Ww International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _ eISSN: 2395-0056 395-0072 RET Volume: 05 Issue: 12| Dec 2018 www.irjetnet p-lsst ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF BRIDGE DECK USING GRILLAGE METHOD - AS PER IRC Pooja C?, Arun L?, Thejashwini* PG Student Department of Civil Engineering EIT Ummathur, chamarajanagar571313 Karnataka, India 2Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering VVIET Mysuru, Karnataka, India Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, ELT College, ummathur chamarajanagar, §71313 karnataka India Abstract: Analysis and design of bridge deck using grillage method is considered. The structural model is developed as per FE discretization in Staad Pro. For the purpose of analysis, dead load (self- weight, wearing coat, super imposed dead load, footpath tive load) and vehicular live loads are considered as per IRC: 6-2014. Linear static analysis is carried. The design values of bending ‘moment and shear force for the class A 70 R tracked vehicle are arrived. Key Words: Grillage model, Discretization, Impact factor, wearing coat, Vehicular live load INTRODUCTION Grillage analogy is probably one ofthe most popular computer-aided analysis for analyzing bridge decks. The method consists ‘of representing the actual decking system of the bridge by an equivalent grillage of beams. The dispersed bending and torsional stiffness of the decking system are assumed, for the purpose of analysis, to be concentrated in these beams. The actual deck loading is replaced by an equivalent nodal loading, ‘The requirement of analysis isthe evaluation of internal member forces, stresses and deformations of structures. After the analysis, distribution of member forces will be ascertained. 41.1 Types of modelling: Iisa procedural way of establishing three mathematical models, such as 1, A structural model 2. Amaterial model 3. Aload model 14, Types offloads 4, Permanent Loads 2, Transient Loads 1.1.2, Modeling discretization Formulation ofa mathematical model using discrete mathematical elements and their connections and interactions to capture the prototype behavior is called Discretization, For this purpose: 1, Joints/Nodes are used to discretize elements at primary locations in structure at which displacements are of interest or a locations of change in geometry. 2, Elements are connected to each other at joints 3, Masses, inertia, and loads are applied to elements and then transferred to joints. ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1059~ International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _ eISSN: 2395-0056 THIET Volume: 05 tssue: 12] Dec 2018 www.irjetnet PASSN: 2395-0072 Figure 1: models of super structure (Priestley, et al 1996) 1.1.3, Spine model Spine Models with beam elements are generally used for ordinary bridges. 1. The effective stiffness of the element may vary depending on the structure type. 2. Spine model can't capture the superstructure carrying wide roadway, high-skewed bridges. In that case grillage model isused. 1.1.4, Grillage model Grillage model isthe most used computer-aided method for analyzing bridge decks. Ifthe load is concentrated on an area which is much smaller than the grillage mesh, the concentration of moments and torque cannot be given by this method and the Influence charts can be used. Figure 2: (a) Prototype deck slab model and (b) equivalent grillage model (Source: Bridge Deck Behavior - E.CHambly) 1.1.5, Plate element model ‘The other method used in modeling the bridges is by using the plate/stell elements model the bridge deck. 2. Analysis and design of RC solid deck stab 2.1 Introduction: Forshortspans,a solid reinforced concrete slab, generally castin-situ rather than precast, is the simplest design, Its also cost- ‘ffective, since the flat, level soffit means that false workand formworkarealso simple, With larger spans, the reinforced slabhas to be thicker to carry the extra stresses under load. This extra weight ofthe slab itself then becomes a problem, which can be solved in one of two ways. The firsts to use prestressing techniques and the second isto reduce the deadweight ofthe slab by Including ‘voids’, often expanded polystyrene cylinders. Up to about 25m span, such volded slabs are more economical than prestressed slabs ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1060~ International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _ eISSN: 2395-0056 THIET Volume: 05 tssue: 12] Dec 2018 www.irjetnet PASSN: 2395-0072 Figure 3: Plan view of Reinforced concrete solid slab waste + iy ‘one a, 760 #: [== | Figure 4: C/S view at A-A of Reinforced concrete solid slab 2.2 Structural analysis: Linear analysis is performed for dead load and vehicular live loads using STAAD Pro, Table 1: General Details Grade afeonaee 7 rade ofmeel e500 Uniwegn of RE En TalweghofPEE za Vehicular ive Toad] Ghar A Velie cousdre fo 2 Land ron nese Vale ineerols TOR Teed Voie ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1061eISSN: 2395-0056 p-ISSN: 2395-0072 Ww International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) TAFT Volume: 05 Issue: 12| Dec 2018 www.irjetnet 2.3 Idealization of deck in Staad Pro: ‘The RC solid Slab deckis modelled as “Grillage’, The slab deckis divided into longitudinaland transverse grillage beams with appropriate properties. oo doe dn dnd te non en, HT tad Pt i Veto \(seeen tt rer t Tr gato ppp Figures: Deck slab grillage model ‘Member property of deck slab: ‘The thickness of the Deck Slab is varying as per the 2.5 9 camber requirement.‘The appropriate depth for each Longitudinal and Transverse members are calculated and the property of each member is defined as a Rectangular Section ‘Table 2: Self weight load calculation (25 kN/m?) Thicknessinm | tntensity ofloadinkN/m* | Spacing oftransverse inm | Load on transverse 0.66 0,66%25=165 06/2503 495 0.66 0.66x25-165 0.6/2+0388/2=0.74 1221 0.66 0,66%25-165 (0.88+0,88)/2=0.88 1452 2.4 Dead load calculation: Table 3: Summary of load due to wearing coat (2 kN/m2) Intensity of load in kN/m? Spacing of transverse inm Load on transverse KN/m 2 06/2503 06 2 0.6/2+0,88/2=0.74 La 2 (0.88+0.88)/2=0.80 176 © 2018, 1RJET | Impact Factor value: 21 | 180 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1062Ww International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _ eISSN: 2395-0056 TAFT Volume: 05 Issue: 12| Dec 2018 wwwirjetnet PASSN: 2395-0072 Table 4: Summary load due to Foot path live load (FLL) (5 kN/m?) Intensity ofload in kN/m? | Spacing of transverse inm Load on transverse N/m 5 06/203 4s 5 (0.6+0.88)/20.74 37 5 (0.88+0.88)/2=0.88 44 ‘Table 5: Summary of self-weight load calculation "Transverse memberload Thickness in Edge | Member Along | _ Remaining SLNo meters(m) | Member | _ support Members 0300 074 0.a8 1 066 495 1221 1452 2 (0,66+0,675)/2 4 12.34 1467 3 (o.675+0.604)/2 | 5.13 12.66 15.059 4 (0.6940.713)/2 | 527. 13.0 1547 5 (o713+0.731)/2 | 5415 13.357 15.884 é 0.781+0.75)/2 555, 13.699 16.291 Load due to crash barrier = 7.75 kN/m, applied on edge members along longitudinal direction Figure 6: Dead load on grillage model consideration in staad pro: ‘The live load with appropriate impact factor is moved on the deck using moving load option, joned at, sure 7: 2 Class A vehicle p Jum edge clearance as per IRC ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1063international Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _e-1SsN: 2395-0056 TRJET Volume: 05 Issue: 12| Dec 2018 www.rjetnet PASSN: 2395-0072 ‘Table 6: Calculation of Impact Factor (I) as per CL 211.1 IRC: 6-2014 For dass A Vehicles F5] (rk) 45] (HO) = 28.12 % 10% For 7OR Tracked Vehicle For TOR wheeled Vehicle 25% 2.5 Summary of forces ‘The Critical BM and SF for deckis obtained at various locations for each of the loadings and compared to getthe Critical Forces. We get different values for different loading condition, that is vehicular live load due to 2 class A, 70R tracked vehicle, 70R ‘Wheeled vehicle. Outof these the one giving maximum bending moment and shear force values is considered for design ofthe deck slab, The total design value= (max dead load value + max vehicular live load value) Figure 8: BM due to 70R tracked vehicle placed on Reinforced concrete slab ‘Table 7: Summary of Design Values Factored Bending moment (kN-m) Wea838 Factored Shear force(kN) ai60i8 CONCLUSIONS: 1. Grillage model is the most popular computer-aided method for analyzing bridge decks. This is because itis easy to comprehend and use, This has been proved to be accurate for a wide variety of bridge types. 2. Grillage model values are dependent upon the property specification of individual grillage beams. 3. The maximum values of bending moment and shear force are 464 kNm and 316 RN, for 70R tracked vehicle 4, The finer grillage mesh, provide more accurate results ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1064~ International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) _ eISSN: 2395-0056 THIET Volume: 05 tssue: 12] Dec 2018 wwwirjetnet PASSN: 2395-0072 [REFERENCES 1, Amendmentto clause I1-loads and stresses” 204 of IRC: 6-2017 “standard specifications and code of practice for road bridges, section ith revision) 2. "Bridge Design using the STAAD Pro/Beava", IEG Group, Bentley Systems, Bently Systems Inc, March 2008. 3. IRC: 6-2017, Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section Il, Loads and Stresses, The Indian Roads Congress, 2000, 4, IRC:112-2011 code of practice for concrete bridges 5, Hambly, E.C., (1975) Bridge Deck Behaviour Second Edition), E & FN SPON, an imprint of chapman & hall AUTHORS Poojacis presently studying M.Tech (structural engineering) in EIT, Ummathur, chamarajanagar, Karnataka, She received her B.E Degree in Civil Engineering from VTU during 2012-2016 ‘Arun Lis presently working as Assistant professor, Dept.of Civil Engineering at VVIET, Mysuru Karnataka, He obtained his M.Tech degree in Structures from VTU. ‘Thejashwini Is presently working as Assistant professor, Dept of Civil Engineering at EIT, ummathur, ‘chamarajanagar Karnataka, she obtained her M-Tech degree in Structures from VTU, ©2018,IRJET | ImpactFactor value: 7.211 | 1S0.9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1065