREMA
girder end rotation imposes push-down and uplift forces, respectively, to the rail on either side of
the gap between the girder ends. These forces may cause damages to the ballast, rail fasteners, or
the slab system if not controlled properly. Research in China suggested limits for vertical girder
end rotations (9), as summarized in Table 4, for ensuring proper performance of the rail-fastener-
slab system, reducing maintenance needs, and ensuring the safety of crossing trains at high
speeds.
Fastener
扣件
Rail
钢轨
Girder
梁 Girder
梁
FIGURE 7. Illustration of Bridge Girder End Rotation and Impact to Rail-Fastener-Slab System.
CWR-Structure Interactions
High speed rail (HSR) requires the use of continuous-welded-rails (CWR) to ensure track
smoothness and ride comfort. Good understanding of CWR-structure interactions is essential to
the design of both the bridge structure and the track system consisting of rails, fasteners and the
slab, with or without ballast. Forces are generated at the CWR-structure interfaces due to
temperature induced deformations, live loads, train braking forces, and accidental rail breaks.
Proper considerations are necessary to minimize structural deformations of the bridge and ensure
the stability of CWR and the safety of train operations.
Extensive research has been conducted in China in the past few decades on CWR-
structure interactions, CWR anchorage requirements on bridges, variations of the CWR neutral
temperature over time, impact of rail breaks on train safety, proper use of rail expansion joints,
© 2012 AREMA
etc. (10). The results from such research have provided great value and detailed provisions to
proper design of bridges and track systems for HSR.
Distribution of train braking forces among bridge substructure depends on the
longitudinal stiffness of adjacent bridge piers and abutments. Research in China suggested that
the longitudinal stiffness of bridge substructure is an important design parameter; and Table 6
was developed as a result to provide longitudinal stiffness limits for the top of piers and
abutments in the fixed zone of ballasted CWR. Since the braking force only considers one train
for double-track bridges in the Chinese bridge design standards, values in Table 6 are to be
multiplied by a factor of 2.0 for piers and abutments supporting elevated train stations within the
departing and approaching limits to consider the simultaneous occurrence of traction and braking
forces on both tracks.
CONCLUSIONS
High speed rail (HSR) has strict requirements on bridge structural stiffness to minimize
deformations and avoid excessive vibrations or resonance for ensuring the safety and comfort of
trains crossing at high speeds. These requirements need to be established based upon analytical
and experimental research for specific train loads, speeds, track systems, and bridge
configurations. China has successfully developed and implemented HSR technologies in a
relatively short time period based on effective employment of foreign experiences and
technologies plus significant research efforts addressing the specific situations in China. Detailed
requirements for bridge design are stipulated in the Chinese Code for Design of High Speed
Railway released in 2009 for passenger train design speed between 250 km/h (155mph) and 350
© 2012 AREMA
km/h (217 mph). Much of their research results and bridge design standards can be used as a
good resource for the development of HSR bridge design standards in North America.
REFERENCES
(1) UIC (International Union of Railways), General definitions of highspeed
http://www.uic.org/spip.php?article971, retrieved June 2012
(2) UIC (International Union of Railways), Leaflet 776-2, Design requirements for rail-
bridges based on interaction phenomena between train, track and bridge, 2nd edition, June
2009
(3) UIC (International Union of Railways), Leaflet 776-1 Loads to be considered in railway
bridge design, 5th edition, August 2006
(4) UIC (International Union of Railways), Leaflet 774-3 Track/bridge Interaction
Recommendations for calculations, 2nd edition, October 2001
(5) BSI (British Standards Institution) / CEN (European Committee for Standardization), BS
EN 1990:2002, Eurocode – Basis of structural design, December 2005
(6) BSI (British Standards Institution) / CEN (European Committee for Standardization), BS
EN 1991-2:2003, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges,
September 2003
(7) People’s Republic of China Ministry of Railway, Code for Design of High Speed Railway
(in Chinese), TB 10621 – 2009/ J 971 – 2009, China Railway Press, Beijing, 2009
(8) Hu, S., Niu, B., Du., B., Ban, X., Su, Y., Establishment of Structural Stiffness and Natural
Frequency Limits for China Code for Design of High Speed Railway (in Chinese),
© 2012 AREMA
Proceedings of 60th Anniversary Symposium of China Academy of Railway Sciences,
China Railway Press, Beijing, 2010
(9) Niu, B., Hu, S., Wei, F., Ma, L., Research and Applications of Prestressed Concrete Box
Girders in China’s High Speed Railway (in Chinese), Proceedings of 19th China Bridge
Engineering Conference, Shanghai, 2010
(10) Lu, Y., Research and Application of Continuous Welded Rail Track (in Chinese), China
Railway Press, 2004
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. Main Line Horizontal Curve Radius and Degree Requirements from Chinese HSR
Design Code.
TABLE 2. Design Loads for Bridges and Culverts.
TABLE 3. Vertical Deflection Limits for Double-Track Simple-Span Concrete Girders of Span
Lengths less than 96 m (315 ft).
TABLE 4. Limits for Vertical Girder End Rotations.
TABLE 5. Vertical Vibration Natural Frequency Lower Limits for Double-Track Simple-Span
Concrete Box Girders of Common Lengths Not Requiring Dynamic Analysis.
TABLE 6. Longitudinal Stiffness Limits for Top of Piers and Abutments.
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. China HSR ZK Standard Live Load.
FIGURE 2. China HSR ZK Special Live Load.
FIGURE 3. Definitions of Vertical Girder End Rotations of Simple Spans.
FIGURE 4. Field Measured Correlation between Vertical Excitation Frequency and Train Speed.
© 2012 AREMA
FIGURE 5. Comparison between Computed and Field Measured Dynamic Impact for 32 m (105 ft)
Simple-Span Concrete Box Girders.
FIGURE 6. Computer Models for Dynamic Responses of Concrete Box Girders.
FIGURE 7. Illustration of Bridge Girder End Rotation and Impact to Rail-Fastener-Slab System.
© 2012 AREMA
2012 Annual Conference & Exposition
Considerations for Development of

High Speed Rail (HSR)
Bridge Design Standards
Ed Zhou (1), Suoting Hu (2),

Bin Niu (2), & Zaitian Ke (2)
(1) URS
Corporation
(2) China Academy of Railway Sciences (CARS)
September 16-19, 2012  Chicago, IL
© 2012 AREMA
HSR – Definition & Major Milestones

•  UIC (International Union of Railways)’s HSR definition:
systems of infrastructure and rolling stock which
operate at speeds of
–  155 mph (250 km/h) or higher on specially built new lines, or
–  the order of 124 mph (200 km/h) on specially upgraded
existing lines
•  First modern commercial HSR: Japan’s Shinkansen
between Tokyo and Osaka, which started operation in
1964 with a top speed of 159 mph (256 km/h ).
•  In Europe, regular HSR services started in the 1970’s in
France, Italy, Germany, Spain, and the Great Britain.
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Bridge Design Codes

•  UIC Code
–  BS EN 1990:2002 Eurocode – Basis of Structural Design
–  BS EN 1991-2:2003 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2:
Traffic loads on bridges
–  Leaflet 776-1 Loads to be considered in railway bridge design
–  Leaflet 776-2 Design requirements for rail-bridges based on
interaction phenomena between train, track and bridge
–  Leaflet 774-3 Track/bridge Interaction Recommendations for
calculations
•  Chinese Code
•  Other…
© 2012 AREMA
China’s HSR Network for 11th 5-Year Plan (2006 ~ 2010)
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Development History in China

•  Early 1990’s: began research on feasibility and
technologies.
•  1998 ~ 2006: debate on national HSR technology,
finally decided to adopt the conventional wheel-rail
track over maglev (magnetic levitation).
•  1999 ~ 2003: constructed a 251 mi. (404 km ) passenger
dedicated line (Qin-Shen) of design and operating
speed of 124 ~ 155 mph (200 ~ 250 km/h), with top test
speed of 186 mph (300 km/h), serving as the national
research/testing/practice base for HSR technologies.
•  2000 ~ 2004: constructed world’s first commercial HS
maglev in Shanghai, 19.0 mi. (30.5 km) long, 267 mph
(431 km/h) top speed, of German technology.
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Development History in China (cont’d)

•  1997 ~ 2007: conducted six rounds of “speed-lift”
campaigns on existing lines across the country,
increasing passenger train speed up to 124 – 155 mph
(200 – 250 km/h) on multiple existing rail lines that
served mixed passenger and freight trains.
•  2007 ~ : started developing commercial passenger
dedicated lines (PDL), because further upgrading of
mixed-traffic rail lines for higher speeds (> 155 mph, or
250 km/h) was considered unpractical and
uneconomical.
•  By June 2011 (after opening of Beijing–Shanghai HSR
line), in-service HSR mileage totaled ±6,027 miles (9,700
km), including ± 2,175 miles (3,500 km) of 186 ~ 217 mph
(300 ~ 350 km/h) top speed.
© 2012 AREMA
Development Process of China’s HSR: Four Stages
1. Technology
Accumula1on
2. Impor1ng &

Diges1on
3. Absorbing &

Improvement
4. Innova1on &

Possession
© 2012 AREMA
China HSR Design Standards (2009)

•  First Chinese Code for Design of
High Speed Railway released on
Dec 1, 2009, for passenger trains
of design speed of 155 ~ 217
mph (250 ~ 350 km/h).
•  Developed based on reviewing
and learning from those of UIC
(International Union of Railways),
Germany, Japan, etc.
•  Similar to UIC’s, with adjustments
for specific situations in China
based on results of analytical
and field experimental research
conducted in the past two
decades.
© 2012 AREMA
China HSR Design Standards (2009) (Cont’d)

•  22 Chapters:
–  General Design Considerations
–  Alignment
–  Embankment and Track Bed
–  Bridges and Culverts
–  Tunnels
–  Tracks
–  Stations
–  Traction and Power Supply
–  Communications
–  Signaling
–  Rolling Stock Equipment
–  Environmental Protection
–  …
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Track Horizontal Curve Req’ts

Three levels: (1) recommended, (2) minimum general, (3) minimum special that requires
technical and economical comparison and approval of the Ministry of Railway
350/250 km/h 300/200 km/h 250/200 km/h 250/160 km/h

Track Type \ Design Speed
(217/155 mph) (186/124 mph) (155/124 mph) (155/99 mph)
Radius (m) 8,000 -‐ 10,000 m 6,000 -‐ 8,000 m 4,500 -‐ 7,000 m 4,500 -‐ 7,000 m
Recomm'd Radius (ft) 26,247 -‐ 32,808 ft 19,685 -‐ 26,247 ft 14,764 -‐ 22,966 ft 14,764 -‐ 22,966 ft
Radius (m) 7,000 m 5,000 m 3,500 m 4,000 m
Ballasted
Track
Radius (m) 6,000 m 4,500 m 3,000 m 3,500 m
Radius (m) 8,000 -‐ 10,000 m 6,000 -‐ 8,000 m 4,500 -‐ 7,000 m 4,500 -‐ 7,000 m
Recomm'd Radius (ft) 26,247 -‐ 32,808 ft 19,685 -‐ 26,247 ft 14,764 -‐ 22,966 ft 14,764 -‐ 22,966 ft
Radius (m) 7,000 m 5,000 m 3,200 m 4,000 m
Ballastless
Track
Radius (m) 5,500 m 4,000 m 2,800 m 3,500 m
Radius (m) 12,000 m 12,000 m 12,000 m 12,000 m
Maximum Radius (ft) 39,370 ft 39,370 ft 39,370 ft 39,370 ft
© 2012 AREMA
Bridge Design
•  Chapter 7 Bridges and Culverts
–  7.1 General provisions
–  7.2 Design loads
–  7.3 Limits for structural deformations, displacements and
natural frequencies
–  7.4 Structural analysis and construction details
–  7.5 Bridge deck arrangement and auxiliary facilities
–  7.6 Elevated station structures
–  7.7 Junctions to other structures and facilities
•  Design speed of 155 ~ 217 mph (250 ~ 350 km/h)
•  Primarily for standard PSC girder spans
•  Steel structures are usually for unconventional long
spans, which require special train-structure interaction
analysis.
© 2012 AREMA
Bridge Design Loads
Loading Types Loading Description
Selfweight of strutural components and auxiliary facilities
Prestressing forces
Effects of concrete shrinkage and creep
Permanent
Earth pressure
Static water pressure and buoyancy
Effects of foundation movements
Vertical train static live loads
Primary
Vertical highway static live loads (as applicable)
loads
Vertical dynamic impact of train loads
Longitudinal and flexural interaction forces with CWR
Transient Centrifugal forces
Lateral oscillation forces
Train live load induced earth pressure
Pedestrian and railing loads
Aerodynamic loads
Train traction and braking forces
Wind loads
Flow pressure
Secondary loads
Ice pressure
Effects of temperature changes
Freezing expansion pressure
Train derailment load
Collision forces from ships and barges
Collision forces from automobiles
Special loads
Construction loads
Earthquake loads
Rail-break forces from CWR (continuous-welded-rail) September 16-19, 2012  Chicago, IL
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Train Live Load

•  ZK standard live load
4 X 200 kN
(4 X 44,962 lb)
64 kN/m 64 kN/m

(4,390 lb/ft) (4,390 lb/ft)
0.8m 1.6m 1.6m 1.6m 0.8m

(2.62ft) (5.25ft) (5.25ft) (5.25ft) (2.62ft)
•  ZK special live load

4 X 250 kN
(4 X 56,202 lb)
1.6m 1.6m 1.6m

(5.25ft) (5.25ft) (5.25ft)
© 2012 AREMA
Train Load Vertical Dynamic Impact

•  Train load vertical dynamic impact for bridge structures
is specified as (1 + μ):
where Lφ = loading length in meters

–  For simple spans, Lφ = span length
–  For continuous spans of 2 ≤ n ≤ 5: Lφ = Lavg(1 + n/10)
–  For continuous spans of more than five spans, Lφ = 1.5Lavg
Lavg = average span length
© 2012 AREMA
Girder Deflection Requirements

Vertical Deflection Limits for Double-track Simple-span
Concrete Girders of Span Lengths less than 315 ft (96 m)
Design Speed Span Length Range, ft (m)
mph (km/h) L ≤ 131 (40) 131 (40) < L ≤ 262 (80) L > 262 (80)
155 (250) L/1,400 L/1,400 L/1,000
186 (300) L/1,500 L/1,600 L/1,100
217 (350) L/1,600 L/1,900 L/1,500
•  Under ZK design live load without dynamic impact

•  For continuous spans of ≥ 3, multiplied by 1.1
•  For continuous/simple spans ≤ 2, multiplied by 1.4
•  For single-track simple/continuous spans, multiplied by 0.6
•  For arches and rigid frames, temperature effects also to be
considered.
•  For PSC bridges, creep induced residual deformations also to be
considered.
© 2012 AREMA
Girder End Rotation Requirements

Vertical Girder End Rotation Limits for Double-rack Simple-
span Concrete Girders Shorter than 315 ft (96 m)
Track Type Location Limit (rad) Girder End Cantilever, Lc, ft (m)
between abutment and span θ ≤ 2.0‰θ
Ballasted θ1
between adjacent spans θ1 + θ2 ≤ 4.0‰
between abutment and θ ≤ 1.5‰ Lc ≤ 1.80 ft (0.55 m)
span θ ≤ 1.0‰ 1.80 (0.55) < Lc ≤ 2.46 (0.75)
Ballastless
θ1 + θ2 ≤ 3.0‰ Lc ≤ 1.80 ft (0.55 m)
between adjacent spans
θ1 + θ2 ≤ 2.0‰ 1.80 (0.55) < Lc ≤ 2.46 (0.75)
θ θ θ θ
Abutment 1
Pier 2
Abutment
•  Under ZK design live load without dynamic impact
•  For girder ends at piers, rotation (θ1 or θ2) of each girder end
needs to satisfy the limits for abutments (θ) in addition to those for
the of adjacent spans (θ1 + θ2)
θ2 θ © 2012 AREMA
Research on Girder Stiffness Requirements

•  To ensure train safety and ride comfort at high speeds
•  Based on comprehensive experimental & analytical
research considering single-track vs. two-track loading,
variation of design live load among different countries,
tolerances for track irregularities, etc., for varying span
lengths
© 2012 AREMA
Girder Vibration Requirements

Vertical Natural Frequency Lower Limits for Double-Track Simple-Span
Concrete Box Girders of Common Lengths Not Requiring Dynamic Analysis
(L = span length in meters)
Span Length Design Speed, km/h (mph)
m (ft) 250 (155) 300 (186) 350 (217)
12 (39) 100/L 100/L 120/L
16 (52) 100/L 100/L 120/L
20 (66) 100/L 100/L 120/L
24 (79) 100/L 120/L 140/L
32 (105) 120/L 130/L 150/L
•  UIC criteria developed primarily for train speeds below 250 km/h
(155 mph), natural frequency lower limit (no) for simple-span
concrete girders shorter than 96 m (315 ft):
© 2012 AREMA
Requirements for Bridges Requiring Dynamic Analysis
Requirements for case-specific train-structure dynamic analysis:
•  Train speed up to 1.2 times design speed

•  Derailment factor (lateral/vertical wheel loads): Q/P ≤ 0.8
•  Wheel load reduction ratio due to dynamic action: ΔP/P ≤ 0.6
•  Wheel lateral force (kN): Q ≤ 10 + P0/3
•  Vertical acceleration of train body: az ≤ 0.13g (half-peak value)
•  Lateral acceleration of train body: ay ≤ 0.10g (half-peak value)
•  Sperling ride comfort index: W ≤ 2.50 excellent
2.50 < W ≤ 2.75 good
2.75 < W ≤ 3.00 acceptable
•  Bridge deck vertical acceleration (due to an excitation ≤ 20 Hz):
≤ 0.35g for ballasted track
≤ 0.50g for ballastless track
© 2012 AREMA
HSR Steel Bridge Train-Struct. Dyn. Interact. Analysis
© 2012 AREMA
Research on Train Loading Excitation Frequency

•  Crossing trains are vibration excitation sources to bridge girders.
•  Train load excitation frequency: fexc. = V/Lv, (V=train speed, Lv=car length)
•  Other factors, e.g., axle spacing, truck spacing, etc. are secondary.
•  Bridge design aims to avoid girder natural frequencies close to fexc.
Field Measured Correla4on between Ver4cal Excita4on Frequency and Train Speed
© 2012 AREMA
Research on Girder Vibration Frequency Requirements
•  For bridge vibration control, UIC provides a girder natural frequency
envelope consisting of a lower bound (for vertical train loads) and an
upper bound (for track irregularities) for varying span lengths.
•  Experience indicated that the UIC lower bound cannot eliminate
excessive vibration at train speeds above 155 mph (250 km/h).
•  Chinese code raised the lower bound and eliminated the upper bound.
Comparison between Computed and Field Measured Dynamic Impact for 32 m (105 H)
Simple-‐Span Concrete Box Girders September 16-19, 2012  Chicago, IL
© 2012 AREMA
Longitudinal Stiffness Requirements for Piers & Abut.’s

Longitudinal S4ﬀness Limits for Top of Piers and Abutments for
Simple-‐span Concrete Girders in Fixed Zone of Ballasted CWR
Span Min. Longitudinal Stiffness, kN/cm (kip/in)

Type
m (ft) Double-Track Single-Track
≤ 12 (39) 100 (57) 60 (34)
16 (52) 160 (91) 100 (57)
20 (66) 190 (108) 120 (69)
Pier 24 (79) 270 (154) 170 (97)
32 (105) 350 (200) 220 (126)
40 (131) 550 (314) 340 (194)
48 (157) 720 (411) 450 (257)
Abutment 3,000 (1,713) 1,500 (857)
•  For areas within departing and approaching limits of

elevated stations, the stiffness limits are multiplied by a
factor of 2.0
© 2012 AREMA
China – U.S. Similarities in HSR Development

•  Large territory and immense railway track mileage
•  Develop HSR via a transition process from existing railway
tracks that serve mixed passenger and freight trains.
•  China is the only country that runs commercial train service
on conventional rail lines up to 217 mph (350 km/h ).
•  Much of their research results and bridge design standards
can be utilized as a good resource by AREMA.
© 2012 AREMA
Questions?
Email: ed.zhou@urs.com
Office phone: 301-820-3539September 16-19, 2012  Chicago, IL
© 2012 AREMA

Considerations For Development-High-Speed Rail Bridge Design Standards PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Considerations For Development-High-Speed Rail Bridge Design Standards PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF

HIGH SPEED RAIL BRIDGE DESIGN STANDARDS

Submitted to: AREMA 2012 ANNUAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Word Count: Text (including Abstract and References): 4,017

track-structure dynamic interactions, requirements for deflections, rotations, and natural

frequencies of bridge spans, as well as continuous welded rail (CWR)-structure interactions. A

Frequency, Continuous-Welded-Rail, CWR, China, UIC

the world's fastest train in regular commercial service as of today.

higher speeds was considered unpractical and uneconomical.

these tests for characterizing the fundamental dynamic behavior of bridges.

KEY ISSUES IN HSR BRIDGE DESIGN

• Requirements for vertical deflections and rotational deformations of bridge spans

• Requirements for natural frequencies of bridge spans

• Train-track-structure dynamic interactions and coupling vibrations

• Continuous welded rail (CWR)-structure interactions

HSR BRIDGE DESIGN CODES

calculations (4). European standards BS EN 1990:2002 Eurocode – Basis of Structural Design

example, BS EN 1991-2:2003 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on

incorporating research results of their own.

AREMA has no specific HSR bridge design standards as of today.

350/250 km/h 300/200 km/h 250/200 km/h 250/160 km/h

changes and vertical curves.

OVERVIEW OF CHINA’S HSR BRIDGE DESIGN STANDARDS

Chapter 7 Bridges and Culverts consists of the following sections:

7.1 General provisions

7.2 Design loads

7.3 Limits for structural deformations, displacements and natural frequencies

7.4 Structural analysis and construction details

7.5 Bridge deck arrangement and auxiliary facilities

7.6 Elevated station structures

7.7 Junctions to other structures and facilities

Loading Types Loading Description

Train Live Load and Impact

FIGURE 2. China HSR ZK Special Live Load.

average span length times 1.5.

Requirements for Vertical Girder Deflections

Lengths less than 96 m (315 ft).

Design Speed Span Length Range, m (ft)

induced residual deformations are also to be taken into account.

Requirements for Vertical Girder End Rotations

without dynamic impact (7).

FIGURE 3. Definitions of Vertical Girder End Rotations of Simple Spans.

rotations in adjacent spans (θ1 + θ2).

TABLE 4. Limits for Vertical Girder End Rotations.

Requirements for Vertical Natural Frequencies of Girders

n0 = 80/L, for L ≤ 20 m (66 ft)

n0 = 23.58 L-0.592, for 20 m (66 ft) < L ≤ 96 m (315 ft)

Concrete Box Girders of Common Lengths Not Requiring Dynamic Analysis.

Span Length Design Speed, km/h (mph)

Wheel-climb derailment factor: Q/P ≤ 0.8

Axle weight reduction ratio: ∆P/P ≤ 0.6

Wheel lateral force: Q ≤ 10 + P0/3

Vertical acceleration of train body: az ≤ 0.13g (half-peak value)

Lateral acceleration of train body: ay ≤ 0.10g (half-peak value)

Sperling ride comfort index: W ≤ 2.50 excellent

2.50 < W ≤ 2.75 good

2.75 < W ≤ 3.00 acceptable

Bridge deck vertical acceleration: ≤ 0.35g for ballasted track

(due to an excitation of ≤ 20 Hz) ≤ 0.50g for ballastless track

gravity = 9.81 m/s2 (32.174 ft/s2 ).

Requirements for Longitudinal Stiffness of Piers and Abutments

to temperature) of ballasted continuous-welded-rail (CWR) track, longitudinal stiffness at the top

TABLE 6. Longitudinal Stiffness Limits for Top of Piers and Abutments.

•  ZK special live load

•  Under ZK design live load without dynamic impact