DESIGN TABLES FOR CONCRETE BRIDGE DECK SLABS , D. SURYA PRAKASH RAO M, G. TAMHANKAR M. S. KAPLA AMRIT SINGH STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTRE, ROORKEE, U. P.FOREWORD ‘The analysis of bridge-deck slabs subjected to concentrated wheel loads involves lengthy caleula- tions. Deck slabs being repetitive structures, readymade tables covering the normal range of lengths, ‘widths and boundary conditions can save the designer much time and effort. ‘The tables developed in this publication cover deck slabs, designed for IRC loadings, with lengths varying from 3 to 8m and widths ranging from 1 to 5m in steps of 0.25m. Both fixed and simply supported boundary conditions are considered. ‘The use of the tables is illustrated by means of worked examples. Useful suggestions for improving ‘the publication are most welcome. They will be acknowledged and incorporated in subsequent editions. . MPs meg es) : DirectorPREFACE. Analysis of bridge deck slabs for IRC loads is a time-consuming job. Design aids such as influence surfaces or Pigeaud’s charts which are generally avai- lable to the designers still involve considerable com- putations, Ruesch prepared tables for critical design values of bending moments for various panel sizes and boundary conditions for German loadings as ‘early as 1952. For a long time 2 need was felt for a similar work for IRC loads. This handbook is an attempt in that direction. By providing critical design moments for IRC class 70R (tracked and wheeied), élass AA (tracked and wheeled), class A and uniformly distributed loading for 285 panels of practical dimensions, it intends to relieve designers from these laborious calculations. However, due to several limitations, the scope of the handbook had to be restricted to simply support ‘ed and fixed deck panels. Skew deck panels and slabs with variable thickness are on the future re- search programme. ‘The authors are grateful to Prof. G. S. Ramaswamy, Director, Structural Engineering Research Centre for his Keen interest and ‘constant encouragement ‘during the preparation of the handbook. Thanks are also due to Shri N. V. Raman, Scientist-in-charge, Roorkee Centre for the co-operation and the encoura- ‘gement extended to the authors. ‘The authors wish to thank Dr. M. N. Keshava Rao for all the unstinted help he extended to them at various stages of the work. Thanks are due to Dr. ‘A. Rajaraman for the useful discussions the authors had with him, The co-operation and help extended by Dr. T. V. SR. Appa Rao in processing the com- puter programs at Madras is gratefully acknowledged. ‘Thanks are due to Shri K. Loganathan and Shri N. Sridharan for their valuable help in processing the programs, Thanks are due to Shri O. P. Thakur and Shri Amar Singh for their help in processing the ‘computer output and preparing the tables. Thanks are due to Shri A. Khan and. ShriR. K. Sood for assiduously, typing the manuscripts, ‘The authors wish to express their sincere thanks to Shri N. Jayaraman and Shri P, N. Zutshi for bringing out the publication in a short time and to Shri 8. C. Jain and Shri C. C. Ravindran for correc: ting the proof. ‘The authors wish to place on record their thanks to the authorities of IBM 360/44 at Delhi University and IBM 370/155 at I. I. T., Madras for extending the use of their facilities. Every possible care has been taken in preparing the Design Tables. Authors would be grateful if any errors, computational or otherwise, are brought to their notice. AuthorsCONTENTS, INTRODUCTION SCOPE OF THE DESIGN TABLES 21 Slab panel sizes 22 Boundary conditions 23 Assumptions 24 Loading cases METHOD OF ANALYSIS 3.1 Simply supported slabs 3.2 Slabs with fixed edges USE OF THE TABLES 41 Dead load moments 4.2. ° Live load moments, 43 Impact factors 4.3.1, Impact factors for span moments 4.3.2 Impact factors for support moments 44 Examples 4.4.1 Analysis of a simply supported slab 4.4.2. Analysis of a slab with all edges fixed DISCUSSION Su Fixity and continuity in deck slabs 5.2 ‘Impact coefficients 53 General DESIGN TABLES TABLE 1 Class 70 R Loading TABLE 2 Class AA loading TABLE 3 Class A loading TABLE 4 Uniformly distributed loading APPENDIX A Relevant extracts from DIN 1075, and ONORM B 4202 on fixity and continuity in deck slabs APPENDIX B Computation of design bending moments in a deck slab APPENDIX € References Page 1B 15 Ww 29 4 33 65 68 01.0 INTRODUCTION The analysis of bridge deck slabs for the local effzcts! is a complex as well as a time-consuming problem, The deck slab panel between the longitudi- nal girders and the transverse beams is presumed to ‘act asa slab spanning over the girders. Even though the girders themselves deflect by different magnitudes, for the purpose of analysis, they are usually assumed to be unyielding", ‘This not only simplifies the problem but also is considered sufficiently accurate for design purposes in concrete bridges. Furthermore, even if the girders are assumed unyielding, the problem still does not permit a simple or closed form solution for the loading specified by the codes of practice for bridges. As such, in a design office further simplifications and approximations are resorted to. Usually, Pigeaud’s or Westergaard’s me- thod or the method of effective width is employed. Alll these methods assume simple unyielding boundaries and arbitrary continuity coefficients are applied in ‘order to account for the slab continuity over the sup- ports, This assumption does not seem to be valid particularly when the beam and slab are cast monoli- thically and the longitudinals are interconnected by ‘means of well designed system of transverse. girders. In such a case the behaviour of slab can be approxi- mated to that of a slab with fixed boundaries. “This factor is recognised by DIN 1075 and ONORM 14202. ‘The bridge loadings specified are either in the form of tracks or axle loads with’'the dimensions of loaded areas laid down by codes of practice. This kind of loading pattern does not permit simplified solutions unlike that for uniformly distributed load covering the entire slab. Further, the multiplicity of loading conditions and various positions of the axles to be considered make the designer's job very tedious, and time-consuming. . Although Pigeaud’s charts provide a ready method of analysis for simple boun- daries, still a lot of computations will be necessary, particularly for eccentric loads and parameters involv. ing interpolation. : These tables are prepared to meet this long felt need for reducing designers’ work. ‘The tables provided in this handbook make it possible to compute design bending moments ina deck panel without resorting to long computations or tedious analysis. . The live load bending moments in a slab under Indian Roads Congress Class 70R, Class ‘AA and Class A loadings are tabulated for all edges fixed as well as all edges simply supported boundary conditions. In order to facilitate dead load computa~ tions, bending moments under a uniformly distributed load. of unit intensity are also tabulated. In all 28 different loading cases were considered for each slab; i.e. about 8,000-cases were examined while pre- paring the tables. ‘The use of design tables is illustrated through examples, The pertinent provisions in German and‘Austrian Codes of Practice for the design of deck slabs are provided in Appendix A. Computations bused on those code provisions alongwith the Pigeaud’s method are illustrated through an example siven in Appendix B. 2.0 SCOPE OF THE DESIGN TABLES 2.1 Slab panel sizes The tables presented here cover most of the deck slab panel sizes likely to occur in practical cases. Usually, the panels are between 2m and 3m wide. The width of the slab panel is varied from Im to 5m in steps of 0.25m. ‘The length of the panel is varied from 3m to &m in steps of 0.25m. It is usual to have deck slab panels with their longer di- mension in the direction of traffic; other cases viz. slab panels with their shorter dimension in the direc- tion of traffic have, therefore, been omitted. Slab panels of widths greater than Sm are exceptional and hence are not included. If the length of the panel is greater than 8m, the values given for 8m long panel can be taken for design purposes. The tables cover 285 slabs which are adequate from practical considerations. Bending moment values for interme- diate panel sizes can be interpolated from the tables. 2.2 Boundary conditions The tables provide critical bending moment values for panels with unyielding supports with all edges simply supported as well as all edges fixed. Slabs with two opposite edges free are not included in these tables. Unlike DIN 1075 or ONORM B4202, there are no recommendations in the IRC Code regarding the boundary conditions to be assumed for deck slab panels, The guidelines for designers in this respect provided in the German and Austrian Codes of prac- tice are briefly explained in Appendix A. Since most of the bridges designed are provided with adequate number of transverse girders, even the exterior panel may be treated as having fixed boundary as indicated in DIN 1075. It_may be adequate in ‘most of the cases if mean of the span bending mo- ments for simply supported and fixed edges cases is taken for design along with the support moments of the latter case, as recommended in ONORM 4202, Even the designers analysing the slabs as simply supported and applying continuity coefficients will find the tables useful. The readily available values for simply supported boundaries will relieve them from cumbersome calculations required for Pigeaud’s charts. 2.3 Assumptions Since the elastic analysis of thin plates deals with the middle plane of the slabs, the dispersion of the loads was taken upto the middle surface of the slab (Fig. 1f). In computing the dimensions of loaded areas of various classes of loading the thickness of wearing coat was taken as 7.5em and that of slab 15cm as shown in Fig. 1. In case the thickness of actual slab is greater than 15cm, the values provided will be slightly on the conservative side- Poisson's ratio for concrete was taken as 0.15. Fig. 2 explains the notation followed in this hand- book. Other usual assumptions associated with the clastic analysis of thin plates" hold valid, 2.4 Loading cases ‘The following loading cases are considered in pre- paring the design tables : 1. Class 70R loading. a) Tracked vehicle ) Bogie axle, type ‘1 2. Class AA loading, a) Tracked vehicle b) Wheeled vehicle Class A train 4. Uniformly distributed load of intensity I t/m? covering the entire slab The load positions considered for tracked and whecled vehicles are indicated in Figs. 3 and 4. In computing support moments the track is so placed as to be along the edge of the slab after dispersion. Two positions of the wheeled loading are considered in computing span moments, viz. one of the loads placed over the centre of the slab, and the pair of the loads placed symmetrically about the slab mid-point on y-axis, For support moments, the wheels are so placed that the dispersed load lies along the boundary. The critical values provided consider both tracked as well as wheeled loads for 70R and AA classes of loading, ‘The last case of uniformly distributed load of unit intensity will be helpful in computing dead load moments.ase tot wot ast eam estan osrm|osean @. CLASS 70R TRACKED VEHICLE b-CLASS 70 R BOGIE AXLE,TYPE ‘L’ € = ast : tasi+ | 3 “Ee pest | § 7 é é ——_- g —-$ & sbeastt | 8 7 & ast 2 past ie 3am e-ssm| 075m |o-usmy € CLASS AA TRACKED VEHICLE . 4. CLASS AA WHEELED VEHICLE é ] srt svt} gl WHEEL OR TRACK 2 ‘WEARING COAT | TR Hl STRUCTURAL SLAB —- |¢ 2 *| a \ re a ee 3 € sit st] 3 7 f. DISPERSION OF LOAD THROUGH THE SLAB o-55m| 0.65 © CLASS A TRAIN. FIG. 1 INTENSITIES AND DIMENSIONS (WITH DISPERSION } OF IRC LOADS CONSIDERED J“ 4. CLASS 70R TRACKED VEHICLE CLASS AA TRACKED VEHICLE 7 wt wt |0-5638 rere |0-563m) [estan] oos7m lesson b-CLASS 70 R BOSIE AXLE,TYPE wu F g dansef | 8 3 g best | § i — 4 f 7 a é 4. CLASS AA WHEELED VEHICLE tsem F in sn wl | WHEEL oR TRACK ial U/j| cwearins coar | {STRUCTURAL S}AB — § z ; is c 1: eas d s7t 3 f. DISPERSION OF LOAD THROUGH THE SLAB asem|o0sm|ossm “e CLASS A TRAIN. FIG. 1 INTENSITIES AND DIMENSIONS (WITH DISPERSION ) OF 1RC LOADS CONSIDERED T5emdu OF TRAFFIC FIG.2 NOTATION3.0 METHOD OF ANALYSIS In. preparing the design tables two types of boundary conditions were considered as mentioned already. The technique of finite element was emplo- yed to obtain solution for slabs with fixed boundaries; for simply supported plates Navier's method provided a simple solution. In both these methods bending ‘moments were obtained within about 1% error. ‘Computer programs capable of handling a general pattern of concentrated loads were developed. In every class of loading each loading position (Figs. 3 and 4) was treated as a separate loading case for the slab. 3.1 Simply supported slabs Navier’s method” was adequate to deal with all the types of loads considered in the preparation of the tables. The loading was representell in the form ofa double trigdnometric series. The deflection of the plate was also represented as a double trigonometric series. The solution of the plate differential equation for the defiection function so obtained was differen- tiated to yield the expressions for moments. Ina particular type of loading, say class A train, cezch whee! load was considered separately for com- puting the bending moments and the effect of all. the loads was then summed up. Computer program based on this solution was developed and processed mostly on IBM 1620 Model T at SERC, Roorkee; for a few loading cases the pro- ‘gram was processed on IBM 360/44 system at Delhi University. 3,2 Slabs with fixed edges The rectangular plate bending element with three degrees of freedom (one deflection and two rotations) at each node was used. Thus a polynomial with twelve undetermined constants was to be used to represent the deffection of the element. ‘The polyno- smial chosen was w (ey) = Ait Anx Asy + det + de xy + day* + An + Aaty + daxy? + Aw + Auxty + Any? “The stiffness mateix for this displacement function is provided in an explicit form by Ghali and Neville ‘The size of the element was kept constant for the ‘entire slab. In most of the cases the slab was divi- ded into 14 x 30 elements. In order to reduce the size of assembled matrix, half symmetry of the slab was considered. In doing so a few additional com- plications arose. Eccentric unsymmetric loads had to be'considered as symmetric loads and then their effect about the line of, symmetry was. halved. This increased the (number of loading cases to be con- sidered; in all 17 loading cases, including uniformly distributed load were handled at a time. ‘The multiplicity and diversity of loading cases made the data handling quite a difficult job. The boundary conditions for the slab were generated by ‘means ofa system of subroutines, Each subroutine ‘generated the necessary data for symmetry about x- axis, or y-axis or quarter symmetry, Consistent load matrix was generated and assembied through a sepa- rate subroutine. ‘The stiffness matrix was assembled at each node yielding a set of three equations. ‘These {equations ‘were solved by means of “Sparse Coefficient Matrix” subroutine developed by Keshava Rao’. ‘The bending moment values were computed only at three points indicated in Fig. 2. “These values were then examined for various load positions in a particular class of loading and critical values for each class were then tabulated. ‘The necessary computer programs were developed and debugged on IBM 1620 Model I system at SERC, Roorkee. The programs were assembled and trial runs were made on IBM 360/44 system at Delhi University and the entire processing was carried out on IBM 370/ 155 system at Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. 4.0 USE, OF THE TABLES ‘The tables provide critical values directly for boundary conditions indicated therein, and no com- putations other than inclusion of live load impact factor are necessary. Fig. 5 provides a key number for each of the slab ‘panel size considered; knowing the key number the corresponding values can be read off from the tab- les for the required loading and boundary conditions. 4.1 Dead load moments ‘The dead Joad ona slab panel is usually the self- weight and that of wearing coat. ‘Table 4 provides bending moment values for a ‘uniformly distributed load of 1t/m* covering the entire slab. Thus, in order to obtain the dead load mo- ‘ment values in a slab panel the corresponding values 9PZZ7ZLZZ ELIZ ZZ COLL GLIA LLLLLVILL LL EZZZZZZIZZ Sad oaaa aaa, FIG 3 LOAD POSITIONS CONSIDERED FOR A _«.« TRACKED VEHICLEFIG. 4 LOAD POSITIONS CONSIDERED FOR A GROUP OF WHEELED LOADSa SBV1S 1930 SHL JO SNOISN3WIO NVId SHLONUVOION! IYVHO ASy S°9ld ~ sez|esz| isz| vez] ciz] o0z| ea1} agi} 67] zer| su] es oos k 7e2| zazlosz| eez| giz] ocr] zer|sor| en] ier] mu] co sev | e8z|99z|67z| zez| siz{esi| sat | rar] cm foe| eu | 96 os | zgz|soz|evz| vez] viz] cor] oat | eat] 971] ear] zu] so en sev vez] 9z|c7z| ocz | eiz| ger) zr} zou} svi] eat | u| 76 eee eee 00-7 (sa. 2u) U}) 29503) 08Z | €9Z}97Z| 622 | zz | SEL} eZb| tot} 77L} zt} OW 6 }O UO!}29IIP BY} U! UO!SUaWIG -0 She scz|z9z|svz|ezz| uz| rer] cer] oor] en| sz] 6ar| zs ose giz isz|772| czz| o1z | e6t | oct} est | ev | set feo. | ts sve liz 092 | erz| 922 | Goz | 261 | Sai ast] 7] zi | cor) o6 | se] zz} e9 | 79 | s7| ge] cz} a] 6 jooe 942] 6SZ | 272 | SZZ | BOZ | 161 | 7ZL} Cot] Ov] E21} 901} 6B} O08} IZ] 29 | €S | 77 | GE] BZ] Ab} 8 |sce { G22 |8S2 | LZ | 722 | LOZ) OGL | Ect} OGL} GEL] 221] SOL) eS] 62] OZ] 19 | 2a | €7 | 7E} SZ] Ob é jose 742 | €SZ 072} €2Z | 90Z| GB | Z2t] SSL} GEL] LZL] 7OL} 2B} eZ] 69]09]} IS | 27] €€| v2] SL} 9 Jsez €42| 962 | 6EZ] 222} SOZ| Bet | dt] 7SL] cet} OZL| EOL) 98] ce] BS} 6S} OS | I7| ZE} EZ] mm} Ss joor 242] $52} 8€Z] 122] 702] cot} Oct} ESL| GEL} GLL| 201] Se] 92] 29} BS} 67] OF} LE} 22] EL] 7 [ser 122 | 752 | 2€z] O22 | €02 | 98L| ESL] Zot {sey Gl} LOL} 78} SZ] 99] 45] 87] GE} OF} IZ} 2b] € Jost 042 | €S2| 9€Z| 612] 20Z| set) sor] ist] vet} cit] GOL} EB] 72] S9] 9S] 27) BE] GZ} oz] Wy 2 {ser 692] 262] SEZ} BIZ | LOZ] 781} cL] OSL] €€1) SUL) 66} 28} €2| 79} SS] 97] ZE}] BZ] GL} OL} bt JOOL foo SL-2]0S-2] S%-4|00-2] S29 ]0S-9]S2-9] 00-9] SZS}0S'S | S2-S] 00'S] Sé-7| 05-7] S2-7 |00-7 | SZ-€) OS-€) SZE |00-€ xin Table 4 should be multiplied by the actual load intensity. For example, for a slab panel 2. 75m x 7.5m the corresponding Key chart No. from Fig. 5 is 242. Say, the dead load intensity on the panel is Q t/m?. ‘The values for the required boundary conditions from Table 4 corresponding to the key chart No. 242 shall have to be multiplied by Q to obtain bending ‘moments in the slab. 4.2 Live load moments Critical values of live load bending moments at plate mid point for simple boundary conditions (Mey ‘M,.), and at plate midpoint as well’ as midpoints of the sides (Mae, Mye Mes, Me) for fixed plates are given in Tables 1 to 3. ‘The corresponding class of loading is indicated at the beginning of each table. The live load moments can thus be read off for the aiven class of loading and boundary conditions. 4.3 Impact factors According to Indian Roads Congress’ code of practice for road bridges, the live load moments should be enhanced by a certain factor’ to account for the dynamic effect of moving loads. This, factor known as the impact factor is to be suitably incor- porated in the values of live load moments. given in the tables. This factor is a function of span and is specified for each class of loading. Further the impact coefficient is. specified separa- tely for tracked type and wheeled type loadings for the same class of loadings. When the loading is of one type only as in class A loading there is no need to consider this distinction between wheeled and tracked loading; but in class 70R and class’ AA loadings this has to be taken into account as explained below. 4.3.1 Impact factor for span moments (Msc, Myc) It was observed that for Mue wheeled load gives higher moments than those due to corresponding tracked loading. Hence the impact factor for Mae shall be that for wheeled loading. The dimension ‘b’ for the slab panel does not exceed Sm. As per the code upto Sm span the im- pact coefficient is 25% for both wheeled and tracked types of loading. Therefore, for Mye an impact coefficient of 25% should be used for 70R and AA classes of loading. 4.3.2. Impact factor for support moments (Hse, My.) ‘As mentioned earlier, upto a span of Sm both tracked and wheeled loadings have, same impact factor. Impact factor for Me shall be that applicable for wheeled loading except for the panel sizes indicated in Figs. 6 and 7 for class 70R and class AA loading respectively. In computing Mye, since the panel dimension does not exceed Sm in that direction, as er the code, an impact coefficient of 25% shall be used for class 70R and class AA loading. For example, for a panel of 2.75m x 7.5m the key chart No. is 242. Since this does not fall in the hatched zone, the impact factor applicable to wheeled loading shall be taken for computing Muy. For a panel of 4m x 8 m, the corresponding key chart No. is 281 When the specified loading is class AA, this falls inthe hatched zone (Fig."7) and hence the impact factor applicable to tracked type load for a span of 8m should be used for Mxy- ‘i When the specified loading is lass 70R, this does not fall in the hatched zone (Fig. 6) and hence the impact factor applicable to wheeled type load for a span of 8m should be used for Mae. For panel sizes intermediate to those in the key chart (Fig, 5) interpolation can be done after in- corporating the impact factor in the moment values. 44 Examples 4.1 Analysis of a simply supported slab _ Slab panel dimensions 3.5m x 7.5 m Slab thickness 20cm Wearing coat thickness 7.5cm The corresponding key chart No. is 245 (Fig. 5). a) Dead load moments Dead load due to wearing coat = 23 x 0.075 = 0.1725 t/m* Dead load due to self-weight of slab 24 x 0.20 0.48 t/m® = 0.6525 tfm* “. Total dead load intensity From Table 4, the moments for a dead load of 1 tm? are 13‘ONIGVOT YO SSV19 JO 193dS3y NI OW 403 1N319133309 LovdNI dO 3910HD 9 ‘913 . “ oos se” / os? ! i 292 | s9z|erz sen syaund 192 | 792] ave asauy Jo} pasn aq 04 a}>14an aia i 082} €92/ 992 PaH204j JO yu J202 320dw) Wy SLE siz | 292] svz| ezz| uz] re | cer] oo | en| szi| eo. | z6 ; ose gcz| 92 | 772] zee] o12| e6t | gt] est | 2m | sze|eor| 16 see C42 | 092 | E72] 92Z| GOZ | ZEL | SZL} SSL} Lvt| 7ZL| dol] O6 | 18] 22] €9 | 7S! G7] GE] cz] BL} 6 jOOE 942| 6S2 | 27% | SZZ| B07] tL | yet] ASL] OvL| EL | 90L] 6B] 08) LZ} 29 | EF] 77) SE] 92] AL] B [See S22 |8S2] 172 | 72Z | LOZ) OGL | E4L} OSL} GEL] 22tj} SOL] BB] 64] O4| 19} 2G] €7| VE} SZ] SL} 2 jasz i ‘742 | £S2 }072 | E22 | 902] GGL} ZL} SSb] BEL] LZL| 7OL) 48] 84 | 69) 09] IS | 27) €€| 72] SL} 9 |szz : | £42 9S2 | 6E2 | 222 soz ‘eet Lat} 7St} ZeL | O2L| EOL} 98) 22] 89] 6S] OS} Ly] Ze} Ez] WY) S [00z 242] SS2} BEZ | Lez} 702] LBL] O4t} ESL} GEL} GL} 2OL] SB} 94} 49} BS| 67} 07 i le] 22} eb] 7 1Sér 122 | 792 | ZZ] OZ | €OZ | GEL] GGL] 2St| SEL] SLL} LOL} 78] SZ} 99} cs] 87] GE} OE} IZ] Z| € Jost 042 | €S2] 9€2 | 612} 2O%) GOL} SOL} tSt} VEL} ciL] QOL) EB | 72) G9} 9G} 27} BE] G2] O2] Wy] z@ |szt 692] 252} SEZ%j OlZ | 102} 7eL} £91] OSL} EEL | GU] 66} zB} EZ] 79} SS} 97] 4E]} BZ) GL] OL} bt jOOr 00-8 | $2.2} 09-2} S2-2]00-2| $49] 059}S2-9 | 00-9] S25] 05-5 | S2-S}00-S su7|0s7 zealous GLE] OSE | SZE}00-€ qONIGVOT VV SSV19 JO 103dS3¥ NI °%W YOS INF!D133309 LOVdWI JO 3DIOHD 2°91 j y a) i ; 00s WD fs is $£7 Y os? y y ous ser Ly sjauod : 2S2U} 10} PASN 2q 0} a}D!4Nan 00-7 ie ss Pay204} Jo yUaI21Jja0> yoodwW) ZZ] eae se ose Yj Ste C62 | 092 | €72 | 922 | 6OZ | ZEL 18 | 22} €9] 79 | $7] SE} 22} BL} 6 JoOE gz | 6s2 | 272 | s2z | oz | tet) yet | cst | om og} 12] za} es | 77] se} az] a | @ {sez siz | ese | tv2 | v22 | £02] 061 | ect | 951 | eet] zzt| So sé | oc] t9 | 2s | ev] ve] sz]-a} cz Josz uz | £S2|072 | EZ | 902 | 6BL | edt | SSL) BEL} LZL| VOL} 28} 84} 69} 09] LS | 27} €€] 7] SL} 9 | Szz £22 | 952 | GEZ| ZZZ} GOZ] BBL} béb| 7SL| ZEL}| O%L] EOL) 98 | 22] 89] 6S} OS | t7] 2E} Ez] WY] S jo0z 22 | SS2 | BEZ | 1ZZ| 7OZ | ZBL | OLL} ESL] GEL] SLL] ZOL] GB] 92| c9| BS] 67] OV] Le] Zz] EL} 7 | Ser 142 | 752 | 2€2 | OZZ| €OZ | 9BL} S9L]}ZSL | SEL} S|] LOL} 7B} Sé} 99} 49 ].87| GE} OE | Iz} 2) € Jost O22 | €S2] 9EZ| GZ] ZOZ | SOL} SOL} ISL} VEL] Zi] OL} €8) 72) S9} 9S) 27] BE] 62} OZ] WwW] 2 |ser 692| 252] SEZ} lz | 10Z | 7EL| 29L| OSL} €€L | Oi} 66) 28] E42] 79] 55] 97] cE} BZ] GL] OL} bt }oor ON GAL > He “AC G 9G 279 9 O_-1S2_.906. 274 71 L 1G. . SAL GE.5 ONG [realgee tage logs ! + a9f--5 Ja-= fare !soc!-as]--olene]ers!e2-!-sol--s|> fz |2f'795"_ 008 +00] 1 | 10 | 19 } 28 | 37 | 46 | 55 | 64 | 73 | 82 | 99 | m6 | 133 | 150| 167 | 184 | 201 | 218 | 235 | 252 |269 125] 2 | 1 | 20 | 29 | 38 | 47 | 56 | 65 | 74 | 83 |100| 07 | 134 | 151 | 168 | 185 | 202 | 219 | 236 | 253 | 270 150] 3 | 12 | 21 | 30] 39 | 48°} 57 | 66 | 75 | 84 | 101,| 8 | 135 | 152.| 169 | 186 | 203 | 220 | 237 | 254 | 271 175| 4 |13 | 22] 31 | 40 | 49 | 58 | 67 | 76 | 85 | 102 | 119 | 136 | 153 | 170 | 187 | 204 | 221 | 238| 255 | 272 200) 5 | 14 | 23 | 32 | 41 | 50 | 59 | 68 | 77 | 86 | 103 |120 | 137 | 154] 171 | 188 | 205 | 222 | 239 | 256] 273 225| 6 | 15 [24 | 33 | 42 | 51 | 60 | 69 | 78 | 87 | 104 | 121 | 138 | 155 | 172 | 189 | 206 | 223 | 240] 257 | 276 250] 7 | 16 | 25 | 34 | 43 | 52 | 61 | 70 | 79 105 | 122 | 139 | 156] 173 | 190 | 207 | 224 | 241 | 258] 275 275| 8 | 17 | 26 | 35 | 44 | 53 | 62 |71 | 80 160 | 157 | 174 | 191 | 208 | 225 | 242 | 259] 276 300] 9 | 18 | 27 |36 | 45 | 54 |'63 | 72 | 81 192 | 209 | 226 | 243 | 260| 277 325 350 375 Impact coefficient of tracked zoo vehicle to be used for these C7 450 ye 675 ‘i 500 clon j FIG.7 CHOICE OF IMPACT COEFFICIENT FOR Mye IN RESPECT OF CLASS AA LOADING —St12 369.18 kgm/m 1264.86 kem/m <. Dead load moments in the slab are Mre = 369.18" 0.6525 = 240.89 kgm/m Myc = 1264.86 X 0.6525 = 825.32 kgm/m 2) Live load moments ‘Computation of live load moments for various classes of loadings is illustrated below : (i) Class 70R loading From Table | the moments are 1852.08 kem/m 4199-71 kgm/m The impact coefficient for Myz as well as Mye shall be 25% as explained in 4.3. + Live load moments inclusive of impact are Mae = 1852.08 x 1.25 = 2315.10 kgm/m Myo = 4199.71 x 1.25 = 5248.64 kgm/m (ii) Class AA loading From Table 2 the moments are Mee My The impact coefficient for Mye us well as Mye shall be 25%. “. Live load moments inclusive of impact are Mug = 2408.13 x 1.25 = 3010.16 kemjm Mye = 4687.89 X 1.23 = 5659.86 kgm/m. (ii) Class A loading From Table 3 the moments are Me = 1155.78 kem/m. 2028.92 kem/m The impact coefficient for class A loading as per Indian Roads Congress codeé (Clause 211.2) works out t0 be 33.33% for Mae and 47.33% for Myo Live load moments inclusive of impact are, Mse = 1155.78 x 1,333 = 1541.00 kem/m Mye = 2028.92 x 1.474 = 2990.02 kgma/m 4.4.2 Analysis of a slab with all edges fixed Panel dimensions 3.5m x 7.5m Slab thickness 20cm Wearing coat thickness 7.5m The corresponding key chart No. is 245 (Fig. 5) \e 4) Dead load moments Toal dead load intensity = 0.6525 t/m* (as in 4.4.1) From Table 4, the moments for a dead load of It/m? are Mee = 109.92 kgm/m My = 516.49 kgm/m Mee = ~693.98 kgm/m Mrz om ~ 1028.05 kgm/m Dead load moments in the slab are Mze = 109.92 x 0.6525 = 71.72 kgmn/m My = 51649 x 0.6525 = 337.01 kgm/m My, =—693.98 x 0.6525 =—452.82 kgm/m My, =~ 1028.05 X 0.6525 —670.80 kgm/m 4) Live load moments Computation of live load moments for various classes of loading is illustrated below: (@) Class 70R loading From Table 1, the moments are, Mzz = 1251.35 kgm/m My. = 2215.29 kgm/m Mige = —2977.84 kgmjm Mye = ~3820.49 kgm/m Impact coefficient shall be taken as explained ~ in the Article 4.3. Impact coefficient for Myz and Mye will be ° 25%, Referring to Fig. 6, since this panel size does not fall in the hatched zone, an impact co- eficient of 25% applicable {9 wheeled loading shall be taken for Mey. For Mye, the impact coeflicient will be 25%. + Live load moments inclusive of impact coefi- cients are, 1215,35% 1.25 = 1519.19 kgm/m *2215.29% 1.25 = 2769.11 kem/m My, = ~297184X 1.25 = —3722.30 kgm/m My, = —3820.49 x 1.25 = —4775.61 kgm/m (ii) Class 4A Loading From Table 2, the moments are Me = 1455.31 kgm/m Mye = 2628.45 kgm/m Mye = ~3575.13 kgm/m Mye = —4706.45 kgra/ma Impact coefficient for Mae and Myc will be 25%. Referring to Fig. 7, since the panel size falls with-in the hatched zone, the impact coefficient appli- cable to tracked load for a span of 7.5 m shall be taken for Me, Thus the impact coefficient for My, shall be 15.63%. For Myr, the impact co- efficient will be 25: Live load moments inclusive of impact coeffi« cient are Mey = 1455.31 1.25 = 1819-14 kem/m My = 2628.45X1.25 = 3285.56 kem/m Me, = —3575.13 1.1562 —4133.92 kem'm Myy <2 4706.45 X 1.25 = —5883.06 kgm/m (iti) Class A loading From Table 3, the moments are Mae 801.06 kgm/m Mye= 1312.24 kgm/m Mz, = —1910.92 kgm/m Mye = —2335.88 kgm/m The impact coefficients work out to be 33.33% for Mug and My, and 47.37% for Mye and Myo. Live load moments inclusive of impact coeffi- cient are : My = 801.06 x 1,333= 1068.08 kgm/m My = 1312.24 x L.4T4= 1933.85 kera/m Mee =—1910.92 X 1.333=—2547.89 kgm/m. My, = —2335.88 X 1.474= —3442.39 kgm/m To consider the influence of continuity of deck slabs over the bridge girders, refer to discusion om fixity ‘and continuity (article 5.1) and Appendices A and B 5.0, DISCUSSION 5.1 Fixity and continuity in deck slabs ‘As explained earlier the slab is usually treated as simply supported for the purpose of analysis under the effect of Indian Roads Congress loads. The maxi- mum bending moments so obtained are reduced by 20% to include the effects of continuity’, Because ‘the assumption of simple support yields only span ‘moments, the support moments are also assumed to be of the same magnitude and the slab is designed accordingly. Note Although such practice may be justifiable in some casés, it cannot be generalised. The beams exercise considerable restraint on the slab deforma- tions and it is well recognised by DIN 1075* and ONORM 84202. DIN 1075* recommends that while calculating ‘bending moments under dead loads, the slab panels be treated as with fixed edges when the bridge compri- 13 ses longitudinals interconnected by a system of, transverse girders. For live loads the slab is treated as fixed but corrections are recommended for conti= ‘nuity in both the directions. For the usual cases of slabs with longer side in the direction of traffic this correction amounts to an increase in live load mo- ments by about 23% for Mye, 5% for Mue, NO ine ; crement for Mf, and about 8% decrement for Me ONORM B4202 recommends that the average of span moments for simply supported and fixed bounda- ries be taken for design purposes. Itis fairly easy to investigate the degree of fixity inoposed by the girders on slabs supported on two ‘girders only. The rotations of the beams give an idea of the degree of fixity, knowing which the actual ‘moments can be calculated. But the same is not true for adeck slab panel in a multibeam bridge. Conti- uous plates have been analysed on the assumption of knife edge supports. But when the slab is built monolithically with the torsionally stiff girders, this assumption looks unrealistic on account of the fixity exerted by the girders on the slab. Timoshenko? provides approximate method for such cases. Ruesch? while discussing the problem of fixity and continuity in deck slabs observes that in the case of a plate loaded in the central zone, the part of the plate which resists the load near the edge is much greater than that in the loaded area. ‘This brings into action fairly a wide portion of the unloaded adjacent slab panel to offer fixity. Further, on account of the transverse action of the slab panel in the zone close to the shorter edges the action is almost that of' a fixed edge in the longitudinal direction. “Thus, the deck slab panel behaviour is entirely different from that of continuous beam or plate strip. As such the beha- viour of a deck slab panel built monolithically with a system of torsionally stiff grid work of beams is much like that of a slab with all edges fixed rather than that of a slab continuous on knife edge supports. ‘The analysis of actual grid work with top slab by the finite element method might provide a better insight into the problem. Such an analysis, however, is very expensive and time-consuming. 5.2 Impact coefficient Though several loading cases were considered in preparing the tables for different classes and types of loading as wel as different placements, only the critical values of the entire computations were tabulated. For instance in the case of class 70R and class AA. loadings, which comprise wheeled and tracked14 types, the tables list only the maximum of the values occurring for both types under one class, as class 70R, or class AA as the case may be. To incorporate the impact factor as per Indian Roads Congress Code, it may be deemed necessary to know the actual type of loading that gives critical value. However, even this factor has been taken care of by providing suitable guidelines.’ As per IRC Clause 211.3%, the impact factor is 25% upto a span of Sm for both wheeled and tracked types of loads. Thus, for My. and My. an impact factor of 25% can be used in all the cases considered in the tables. For Mye in all the cases wheeled loading yields higher values for both 7OR and AA classes of loading. | Hence the impact factor applicable to wheeled loading shall be used. % For Mf it is found that for larger slab widths tracked loading yields values higher than those due to wheeled loading. However, for longer dimensions the impact factor for tracked load gets reduced. Thus, even though the tracked load yields higher | Value for Mz after incorporating the impact | factor wheeled load gives higher Value in some cases.' This factor was taken into consideration while pre~ paring Figs. 6 and 7. It may be mentioned that for the panel sizes close to the demarcating line both wheeled and tracked types of loads yield almost same values for Ms, after including impact coefficient. 5.3 General It was observed in general, that class AA loading } dies higher moment values than class 70% loading. ‘The tables form a useful basis to obtain equiva lent uniformly distributed loads for different types of IRC loadings, the work on which will be taken up in the course of time,1s 6.0 DESIGN TABLES Summary Lo: ing cases (IRC Class 70R a) Tracked vehicle b) Bogie axle (i) IRC Class AA a) Tracked vehicle b) Wheeled vehicle (Gli) IRC Class A train (iv) [Uniformly distributed load of unit -in- tensity (1 t/m*) covering the entire stab Boundary conditions (B.A edges simply supported i) All edges fixed Slab sizes Length varying from 3m to 8m Width varying from 1m to Sm (in steps of 0.25m) Key chart provides an index number for each size of panel considered. The corresponding bending mo- ‘ments can be obtained from Tables 1 to 4. Other details (® Stab thickness 15 om (for the purpose of computing dispersed areas of loads on the slab) (ii) Wearing coat thickness 75cm Gii) Poisson's ratio for concrete ous Sas 316TABLE 1 LOADING...... Class 70R| 19 TABLE 1 | Bending Moments (kgm/m) an All edges simply supported All edges fixed Mn | Me Ma | Me | fn | ite 1 472.80 911.64 26223. «431.66 = — 099.24 — 952.37 2 670.00 1204.34 388.72 «578.70 — 940.93 — 1295.18 3 859.66 1471.06 5173572548 1190.64. 1592.13 4 1046.77 1678.41 64883 859.76. — 1451.21 —1808.53 3 1229.11 1803.35 78303 «966.42. 1713.38 1965.61 6 1401.07 1380.93 91732. 1048.76 1976.39 2070.65 7 1562.08 1914.72 1041.23=—=—«1108.28 2206.32 — 2186.76 3 171690 1936.01 116474114792 2431.72... 2296.83 9 1844.09 1908.45 1270.69 1166.59 2619.43 © —2400.99 10 468.34 922.47 26187 431.49 — 695.68 — 956.45 Me 65701 1236.12 384.01 519.96. — 939.69 1295.52 12 838.08 1508.63 504.60 73361 33; 1188.07 -* 1600.52 a 1022.16 1140.34 62694 880.27 ~ 1581.18 s —1831.93 14 1108.87 1896.58 754.76» 1006.17 186.16 1999.21 15 1373.84... 2000.90 88564. OTOL. 2144.47 2123.62 is 154207 -, 2087.80 101887 118219 2412.16. 2256.89 n \ror71 =~ 2099.51 1136.72 1227.39 2637.19 2378.06 ~ 18 1848.12 2085.35 1248.24 1282.09) —2843.27-:7 =2535.03 19 462.77", . 928.06 26185 A3LAT, = = 692.15. — 955.01 20 64650. = 1254.86 3814958043 — 934.91 —129587 a 819.58 1532.81 496.21 73883 —1212.61 1604.95 LR 996.41 1787.19 609.81 $94.00 ~152600 .. 1844.69 23 "1169.07 1964.72 728.37 ©. 1031.17. 1828.89 ~2026.94 24S 1342053 2093.81 85589, 115437 212719» 2170.80 2s 1513.25 2173.07 98435. 1251.99» 2405.68 2327-75 26 1684.93 2235.58 1109.92, 1327.89 266145 2484.37 n 1834.15 2235.86 1232.73, 1372.70 2898.81» 2640.16 2% 463.33 931.70 26222 ABS — 68831 — 954.89 2» 641.60 1266.89 380.90 580.96 ~ 931.71 —1296.66 30 805.42 1548.29 490.94 740.62 1179.43 — 1606.6320 TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kem/m) 2 Key T chart All edges simply supported I All edges fixed No. \ | Mae Me | Me Me | Mw My 31 : 977.70 1816.66 (597.82 902.65 1439.75 1852.17 2 1142.19 2016.16 708.36 1049.48 = 1701.43 — 2036.91 33 Bian 2165.78 82876 118799 2006.76 2203.07 4 1483.36, 2265.57 953.02 1297.14 2294.48 2372.39. 35 1654.66 2348.23 108098 1407.14 = 2578.49 © 2569.69 36 1809.00 2563.24 1207.62 1467.23 2838.65, 2753.89 a 461.59 933.06 262.80 431.36 © — 68406 — 955.76 38 636.11 1272.46 381.17 580.91 — 928.34 1297.83 39 ‘T9T.AT 1561.36 489.08 742.21 1176.89 1607.25 0 960.66 1840.69 59023 906.46 = 143649 —1857.35 41 1121.12) 2056.32 694.28 1061.31. 1698.23 2048.50 42 1287.06 2229.24 807.86 1211.09 1969.05 2221.68 43 1453.59 2376.12 926.02 1327.87, 2214.08 — 2404.57 44 1627.46 2469 51 1050.17 1446.31 2443.06 2614.46 45 1719.62 2530.69 N73 1535.28 267718 —2839.29 46 459.79 933.38 272.81 431.86 — 679.96 — 956.55 a7 632.16 1275.97 390.00 580.55 921.86 = —1999.14 48 789.68 NSTL.77 495.27 ‘741.68. —1168.89* 1610.35 49 ‘947.57 1890.56 592.05 907.48 1428.03 1859.19 50 1102.32 2131.25 689.41 1065.89 — 1689.13 2054.32 Ss 1262.56 2331.26 795.64 1219.94, 1958.53 2235.59 52 1425.60 2503.97 908.32, 1349.89 2205.08 2433.62 53 1597.30 2621.96 1028.73 1473.32 2436.34 2650.67 54 1752.64 2701.27 1148.99 1585.63 2644.07 2908.33 ‘55 461.17 934.06 (274.82 432.33 — 676,05 — 957.13 56 632.18 1278.34 392.38 580.07 — 918.30. 1299.52 57 784.13 1578.40 (497.32 742.63 1165.85 1610.34 38 937-77 1933.21 59187 909.86 1425.48 —aso149 59 1087.97 2196.11 685,39 1070.52, 1685.75 —2058.08 60 1243.53 (2421.53 783.76 1224.66 1951.04 2240.6523 fT TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kgm/m) Key | hart | Altedges simply supported All edges fixed Me | Me | Maw aye | He Tay 61 1402.04 2617.78 92.20, 1366.63 - —2199.99 2443.74 a 1570.21 2959.96 1007.84 1496.81 ° = —2430.24 = 2677.91 6 1720.91 2859.39 1128.09 1613.44 = — 2643.62 — 2946.99 6 459.98 933.56 216.79 432.99. — 67152 — 969.50 65 630.18 1279.38 394.63 581.24 — 91390 1309.88 66 783.16 1595.0 499.10 742.63 = 1161.39» —1617.33 o 933.38 1968.28 » 592.04 909.82 | 1421.06 —1866.92 68 1078.83 2251.72 683.22 «107.47 1683.45 2063.95 cc) 1229.38 2499.33 TRI 123463 1950.75 2243.03, 1. 1379.86 2719.62 881.67 1382.66 © 2201.15 2458.24 m 1543.32 2876.47 990.64 © «1516.11 2429.19." —2704.83 n 1694.46 3005.52 1106.44 1644.39 <> 2642.69 2989.10 ° B 461.48 934.00 27193 433.19 — 666.64 — 972.53 "4 629.35 1280.00 396.37 581.74 — 909.94 = 1312.91 8 781.06 1609.52 501.00 143.43 1158.14 1620.67 6 928.69 1992.21 593.54 911.46 141797 1870.70 . n 1070.79 2298.41 682.35 «1074.74. 1679.07 2067.22 B 1218.14 2566.19 771387 1237.85 1946.38 © 2248.47 nD 1367.06 2808.84 874.15 1392.16 © 2197.86 2465.95 80 1529.96 2987.58 97196 1525.42 2425.02 © 2717.18 81 1675.38 3137.66 1091.40 165430 2640.48 — 3010.66 82 456.68 932.90 271.54 432.91 = 668.14 — 974.90 83 626.61 1279.97 395.86 581.59 — SULT 1315.25 4 TITAS 1619.10 500.44 74344 1159.41 1623.73 85 920.02 2012.26 592.14 91054» 1419.09 = —1872.40 86 1059.43 2333.10 680.18 1074.67 1680.20 —2069.20 a7 1203.56 2619.15 769.33 ° 1239.28 = —1947.96° 2251.48 8 1350.82 2879.27 866.09 1396.30 2198.75 — 2471.58 89 1508.04 3078.02, 967.27 1572.80 2428.10 — 2729.72 90 1648.71 3247.42 1073.54 1728.38 © 2634.20 3036.5122 TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kgm/m) Key | ghar |All edges simply suportea All edges fixed . Moe Me | Me | My Hae My 3 1816.06 3388.32 119489187649 —2836.96 3359.90 2 1997.01 3504.07 1325.48 2002.72 3042.09 — 367608 93 2190.74 3626.09 146656 2111.27 3246.60 — 3964.59 94 2362.26 3727.38 1628.89 222845 357499 4191.56 9s 2599.55 3924.74 1788.86 229997 390781 4384.08 96 2815.33 3899.23 197561 2384.28 4291.96 4523.01 97 3023.31 3956.17 214689 2415.02 4633.91 —4688.07 98 3254.88 3989.34 2319.79 2425.97 496401 —4806.43 99 459.88 933.51 21858 433.74. — 66337 = — 267 100 628.70 1280.54 39723" $8224 = — 90708 —1318.37 101 718.78 1624.34 50207 743.95. 1155.86 —1626.77 102 973.26 2025.69 59387 911.20. 141503. — 1875.54 103 1060.56 2357.60 681.73 1076.28. 1676.98 — 2073.42 104, 1199.37 2657.78 760.32 I24LS6 194855 25494 10s 1338.60 2934.27 863.97 1400.81. 219625 — 2478.77 106 1492.18 3150.89 96045 158611 242211 2732.98 107 1631.30 3337.52 1066.47 «176291. 2639.78 + — 3046.81 108 1798.27 349698 117822191155. 2829.22. — 3386.05 109 1973.46 3639.96 1304.39 2048.79 3032.59. —3716.98 110 2164.94 372.2 1445.86 218083 324001 —4012.39 un 2365.41 3894.06 1602.66 2310.66. 3578.65. —4263.80 2 2572.24 401.13 176707241214 3937.46 = 4519.72 13 2787.79 4104.77 946.61 280048 431141 4781.41 14 3007.73 4172.23 2137.23 2574.86 = 4709.14 © — 4922.29 lis 3243.50 4230.00 2333.69 2625.49 5105.63 5060.69 16 459.66 933.50 2941 439.12 657.99 — 970.48 7 621.29 1280.42 398.66 58305 — 901.83 —132165 18 71699 1628.80 50391 745.16. 1150.76 — 1630.56 ng 920.44 2036.97 5957791274 411.38 — 880.48 220 1056.19 2316.22 68325 107736 = 167387 2077.7623, TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kgm/m) ce All edges simply supported All edges fixed Mac My Moe | Me | Tw iy 124 19484 2687.70 769.39 | 1242.29 1940.49 —2256.50 122 1332.53 2980.30 86251 1403.11 2193.26 — 2481.79 123 1483.12 3212.68 95657 1598.68 2420.78 |= — 2740.24 124 1612.81 3414.69 105947 «1783468. «2638.69 —3056.68 125 1773.27 3591.93 116603 1941.84 280749 —3472.09 126 1948.50 3743.63, 1799.49 209357 301083. 3740.72 27 2137.22 3896.67 1427.50” 2239.29 323404 — 4056.03 128 233383 4044.50 1581.52 238392 358253 4348.84 19 2539.37 4179.82 173453. 2487.18 ~ 3929.30 —4677.67 130 2755.33 4292.96 1912.06 2592.66 —4313.57 —4956.16 131 2976.19 4379.66 210597 + 2694.02 4729.69" 5166.55 132 3213.51 4454554 2331.66 2805.51 5199.22 —8327.89 133 439.15 933.43 28026 43767. — 652.87 — 982.09 134 628.90 1281.09 39987-58348 — 896.46 ~ 1324.05 135 78.31 1631.16 50520 45.23. 1144.88 ~ 1632.40 136 917.42 2042.68 59109 912.88 «= 1406.06 © — 1881.29 37 1051.94 2389.21 684.75 «107795 1668.49 2078.92 138 1188.60 2709.71 769.59 1242.39 = 1934.57 2258.17 139 1323.74 3010.91 861.63 1403.89 2187.40 —2483.40 140 1474.85 3257.02 953.66 © 1605.18 |= 2415.21 © —2742.17 at 1604.85 3478.30 105281 1792.97 2631.33 — 3065.49 142 1763.89 3663.77 1158.23 1965.68“ \ —2801.83 —3483.72 143 1930.67 3827.87 1278.91 2129.27, 3005.43 3765.87 144 2107.46 4000.23 1409.77 2280.79 3207.98 © — 4088.54 145 2303.83 4164.70 1560.72 2438.14 3578.26 — 4442.95 146 2507.30 4319.29 ITIS15 2569.72", —3938.98 —4796.53 7 22.7 441.16 1890.22 2691.72 4325.22 — 5085.98 14s 2942.97 4857.64 2081.88 © 2807.74 ©” 4753.37 $520.85 vas 3180.69 4651.90 20728 2890.07 5161.58 5524.75 150 458.32 933.33 2813343492 658.70 — 984.1124 TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kgm/m) oir All edges simply supported | All edges fixed (0. Me | My Mae | My | 151 628.00 1280.98 401.18 583.65 — 887.19 1326.06 152 717.25 1632.95 50639 745.69 1132.25 1634.77 153 919.39 2047.64 597.93 91336 ~1390.57 1882.76 154 1047.92 2398.70 685.79 1079.04. «= 1651.50 —2081.29 155 1183.00 2736.95 710.34 124497 «= 1918.32, 2262.61 156 1316.00 3036.64 858.88 «1398.87 2163.05 2473.56 157 1640.88 3294.56 951.88 1610.31 2303.88 © —2757.78 158 1591.67 3521.88 1048.46 1802.32 © 260752 ~3075.82 159 1781.67 3726.35 115245198440 2799.07 3498.64 160 1914.74 3910.99 126.05 2156.10 3003.23.» 3779.35 lel ~~ 2097.43 4100.35 139797 2318.86 = 3206.05 —4117.93 162 2291.03 4282.76 1544.27 2485.14 3554.56 = —4512.62 163 2491.90 4448.25 1696.61 2636.41 «= 3940.43. —4904.07 164 2694.05 4604.03 1874.14 278045 434241 5221.88 165 2934.30 4729.88 205346 2896.24 «© 4745.42 $452.03 166 3173.34 4843.94 2271.78 3012.54 5195.11 — 5696.44 167 439.34 933.43 28217 435.72 — 644.26 — 986.93. 168 626.44 1280.74, 40240 58413 882.83 ~1328.17 169 713.38 1633.65 50795 746.32, 112832 1637.32 170 917.37 2050.72 599.62 91430 1386.75. — 1886.15 m 1050.22 2405.09 68733 107899 1646.70 — 2082.64 im 1184.03 2149.34 732 1245.36" 1913.47 | 2264.33 13 1308.70 3056.97. 859.52, 1399.41 2157.94 2477.04 14 1456.45 332368 -° «951-70 «1613.22 2386.96 = 2758.99 115 1579.23 3556.47 1046.72 1808.25, 260012, 3077.79 176 1732.56 3777.31 115001 1998.95 2795.29 — 3503.68 7 1893.57 3975.62 1264.97 2180.83 2999.67 — 3848.29 178 2037.72 4180.85 1388.70 2345.21 319955 4229.68. 179 2264.49 4377.14 1533.27 2531.73 «3450.19 — 4577.61 180 2462.63 4661.59 167591 2679.97 3927.59 4976.02of 25 TABLE | (Continued) | Bending Moments (kgm/m) oar ‘Ail edges simpy supported | All edges fixed Mac | Mye Mr | Mw My 181 2675.38 4732.65 ye44s 282031 | ~—431684 — —5352.09 182 2891.78 4876.20 2027.16 2963.60 © 4742002. — 5585.54 183, 3129.04 5009.47 2247.44 = 311281 $204.23 $856.52 184 458.84 933.53 283.02 43646 — 639.05 — 989.24 185 628.49 1281.07 403.69 585.02 — 87697 1331.71 186 713.22 1632.70 509.60 747.397 1421.92 1640.73 187 915.21 2051.58 O11 91485 1380.50 1889.12 188 1047.53 2408.44 689.60 1080.81 1642.02 - 2086.69 189 1180.24 2755.68 791 1249.59 1909.67 ~-2267.01 190 | 1310415 3069.45, 861.16 1401.44 = 2155.60 2480.60 191 1452.88 3346.01 952.53 1616.00 © —2386.47..* —2757.51 192° 1568.45, 3588.27 1046.52 1814.27, 2600.38 3075.09 193 1719.00 3818.39 1147.41 2007.62 2789.99 —3505.79 194 1879.93 4028.42 125965 2192.77 2992.01 = 3802.73 195 2053.28 4248.95 1387.18 2384.26 = 3199.88 4164.32 196 2240.54 4459.63 152048 «2567.95 3447.61 4635.16 197 2436.31 4659.93 1656.73 2710.38 3916.59 — 5058.34 198 2646.58 4846.05 1828.14 2885.74 4324.95 5412.39 199 2861.88 5009.80 200382 «3030.15 4737.00 5697.93 200 3096.77 5158.16 224.2 «3185.28 = 5186.36 = 5944.67 201 457.62 933.30 283.76 437.08 — 634.28. — 991.86 202 627.23 1280.87 404.64 585.95 — 87243 1334.72 203 776.28 1633.99 510.70 748.00 © 117.13 1643.33 204 912.50 2054.14 602.79 91643 > —1375.81 1892.50 205 1044.49 2412.63 691.66 1081.76 1636.83 — 2089.65 206 1176.35 2762.92 11447 1246.10 1903.29 2269.05 207 -. 1305.09 3080.15 863.56 1402.55 2150.61 - —2484.79 ~ 208 1445.17 3366.74 934.93 1617.22. "2381.81 2759.91. 209 1567.94 3616.03 1049.49 «1821.62 2596.38... —3078.25 210 1716.10 3854.39 1145.21 2009.69 2782.46 3508.1226 TABLE 1 (Continued) | Bending Moments (kgim/m) Key ] fe All edges simply supported i All edges fixed My | Mye | Mae Mye | i, | Hy 211 1864.6 4075.37 125583 2201.75 2986.02 —3809.02 212 2039.15 4306.86 1379.21 2396.20 3192.11 4178.66 213 2223.62 4530.21 1510.64 2590.18 3443.13 4663.65 214 2414.57 4749.20 1650.28 2761.67 3926.88 5113.48 215 2621.82 4949.78 181587 2940.62 4329.04 — 5506.52 216 2835.22 5130.52 1988.14 309697. 4743.80 ~5810.34 217 3068.93 5294.09 220643 «3287.17 5218.30 © 6119.42 218 459.20 933.64 284.85, 437.61 — 629.09 — 994.13 219 622.68 1280.12 406.02 58640 — 868.25 1337.27 220 71.69 1635.62, 512.35, 748.82 1114.02 1646.53 221 912.77 2058.90 604.49 91762 1373.08 — 1896.13, 22 1038.24 2418.32 69334 108262 1633.28. © 2002.31 223 1169.46 2771.14 716.14 1248.16 1889.94 2272.68 : 224 1300.56 3093.95 86513 140387 2145.47 2488.77 225 1437.82 3384.60 955.92 1616.14" 2375.12 2765.70 7 226 1560.33 3640.61 1049.82 1821 35 2588.85 —3083.31 227 1702.92 3934.72 1143.83 2017.35, 27792 3449.33, 7 228 1860.26 4164.54 1251.64 2208.87 2981.08 3714.84 229 2030.74 4408.88 1372.14 (2407.54 3186.46 4188.88 230 2237.66 4646.16. 1505.71 2607.33 3434.06 — 4684.14 231 (2432.85 4872.29 1634.74 2784.12 3917.55 5153.11 232 2640.28 5085.55 1797.32 2973.83 —4319.41 5543.99 233 2852.94 ‘5281.68 1977.18 3166.59 4759.12 5884.32 234 3087.70 5461.60 2192.01 3350.91 5212.00 — 6202.46 235 458,12 933.00 286.18 438.15, — 623.55 — 996.82 236 627.81 1280.94 407.65 587.04 — 863.17 1340.28 237 722.92 1635.63 ‘514.05 749.25 1118.99 1648.96 238 9131S, 2056.51 606.09 918.09 1368.07 1898.41 239 1045.46 (2416.99 695,48 1083.56 1628.94 2095.49 240 1176.24 2772.93 ‘777.82 1249.38 1895.23 — 2275.12a 4 TABLE 1 (Continued) Bending Moments (kem/m) Siete |All edges simply supported | All edges fixed No. a . Mare | Mye | | My | Mu My mat 1298.72 3098.42 866.87 *. 140489 - —2140.54 2489.78 242 1431.38 3394.13, 95799 1617.94 = 2370.61 2767.38 23 1552.94 3656.06 1050.50 1820.36 2588.40 — 3086.79 244 1696.97 3906.91 1143.78 201699 2772.39 — 3518.37 245 1852.08 4199-71 125135 2218.29 2977.84 — 3820.49 246 2019.80 4405.42 1368.40 2407.39 «= 3180.75 —4203.68 247 2195.14 fos2.73 1500.87 2622.91 3427.08. — 4702.62 248 2381.75 4893.88 1629.88 281541 363287 — 5178.33 249 2584.03, 5120.98 1786.49 «3005.51. 4314.08 — 5589.32 250 2792.35 5332.07 1961.04 320366 «= 4750.08 — $935.60 251 3021.65 $525.56 2170.72 3393.13 $198.56... - 6267.06 282 457.04 932.81 288.29 43794 — 61748 998.95 253 626.69 1280.74 410.06 58668 = — 857.48 1341.93 254 775.11 1634.82 516.06 149.27 = 1103.70 1650.77 255 911.59 2056.75 607.18 91792 1362.45 1898.81 256 1043.14 2417.84 696.20 1083.54.» 1620.03 © —2094.67 257 1173.50 2773.41 77150 1248.94 1889.16 2274.77 . 258 1299.85 3101.25 866.47 1405.14 2134.44 2487.21 259 1435.40 3401.33 95733 (1616.37 2365.08 © 2771.64 260 1545.84 3668.14 1050.24 1822.37 2579.14 3089.27 261 1688.57 3923.72 1146.89 2018.77 2766.16 —3822.71 262 1841.49 4170.27 1253.77 «2217.58 = 2969.32, 3824.70 263 2007.43 4435.70 1369.09 2412.91 =3173.07 4210.85 264 2181 55 4691.33 1498.71 263463 3417.32 —4720.52 265 2366.52 4945.32 1624.17 2829.21 3626.26. 5182.85 266 2565.03 5184.17 1780.93 3035.94 4315.01 5622.50 267 2710.15 5408.87 1954.45 3246.39. 4751.08 = 5977.33 268 2997.43 5616.53 2155.69 343498 = + 5187.50 6316.67 269 455.21 932.41 289.87 438.68 — 610.64 = 1001.03 270 621.74 1279.92 412.04 58734 — 849.04 1345.43 RAT