Book All Semester Assignments at 50% OFF! ORDER NOW

Action and Preliminary Sizing

Loading

dead load of slab Gs – 0.25 x 24 – 6kN/m2
UDL to beam considered with self weight
Ws – 6 x 6 = 36 kN/m
Wsw - (52 x 9.81)/(10 x 10 x 10) = 0.5 Kn/m
Wq wind – 6 x 6.5 = 39kN/m
serviceability limit and ultimate load
Wser – 36+0.5+39 = 75.5 kN/m
Wult – 1.4 (36+0.5)+1.6(39) =113.5 kN/m
preliminary beam sizing
beam considered is 457 x 152 x 52 UB with 43 A grade and py value of 275 N/mm2
The span is 30m structure supported by beams at 6 m c/c
section properties are A – 66.5 cm2, D – 449.8 mm , tw – 7.6 mm
Ix – 21345 x 104
tf – 10.9mm
for slab Ds – 250 mm , grade of 30N concrete with fcu – 30 N/mm2
Reinforcement to be provided is T 12 at 150 centres
Asv – 754 mm2/m and 0.754 mm2/mm

Check for lateral stability

Check for Lateral Stability

we have splitting the span 4 parts for calculation of moment and shear forces
Design moment and shear
Mser – Wser L2/ 8 = 462.5 knm
Vult – Wult L /2 = 113.5 x l/2 = 397.3 kNm
Mult – Wult L2/8 = 113.5 x l x l / 8 = 695.2 kNm

Check for lateral stability 1

Moment Capacity

effective width Be – 0.25 L = 0.25 x 7000 = 1750 mm
FC – 0.45 FCW (Ds-De)Be
= 0.45(30)(250)(1750) / 10^3
= 5906.25 Kn
Fs – pyA
= 275 (66.5 x100)/10^3 = 1828.75 kN
We have case PNA in the slab as
Fc > FS

m

Moment Calculation

Mc – Fs (D/2 + Ds - Fs/Fc (Ds-Dp/2))
= 1828.75 (449.8/2 – 1828.75/5906.25(250-0)/2 ) x 10^-3
= 1828.75(449.8/2 + 250- 1828.75/5906.25(250-0)/2) x10^-3
= 797.7 kNm
this Mc > Mult

Bracing Requirement and Provision

There are numerous bracing configurations that are available. As previously said, torsional bracing is typically preferred over lateral bracing. For torsional bracing in multi-girder bridges, K type bracing is typically favoured over X bracing for tall main beams, however channel bracing would be better if main girders were shallow in relation to spacing. Transverse beams will serve as the bracing for ladder deck bridges. If at all practicable, a constant depth transverse beam should be used instead of knee braces. It is best to keep intermediate bracing equal to the primary beams in skew bridges.
Support bracing on bridges with down to 20° skew might be skew to the main beams or follow the lines of supports. However, if the skew is greater than this figure, it is recommended to double up the support bracing as illustrated below and keep it parallel to the main beams. The majority of bracing is only necessary during "wet concrete" construction. The bracing is no longer necessary once the concrete has solidified. Bracing may also be an inconvenience once it is complete because it might attract significant effects from heavy traffic and be challenging to make the bracing function.

It is generally thought to be better to keep bracing in place. Although the weight of the bracing is relatively little in comparison to the total tonnage, it is likely too heavy to be handled manually, and it can be challenging to move the bracing out from beneath a finished bridge deck. Bolt removal may not be simple because the bracing may have taken on additional stress. Leaving the bracing in place also allows for the possibility of using it to stabilise the steelwork during the breaking out of the deck should the bridge ever need to be dismantled. Bolts, almost never welds, are almost always used to join pieces of bracing. Although beams are frequently delivered to the site already braced in pairs and ready for lifting, this enables the bracing to be readily constructed on site. Often, slip-resistant connectors are employed.

Modular ratio with shrinkage effects of 70 %

Here αe is the effective modular ratio which can be taken as 10 as per eurocode specifictsion

Bending resistance of composite beam

Bending resistance of composite beam can be calculated as

m

Mc – Fs (D/2 + Ds - Fs/Fc (Ds-Dp/2))
= 1828.75 (449.8/2 – 1828.75/5906.25(250-0)/2 ) x 10^-3
= 1828.75(449.8/2 + 250- 1828.75/5906.25(250-0)/2) x10^-3
= 797.7 kNm

shrinkage induced deflection

serviceability

stress and deflection serviceability

therefore

shear connector requirement

shear connector requirement share

installation procedure

Before erection commences, the safety of the foundation must be confirmed. Cranes are utilised to lift the components, and jacking bolt connections can be employed to fully tighten the components in position.
Installing piles as foundation piers is the first phase in the design process. They must be properly aligned, and base plate hold down bolts must be combined with screws to maintain the necessary grout hap between bottom plates and pile foundation. In order to prevent swaying in the structure, the temporary bracings are used to maintain the piers' true vertical position.
The truss may be connected with pier ends and bolted to the full structural frame after final alignments and adjustments of frame placement installing vertical column b bracing and other bracing elements. The columns or stanchions are erected in parts and fastened on site. The central portion of the rafter is to be installed in the next stage. The bolted connections hold the sheeting rail and roof purlin to the structure. It is crucial to erect girders as a slab for the footbridge. Overhead cranes and crane girders must be utilised when necessary. Side panles must be installed on the underside of the base plate, and non-shrinking grout must be taken into consideration. Bolted connections are preferred to site welding because they are quicker and less susceptible to adverse weather conditions.

suitability of chosen bridge

The splices in the longitudinal girders and the bracing connection or cross girders to the main girders are the structural connections. Bolts or welding can be used to make these connections, and choosing between the two has an impact on both design and construction. This study explores the two connection types and how well they work with various bridge applications. Although connections in truss bridges aren't specifically covered, many of the remarks still apply to that style of building.
There are other articles that explain the fatigue design of connection details as well as instructions on how to link steel and concrete elements to generate composite action between steel members and concrete decks. The bolt shear and the bearing between the bolt shank and the linked plies convey the design force, respectively. The plies must move relative to one another for this process to function. The fact that the bolts only need to be nominally tightened is the main benefit of not preloading the bolts. However, due to their low fatigue resistance and propensity to come free under vibration, these connections shouldn't be used in bridges. These connections could be applied in short-term circumstances.

Alternative Solution

The modular bridge technology from Acrow is adaptable for both long-term and transient uses. Acrow's temporary bridges are used on construction, drilling, and excavation sites all over the world, providing safe and effective access for employees, heavy off-road vehicles, machinery, and equipment. They are simple to install, deconstruct, and transport for usage in other areas. Also, during bridge replacement and repair as well as in times of emergencies, our bridges are employed as temporary detours to steer traffic past road construction areas. Acrow's temporary bridges are adaptable, strong, and economical ways to get where you need to go.

Features & Benefits

Length, width, and strength can be easily customised. High-quality steel is used in the construction, and it is produced in ISO-certified mills and galvanised to prevent corrosion. Modular components enable accelerated bridge construction.
Complete highway load-carrying capabilities to accommodate both light- and heavy-duty applications; In-stock components ready for expedited shipping directly to site; Quick, simple assembly and disassembly with little equipment; Professional site support services available as needed. With the use of Acrow's modular technology, crucial temporary access bridging may be quickly mobilised. The bridging solutions serve detour and emergency applications, as well as building, drilling, and excavation sites all over the world, with components in stock and available for prompt delivery. The temporary bridges from Acrow are very simple to disassemble, store, and reuse as necessary in other locations.

References

European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (1990). “Basis for structural design.” Eurocode 0, Brussels, Belgium. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (1991). “Actions on structures, part 2: Traffic loads on bridges.”

Eurocode 1, Brussels, Belgium. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (1992a). “Design of concrete structures, part 2: Reinforced and prestressed concrete bridges.”

Eurocode 2, Brussels, Belgium. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (1992b). “Design of structures for earthquake resistance, part 2: Bridges.” Eurocode 8, Brussels, Belgium. Gara, F., Graziano, L., and Dezi, L. (2013). “Slab cracking control in continuous steel-concrete bridge decks.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1319– 1327.

Granata, M. F., Margiotta, P., and Arici, M. (2013). “Simplified procedure for evaluating the effects of creep and shrinkage on prestressed concrete girder bridges and the application of European and North American prediction models.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1281–1297.

Kappos, A. J., Paraskeva, T. S., and Moschonas, I. F. (2013). “Response modification factors for concrete bridges in Europe.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1328–1335.

Maiorana, E., and Pellegrino, C. (2013). “Comparison between Eurocodes and North American and main international codes for design of bolted connections in steel bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1298–1308.

Martí-Vargas, J. R., and Hale, W. M. (2013). “Predicting strand transfer length in pretensioned concrete: Eurocode versus North American practice.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1270–1280.

Rombach, G., and Kohl, M. (2013). “Shear design of RC bridge deck slabs according to Eurocode 2.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1261–1269.


Walbridge, S., Fischer, V., Maddah, N., and Nussbaumer, A. (2013). “Simultaneous vehicle crossing effects on fatigue damage equivalence factors for North American roadway bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 18(12), 1309–1318.

LOADING DIAGRAM


LOADING DIAGRAM

SHEAR CONNECTOR AND SHEAR CAPACITY


SHEAR CONNECTOR AND SHEAR CAPACITY

MESH REINFORCEMENT AND PERPENDICULAR DECKING


MESH REINFORCEMENT AND PERPENDICULAR DECKING

o

You Might Also Like:-

Civil Engineering Assignment Help

Civil Engineering Dissertation Topics and Titles

Slope Stability and Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Report Answer

Get It Done! Today

Country
Applicable Time Zone is AEST [Sydney, NSW] (GMT+11)
+
  • 1,212,718Orders

  • 4.9/5Rating

  • 5,063Experts

Highlights

  • 21 Step Quality Check
  • 2000+ Ph.D Experts
  • Live Expert Sessions
  • Dedicated App
  • Earn while you Learn with us
  • Confidentiality Agreement
  • Money Back Guarantee
  • Customer Feedback

Just Pay for your Assignment

  • Turnitin Report

    $10.00
  • Proofreading and Editing

    $9.00Per Page
  • Consultation with Expert

    $35.00Per Hour
  • Live Session 1-on-1

    $40.00Per 30 min.
  • Quality Check

    $25.00
  • Total

    Free
  • Let's Start

Browse across 1 Million Assignment Samples for Free

Explore MASS

Customer Feedback

Check out what our Student community has to say about us.

Read More

Request Callback

My Assignment Services- Whatsapp Get 50% + 20% EXTRAAADiscount on WhatsApp

Need Assistance on your
existing assignment order?
refresh