87th MEETING OF BRIDGE AND STRUCTURES STANDARDS COMMITTEE
(September, 2023)
ITEM NO. 1101
Subject : Designing all future ROB superstructures considering Special
Vehicle loading/ non-SV loading with Congestion Factor as
prescribed in IRC:6-2017.
BSC Reference : Nil.
RDSO File No. : CBS/ROB/Arch
Agenda : In view of recent cases of adoption of Bow String Girder
drawings designed for non-SV loading and non Congestion
Factor cases in places where both are likely as per traffic
conditions, RDSO has recently proposed the above subject
matter to Railway Board vide letter No. CBS/ROB/Arch dated
02.08.2023.
NOTES BY SECRETARY
Issue Raised by:
Bridges & Structures Directorate, RDSO, Lucknow
1. One of the Zonal Railways recently reported problems/failures in an ROB
consisting of 2 Bow String Girders built as per RDSO Drg. No. RDSO/B-10410
(54m) and RDSO/B-10411 (60m).
2. Designs selected were meant for normal loading (non-Special vehicle loading)
and no Congestion Factor was considered in these designs, basically implying
that these designs are not meant to be used where heavy to very heavy
vehicles are supposed to cross the ROB and where congestion of such
vehicles is likely to occur over the bridge.
3. RDSO team visited the site and found that the location of this ROB is in highly
industrialized area where very heavy vehicles carrying stone boulders, ballast,
stone aggregates ply. Under these circumstances, it was prudent to adopt the
designs where SV loading or Congestion Factor have been taken into
account. Thus, wrong selection of ROB Bow String Girder design was done
by the Zonal Railway for this site leading to reported failures.
Discussion:
1. From above instance, it is very important to note that selection of suitable
design is very important in case of ROB superstructure. As RDSO has now
provided many options for ROB superstructures (with and without SV loading
and Congestion Factor) in the form of RDSO standard drawings as well as
BS-132 (Compendium for Road Over Bridges on Indian Railways) therefore
6
87th MEETING OF BRIDGE AND STRUCTURES STANDARDS COMMITTEE
(September, 2023)
selection of right drawing based on right parameters is very critical for
satisfactory structural performance of the structure chosen.
2. Regarding Congestion Factor, IRC-6 clause 204.4 says – “For bridges,
Flyovers/grade separators close to areas such as ports, heavy industries and
mines and any other areas where frequent congestion of heavy vehicles may
occur, as may be decided by the concerned authorities, additional check for
congestion of vehicular live load on the carriageway shall be considered”.
Further IRC-6 provides Congestion Factors in the form of multiplying factors
on the global effect of vehicular live load depending upon span of the bridge.
The Congestion Factor was introduced in IRC-6 in the year 2014.
3. Before introduction of concept of Special Vehicle (SV) loading bridges were
supposed to be designed with Class A and Class 70R vehicles only. As per
IRC-6 clause 201.1, “SV loading is to be adopted for design of new bridges in
select corridors as may be decided by the concerned authorities where
passage of trailer vehicles carrying stator units, turbines, heavy equipment
and machinery may occur occasionally. This loading represents a spectrum
of special vehicles in the country and should be considered for inclusion in the
design wherever applicable.” A comparison of SV loading and non-SV loading
is as under:
SV loading Non-SV Loading
Total axle load-385t Class 70R – 100t
Class A – 55.4t
Length of vehicle – 38.459m Class 70R – 14.9m
Class A – 20.3m
No impact and no congestion to be Both are to be taken
taken
Single unit of vehicle to be taken 70R @ 30m clearance
Class A @ 18.5m clearance
Eccentricity @ 0.3m from centre of Class 70R – 1.2m from kerb face
carriageway Class A – 0.15m from kerb face
Single vehicle Combination as per Table 6 of IRC:6
4. From above paras it is clear that the ROB girders which are not designed
considering SV loading/ Congestion Factor, if put into service in an area
where these situations prevail may ultimately lead to failures. The role of GAD
approving authorities becomes very critical in this regard. However, with the
growth of industrialization throughout the country, rapid development of road
networks and possible diversion of heavy traffic to the bridge site in case of
some problem with the routine routes, possible diversion of heavy vehicles
from toll roads towards non-toll roads for toll avoidance etc. it can never be
rightly estimated that the bridge under consideration will never be subject to
7
87th MEETING OF BRIDGE AND STRUCTURES STANDARDS COMMITTEE
(September, 2023)
SV loading or congestion situations as mentioned in IRC-6. So the bridges
designed with non-SV loading/ without Congestion Factor are bound to
encounter failures in future if loading pattern changes in the life span of the
bridge which is more than 50 years. For comparison purpose 2 Bow String
Girders have been compared with/ without SV/Congestion factor loading as
under –
Weight difference due to consideration of Special congestion and SV loading
Span Drg. No. Total deck Spl. Vehicle Congestion Design for Weight Weight
width (m) loading Factor lane/ (t) difference
considered considered loading (t) %
54m RDSO/B-10422/R 12.2 No No Two 345 50 t
54m RDSO/B-10417/R 12.2 Yes Yes Two 395 14.5%
RDSO Remarks:
1. Even with increase in superstructure weight / cost by 10-15%, RDSO is of the
opinion that all future ROBs should be constructed considering SV loading/
Congestion Factor to eliminate the element of subjectivity in selecting the right
design variables for the design of superstructure, to take care of changes in
traffic pattern due to industrial/ infrastructural development in adjoining areas,
traffic jams/ traffic diversions which can never be predicted.
2. Each component of ROB superstructure should be designed to cater for
maximum forces and moments etc. developed either due to SV loading or due
to non-SV loading combined with Congestion Factor, whichever is more.
3. The committee may deliberate on this Item.
***********
