AASHTO LRFD 2012 BridgeDesignSpecifications 6th Ed (US)

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
12 by the American Association of

S
Officials.
Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO
No reproduction or networing permitted without license from IHS
!icensee"#ept of Transportation$%&%''()''*
All rights reserved. Duplication Not for +esale, '&$')$-'*- *./%&/-' 0#T w.
20
tate ighway and !ransportation
is a violation of applicable la
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
LRFDUS-6-E1: June 2012 Errata to LRFD Design, Sixth Edition
4-70 AASHTO LRF D BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFI CATIONS
4.6.3.2.3Orthotropic Plate Model
"n orthotropic plate modeling# the fle$ural rigidity
of the elements may be uniformly distributed along the
cross%section of the dec&. 'here the torsional stiffness
of the dec& is not contributed solely by a solid plate of
uniform thic&ness# the torsional rigidity should be
established by physical testing# three%dimensional
analysis# or generally accepted and verified
appro$imations.
C4.6.3.2.3
!he accuracy of the orthotropic plate analysis is
sharply reduced for systems consisting of a small
number of elements sub(ected to concentrated loads.
4.6.3.2.4Refined Orthotropic Deck Model
)efined analysis of orthotropic dec& structures
sub(ected to direct wheel loads should be accomplished
using a detailed three%dimensional shell or solid finite
element structural model. !he structural model should
include all components and connections and consider
local structural stress at fatigue prone details as shown in
!able *.*.1.2.+%1. Structural modeling techni,ues that
utili-e the following simplifying assumptions may be
applied.
/ 0inear elastic material behavior#
/ Small deflection theory#
/ 1lane sections remain plane#
/ 2eglect residual stresses# and
/ 2eglect imperfections and weld geometry.
3eshing shall be sufficiently detailed to calculate
local stresses at weld toes and to resolve the wheel patch
pressure loading with reasonable accuracy.
C4.6.3.2.4
4urther guidance on evaluating local structural
stresses using finite element modeling is provided in
Manual for Design, Construction, and Maintenance of
Orthotropic teel !ridges 54'A# 20126.
4.6.3.3Beam-Slab Br!"e#
4.6.3.3."#eneral
!he aspect ratio of finite elements and grid panels
should not e$ceed 7.0. Abrupt changes in si-e and8or
shape of finite elements and grid panels should be
avoided.
2odal loads shall be statically e,uivalent to the
actual loads being applied.
C4.6.3.3."
3ore restrictive limits for aspect ratio may be
specified for the software used.
"n the absence of other information# the following
guidelines may be used at the discretion of the
9ngineer.
/ A minimum of five# and preferably nine# nodes per
beam span should be used.
/ 4or finite element analyses involving plate and
beam elements# it is preferable to maintain the
relative vertical distances between various elements.
"f this is not possible# longitudinal and transverse
elements may be positioned at the midthic&ness of
the plate%bending elements# provided that the
eccentricities are included in the e,uivalent
properties of those sections that are composite.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
SECTION 4$ STR%CT%RAL ANAL&SIS AND E'AL%ATION 4-7(
/ 4or grid analysis or finite element and finite
difference analyses of live load# the slab shall be
assumed to be effective for stiffness in both positive
and negative fle$ure. "n a filled or partially filled
grid system# composite section properties should be
used.
/ "n finite element analysis# an element should have
membrane capability with discreti-ation sufficient
to properly account for shear lag. !he force effects
so computed should be applied to the appropriate
composite or noncomposite section for computing
resistance.
/ 4or longitudinal composite members in grid
analyses# stiffness should be computed by assuming
a width of the slab to be effective# but it need not be
less than that specified in Article :.*.2.*.
/ 4or ;%frame and <%frame diaphragms# e,uivalent
beam fle$ure and shear stiffnesses should be
computed. 4or bridges with widely spaced
diaphragms# it may be desirable to use notional
transverse beam members to model the dec&. !he
number of such beams is to some e$tent
discretionary. !he significance of shear lag in the
transverse beam%slab width as it relates to lateral
load distribution can be evaluated ,ualitatively by
varying the stiffness of the beam%slab elements
within reasonable limits and observing the results.
Such a sensitivity study often shows that this effect
is not significant.
/ 0ive load force effects in diaphragms should be
calculated by the grid or finite element analysis.
!he easiest way to establish e$treme force effects is
by using influence surfaces analogous to those
developed for the main longitudinal members.
/ !he St. =enant torsional inertia may be determined
using the e,uation in Article >:.*.2.2.1.
!ransformation of concrete and steel to a common
material should be on the basis of shear modulus# ##
which can be ta&en as # ? 0.7$851@A6. "t is
recommended that the St. =enant rigidity of
composite sections utili-e only one%half of the
effective width of the fle$ural section# as described
above# before transformation.
4.6.3.3.2Cur%ed teel !ridges
)efined analysis methods should be used for the
analysis of curved steel bridges unless the 9ngineer
ascertains that appro$imate analysis methods are
appropriate according to the provisions of
Article :.*.2.2.:.
C4.6.3.3.2
)efined analysis methods# identified in Article :.:#
are generally computer%based. !he finite strip and finite
element methods have been the most common. !he
finite strip method is less rigorous than the finite
element method and has fallen into disuse with the
advent of more powerful computers. 4inite element
programs may provide grid analyses using a series of
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4-7) AASHTO LRF D BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFI CATIONS
beam elements connected in a plane. )efinements of the
grid model may include offset elements. 4re,uently# the
torsional warping degree of freedom is not available in
beam elements. !he finite element method may be
applied to a three%dimensional model of the
superstructure. A variety of elements may be used in this
type of model. !he three%dimensional model may be
made capable of recogni-ing warping torsion by
modeling each girder cross%section with a series of
elements.
!he stiffness of supports# including lateral restraint
such as integral abutments or integral piers# should be
recogni-ed in the analysis. Since bearing restraint is
offset from the neutral a$is of the girders# large lateral
forces at the bearings often occur and may create
significant bending in the girders# which may lead to
lower girder moments than would be computed if the
restraints were not present. !he 9ngineer should
ascertain that any such benefit recogni-ed in the design
will be present throughout the useful life of the bridge.
0oads may be applied directly to the structural
model# or applied to influence lines or influence
surfaces. Only where small%deflection elastic solutions
are used are influence surfaces or influence lines
appropriate. !he 9ngineer should ascertain that dead
loads are applied as accurately as possible.
4.6.3.4Cell*lar a+! B,- Br!"e#
A refined analysis of cellular bridges may be made
by any of the analytic methods specified in Article :.:#
e$cept the yield line method# which accounts for the two
dimensions seen in plan view and for the modeling of
boundary conditions. 3odels intended to ,uantify
torsional warping and8or transverse frame action should
be fully three%dimensional.
4or single bo$ cross%sections# the superstructure
may be analy-ed as a spine beam for both fle$ural and
torsional effects. A steel bo$ should not be considered to
be torsionally rigid unless internal bracing is provided to
maintain the bo$ cross%section. !he transverse position
of bearings shall be modeled.
4.6.3..Tr*## Br!"e#
A refined plane frame or space frame analysis shall
include consideration for the following.
/ >omposite action with the dec& or dec& systemB
/ >ontinuity among the componentsB
/ 4orce effects due to self%weight of components#
change in geometry due to deformation# and a$ial
offset at panel pointsB and
/ "n%plane and out%of%plane buc&ling of components
including original out%of%straightness# continuity
among the components and the effect a$ial forces
present in those components.
C4.6.3..
0oad applied to dec& or floorbeams instead of to
truss (oints will yield results that more completely
,uantify out%of%plane actions.
9$perience has shown that dead load force effects
calculated using either plane frame or space frame
analysis in a truss with properly cambered primary and
secondary members and detailed to minimi-e
eccentricity at (oints# will be ,uite close to those
calculated by the conventional appro$imations. "n many
cases# a complete three%dimensional frame analysis may
be the only way to accurately calculate forces in
secondary members# particularly live load force effects.
20
7
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
SECTION 4$ STR%CT%RAL ANAL&SIS AND E'AL%ATION 4-73
Out%of%plane buc&ling of the upper chords of pony
truss bridges shall be investigated. "f the truss derives its
lateral stability from transverse frames# of which the
floorbeams are a part# the deformation of the floorbeams
due to vehicular loading shall be considered.
4.6.3.6Ar/0 Br!"e#
!he provisions of Article :.*.+.7 shall apply where
applicable.
!he effect of the e$tension of cable hangers shall be
considered in the analysis of an arch tie.
'here not controlled through proper detailing# rib
shortening should be investigated.
!he use of large deflection analysis of arches of
longer spans should be considered in lieu of the
moment magnification correction as specified in
Article :.7.+.2.2c.
'hen the distribution of stresses between the top
and bottom chords of trussed arches is dependent on the
manner of erection# the manner of erection shall be
indicated in the contract documents.
C4.6.3.6
)ib shortening and arch design and construction are
discussed by 2ettleton 51CDD6.
Any single%step correction factor cannot be
e$pected to accurately model deflection effects over a
wide range of stiffnesses.
"f a hinge is provided at the crown of the rib in addition
to hinges at the abutment# the arch becomes statically
determinate# and stresses due to change of temperature and
rib shortening are essentially eliminated.
Arches may be analy-ed# designed# and constructed
as hinged under dead load or portions of dead load and
as fi$ed at some hinged locations for the remaining
design loads.
"n trussed arches# considerable latitude is available
in design for distribution of stresses between the top and
bottom chords dependent on the manner of erection. "n
such cases# the manner of erection should be indicated in
the contract documents.
4.6.3.7Cable-S1a2e! Br!"e#
!he distribution of force effects to the components
of a cable%stayed bridge may be determined by either
spatial or planar structural analysis if (ustified by
consideration of tower geometry# number of planes of
stays# and the torsional stiffness of the dec&
superstructure.
>able%stayed bridges shall be investigated for
nonlinear effects that may result from.
/ !he change in cable sag at all limit states#
/ Deformation of dec& superstructure and towers at
all limit states# and
/ 3aterial nonlinearity at the e$treme event limit
states.
>able sag may be investigated using an e,uivalent
member modeled as a chord with modified modulus of
elasticity given by 9,. :.*.+.D%1 for instantaneous
stiffness and 9,. :.*.+.D%2# applied iteratively# for
changing cable loads.
C4.6.3.7
2onlinear effects on cable%stayed bridges are
treated in several te$ts# e.g.# 51odolny and Scal-i# 1CE*B
!roits&y# 1CDD6# and a report by the AS>9 >ommittee
on >able Suspended Fridges 5AS>9# 1CC16# from which
the particular forms of 9,s. :.*.+.D%1 and :.*.+.D%2 were
ta&en.
$ ? $
1
@
G1
$ &'
2

5cos H 6
1
1
5:.*.+.D%16
MOD
12(
+
]
S
Officials.
All rights reserved. Duplication Not for +esale, '&$')$-'*- *./%&/-' 0#T w. is a violation of applicable la
" 2
1
G1

2
7
1
$
MOD
? $ 1
@
5 (
"
@ (
2
6 $&'
5
cos H
6
1
2:(
2
(
2
]
5:.*.+.D%26
where.
$ ? modulus of elasticity of the cable 5&si6
' ? total weight of cable 5&ip6
& ? cross%sectional area of cable 5in.
2
6
H ? angle between cable and hori-ontal 5degrees6
(, (
1
,
(
2
? hori-ontal component of cable force 5&ip6
!he change in force effects due to deflection may
be investigated using any method that satisfies the
provisions of Article :.7.+.2.1 and accounts for the
change in orientation of the ends of cable stays.
>able%stayed bridges shall be investigated for the
loss of any one cable stay.
4.6.3.3S*#4e+#,+ Br!"e#
4orce effects in suspension bridges shall be
analy-ed by the large deflection theory for vertical
loads. !he effects of wind loads shall be analy-ed# with
consideration of the tension stiffening of the cables. !he
torsional rigidity of the dec& may be neglected in
assigning forces to cables# suspenders# and components
of stiffening trusses.
C4.6.3.3
"n the past# short suspension bridges have been
analy-ed by conventional small deflection theories.
>orrection factor methods have been used on short% to
moderate%span bridges to account for the effect of
deflection# which is especially significant for calculating
dec& system moments. Any contemporary suspension
bridge would have a span such that the large deflection
theory should be used. Suitable computer programs are
commercially available. !herefore# there is little
rationale to use anything other than the large deflection
solution.
4or the same economic reasons# the span would
probably be long enough that the influence of the
torsional rigidity of the dec&# combined with the
relatively small effect of live load compared to dead
load# will ma&e the simple sum%of%moments techni,ue
suitable to assign loads to the cables and suspenders and
usually even to the dec& system# e.g.# a stiffening truss.
4.6.4Re!#1rb*1,+ ,5 Ne"a16e 7,me+1# +
C,+1+*,*# Beam Br!"e#
4.6.4.(Ge+eral
!he Owner may permit the redistribution of force
effects in multispan# multibeam# or girder
superstructures. "nelastic behavior shall be restricted to
the fle$ure of beams or girders# and inelastic behavior
due to shear and8or uncontrolled buc&ling shall not be
permitted. )edistribution of loads shall not be
considered in the transverse direction.
!he reduction of negative moments over the
internal supports due to the redistribution shall be
accompanied by a commensurate increase in the positive
moments in the spans.
S
Officials.
20 tate ighway and !ransportation
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
SECTION 4$ STR%CT%RAL ANAL&SIS AND E'AL%ATION 4-7.
4.6.4.)Re5+e! 7e10,!
!he negative moments over the support# as
established by linear elastic analysis# may be decreased
by a redistribution process considering the
moment%rotation characteristics of the cross%section or
by a recogni-ed mechanism method. !he
moment%rotation relationship shall be established using
material characteristics# as specified herein# and8or
verified by physical testing.
4.6.4.3A44r,-ma1e Pr,/e!*re
"n lieu of the analysis described in Article :.*.:.2#
simplified redistribution procedures for concrete and
steel beams# as specified in Sections 7 and *#
respectively# may be used.
4.6..S1abl12
!he investigation of stability shall utili-e the large
deflection theory.
4.6.6A+al2## 5,r Tem4era1*re Gra!e+1
'here determination of force effects due to vertical
temperature gradient is re,uired# the analysis should
consider a$ial e$tension# fle$ural deformation# and
internal stresses.
Iradients shall be as specified in Article +.12.+.
C4.6.6
!he response of a structure to a temperature
gradient can be divided into three effects as follows.
/ A<"A0 9<1A2S"O2J!his is due to the uniform
component of the temperature distribution that
should be considered simultaneously with the
uniform temperature specified in Article +.12.2. "t
may be calculated as.
1
)
*#
? )
#
d+ d,
&
c
5>:.*.*%16
!he corresponding uniform a$ial strain is.
K
u
? H 5)
*#
@ )
u
6 5>:.*.*%26
/ 409<L)A0 D94O)3A!"O2JFecause plane
sections remain plane# a curvature is imposed on the
superstructure to accommodate the linearly variable
component of the temperature gradient. !he rotation
per unit length corresponding to this curvature may
be determined as.
H 1
M ? )
#
, d+ d, ? 5>:.*.*%+6
- c
R
"f the structure is e$ternally unrestrained# i.e.#
simply supported or cantilevered# no e$ternal force
effects are developed due to this superimposed
deformation.
S
Officials.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4-76 AASHTO LR F D B RIDGE D ESIGN S PECIF I CATIONS
!he a$ial strain and curvature may be used in both
fle$ibility and stiffness formulations. "n the former#
K
u
may be used in place of P8&$# and M may be used
in place of M8$- in traditional displacement
calculations. "n the latter# the fi$ed%end force effects
for a prismatic frame element may be determined
as.
. ? $&
c
K
u
5>:.*.*%:6
M ? $-
c
M 5>:.*.*%76
An e$panded discussion with e$amples may be
found in Ihali and 2eville 51CEC6.
Strains induced by other effects# such as shrin&age
and creep# may be treated in a similar manner.
/ "2!9)2A0 S!)9SSJLsing the sign convention
that compression is positive# internal stresses in
addition to those corresponding to the restrained
a$ial e$pansion and8or rotation may be calculated
as.
N
$
? $
O
H)
#
G H)
*#
G M,
P
5>:.*.*%*6
where.
)
#
? temperature gradient 5QR46
)
*#
? temperature averaged across the cross%section
5R46
)
u
&
c
?
?
uniform specified temperature 5R46
cross%section areaJtransformed for steel
beams 5in.
2
6
-
c
? inertia of cross%sectionJtransformed for steel
beams 5in.
:
6
H ? coefficient of thermal e$pansion 5in.8in.8R46
$ ? modulus of elasticity 5&si6
R ? radius of curvature 5ft6
+ ? width of element in cross%section 5in.6
, ? vertical distance from center of gravity of
cross%section 5in.6
4or e$ample# the fle$ural deformation part of the
gradient fle$es a prismatic superstructure into a segment
of a circle in the vertical plane. 4or a two%span structure
with span length# /# in ft# the unrestrained beam would
lift off from the central support by Q ? * /
2
8R in in.
4orcing the beam down to eliminate Q would develop a
moment whose value at the pier would be.
M ?
+
$- M 5>:.*.*%D6
c
2
c
!herefore# the moment is a function of the beam rigidity
and imposed fle$ure. As rigidity approaches 0.0 at the
strength limit state# M
c
tends to disappear. !his behavior
also indicates the need for ductility to ensure structural
integrity as rigidity decreases.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4.7D&NA7IC ANAL&SIS
4.7.(Ba#/ Re8*reme+1# ,5 S1r*/1*ral D2+am/#
4.7.(.(Ge+eral
4or analysis of the dynamic behavior of bridges# the
stiffness# mass# and damping characteristics of the
structural components shall be modeled.
!he minimum number of degrees%of%freedom
included in the analysis shall be based upon the number
of natural fre,uencies to be obtained and the reliability
of the assumed mode shapes. !he model shall be
compatible with the accuracy of the solution method.
Dynamic models shall include relevant aspects of the
structure and the e$citation. !he relevant aspects of the
structure may include the.
/ Distribution of mass#
/ Distribution of stiffness# and
/ Damping characteristics.
!he relevant aspects of e$citation may include the.
/ 4re,uency of the forcing function#
/ Duration of application# and
/ Direction of application.
C4.7.(.(
!ypically# analysis for vehicle% and wind%induced
vibrations is not to be considered in bridge design.
Although a vehicle crossing a bridge is not a static
situation# the bridge is analy-ed by statically placing the
vehicle at various locations along the bridge and
applying a dynamic load allowance# as specified in
Article +.*.2# to account for the dynamic responses
caused by the moving vehicle. owever# in fle$ible
bridges and long slender components of bridges that
may be e$cited by bridge movement# dynamic force
effects may e$ceed the allowance for impact given in
Article +.*.2. "n most observed bridge vibration
problems# the natural structural damping has been very
low. 4le$ible continuous bridges may be especially
susceptible to vibrations. !hese cases may re,uire
analysis for moving live load.
"f the number of degrees%of%freedom in the model
e$ceeds the number of dynamic degrees%of%freedom used#
a standard condensation procedure may be employed.
>ondensation procedures may be used to reduce the
number of degrees%of%freedom prior to the dynamic
analysis. Accuracy of the higher modes can be
compromised with condensation. !hus if higher modes
are re,uired# such procedures should be used with caution.
!he number of fre,uencies and mode shapes
necessary to complete a dynamic analysis should be
estimated in advance or determined as an early step in a
multistep approach. aving determined that number# the
model should be developed to have a larger number of
applicable degrees%of%freedom.
Sufficient degrees%of%freedom should be included to
represent the mode shapes relevant to the response
sought. One rule%of%thumb is that there should be twice
as many degrees%of%freedom as re,uired fre,uencies.
!he number of degrees%of%freedom and the
associated masses should be selected in a manner that
appro$imates the actual distributive nature of mass. !he
number of re,uired fre,uencies also depends on the
fre,uency content of the forcing function.
4.7.(.)D#1rb*1,+ ,5 7a##e#
!he modeling of mass shall be made with
consideration of the degree of discreti-ation in the
model and the anticipated motions.
C4.7.(.)
!he distribution of stiffness and mass should be
modeled in a dynamic analysis. !he discreti-ation of the
model should account for geometric and material
variation in stiffness and mass.
!he selection of the consistent or lump mass
formulation is a function of the system and the response
sought and is difficult to generali-e. 4or distributive
mass systems modeled with polynomial shape functions
in which the mass is associated with distributive
S
Officials.
20
stiffness# such as a beam# a consistent mass formulation
is recommended 51a-# 1CE76. "n lieu of a consistent
formulation# lumped masses may be associated at the
translational degrees%of%freedom# a manner that
appro$imates the distributive nature of the mass 5>lough
and 1en-ian# 1CD76.
4or systems with distributive mass associated with
larger stiffness# such as in%plane stiffness of a bridge
dec&# the mass may be properly modeled as lumped. !he
rotational inertia effects should be included where
significant.
4.7.(.3S155+e##
!he bridge shall be modeled to be consistent with
the degrees%of%freedom chosen to represent the natural
modes and fre,uencies of vibration. !he stiffness of the
elements of the model shall be defined to be consistent
with the bridge being modeled.
C4.7.(.3
"n seismic analysis# nonlinear effects which
decrease stiffness# such as inelastic deformation and
crac&ing# should be considered.
)einforced concrete columns and walls in Seismic
Sones 2# +# and : should be analy-ed using crac&ed
section properties. 4or this purpose# a moment of inertia
e,ual to one%half that of the uncrac&ed section may be
used.
4.7.(.4Dam4+"
9,uivalent viscous damping may be used to
represent energy dissipation.
C4.7.(.4
Damping may be neglected in the calculation of
natural fre,uencies and associated nodal displacements.
!he effects of damping should be considered where a
transient response is sought.
Suitable damping values may be obtained from field
measurement of induced free vibration or by forced
vibration tests. "n lieu of measurements# the following
values may be used for the e,uivalent viscous damping
ratio.
/ >oncrete construction. two percent
/ 'elded and bolted steel construction. one percent
/ !imber. five percent
4.7.(..Na1*ral Fre8*e+/e#
4or the purpose of Article :.D.2# and unless
otherwise specified by the Owner# elastic undamped
natural modes and fre,uencies of vibration shall be used.
4or the purpose of Articles :.D.: and :.D.7# all relevant
damped modes and fre,uencies shall be considered.
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4.7.)Ela#1/ D2+am/ Re#4,+#e#
4.7.).('e0/le-I+!*/e! 'bra1,+
'hen an analysis for dynamic interaction between a
bridge and the live load is re,uired# the Owner shall
specify and8or approve surface roughness# speed# and
dynamic characteristics of the vehicles to be employed
for the analysis. "mpact shall be derived as a ratio of the
e$treme dynamic force effect to the corresponding static
force effect.
"n no case shall the dynamic load allowance used in
design be less than 70 percent of the dynamic load
allowance specified in !able +.*.2.1%1# e$cept that no
reduction shall be allowed for dec& (oints.
C4.7.).(
!he limitation on the dynamic load allowance
reflects the fact that dec& surface roughness is a ma(or
factor in vehicle8bridge interaction and that it is difficult
to estimate long%term dec& deterioration effects thereof
at the design stage.
!he proper application of the provision for reducing
the dynamic load allowance is.
-M
C&/C
T 0.7-M
)a0le 316 5>:.D.2.1%16
not.
1 @
-M _
T 0.7
1 @
-M
_
5>:.D.2.1%26

100
,
C&/C

100
,
4.7.).):+!-I+!*/e! 'bra1,+
4.2.2.2."'ind 3elocities
4or critical or essential structures# which may be
e$pected to be sensitive to wind effects# the location and
magnitude of e$treme pressure and suction values shall
be established by simulated wind tunnel tests.
4.2.2.2.2D4na5ic $ffects
'ind%sensitive structures shall be analy-ed for
dynamic effects# such as buffeting by turbulent or
gusting winds# and unstable wind%structure interaction#
such as galloping and flutter. Slender or torsionally
fle$ible structures shall be analy-ed for lateral buc&ling#
e$cessive thrust# and divergence.
4.2.2.2.3Design Considerations
Oscillatory deformations under wind that may lead
to e$cessive stress levels# structural fatigue# and user
inconvenience or discomfort shall be avoided. Fridge
dec&s# cable stays# and hanger cables shall be protected
against e$cessive vorte$ and wind%rain%induced
oscillations. 'here practical# the employment of
dampers shall be considered to control e$cessive
dynamic responses. 'here dampers or shape
modification are not practical# the structural system shall
be changed to achieve such control.
C4.2.2.2.3
Additional information on design for wind may be
found in AAS!O 51CE76B Scanlan 51CD76B Simiu and
Scanlan 51CDE6B Fasu and >hi 51CE1a6B Fasu and >hi
51CE1b6B AS>9 51C*16B and AS>9 51CC16.
S
Officials.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4.7.3I+ela#1/ D2+am/ Re#4,+#e#
4.7.3.(Ge+eral
During a ma(or earth,ua&e or ship collision# energy
may be dissipated by one or more of the following
mechanisms.
/ 9lastic and inelastic deformation of the ob(ect that
may collide with the structure#
/ "nelastic deformation of the structure and its
attachments#
/ 1ermanent displacement of the masses of the
structure and its attachments# and
/ "nelastic deformation of special%purpose mechanical
energy dissipators.
4.7.3.)Pla#1/ H+"e# a+! &el! L+e#
4or the purpose of analysis# energy absorbed by
inelastic deformation in a structural component may be
assumed to be concentrated in plastic hinges and yield
lines. !he location of these sections may be established
by successive appro$imation to obtain a lower bound
solution for the energy absorbed. 4or these sections#
moment%rotation hysteresis curves may be determined
by using verified analytic material models.
4.7.4A+al2## 5,r Ear108*a;e L,a!#
4.7.4.(Ge+eral
3inimum analysis re,uirements for seismic effects
shall be as specified in !able :.D.:.+.1%1.
4or the modal methods of analysis# specified in
Articles :.D.:.+.2 and :.D.:.+.+# the design response
spectrum specified in 4igure +.10.:.1%1 and
9,s. +.10.:.2%1# +.10.:.2%+# and +.10.:.2.: shall be used.
Fridges in Seismic Sone 1 need not be analy-ed for
seismic loads# regardless of their operational
classification and geometry. owever# the minimum
re,uirements# as specified in Articles :.D.:.: and +.10.C#
shall apply.
4.7.4.)S+"le-S4a+ Br!"e#
Seismic analysis is not re,uired for single%span
bridges# regardless of seismic -one.
>onnections between the bridge superstructure and
the abutments shall be designed for the minimum force
re,uirements as specified in Article +.10.C.
3inimum support length re,uirements shall be
satisfied at each abutment as specified in Article :.D.:.:.
C4.7.4.)
A single%span bridge is comprised of a
superstructure unit supported by two abutments with no
intermediate piers.
4.7.4.37*l1#4a+ Br!"e#
4.2.4.3."election of Method
4or multispan structures# the minimum analysis
re,uirements shall be as specified in !able :.D.:.+.1%1 in
which.
U ? no seismic analysis re,uired
L0 ? uniform load elastic method
S3 ? single%mode elastic method
33 ? multimode elastic method
! ? time history method
C4.2.4.3."
!he selection of the method of analysis depends on
seismic -one# regularity# and operational classification
of the bridge.
)egularity is a function of the number of spans and
the distribution of weight and stiffness. )egular bridges
have less than seven spansB no abrupt or unusual
changes in weight# stiffness# or geometryB and no large
changes in these parameters from span to span or
support%to%support# abutments e$cluded. A more
rigorous analysis procedure may be used in lieu of the
recommended minimum.
Table 4.7.4.3.(-(7+m*m A+al2## Re8*reme+1# 5,r Se#m/ E55e/1#
Seismic
Sone
Single%Span
Fridges
3ultispan Fridges
Other Fridges 9ssential Fridges >ritical Fridges
regular irregular regular irregular regular irregular
1
2o seismic
analysis
re,uired
U U U U U U
2 S38L0 S3 S38L0 33 33 33
+ S38L0 33 33 33 33 !
: S38L0 33 33 33 ! !
9$cept as specified below# bridges satisfying the
re,uirements of !able :.D.:.+.1%2 may be ta&en as
VregularW bridges. Fridges not satisfying the
re,uirements of !able :.D.:.+.1%2 shall be ta&en as
VirregularW bridges.
Table 4.7.4.3.(-)Re"*lar Br!"e Re8*reme+1#
1arameter =alue
2umber of Spans 2 + : 7 *
3a$imum subtended angle for a curved bridge C0R C0R C0R C0R C0R
3a$imum span length ratio from span to span + 2 2 1.7 1.7
3a$imum bent8pier stiffness ratio from span to span#
e$cluding abutments
J : : + 2
>urved bridges comprised of multiple simple%spans
shall be considered to be VirregularW if the subtended
angle in plan is greater than 20 degrees. Such bridges
shall be analy-ed by either the multimode elastic method
or the time%history method.
A curved continuous%girder bridge may be analy-ed
as if it were straight# provided all of the following
re,uirements are satisfied.
/ !he bridge is VregularW as defined in
!able :.D.:.+.1%2# e$cept that for a two%span bridge
the ma$imum span length ratio from span to span
must not e$ceed 2B
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
s
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4-3) AASHTO LR F D B RIDGE D ESIGN S PECIF I CATIONS
/ !he subtended angle in plan is not greater than
C0 degreesB and
/ !he span lengths of the e,uivalent straight bridge
are e,ual to the arc lengths of the curved bridge.
"f these re,uirements are not satisfied# then curved
continuous%girder bridges must be analy-ed using the
actual curved geometry.
4.2.4.3.2ingle1Mode Methods of &nal4sis
4.2.4.3.2a#eneral
9ither of the two single%mode methods of analysis
specified herein may be used where appropriate.
4.2.4.3.20ingle1Mode pectral Method
!he single%mode method of spectral analysis shall
be based on the fundamental mode of vibration in either
the longitudinal or transverse direction. 4or regular
bridges# the fundamental modes of vibration in the
hori-ontal plane coincide with the longitudinal and
transverse a$es of the bridge structure. !his mode shape
may be found by applying a uniform hori-ontal load to
the structure and calculating the corresponding
deformed shape. !he natural period may be calculated
by e,uating the ma$imum potential and &inetic energies
associated with the fundamental mode shape. !he
amplitude of the displaced shape may be found from the
elastic seismic response coefficient# C
s5
# specified in
Article +.10.:.2# and the corresponding spectral
displacement. !his amplitude shall be used to determine
force effects.
C4.2.4.3.20
!he single%mode spectral analysis method described
in the following steps may be used for both transverse
and longitudinal earth,ua&e motions. 9$amples
illustrating its application are given in AAS!O 51CE+6
and A!> 51CE16.
/ >alculate the static displacements %
s
678 due to an
assumed uniform loading p
o
as shown in
4igure >:.D.:.+.2b%1.
F"*re C4.7.4.3.)b-(Br!"e De/; S*b<e/1e! 1, A##*me!
Tra+#6er#e a+! L,+"1*!+al L,a!+"
/ >alculate factors H# X# and Y as.
H ?

%
s
5 7 6 d7
X ?

+
5
7
6
%
s
5
7
6
d7
5>:.D.:.+.2b%16
5>:.D.:.+.2b%26
Y ?
+ 5 7 6 %
2
5 7 6
d7
5>:.D.:.+.2b%+6
S
Officials.
where.
p
o
? a uniform load arbitrarily set e,ual to
1.0 5&ip8ft6
%
s
678
+678
?
?
deformation corresponding to p
o
5ft6
nominal# unfactored dead load of the
bridge superstructure and tributary
substructure 5&ip8ft6
!he computed factors# H# X# and Y have units of 5ft
2
6#
5&ip%ft6# and 5&ip%ft
2
6# respectively.
/ >alculate the period of the bridge as.
where.
)
5
? 2Z
Y
p
o
gH
5>:.D.:.+.2b%:6
g ? acceleration of gravity 5ft8sec.
2
6
/ Lsing )
5
and 9,s. +.10.:.2%1# +.10.:.2%:# or
+.10.:.2%7# calculate C
s5
.
/ >alculate the e,uivalent static earth,ua&e loading
p
e
678 as.
p 5 7 6 ?
X C
s5
+5 76% 5 76 5>:.D.:.+.2b%76
e
Y
s
where.
C
s5
? the dimensionless elastic seismic response
coefficient given by 9,s. +.10.:.2%1#
+.10.:.2%:# or +.10.:.2%7
p
e
678 ? the intensity of the e,uivalent static
seismic loading applied to represent the
primary mode of vibration 5&ip8ft6
/ Apply loading p
e
678 to the structure# and determine
the resulting member force effects.
4.2.4.3.2c*nifor5 /oad Method
!he uniform load method shall be based on the
fundamental mode of vibration in either the longitudinal
or transverse direction of the base structure. !he period
of this mode of vibration shall be ta&en as that of an
e,uivalent single mass%spring oscillator. !he stiffness of
this e,uivalent spring shall be calculated using the
ma$imum displacement that occurs when an arbitrary
uniform lateral load is applied to the bridge. !he elastic
seismic response coefficient# C
s5
# specified in
Article +.10.:.2 shall be used to calculate the e,uivalent
uniform seismic load from which seismic force effects
are found.
C4.2.4.3.2c
!he uniform load method# described in the following
steps# may be used for both transverse and longitudinal
earth,ua&e motions. "t is essentially an e,uivalent static
method of analysis that uses a uniform lateral load to
appro$imate the effect of seismic loads. !he method is
suitable for regular bridges that respond principally in
their fundamental mode of vibration. 'hereas all
displacements and most member forces are calculated
with good accuracy# the method is &nown to overestimate
the transverse shears at the abutments by up to 100
percent. "f such conservatism is undesirable# then the
single%mode spectral analysis method specified in Article
:.D.:.+.2b is recommended.
S
Officials.
20
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
/ >alculate the static displacements %
s
678 due to an
assumed uniform load p
o
# as shown in
4igure >:.D.:.+.2b%1. !he uniform loading p
o
is
applied over the length of the bridgeB it has units of
force per unit length and may be arbitrarily set
e,ual to 1.0. !he static displacement %
s
678 has units
of length.
/ >alculate the bridge lateral stiffness# 9# and total
weight# '# from the following e$pressions.
p /
9 :
o
%
s,M&;
5>:.D.:.+.2c%16
' ? +5 76d7
5>:.D.:.+.2c%26
where.
/ ? total length of the bridge 5ft6
%
s,M&;
? ma$imum value of %
s
576 5ft6
+678 ? nominal# unfactored dead load of the
bridge superstructure and tributary
substructure 5&ip8ft6
!he weight should ta&e into account structural
elements and other relevant loads including# but not
limited to# pier caps# abutments# columns# and footings.
Other loads# such as live loads# may be included.
Ienerally# the inertia effects of live loads are not
included in the analysisB however# the probability of a
large live load being on the bridge during an earth,ua&e
should be considered when designing bridges with high
live%to%dead load ratios that are located in metropolitan
areas where traffic congestion is li&ely to occur.
/ >alculate the period of the bridge# )
5
# using the
e$pression.
) ? 2Z
'
5>:.D.:.+.2c%+6
5
g9
where.
g ? acceleration of gravity 5ft8sec.
2
6
/ >alculate the e,uivalent static earth,ua&e loading p
e
from the e$pression.
p :
C
s5
'
5>:.D.:.+.2c%:6
e
/
where.
C
s5
? the dimensionless elastic seismic response
coefficient given by 9,s. +.10.:.2%1# +.10.:.2%:#
or +.10.:.2%7
S
Officials.
20
4-3.
p
e
? e,uivalent uniform static seismic loading per
unit length of bridge applied to represent the
primary mode of vibration 5&ip8ft6
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
SECTION 4$ STR%CT%RAL ANAL&SIS AND E'AL%ATION
/ >alculate the displacements and member forces for
use in design either by applying p
e
to the structure
and performing a second static analysis or by
scaling the results of the first step above by the ratio
p
e
<p
o
.
4.2.4.3.3Multi5ode pectral Method
!he multimode spectral analysis method shall be
used for bridges in which coupling occurs in more than
one of the three coordinate directions within each mode
of vibration. As a minimum# linear dynamic analysis
using a three%dimensional model shall be used to
represent the structure.
!he number of modes included in the analysis
should be at least three times the number of spans in the
model. !he design seismic response spectrum as
specified in Article +.10.: shall be used for each mode.
!he member forces and displacements may be
estimated by combining the respective response
,uantities 5moment# force# displacement# or relative
displacement6 from the individual modes by the
>omplete [uadratic >ombination 5>[>6 method.
C4.2.4.3.3
3ember forces and displacements obtained using
the >[> combination method are generally ade,uate for
most bridge systems 5'ilson et al.# 1CE16.
"f the >[> method is not readily available#
alternative methods include the s,uare root of the sum of
the s,uares method 5S)SS6# but this method is best
suited for combining responses from well%separated
modes. 4or closely spaced modes# the absolute sum of
the modal responses should be used.
4.2.4.3.4)i5e1(istor4 Method C4.2.4.3.4
4.2.4.3.4a#eneral
Any step%by%step time%history method of analysis
used for either elastic or inelastic analysis shall satisfy
the re,uirements of Article :.D.
!he sensitivity of the numerical solution to the si-e
of the time step used for the analysis shall be
determined. A sensitivity study shall also be carried out
to investigate the effects of variations in assumed
material hysteretic properties.
!he time histories of input acceleration used to
describe the earth,ua&e loads shall be selected in
accordance with Article :.D.:.+.:b.
C4.2.4.3.4a
)igorous methods of analysis are re,uired for
critical structures# which are defined in Article +.10.+#
and8or those that are geometrically comple$ or close to
active earth,ua&e faults. !ime history methods of
analysis are recommended for this purpose# provided
care is ta&en with both the modeling of the structure and
the selection of the input time histories of ground
acceleration.
4.2.4.3.40&cceleration )i5e (istories
Developed time histories shall have characteristics
that are representative of the seismic environment of the
site and the local site conditions.
)esponse%spectrum%compatible time histories shall
be used as developed from representative recorded
motions. Analytical techni,ues used for spectrum
matching shall be demonstrated to be capable of
C4.2.4.3.40
>haracteristics of the seismic environment to be
considered in selecting time histories include.
/ !ectonic environment 5e.g.# subduction -oneB
shallow crustal faults6#
/ 9arth,ua&e magnitude#
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
achieving seismologically realistic time series that are
similar to the time series of the initial time histories
selected for spectrum matching.
'here recorded time histories are used# they shall
be scaled to the appro$imate level of the design response
spectrum in the period range of significance. 9ach time
history shall be modified to be response%spectrum%
compatible using the time%domain procedure.
At least three response%spectrum%compatible time
histories shall be used for each component of motion in
representing the design earth,ua&e 5ground motions
having seven percent probability of e$ceedance in
D7 yr6. All three orthogonal components 57# 4# and ,6 of
design motion shall be input simultaneously when
conducting a nonlinear time%history analysis. !he design
actions shall be ta&en as the ma$imum response
calculated for the three ground motions in each principal
direction.
"f a minimum of seven time histories are used for
each component of motion# the design actions may be
ta&en as the mean response calculated for each principal
direction.
4or near%field sites 5D \ * mi6# the recorded
hori-ontal components of motion that are selected
should represent a near%field condition and should be
transformed into principal components before ma&ing
them response%spectrum%compatible. !he ma(or
principal component should then be used to represent
motion in the fault%normal direction and the minor
principal component should be used to represent motion
in the fault%parallel direction.
/ !ype of faulting 5e.g.# stri&e%slipB reverseB normal6#
/ Seismic%source%to%site distance#
/ 0ocal site conditions# and
/ Design or e$pected ground%motion
characteristics 5e.g.# design response spectrum#
duration of strong sha&ing# and special ground
motion characteristics such as near%fault
characteristics6
Dominant earth,ua&e magnitudes and distances#
which contribute principally to the probabilistic design
response spectra at a site# as determined from national
ground motion maps# can be obtained from
deaggregation information on the LSIS website.
http.88geoha-ard s .c r.usgs.gov.
"t is desirable to select time histories that have been
recorded under conditions similar to the seismic
conditions at the site listed above# but compromises are
usually re,uired because of the multiple attributes of the
seismic environment and the limited data ban& of
recorded time histories. Selection of time histories having
similar earth,ua&e magnitudes and distances# within
reasonable ranges# are especially important parameters
because they have a strong influence on response spectral
content# response spectral shape# duration of strong
sha&ing# and near%source ground%motion characteristics. "t
is desirable that selected recorded motions be somewhat
similar in overall ground motion level and spectral shape
to the design spectrum to avoid using very large scaling
factors with recorded motions and very large changes in
spectral content in the spectrum%matching approach. "f
the site is located within * mi of an active fault# then
intermediate%to%long%period ground%motion pulses that
are characteristic of near%source time histories should be
included if these types of ground motion characteristics
could significantly influence structural response.
Similarly# the high short%period spectral content of near%
source vertical ground motions should be considered.
Iround motion modeling methods of strong motion
seismology are being increasingly used to supplement
the recorded ground motion database. !hese methods
are especially useful for seismic settings for which
relatively few actual strong motion recordings are
available# such as in the central and eastern Lnited
States. !hrough analytical simulation of the earth,ua&e
rupture and wave propagation process# these methods
can produce seismologically reasonable time series.
)esponse spectrum matching approaches include
methods in which time series ad(ustments are made in
the time domain 50ilhanand and !seng# 1CEEB
Abrahamson# 1CC26 and those in which the ad(ustments
are made in the fre,uency domain 5Iasparini and
=anmarc&e# 1CD*B Silva and 0ee# 1CEDB Folt and
Iregor# 1CC+6. Foth of these approaches can be used to
modify e$isting time histories to achieve a close match
to the design response spectrum while maintaining fairly
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
well the basic time domain character of the recorded or
simulated time histories. !o minimi-e changes to the
time domain characteristics# it is desirable that the
overall shape of the spectrum of the recorded time
history not be greatly different from the shape of the
design response spectrum and that the time history
initially be scaled so that its spectrum is at the
appro$imate level of the design spectrum before
spectrum matching.
'here three%component sets of time histories are
developed by simple scaling rather than spectrum
matching# it is difficult to achieve a comparable
aggregate match to the design spectra for each
component of motion when using a single scaling factor
for each time history set. "t is desirable# however# to use
a single scaling factor to preserve the relationship
between the components. Approaches for dealing with
this scaling issue include.
/ use of a higher scaling factor to meet the minimum
aggregate match re,uirement for one component
while e$ceeding it for the other two#
/ use of a scaling factor to meet the aggregate match
for the most critical component with the match
somewhat deficient for other components# and
/ >ompromising on the scaling by using different
factors as re,uired for different components of a
time%history set.
'hile the second approach is acceptable# it re,uires
careful e$amination and interpretation of the results and
possibly dual analyses for application of the higher
hori-ontal component in each principal hori-ontal
direction.
!he re,uirements for the number of time histories to
be used in nonlinear inelastic dynamic analysis and
for the interpretation of the results ta&e into account
the
dependence of response on the time domain character of
the time histories 5duration# pulse shape# pulse
se,uencing6 in addition to their response spectral content.
Additional guidance on developing acceleration
time histories for dynamic analysis may be found in
publications by the >altrans Seismic Advisory Foard
Adhoc >ommittee 5>SAFA>6 on Soil%4oundation%
Structure "nteraction 51CCC6 and the L.S. Army >orps of
9ngineers 520006. >SAFA> 51CCC6 also provides
detailed guidance on modeling the spatial variation of
ground motion between bridge piers and the conduct of
seismic soil%foundation%structure interaction 5S4S"6
analyses. Foth spatial variations of ground motion and
S4S" may significantly affect bridge response. Spatial
variations include differences between seismic wave
arrival times at bridge piers 5wave passage effect6#
ground motion incoherence due to seismic wave
scattering# and differential site response due to different
soil profiles at different bridge piers. 4or long bridges#
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
all forms of spatial variations may be important. 4or
short bridges# limited information appears to indicate
that wave passage effects and incoherence are# in
general# relatively unimportant in comparison to effects
of differential site response 5Shino-u&a et al.# 1CCCB
3artin# 1CCE6. Somerville et al. 51CCC6 provide guidance
on the characteristics of pulses of ground motion that
occur in time histories in the near%fault region.
4.7.4.47+m*m S*44,r1 Le+"10
Re8*reme+1#
Support lengths at e$pansion bearings without
restrainers# S!Ls# or dampers shall either accommodate
the greater of the ma$imum displacement calculated in
accordance with the provisions of Article :.D.:.+# e$cept
for bridges in Sone 1# or a percentage of the empirical
support length# .# specified by 9,. :.D.:.:%1. Otherwise#
longitudinal restrainers complying with Article +.10.C.7
shall be provided. Fearings restrained for longitudinal
movement shall be designed in compliance with
Article +.10.C. !he percentages of .# applicable to each
seismic -one# shall be as specified in !able :.D.:.:%1.
!he empirical support length shall be ta&en as.
C4.7.4.4
Support lengths are e,ual to the length of the overlap
between the girder and the seat as shown
in 4igure >:.D.:.:%1. !o satisfy the minimum values for
. in this Article# the overall seat width will be larger than
. by an amount e,ual to movements due to prestress
shortening# creep# shrin&age# and thermal
e$pansion8contraction. !he minimum value for . given
in 9,. :.D.:.:%1 includes an arbitrary allowance for cover
concrete at the end of the girder and face of the seat. "f
above average cover is used at these locations# . should
be increased accordingly.
. ? 5E @ 0.02/ @ 0.0E( 6
5
1 @ 0.000127
2
6
where.
5:.D.:.:%16
. ? minimum support length measured normal to
the centerline of bearing 5in.6
/ ? length of the bridge dec& to the ad(acent
e$pansion (oint# or to the end of the bridge
dec&B for hinges within a span# / shall be the
sum of the distances to either side of the hingeB
for single%span bridges# / e,uals the length of
the bridge dec& 5ft6
( ? for abutments# average height of columns
supporting the bridge dec& from the abutment
to the ne$t e$pansion (oint 5ft6
for columns and8or piers# column# or pier height
5ft6
for hinges within a span# average height of the
ad(acent two columns or piers 5ft6
0.0 for single%span bridges 5ft6
F"*re C4.7.4.4-(S*44,r1 Le+"10= N
? s&ew of support measured from line normal to
span 5degrees6
S
Officials.
d
Table 4.7.4.4-(Per/e+1a"e N b2 >,+e a+! A//elera1,+
C,e55/e+1 A
S
= S4e/5e! + E8. 3.(0.4.)-)
Sone
Acceleration
>oefficient# &
1ercent# .
1 \0.07 TD7
1 T0.07 100
2 All Applicable 170
+ All Applicable 170
: All Applicable 170
4.7.4.. P-? Re8*reme+1#
!he displacement of any column or pier in the
longitudinal or transverse direction shall satisfy.
C4.7.4..
Fridges sub(ect to earth,ua&e ground motion may
be susceptible to instability due to P%Q effects.
"nade,uate strength can result in ratcheting of structural
QP
u
\ 0.27MM
n
in which.
Q ? R
d
Q
e
/ "f ) \ 1.27)
s
# then.
R ?
1 G
1 _
1 .2 7)
s
@

1
5:.D.:.7%16
5:.D.:.7%26
5:.D.:.7%+6
displacements to larger and larger values causing
e$cessive ductility demand on plastic hinges in the
columns# large residual deformations# and possibly
collapse. !he ma$imum value for Q given in this Article
is intended to limit the displacements such that P%Q
effects will not significantly affect the response of the
bridge during an earth,ua&e.
P%Q effects lead to a loss in strength once yielding
occurs in the columns of a bridge. "n severe cases# this
can result in the force%displacement relationship having

R
,
) R
/ "f ! T 1.27!
s
# then.
R
d
? 1 5:.D.:.7%:6
where.
Q ? displacement of the point of contrafle$ure in
the column or pier relative to the point of fi$ity
for the foundation 5ft6
Q
e
? displacement calculated from elastic seismic
analysis 5in.6
) ? period of fundamental mode of vibration 5sec.6
)

? corner period specified in Article +.10.:.2
5sec.6
R ? R%factor specified in Article +.10.D
P
u
? a$ial load on column or pier 5&ip6
M ? fle$ural resistance factor for column specified
in Article 7.10.11.:.1b
M
n
? nominal fle$ural strength of column or pier
calculated at the a$ial load on the column or
pier 5&ip%ft6
a negative slope once yield is fully developed. !he value
for Q given by 9,. :.D.:.7%1 is such that this reduction in
strength is limited to 27 percent of the yield strength of
the pier or bent.
An e$plicit P%Q chec& was not re,uired in the
previous edition of these Specifications but has been
introduced herein because two conservative provisions
have been rela$ed in this revised edition. !hese are.
/ !he shape of the response spectrum
54igure +.10.:.1%16 has been changed from being
proportional to 18)
28+
to 18). !he reason for the
"<)
2<3
provision in the previous edition was to give
conservative estimates of force and displacement in
bridges with longer periods 5]1.0 secs6 which# in an
indirect way# provided for such effects as P%Q. 'ith
the change of the spectrum to being proportional to
18)# an e$plicit chec& for P%Q is now re,uired.
/ !he fle$ural resistance factor# M# for seismic design
of columns with high a$ial loads has been increased
from a minimum value of 0.7 to 0.C 5Article
7.10.11.:.1b6. Lse of a low resistance factor led to
additional strength being provided in heavily loaded
columns that could be used to offset reductions due
to P%Q# in the previous edition. !he increased value
for M now permitted in Section 7 is a second reason
for re,uiring an e$plicit chec& for P%Q.
S
Officials.
20
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
4.7..A+al2## 5,r C,ll#,+ L,a!#
'here permitted by the provisions of Section +#
dynamic analysis for ship collision may be replaced by
an e,uivalent static elastic analysis. 'here an inelastic
analysis is specified# the effect of other loads that may
also be present shall be considered.
4.7.6A+al2## ,5 Bla#1 E55e/1#
As a minimum# bridge components analy-ed for
blast forces should be designed for the dynamic effects
resulting from the blast pressure on the structure. !he
results of an e,uivalent static analysis shall not be used
for this purpose.
C4.7.6
0ocali-ed spall and breach damage should be
accounted for when designing bridge components for
blast forces. Data available at the time these provisions
were developed 5winter 20106 are not sufficient to
develop e$pressions for estimating the e$tent of
spall8breach in concrete columnsB however# spall and
breach damage can be estimated for other types of
components using guidelines found in Department of
Defense 5200Ea6.
!he highly impulsive nature of blast loads warrants
the consideration of inertial effects during the analysis
of a structural component. 1ast research has
demonstrated that# in general# an e,uivalent static
analysis is not acceptable for the design of any structural
member sub(ected to blast loads 5Department of
Defense# 200EaB Department of Defense# 2002B Founds#
1CCEB AS>9# 1CCD6. "nformation on designing structures
to resist blast loads may be found in AAS!O^s !ridge
ecurit4 #uidelines 520116# AS>9 51CCD6# Department
of Defense 5200Ea6# >onrath# et al. 51CCC6# Figgs 51C*:6#
and Founds 51CCE6.
4.3ANAL&SIS B& PH&SICAL 7ODELS
4.3.(S/ale 7,!el Te#1+"
!o establish and8or to verify structural behavior# the
Owner may re,uire the testing of scale models of
structures and8or parts thereof. !he dimensional and
material properties of the structure# as well as its
boundary conditions and loads# shall be modeled as
accurately as possible. 4or dynamic analysis# inertial
scaling# load8e$citation# and damping functions shall be
applied as appropriate. 4or strength limit state tests#
factored dead load shall be simulated. !he
instrumentation shall not significantly influence the
response of the model.
4.3.)Br!"e Te#1+"
9$isting bridges may be instrumented and results
obtained under various conditions of traffic and8or
environmental loads or load tested with special purpose
vehicles to establish force effects and8or the load%
carrying capacity of the bridge.
C4.3.)
!hese measured force effects may be used to pro(ect
fatigue life# to serve as a basis for similar designs# to
establish permissible weight limits# to aid in issuing
permits# or to establish a basis of prioriti-ing
rehabilitation or retrofit.
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
4.9REFERENCES
AAS!O. 1CE+. #uide pecification for eis5ic Design of (igh+a4 !ridges. American Association of State
ighway and !ransportation Officials# 'ashington# D>.
AAS!O. 2000. #uide pecifications for eis5ic -solation Design# Second 9dition. American Association of State
ighway and !ransportation Officials# 'ashington# D>. Archived.
AAS!O. 200C. tandard pecifications for tructural upports for (igh+a4 igns, /u5inaries, and )raffic ignals#
4ifth 9dition# 0!S%7. American Association of State ighway and !ransportation Officials# 'ashington# D>.
AAS!O. 2010. #uide pecifications for eis5ic -solation Design# !hird 9dition# IS"D%+. American Association of
State ighway and !ransportation Officials# 'ashington# D>.
AAS!O. 2011. !ridge ecurit4 #uidelines# 4irst 9dition# FSI%1. American Association of State ighway and
!ransportation Officials# 'ashington# D>.
Abrahamson# 2. A. 1CC2. V2on%stationary Spectral 3atching 1rogram#W eis5ological Research /etters. =ol. *+#
2o.1. Seismological Society of America# 9l >errito# >A# p.+.
A>" >ommittee :+7. 1CE*. tate1of1&rt Report on )e5perature1-nduced Deflections of Reinforced Concrete
Me50ers. S1%E*%1. A>" :+7.D)%E7. American >oncrete "nstitute# 4armington ills# 3".
A>". 2002. !uilding Code Re=uire5ents for tructural Concrete and Co55entar4# A>" +1E%02 and A>" +1E)%02.
American >oncrete "nstitute# 4armington# ill# 3".
A"S>. 1CC+. V0oad and )esistance 4actor Design.W pecification for tructural teel !uildings and Co55entar4#
2nd 9dition. American "nstitute of Steel >onstruction# >hicago# "0.
A"S>. 1CCC. /R>D pecifications for tructural teel !uildings# !hird 9dition. American "nstitute of Steel
>onstruction# >hicago# "0.
Allen# !. 3. 2007. De%elop5ent of #eotechnical Resistance >actors and Do+ndrag /oad >actors for /R>D
>oundation trength /i5it tate Design# 4'A%2"%07%072. 4ederal ighway Administration# L.S. Department of
!ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
Aristi-abal# _. D. 1CED. V!apered Feam and >olumn 9lements in Lnbraced 4rame Structures.W ?ournal of Co5puting
in Ci%il $ngineering# =ol. 1# 2o. 1# _anuary 1CED# pp. +7`:C.
AS>9. 1C*1. V'ind 4orces on Structures.W )ransactions of the &C$# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew
aor&# 2a# =ol. 12*# 2o. +2*C.
AS>9. 1CD1. VIuide for Design of !ransmission !owers.W Manuals and Reports on $ngineering Practice# 2o. 72#
American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# pp. 1`:D.
AS>9 >ommittee on >able%Suspended Fridges. 1CC1. #uidelines for Design of Ca0le1ta4ed !ridges. >ommittee on
>able%Suspended Fridges# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a.
AS>9 !as& >ommittee on 9ffective 0ength. 1CCD. $ffecti%e /ength and .otional /oad &pproaches for &ssessing
>ra5e ta0ilit4@ -5ple5entation for &5erican teel Design. !as& >ommittee on 9ffective 0ength# American Society
of >ivil 9ngineers# )eston# =A.
Astaneh%Asl# A.# and S. >. Ioel. 1CE:. V>yclic "n%1lane Fuc&ling of Double Angle Fracing.W ?ournal of tructural
$ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 110# 2o. C# September 1CE:# pp. 20+*`2077.
Astaneh%Asl# A.# S. >. Ioel# and ). D. anson. 1CE7. V>yclic Out%of%1lane Fuc&ling of Double Angle Fracing.W
?ournal of tructural $ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 111# 2o. 7# 3ay 1CE7#
pp. 11+7`117+.
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
20
4-9) AASHTO LR F D B RIDGE D ESIGN
S PECIF I CATIONS
A!>. 1CE1. eis5ic Design #uidelines for (igh+a4 !ridges. A!>%*. Applied !echnology >ouncil# Fer&eley# >A.
Fasu# S.# and 3. >hi. 1CE1a. &nal4tic tud4 for >atigue of (igh+a4 !ridge Ca0les# 4'A%)D%E1%0C0. 4ederal
ighway Administration# L.S. Department of !ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
Fasu# S.# and 3. >hi. 1CE1b. Design Manual for !ridge tructural Me50ers under 'ind1-nduced $7citation#
4'A%!S%E1%20*. 4ederal ighway Administration# L.S. Department of !ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
Figgs# _. 3. 1C*:. -ntroduction to tructural D4na5ics. 3cIraw%ill Foo& >ompany# 2ew aor&# 2a.
Folt# F. A.# and 2. _. Iregor. 1CC+. 4nthesi,ed trong #round Motions for the eis5ic Condition &ssess5ent of the
$astern Portion of the an >rancisco !a4 !ridge# )eport L>F899)>%C+.12. 9arth,ua&e 9ngineering )esearch
>enter# Lniversity of >alifornia at Fer&eley# Fer&eley# >A.
Fridge!ech# "nc. 200D. i5plified /i%e /oad Distri0ution >actor $=uations# 2>)1 )eport 7C2. 2ational
>ooperative ighway )esearch 1rogram# !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil# 'ashington#
D>.
Furgan# F. A. and 1. _. Dowling. 1CE7. )he Collapse !eha%ior of !o7 #irder Co5pression >langes.u5erical
Modeling of $7peri5ental Results# >9S0"> )eport FI E+. "mperial >ollege# Lniversity of 0ondon# L;.
>hen# S. S.# A. _. Aref# ".%S. Ahn# 3. >hiewanicha&orn# _. A. >arpenter# A. 2ottis# and ". ;alpa&idis. 2007. $ffecti%e
la0 'idth for Co5posite teel !ridge Me50ers# 2>)1 )eport 7:+. !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational
)esearch >ouncil# 'ashington# D>.
>hen# '. 4.# and 9. 3. 0ui. 1CC1. ta0ilit4 Design of teel >ra5es. >)> 1ress# Foca )aton# 40.
>lough# ). '.# and _. 1en-ian. 1CD7. D4na5ics of tructures. 3cIraw ill# 2ew aor&# 2a.
>SAFA>. 1CCC. eis5ic oil1>oundation1tructure -nteraction# final report. >altrans Seismic Advisory Foard Ad
oc >ommittee on Soil%4oundation%Structure "nteraction 5>SAFA>6# >alifornia Department of !ransportation#
Sacramento# >A.
Danon# _. ). and '. 0. Iamble. 1CDD. V!ime%Dependent Deformations and 0osses in >oncrete Fridges Fuilt by the
>antilever 3ethod.W Ci%il $ngineering tudies, tructural Research eries. Lniversity of "llinois at Lrbana`
>hampaign# Department of >ivil 9ngineering# 2o. :+D# _anuary 1CDD# p. 1*C.
Davis# ).# _. ;o-a&# and >. Scheffey. 1C*7. tructural !eha%ior of a !o7 #irder !ridge. State of >alifornia ighway
!ransportation Agency# Department of 1ublic 'or&s# Division of ighways# Fridge Department# in cooperation with
L.S. Department of >ommerce# Fureau of 1ublic )oads# and the Lniversity of >alifornia# Fer&eley# >A# 3ay 1C*7.
Dis,ue# ). O. 1CD+. V"nelastic ;%4actor in Design.W &-C $ngineering ?ournal# American "nstitute of Steel
>onstruction# >hicago# "0# =ol. 10# 2nd [tr.# p. ++.
Dowling# 1. _.# _. 9. arding# and 1. A. 4rie-e# eds. 1CDD. Steel 1lated Structures. "n 1roc.# "mperial >ollege# >rosby
0oc&wood# 0ondon# L;.
Duan# 0. and '. 4. >hen. 1CEE. V9ffective 0ength 4actor for >olumns in Fraced 4rames.W ?ournal of tructural
$ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# =ol. 11:# 2o. 10# October# 1CEE# pp. 2+7D`2+D0.
Duan# 0.# and '. 4. >hen. 1CEC. V9ffective 0ength 4actor for >olumns in Lnbraced 4rames.W ?ournal of tructural
$ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 117# 2o. 1# _anuary 1CEC# pp. 1:C`1*7.
Duan# 0.# '. S. ;ing# and '. 4. >hen. 1CC+. V;%factor 9,uation to Alignment >harts for >olumn Design.W &C-
tructural ?ournal# =ol. C0# 2o. +# 3ay`_une# 1CC+# pp. 2:2`2:E.
9by# >. >.# _. 3. ;ulic&i# >. 2. ;ostem# and 3. A. Sellin. 1CD+. )he $%aluation of t. 3enant )orsional Constants for
Prestressed Concrete -1!ea5s. 4rit- 0aboratory )eport 2o. :00.12. 0ehigh Lniversity# Fethlehem# 1A.
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
S
Officials.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4'A. 2012. Manual for Design, Construction, and Maintenance of Orthotropic teel Deck !ridges. 4ederal
ighway Administration# L.S. Department of !ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
4rederic&# I. ).# >. =. Ardis# ;. 3. !arhini# and F. ;oo. 1CEE. V"nvestigation of the Structural Ade,uacy of > E70
Fo$ >ulverts#W )ransportation Research Record 11C1# !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil#
'ashington# D>.
Ialambos# !. =.# ed. 1CCE. #uide to ta0ilit4 Design for Metal tructures# 7th 9dition. Structural Stability )esearch
>ouncil. _ohn 'iley and Sons# "nc.# 2ew aor&# 2a.
Iasparini# D.# and 9. =anmarc&e. 1CD*. -MA9$@ & Progra5 for &rtificial Motion #eneration. Department of
>ivil 9ngineering# 3assachusetts "nstitute of !echnology# >ambridge# 3A.
Ihali# A.# and A. 3. 2eville. 1CEC. tructural &nal4sis@ & *nified Classical and Matri7 &pproach# +rd 9dition.
>hapman all# 2ew aor&# 2a.
Ioel# S. >.# and A. A. 9l%!ayem. 1CE*. V>yclic 0oad Fehavior of Angle <%Fracing.W ?ournal of
tructural
$ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 112# 2o. 11# 2ovember 1CE*# pp. 272E`
27+C.
Iuyan# ). _. 1C*7. V)eduction of Stiffness and 3ass 3atrices.W &-&& ?ournal# American "nstitute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics# )eston# =A# =ol. +# 2o. 2# 4ebruary 1C*7# p. +E0.
all# D. .# and >. . aoo. 1CC*. -1#irder Cur%ature tud4. "nterim )eport# 2>)1 1ro(ect 12%+E submitted to
2>)1# !ransportation )esearch Foard# 'ashington# D># pp. 1`D2 5or see Appendi$ A of 2>)1 )eport :2:.
"mproved Design Specifications for ori-ontally >urved Steel ighway Fridges# pp. :C`D:6.
aroun# 2. 3.# and ). Sheperd. 1CE*. V"nelastic Fehavior of <%Fracing in 1lane 4rames.W ?ournal of tructural
$ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 112# 2o. :# April 1CE*# pp. D*:`DE0.
iggins# >. 200+. V0)4D Orthotropic 1late 3odel for Determining 0ive 0oad 3oments in >oncrete 4illed Irid
Fridge Dec&s.W ?ournal of !ridge $ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# )eston# =A# _anuary84ebruary
200+# pp. 20`2E.
ighway 9ngineering Division. 1CC1. Ontario (igh+a4 !ridge Design Code. ighway 9ngineering Division#
3inistry of !ransportation and >ommunications# !oronto# >anada.
indi# '. A. 1CC1. VFehavior and Design of Stiffened >ompression 4langes of Steel Fo$ Iirder Fridges.W 1h.D.
!hesis. Lniversity of Surrey# Iuilford# L;.
omberg# . 1C*E. >ahr0ahnplatten 5it 3erandlicher Dicke. Springer%=erlag# 2ew aor&# 2a.
_ames# ). '. 1CE:. VFehavior of AS!3 > E70 >oncrete Fo$ >ulverts 'ithout Shear >onnectors#W )ransportation
Research Record 1001# !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil# 'ashington# D>.
_etteur# 1. et al. 1CE:. V"nteraction of Shear 0ag with 1late Fuc&ling in 0ongitudinally Stiffened >ompression
4langes#W &cta )echnica C&3. A&ademie =ed >es&e )epubli&y# >-ech )epublic# 2o. +# p. +D*.
_ohnston# S. F.# and A. . 3attoc&. 1C*D. /ateral Distri0ution of /oad in Co5posite !o7 #irder !ridges. ighway
)esearch )ecord 2o. 1*D# ighway )esearch Foard# 'ashington# D>.
;arabalis# D. 0. 1CE+. VStatic# Dynamic and Stability Analysis of Structures >omposed of !apered Feams.W
Co5puters and tructures# =ol. 1*# 2o. *# pp. D+1`D:E.
;etchum# 3. S. 1CE*. VShort >uts for >alculating Deflections.W tructural $ngineering Practice@ &nal4sis, Design,
Manage5ent# =ol. +# 2o. 2# pp. E+`C1.
;ing# >sagoly 1. 4.# and _. '. 4isher. 1CD7. >ield )esting of the &=uasa0on Ri%er !ridge. Ontario# >anada.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
S
Officials.
4-94 AASHTO LR F D B RIDGE D ESIGN
S PECIF I CATIONS
0amas# A. ). I. and 1. _. Dowling. 1CE0. V9ffect of Shear 0ag on the "nelastic Fuc&ling Fehavior of !hin%'alled
Structures.W "n )hin1'alled tructures# _. )hodes b A.>. 'al&er# eds.# Iranada# 0ondon# p. 100.
0iu# . 1CC1. 'ind $ngineering@ & (and0ook for tructural $ngineers. 1rentice all# 9nglewood >liffs# 2_.
Manual for Design, Construction and Maintenance of Orthotropic teel !ridges. "n development.
3cIrath# !. _.# A. A. 0iepins# _. 0. Feaver# and F. 1. Strohman. 200:. /i%e /oad Distri0ution 'idths for Reinforced
Concrete !o7 Cul%erts. A Study for the 1ennsylvania Department of !ransportation# Simpson Iumpert- b eger
"nc.# 'altham# 3A.
3od(es&i and 3asters# "nc. 1CC:. Report to Penns4l%ania Depart5ent of )ransportation. arrisburg# 1A.
3offatt# ;. ).# and 1. _. Dowling. 1CD7. VShear 0ag in Steel Fo$ Iirder Fridges.W )he tructural $ngineer# October
1CD7# pp. :+C`::D.
3offatt# ;. ).# and 1. _. Dowling. 1CD*. VDiscussion.W )he tructural $ngineer# August 1CD*# pp. 2E7`2CD.
2assif# .# A.%A. !alat# and S. 9l%!awil. 200*. V9ffective 4lange 'idth >riteria for >omposite Steel Iirder Fridges#W
Annual 3eeting >D%)O3# !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil# 'ashington# D>.
2ettleton# D. A. 1CDD. &rch !ridges. Fridge Division# Office of 9ngineering# 4ederal ighway Administration# L.S.
Department of !ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
2utt# )edfield and =alentine in association with David 9vans and Associates and Socon >onsulting 9ngineers. 200E.
Development of Design Specifications and >ommentary for ori-ontally >urved >oncrete Fo$%Iirder Fridges#
2>)1 )eport *20. !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil# 'ashington# D>.
1ai&ows&y# S. I.# with contributions from F. Firgisson# 3. 3c=ay# !. 2guyen# >. ;uo# I. Faecher# F. Ayyab# ;.
Stenersen# ;. O^3alley# 0. >hernaus&as# and 3. O^2eill. 200:. /oad and Resistance >actor Design 6/R>D8 for Deep
>oundations# 2>)1 54inal6 )eport 70D. !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil#
'ashington# D>.
1a-# 3. 1CE:. VDynamic >ondensation.W &-&& ?ournal# American "nstitute of Aeronautics and Astronautics# )eston#
=A# =ol. 22# 2o. 7# 3ay 1CE:# pp. D2:`D2D.
1a-# 3. 1CE7. tructural D4na5ics# 2nd 9dition. =an 2osstrand )einhold >ompany# 2ew aor&# 2a.
1ec&# ). F.# '. 9. anson# and !. . !hornburn. 1CD:. >oundation $ngineering# 2nd 9dition. _ohn 'iley and Sons#
"nc.# 2ew aor&# 2a.
1odolny# '.# and _. F. Scal-i. 1CE*. Construction and Design of Ca0le1ta4ed !ridges# 2nd 9dition. 'iley%
"nterscience# 2ew aor&# 2a.
1r-emieniec&i# _. S. 1C*E. )heor4 of Matri7 tructural &nal4sis. 3cIraw ill# 2ew aor&# 2a.
1ucher# A. 1C*:. -nfluence urfaces of $lastic Plates# :th 9dition. Springer%=erlag# 2ew aor&# 2a.
1uc&ett# _. A. and 3. _ablin. 200C. VAAS!O !%07 )eport.W >orrespondence# 3arch 200C.
)ichardson# Iordon and Associates 5presently D)# 1ittsburgh office6. 1CD*. V>urved Iirder 'or&shop 0ecture
2otes.W 1repared under >ontract 2o. DO!%4%11%EE17. 4ederal ighway Administration# L.S. Department of
!ransportation. 4our%day wor&shop presented in Albany# Denver# and 1ortland# September`October 1CD*# pp. +1`+E.
Salmon# >. I.# and _. 9. _ohnson. 1CC0. teel tructures@ Design and !eha%ior, $5phasi,ing /oad, and Resistance
>actor Design# +rd 9dition. arper and )ow# 2ew aor&# 2a.
Scanlan# ). . 1CD7. Recent Methods in the &pplication of )est Results to the 'ind Design of /ong uspended1pan
!ridges# 4'A%)D%D7%117. 4ederal ighway Administration# L.S. Department of !ransportation# 'ashington# D>.
S
Officials.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
SECTION 4$ STR%CT%RAL ANAL&SIS AND E'AL%ATION 4-9.
Shino-u&a# 3.# =. Sa$ena# and I. Deodatis. 1CCC. $ffect of patial 3ariation of #round Motion on (igh+a4
tructures# Draft 4inal )eport for 3>99) ighway 1ro(ect. Submitted to 3ultidisciplinary >enter for 9arth,ua&e
9ngineering )esearch# Lniversity at Fuffalo# Fuffalo# 2a.
Shush&ewich# ;. '. 1CE*. V!ime%Dependent Analysis of Segmental Fridges.W Co5puters and tructures# =ol. 2+#
2o. 1# pp. C7`11E.
Silva# '.# and ;. 0ee. 1CED. VState%of%the%Art for Assessing 9arth,ua&e a-ards in the Lnited State. )eport 2:#W
'$ R&C&/ Code for 4nthesi,ing $arth=uake #round Motions# 3iscellaneous 1aper 7%D+%1. L. S. Army 9ngineer
'aterways 9$periment Station# =ic&sburg# 3S.
Simiu# 9. 1CD+. V0ogarithmic 1rofiles and Design 'ind Speeds.W ?ournal of the Mechanics Di%ision# American
Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. CC# 2o. 937# October 1CD+# pp. 10D+`10E+.
Simiu# 9. 1CD*. V9,uivalent Static 'ind 0oads for !all Fuilding Design.W ?ournal of the tructures Di%ision#
American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# 2ew aor&# 2a# =ol. 102# 2o. S!:# April 1CD*# pp. D1C`D+D.
Simiu# 9.# and ). . Scanlan. 1CDE. 'ind $ffects on tructures. 'iley%"nterscience# 2ew aor&# 2a.
Smith# _r.# >. =. 1CD*. VOn "nelastic >olumn Fuc&ling.W &-C $ngineering ?ournal# American "nstitute of Steel
>onstruction# >hicago# "0# =ol. 1+# +rd [tr.# pp. E*`EE.
Song# S. !.# a. . >hai# and S. 9. ida. 2001. /i%e /oad Distri0ution in Multi1Cell !o71#irder !ridges and its
Co5parisons +ith &&()O /R>D !ridge Design pecifications# L>D%S!)%01%1# Lniversity of >alifornia# Davis#
>A# _uly 2001.
Song# S. !.# a. . >hai# and S. 9. ida. 200+. V0ive 0oad Distribution 4actors for >oncrete Fo$%Iirder Fridges.W
?ournal of !ridge $ngineering# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# =ol. E# 2o. 7# pp. 2D+`2E0.
!obias# D. .# ). 9. Anderson# S. a. ;ayyat# S. F. L-man# and ;. 0. )iechers. 200:. VSimplified AAS!O 0oad and
)esistance 4actor Design Iirder 0ive 0oad Distribution in "llinois#W ?ournal of !ridge $ngineering. American
Society of >ivil 9ngineers# )eston# =A# =ol. C# 2o. *# 2ovember8December 200:# pp. *0*`*1+.
!roits&y# 3. S. 1CDD. Ca0le1ta4ed !ridges. >rosby 0oc&wood Staples# 0ondon# 9ngland# p. +E7.
!ung# D. . .# and ). S. 4ountain. 1CD0. VAppro$imate !orsional Analysis of >urved Fo$ Iirders by the
38)%3ethod.W $ngineering ?ournal, American "nstitute of Steel >onstruction# =ol. D# 2o. +# pp. *7`D:.
Lnited States Steel. 1CE:. V=%0oad Analysis.W Available from the 2ational Steel Fridge Alliance# >hicago# "0#
pp. 1`7*.
LSA>9. 200+. )i5e (istor4 D4na5ic &nal4sis of Concrete (4draulic tructures# LSA>9 9ngineering >ircular
9>1110%2%*071. L.S. Army >orp of 9ngineers#
'hite# D. '.# and _. 4. a((ar. 1CC1. VApplication of Second%Order 9lastic Analysis in 0)4D. )esearch to 1ractice.W
&-C $ngineering ?ournal# American "nstitute of Steel >onstruction# >hicago# "0# =ol. 2E# 2o. :# pp. 1++`1:E.
'ilson# 9. 0.# A. Der ;iureghian# and 9. 1. Fayo. 1CE1. VA )eplacement for the S)SS 3ethod in Seismic Analysis.W
-nternational ?ournal of $arth=uake $ngineering and tructural D4na5ics# =ol. C# pp. 1ED`1C:.
'olchu&# ). 1C*+. Design Manual for Orthotropic teel Plate Deck !ridges. American "nstitute of Steel
>onstruction# >hicago# "0.
'olchu&# ). 1CC0. VSteel%1late%Dec& Fridges.W "n tructural $ngineering (and0ook# +rd 9dition. 9. . Iaylord and
>. 2. Iaylord# eds. 3cIraw%ill# 2ew aor&# 2a# pp. 1C%1`1C%2E.
S
Officials.
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
4-96 AASHTO LR F D B RIDGE D ESIGN
S PECIF I CATIONS
'right# ). 2.# and S. ). Abdel%Samad. 1C*E. VF94 Analogy for Analysis of Fo$ Iirders.W ?ournal of the tructural
Di%ision# American Society of >ivil 9ngineers# =ol. C:# 2o. S!D# pp. 1D1C`1D:+.
aura# _. A. 1CD1. V!he 9ffective 0ength of >olumns in Lnbraced 4rames.W &-C $ngineering ?ournal# American
"nstitute of Steel >onstruction# >hicago# "0# =ol. E# 2o. 2.# April 1CD1# pp. +D`:2.
aen# F. !.# !. uang# and D. =. =anorn. 1CC7. >ield )esting of a teel !ridge and a Prestressed Concrete !ridge#
)esearch 1ro(ect 2o. E*%07# 4inal )eport# =ol. ""# 1ennsylvania Department of !ransportation Office of )esearch and
Special Studies# 4rit- 9ngineering 0aboratory )eport 2o. 71C.2# 0ehigh Lniversity# Fethlehem# 1A.
So&aie# !. 1CCE# 1CCC# 2000. 1rivate >orrespondence.
So&aie# !.# !. A. Oster&amp# and ). A. "mbsen. 1CC1. Distri0ution of 'heel /oads on (igh+a4 !ridges# 2>)1
)eport 12%2*11. !ransportation )esearch Foard# 2ational )esearch >ouncil# 'ashington# D>.
S
Officials.
APPENDI@ A4DECA SLAB DESIGN TABLE
!able A:%1 may be used in determining the design moments for different girder arrangements. !he following
assumptions and limitations were used in developing this table and should be considered when using the listed values
for design.
/ !he moments are calculated using the e,uivalent strip method as applied to concrete slabs supported on parallel
girders.
/ 3ultiple presence factors and the dynamic load allowance are included in the tabulated values.
/ See Article :.*.2.1.* for the distance between the center of the girders to the location of the design sections for
negative moments in the dec&. "nterpolation between the listed values may be used for distances other than those
listed in !able A:%1.
/ !he moments are applicable for dec&s supported on at least three girders and having a width of not less than 1:.0
ft between the centerlines of the e$terior girders.
/ !he moments represent the upper bound for the moments in the interior regions of the slab and# for any specific
girder spacing# were ta&en as the ma$imum value calculated# assuming different number of girders in the bridge
cross%section. 4or each combination of girder spacing and number of girders# the following two cases of overhang
width were considered.
5a6 3inimum total overhang width of 21.0 in. measured from the center of the e$terior girder# and
5b6 3a$imum total overhang width e,ual to the smaller of 0.*27 times the girder spacing and *.0 ft.
A railing system width of 21.0 in. was used to determine the clear overhang width. 4or other widths of
railing systems# the difference in the moments in the interior regions of the dec& is e$pected to be within the
acceptable limits for practical design.
/ !he moments do not apply to the dec& overhangs and the ad(acent regions of the dec& that need to be designed
ta&ing into account the provisions of Article A1+.:.1.
/ "t was found that the effect of two 27
k
a$les of the tandem# placed at :.0 ft from each other# produced ma$imum
effects under each of the tires appro$imately e,ual to the effect of the +2
k
truc& a$le. !he tandem produces a
larger total moment# but this moment is spread over a larger width. "t was concluded that repeating calculations
with a different strip width for the tandem would not result in a significant difference.
--`,```,`,``,`,```,,`,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
S
Officials.
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
`
`
`
`
,
-
`
-
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
,
`
,
,
`
-
-
-
Table A4-(7a-m*m L6e L,a! 7,me+1# 4er %+1 :!10= ;4-51B51
1ositive
3oment
2egative 3oment
Distance from >0 of Iirder to Design Section for 2egative 3oment
0.0 in. + in. * in. C in. 12 in. 1E in. 2: in.
:^ `0W :.*E 2.*E 2.0D 1.D: 1.*0 1.70 1.+: 1.27
:^ `+W :.** 2.D+ 2.27 1.C7 1.D: 1.7D 1.++ 1.20
:^ `*W :.*+ +.00 2.7E 2.1C 1.C0 1.*7 1.+2 1.1E
:^ `CW :.*: +.+E 2.C0 2.:+ 2.0D 1.D: 1.2C 1.20
7^ `0W :.*7 +.D: +.20 2.** 2.2: 1.E+ 1.2* 1.12
7^ `+W :.*D :.0* +.:D 2.EC 2.:1 1.C7 1.2E 0.CE
7^ `*W :.D1 :.+* +.D+ +.11 2.7E 2.0D 1.+0 0.CC
7^ `CW :.DD :.*+ +.CD +.+1 2.D+ 2.1C 1.+2 1.02
*^ `0W :.E+ :.EE :.1C +.70 2.EE 2.+1 1.+C 1.0D
*^ `+W :.C1 7.10 :.+C +.*E +.02 2.:2 1.:7 1.1+
*^ `*W 7.00 7.+1 :.7D +.E: +.17 2.7+ 1.70 1.20
*^ `CW 7.10 7.70 :.D: +.CC +.2D 2.*: 1.7E 1.2E
D^ `0W 7.21 7.CE 7.1D :.+* +.7* 2.E: 1.*+ 1.+D
D^ `+W 7.+2 *.1+ 7.+1 :.:C +.*E 2.C* 1.*7 1.71
D^ `*W 7.:: *.2* 7.:+ :.*1 +.DE +.17 1.EE 1.D2
D^ `CW 7.7* *.+E 7.7: :.D1 +.EE +.+0 2.21 1.C:
E^ `0W 7.*C *.:E 7.*7 :.E1 +.CE +.:+ 2.:C 2.1*
E^ `+W 7.E+ *.7E 7.D: :.C0 :.0* +.7+ 2.D: 2.+D
E^ `*W 7.CC *.** 7.E2 :.CE :.1: +.*1 2.C* 2.7E
E^ `CW *.1: *.D: 7.C0 7.0* :.22 +.*D +.17 2.DC
C^ `0W *.2C *.E1 7.CD 7.1+ :.2E +.D1 +.+1 +.00
C^ `+W *.:: *.ED *.0+ 7.1C :.:0 +.E2 +.:D +.20
C^ `*W *.7C D.17 *.+1 7.:* :.** :.0: +.*E +.+C
C^ `CW *.D: D.71 *.*7 7.E0 :.C: :.21 +.EC +.7E
10^ `0W *.EC D.E7 *.CC *.1+ 7.2* :.:1 :.0C +.DD
10^ `+W D.0+ E.1C D.+2 *.:7 7.7E :.D1 :.2C +.C*
10^ `*W D.1D E.72 D.*: *.DD 7.EC 7.02 :.:E :.17
10^ `CW D.+2 E.E+ D.C7 D.0E *.20 7.+2 :.*E :.+:
11^ `0W D.:* C.1: E.2* D.+E *.70 7.*2 :.E* :.72
11^ `+W D.*0 C.:: E.77 D.*D *.DC 7.C1 7.0: :.D0
11^ `*W D.D: C.D2 E.E: D.C* D.0D *.1C 7.22 :.ED
11^ `CW D.EE 10.01 C.12 E.2: D.+* *.:D 7.:0 7.07
12^ `0W E.01 10.2E C.:0 E.71 D.*+ *.D: 7.7* 7.21
12^ `+W E.17 10.77 C.*D E.DE D.C0 D.02 7.D7 7.+E
12^ `*W E.2E 10.E1 C.C+ C.0: E.1* D.2E 7.CD 7.7:
12^ `CW E.:1 11.0* 10.1E C.+0 E.:2 D.7: *.1E 7.D0
1+^ `0W E.7: 11.+1 10.:+ C.77 E.*D D.DC *.+E 7.E*
1+^ `+W E.** 11.77 10.*D C.E0 E.C2 E.0: *.7C *.01
1+^ `*W E.DE 11.DC 10.C1 10.0+ C.1* E.2E *.DC *.1*
1+^ `CW E.C0 12.02 11.1: 10.2D C.:0 E.72 *.CC *.+0
1:^ `0W C.02 12.2: 11.+D 10.70 C.*+ E.D* D.1E *.:7
1:^ `+W C.1: 12.:* 11.7C 10.D2 C.E7 E.CC D.+E *.7E
1:^ `*W C.27 12.*D 11.E1 10.C: 10.0E C.21 D.7D *.D2
1:^ `CW C.+* 12.EE 12.02 11.1* 10.+0 C.:: D.D* *.E*
17^ `0W C.:D 1+.0C 12.2+ 11.+D 10.71 C.*7 D.C: D.02
S
Officials.
20
-
-
`
,
`
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
,
`
,
`
`
`
,
,
`
,
,
`
SECTION .$ CONCRETE STR%CT%RES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7.1JS>O19 ................................................................................................................................................................. 7%1
7.2JD94"2"!"O2S..................................................................................................................................................... 7%1
7.+J2O!A!"O2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 7%7
7.:J3A!9)"A0 1)O19)!"9S .............................................................................................................................. 7%12
7.:.1JIeneral..................................................................................................................................................... 7%12
7.:.2J2ormal 'eight and Structural 0ightweight >oncrete ............................................................................. 7%1+
7.:.2.1J>ompressive Strength .................................................................................................................... 7%1+
7.:.2.2J>oefficient of !hermal 9$pansion................................................................................................. 7%17
7.:.2.+JShrin&age and >reep ...................................................................................................................... 7%17
7.:.2.+.1JIeneral ................................................................................................................................ 7%17
7.:.2.+.2J>reep ................................................................................................................................... 7%17
7.:.2.+.+JShrin&age ............................................................................................................................. 7%1D
7.:.2.:J3odulus of 9lasticity..................................................................................................................... 7%1E
7.:.2.7J1oisson^s )atio .............................................................................................................................. 7%1E
7.:.2.*J3odulus of )upture ....................................................................................................................... 7%1E
7.:.2.DJ!ensile Strength ............................................................................................................................. 7%1C
7.:.+J)einforcing Steel ..................................................................................................................................... 7%1C
7.:.+.1JIeneral .......................................................................................................................................... 7%1C
7.:.+.2J3odulus of 9lasticity..................................................................................................................... 7%20
7.:.+.+JSpecial Applications ...................................................................................................................... 7%20
7.:.:J1restressing Steel ..................................................................................................................................... 7%20
7.:.:.1JIeneral .......................................................................................................................................... 7%20
7.:.:.2J3odulus of 9lasticity..................................................................................................................... 7%21
7.:.7J1ost%!ensioning Anchorages and >ouplers ............................................................................................. 7%21
7.:.*JDucts ........................................................................................................................................................ 7%22
7.:.*.1JIeneral .......................................................................................................................................... 7%22
7.:.*.2JSi-e of Ducts.................................................................................................................................. 7%22
7.:.*.+JDucts at Deviation Saddles ............................................................................................................ 7%2+
7.7J0"3"! S!A!9S................................................................................................................................................. 7%2+
7.7.1JIeneral..................................................................................................................................................... 7%2+
7.7.2JService 0imit State................................................................................................................................... 7%2+
7.7.+J4atigue 0imit State................................................................................................................................... 7%2+
7.7.+.1JIeneral .......................................................................................................................................... 7%2+
7.7.+.2J)einforcing Fars ............................................................................................................................ 7%2:
7.7.+.+J1restressing !endons ..................................................................................................................... 7%27
7.7.+.:J'elded or 3echanical Splices of )einforcement.......................................................................... 7%27
7.7.:JStrength 0imit State ................................................................................................................................. 7%2*
7.7.:.1JIeneral .......................................................................................................................................... 7%2*
7.7.:.2J)esistance 4actors ......................................................................................................................... 7%2*
7.7.:.2.1J>onventional >onstruction .................................................................................................. 7%2*
7.7.:.2.2JSegmental >onstruction....................................................................................................... 7%2E
.-

AASHTO LRFD 2012 BridgeDesignSpecifications 6th Ed (US)

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AASHTO LRFD 2012 BridgeDesignSpecifications 6th Ed (US)

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

12 by the American Association of

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi