Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 25

NBN EN 1991-2 ANB : XXXX

Eurocode 1 :Actions on structures Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges


Belgian National Annex
Version 22/04/2005 ANB1991-2e.doc

Introduction to the National Annex


1. 2. 3. La prsente norme NBN EN 1991-2-ANB:2005 est lAnnexe Nationale - Nationale Bijlage (ANB) dfinissant les conditions d'application en Belgique de la norme NBN EN 1991-2:2003. Cette ANB a t prpare par la Commission E250 de l'IBN. Cette ANB fournit les lments suivants : le prsent "avant-propos national" qui prcise la procdure d'implantation de l'EN 1991-2 ; les "paramtres dtermins nationalement" (en Anglais NDP) pour les clauses de l'EN 19912 pour lesquelles est prvu un choix national ; les conditions d'emploi des lments informatifs de la NBN EN 1991-2:XXXX, en particulier les Annexes informatives A, B, E, F, G et H. Pour respecter les rgles du CEN et les besoins de la normalisation en Belgique, cette Annexe Nationale remplit une double fonction auprs de l'IBN : d'une part comme Partie 2 intgre la publication de l'Eurocode EN 1991-2 par l'IBN comme norme NBN EN 1991-2, au sein de laquelle cette annexe a un caractre informatif conformment aux rgles du CEN; d'autre part comme norme nationale distincte NBN EN 1991-2 - ANB, ce qui donne ses prescriptions - et notamment aux paramtres dtermins nationalement - un caractre normatif pour la Belgique. L'utilisation de la NBN EN 1991-2:XXXX pour les ouvrages, est prvue en lassociant avec l'ensemble des Eurocodes (normes NBN EN 1990 NBN EN 1999), avec leur ANB. En attendant la publication complte de ces EN, chaque projet individuel dfinira, lorsquil y a lieu, les prescriptions manquantes. Si lEN existe sans son ANB correspondante, chaque projet individuel dfinira les valeurs des paramtres dtermins nationalement. La version de langue franaise de lEN 1991-2 a t rdige par lAFNOR. En consquence, on y rencontre certaines expressions dusage moins courant en Belgique. Une liste des synonymes est donne ci-aprs :
Terme de lEN 1991-2 Bande drase Terre-plain central Voie (de circulation) Caniveau Synonymes Accottement carrossable [y compris bande de contreb(o)utage] Berme centrale Bande de circulation Filet deau

4.

5.

6.

Section 1 General
1.1 Scope (3) NOTE
For the application in Belgium, the load models shall also be applied to the design of: - the movable bridges (see Annex M normative - in this National Annex); - the existing bridges to be repaired or upgraded (see informative Annex R); - the retaining walls, tunnels and underground structures (see Annex T).

Section 2 Classification of actions


2.2 Variable actions (2) NOTE 2:
For the traffic load models LM1 and LM2 on road bridges, and for the uniformly distributed load on footbridges, the infrequent load is defined as the one year return period load. See Table A2.2 ANB and A2.2.3 of EN 1990 Annex A2.

2.3 Actions for accidental design situations (1) NOTE (4) NOTE.
The appropriate protection are detailed in section 4.7. The values for boat and ship impacts, as for ice and driving materials impacts, are given in EN 1991-1-7, for bridges and tunnels. Additional requirements are specified for the individual project.

Section 3 Design situations


(5) NOTE
The particular rules for the simultaneity of road and rail traffic must be defined whenever required for each individual project.

Section 4 Road traffic actions and other actions specifically for road bridges
4.1 Field of application (1) NOTE 2 (2) NOTE 1
Load models still apply to bridge length greater than 200 m, unless different prescriptions are defined for the individual project. Specific models for bridges equipped with appropriate means, including road signs, to strictly limit the weight of any vehicle are defined in informative Annex R relative to existing bridges.

4.2 Representation of actions 4.2.1 Models of road traffic loads (1) NOTE 2
No complementary load model is defined for the application in Belgium, except for very heavy traffic in more than 1 lanes (see 4.3.2(3) NOTE 2) and for existing bridges (see informative Annex R). Standard models for special vehicles (exceptional transport) and their application are given in Annex A and in 4.3.4.

(2) NOTE

4.2.3 Divisions of the carriageway into notional lanes (1) NOTE


The minimal height of the kerbs or restraint system determining the carriageway width is 100 mm.

4.3 Vertical loads - Characteristic values 4.3.1 General and associated design situations (2) NOTE 2
No additional rule for the use of LM2 in Belgium.

4.3.2 Load Model 1 (3) NOTE 1 (3) NOTE 2


For the application in Belgium, the adjustment factors Qi are taken as 1,0. For existing bridges, see informative Annex R. For particular situations (which will be referred to as very heavy traffic situations), for instance when a continuous heavy traffic is expected in many real lanes (harbour or industrial areas, or traffic regulation area for a movable bridge), it cannot be excluded that two or several lanes are simultaneously loaded with the maximum load. Consequently, the loads applied on notional lane 2 (and further) should be taken as identical to those on notional lane 1. The following situations correspond in particular to very heavy traffic situations : - the total number of heavy vehicles exceeds for the total carriageway : 8 000 heavy vehicles/average day (AADT annual average daily traffic) - the number of vehicles in the notional lane 2 exceeds : 3 000 heavy vehicles/average day (AADT)

(6) NOTE

This alternative rule cannot be considered as a load model, but only as a possible simplification for the calculation.

4.3.3 Load Model 2 (2) NOTE (4) NOTE 2


The normalised value is Q = Q1 Not applicable in Belgium.

4.3.4 Load Model 3 (special vehicles) (1) NOTE


Notwithstanding other special vehicles specified for a particular project, the special vehicle 900/150 shall be considered as load model 3 for all bridge decks. This special vehicle is supposed to move on the bridge deck : - on the most unfavourable place of the physical traffic lanes, - with a maximum speed of 70 km/h, so that the dynamic magnification of 1,4 L / 500 of A.3 (5) is applicable, and that the braking forces are determined by 4.4.1 (2) NOTE 2, - with the other physical lanes loaded with the frequent traffic loads (see A.3).

4.4 Horizontal forces - Characteristic values 4.4.1 Braking and acceleration forces
(2) NOTE 2 The upper limit of 900 kN in (4.6) is replaced by a variable upper limit Qlmax fixed as : 200 kN if L < 30 m and 500 kN if L > 150 m with linear interpolation on L if 30 m < L < 150 m (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101) (3) NOTE For the special vehicle 900 / 150 introduced in 4.3.4 (1), the braking force is supposed to be included in formula (4.6) of 4.4.1(2), when the special vehicle and the tandem systems are acting together on 5

the bridge deck. For other special vehicles, it is supposed that the braking force is equal to 15% of the vertical load on the bridge deck (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101). (6) NOTE The horizontal force transmitted by expansion joints or applied to structural members that can be loaded by only one axle is (normative value for LM1-LM2 and the special vehicle 900 / 150 introduced in 4.3.4 (1)) : Q lk = 0,6 Q1 Q1k (4.6a) For special vehicles, it is supposed that the braking force is equal to 15% of the vertical load on the structural member (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101).

4.4.2 Centrifugal and other transverse forces


(4) NOTE The transverse braking force, Q trk , equal to 25% of the longitudinal braking or acceleration force Q lk , to be considered to act simultaneously with Q lk at the finished carriageway level, is normative for Belgium

4.5 Groups of traffic loads on road bridges 4.5.1 Characteristic values of the multi-component action (1) Table 4.4a ANB is normative for Belgium, as given hereafter.

Table 4.4a ANB - Assessment of groups of traffic loads [based on the corrected version of EN 1991-2 of 2004] characteristic values of the multi-component action (= group of loads considered as 1 action)
CARRIAGEWAY FOOTWAYS AND CYCLE TRACKS

Load type
Reference Load system gr1a gr1b gr2 Groups of loads gr3 d gr4 gr5 4.3.2 LM1 (TS and UDL systems)

Vertical forces 4.3.3 LM2 (Single axle) 4.3.4 LM3 (Special vehicles) 4.3.5 LM4 (Crowd loading)

Horizontal forces 4.4.1 Braking and acceleration forces


a

Vertical forces only 4.4.2 5.3.2-(1) Centrifugal and Uniformly transverse Distributed forces load
a

Characteristic values Characteristic value Frequent values

Combination value b

Characteristic Characteristic value value Characteristic value c Characteristic value c

Characteristic value See annex A

Characteristic value Dominant component action (designated as component associated with the group)
a b c

Defined as the frequent values (normative for Belgium). Defined as 2,5 kN / m2 (normative for Belgium)

See 5.3.2.1-(2). One footway only should be considered to be loaded if the effect is more unfavourable than the effect of two loaded footways. This group is irrelevant if gr4 is considered.

4.5.2 Other representative values of the multi-component action (1) The frequent actions can be determined by using Table 4.4b ANB Table 4.4b ANB - Assessment of groups of traffic loads (frequent values of the multicomponent action) CARRIAGEWAY Load type Reference Load system Group of loads
a

FOOTWAYS AND CYCLE TRACKS 5.3.2(1) Uniformly distributed load

gr1a gr1b gr3

4.3.2 LM1 (TS and UDL systems) Frequent valuesb

Vertical forces 4.3.3 LM2 (single axle) Frequent valueb

Frequent values a,b

One footway only should be considered to be loaded if the effect is more unfavourable than the effect of two loaded footways. b The frequent values of the loads are obtained using the values of 1 of Table A.2.1 ANB of the National Annex (ANB) of Annex A2 of EN 1990. E.g. : 1 = 0,75 for the loads Qik of the tandem system (TS) and 1 = 0,40 for the uniformly distributed loads loads qik and qrk (UDL) (1) NOTE 3 For infrequent loads, if needed, the Table 4.4a is modified as described in EN 1991-2.

4.6 Fatigue load models 4.6.1 General


(2) NOTE 2 For the use of the various Fatigue Load Models, it must be noted that : e) Fatigue Load Model 4 is to be used only for particular projects when traffic data are available NOTE 4 The values of Fatigue Load Models 1 and 2 may be modified for an individual project.

(3) NOTE 1 The traffic categories and values are defined in Table 4.5 ANB for a slow lane when using
Fatigue Load Models 3 and 4. On each fast lane (i.e. a traffic lane used predominantly by cars), additionally, 10% of Nobs may be taken into account. Table 4.5 ANB - Number of heavy vehicles expected per year and per slow lane Traffic categories 1 2 3 4 (6) NOTE Roads and motorways with 2 or more lanes per direction with high flow rates of lorries Roads and motorways with medium flow rates of lorries Main roads with low flow rates of lorries Local roads with low flow rates of lorries Expression (4.7) is normative for Belgium. 8 Nobs per year and per slow lane 2,0 106 0,5 106 0,125 106 0,05 106

4.6.4 Fatigue Load Model 3 (single vehicle model)


(3) NOTE For the cases where 2 vehicles are taken into account on the same lane, the following conditions are normative for Belgium : one vehicle is as defined in (1) above ; the geometry of the second vehicle is as defined in (1) above and the weight of each axle is equal to 36 kN (instead of 120 kN) ; the distance between the two vehicles, measured from centre to centre of vehicles, is not less than 40 m.

4.6.5 Fatigue Load Model 4 (set of "standard equivalent lorries)


(1) NOTE 2 The standard equivalent lorries and lorry percentages of Tables 4.7 and 4.8 are normative for Belgium, unless other percentages are defined for an individual project.

4.6.6 Fatigue Load Model 5 (based on recorded road traffic data)


(1) NOTE Specific rules for the use of this fatigue load may be given for an individual project.

4.7 Actions for accidental design situations 4.7.2 Collision forces from vehicles under the bridge 4.7.2.1 Collision forces on piers and other supporting members
(1) NOTE The prescriptions of the National Annex (ANB) of EN 1991-1-7 are applicable. As long as this document is not available, the following prescriptions are normative : a) Impact force : 1000 kN in the direction of vehicle travel or 500 kN perpendicular to that direction ; b) Height above the level of adjacent ground surface : 1,25 m.

4.7.2.2 Collision forces on decks


(1) NOTE 1 The prescriptions of the National Annex (ANB) of EN 1991-1-7 are applicable. As long as this document is not available, and unless otherwise specified for an individual project (e.g. in case of possible protection as described hereunder), the following prescriptions are normative : a) le tablier du pont pouvant tre heurt par un vhicule circulant sous l'ouvrage doit tre vrifi sous l'effet d'une force valant 400 kN si la hauteur libre au-dessus de la chausse est infrieure ou gale 4 m; 0 kN si la hauteur libre au-dessus de la chausse est suprieure ou gale 5 m; avec interpolation linaire entre ces deux hauteurs libres. b) cette force agit dans le sens de la circulation avec une inclinaison sur l'horizontale entre 0 et 30 tendant soulever le tablier, et s'applique la face infrieure du tablier l'endroit le plus dfavorable (poutre de rive, poutre intermdiaire, etc.). La surface de contact a 2m de large et - sur les faces verticales 0,25m de hauteur maximum. La protection dun tablier de pont vis--vis de chocs de vhicules peut tre assure par la prsence dautres ouvrages sur le mme itinraire sans possibilit d'accs intermdiaire, ou par la mise en place de portiques de protection et de signalisation appropris.

4.7.3 Actions from vehicles on the bridge 4.7.3.3 Collision forces on vehicle restraint systems
(1) NOTE 1 The following classes of collision forces are normative in Belgium : 9

Table 4.9 ANB Recommended classes for the horizontal force transferred by vehicle restraint systems Recommended class AA (*) A B C D Horizontal force (kN) 50 100 200 400 600

(*) Class AA is provided to be used in conjunction with the prescriptions of EN 1991-1-1 for vehicle barriers and parapets in traffic and parking areas in buildings (category F and G), as long as EN 1991-1-7 ANB is not available, as follows : category F : category G : - for normal barriers and parapets A A - for barriers to access ramps AA B - opposite the ends of straight ramps, intended for downward travel, which exceed 20 m in length B C There is no direct correlation between these values and performances classes of vehicle restraint systems. The proposed values depend on the stiffness connection between the vehicle restraint system and the part of the bridge to which it is connected. The higher classes correspond to Higher containment in the sense of EN 1317-2 (e.g. H2 for class D). The lower classes (e.g. AA) correspond to weak connections (e.g. for restraint barriers with a rigid railing). The horizontal force, acting transversely, are applied 100 mm below the top of the selected vehicle restraint system or 1,0 m above the level of the carriageway or footway, whichever is the lower, and on a line 0,5 m long. (1) NOTE 3 The vertical force acting simultaneously with the horizontal collision force is equal to 0,375 Q1Q1k for classes A and Abis, and to 0,75 Q1Q1k for higher classes; these values are normative for Belgium. (2) NOTE The value of 1,25 times the characteristic resistance of the restraint system is the normative minimum value.

4.7.3.4 Collision forces on structural members


(1) NOTE These forces are the same as those defined in 4.7.2.1(1), acting 1,25 m above the carriageway level. For individual projects, when additional protective measures between the carriageway and these members are provided, this force may be reduced. These prescriptions can lead to the justification of the stability in the case of the failure of the structural member for individual projects.

4.8 Actions on pedestrian parapets


(1) NOTE 2 The forces transferred to the bridge deck by pedestrian parapets for footways or footbridges is a line force of 1,0 kN/m acting as a variable load horizontally or vertically on the top of the parapet. For service side paths, the minimum value is 0,8 kN/m. Exceptional and accidental cases are not covered by these recommended minimum values. When grouping the loads for the calculation (see 4.5 and 5.5), this force is considered to form a group with the vertical loads on the footways and cycle tracks. (3) NOTE normative. The value of 1,25 times the characteristic resistance of the parapet is considered as

10

4.9 Load models for abutments and walls adjacent to bridges 4.9.1 Vertical loads
(1) NOTE 1 Load Model 1 is applicable to the carriageway behind abutments, wing walls, side walls and generally to all parts of bridges, tunnels and other underground constructions in contact with earth. The tandem system loads are replaced by a uniformly distributed load spread over a rectangular area of 3 m width and 2,20 m length at 0,3 m depth. In the fill, a dispersal angle of 30 from to the vertical for this load should be taken into account. (1) NOTE 2 The calculated equivalent distributed load qeq (kN/m) at the depth Z (m), as described in table 4.10 ANB and fig. 4.11 ANB. Furthermore, attention must be drawn to efforts transmitted to side walls, wing walls or retaining walls during the compacting of embankments, which may have a high magnitude.
Table 4.10 ANB : EQUIVALENT LOAD
Z depth
(m)

q eq DEPENDING ON THE DEPTH Z


Long
(m)

dyn
1.7-Z/10

larg 1
(m)

larg 2
(m)

Values including all traffic loads q eq0 q eq 1 q eq2 (see figure 4.12 ANB)
(kN/m) (kN/m) (kN/m)

0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

1.67 1.65 1.63 1.62 1.60 1.50 1.40 1.30 1.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10

3.00 3.23 3.46 3.58 3.81 4.96 6.12 7.27 8.43 10.74 14.20 19.97 25.75

6.00 6.23 6.46 6.58 6.81 7.96 9.12 10.27 11.43 13.74 17.20 22.97 28.75

2.20 2.43 2.66 2.78 3.01 4.16 5.32 6.47 7.63 9.94 13.40 19.17 24.95

9.00 8.54 8.13 7.95 7.62 6.43 5.69 5.18 4.81 4.32 3.87 3.48 3.26

98.30 84.51 73.54 68.87 60.81 36.26 24.34 17.63 13.49 9.32 6.80 4.99 4.18

62.04 53.76 47.09 44.23 39.26 23.79 16.09 11.70 8.98 6.29 4.75 3.68 3.22

Figure 4.12 ANB EQUIVALENT LOAD qeq DEPENDING ON THE DEPTH Z


0.00 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00

kN/m

qeq1

qeq2

Z (m)
Figure 4.12 ANB DISPERSAL AREA FOR A GIVEN DEPTH.

axis of notional lane 1

qeq0

qeqr = 2,5 kN/m2 qeq2

qeq1

Long

larg2 larg1

11

Section 5 Actions on footways, cycle tracks and footbridges


5.2 Representation of actions 5.2.3 Application of the load models
(2) NOTE Unless otherwise defined for an individual project, the normative models for inspection gangways within the bridges and for platforms on railway bridges, to be used separately in order to get the most unfavourable effects, are an uniformly distributed load of 2 kN/m and a concentrated load of 3 kN applicable to a square surface of 0,20 0,20 m. For inspection gangways, these loads cover visual inspections and light maintenance work.

5.3 Static models for vertical loads characteristic values 5.3.2 Load Models 5.3.2.1 Uniformly distributed load
(1) NOTE The normative characteristic value is qfk = 5 kN/m. This value cover effects of a continuous dense crowd. For cycle tracks, it is assumed that pedestrians may be present, frequently or not. (2) NOTE Load Model 4 (crowd loading) defined in 4.3.5, corresponding to qfk = 5 kN/m, is normative to cover the static effects of a continuous dense crowd where such a risk exists. For an individual project where the application of Load Model 4 is not required, the recommended value for qfk is : qfk = 2,5 kN/m for L > 210 m qfk = 2,0 + 120 / (L + 30) for 10 m < L < 210 m qfk = 5,0 kN/m for L < 10 m where : L is the loaded length in [m].

5.3.2.2 Concentrated load


(1) NOTE normative. The values Qfwk equal to 10 kN acting on a square surface of sides 0,10 m are

5.3.2.3 Service vehicle


(1)P NOTE 1 The service vehicle Qserv must be described for the individual project, if needed. If no information is available and if no permanent obstacle prevents a vehicle being driven onto the bridge deck, the use of the vehicle defined in 5.6.3 as the service vehicle (characteristic load) is recommended ; in this case, there will be no need to apply 5.6.3, i.e. to consider the same vehicle as accidental.

5.4 Static model for horizontal forces - Characteristic values


(2) NOTE The characteristic value of the horizontal force is normative as taken equal to the greater of the following two values : 10 per cent of the total load corresponding to the uniformly distributed load (5.3.2.1), 60 per cent of the total weight of the service vehicle, if relevant (5.3.2.3-(1)P). are normative.

5.6 Actions for accidental design situations for footbridges


12

5.6.1 General
(1) NOTE Other collision actions may be defined for the individual project (see 2.3).

5.6.2 Collision forces from road vehicles under the bridge 5.6.2.1 Collision forces on piers
(1) NOTE For the forces due to the collision of abnormal height or aberrant road vehicles with piers or with the supporting members of a footbridge or ramps or stairs, the prescriptions of 4.7.2.1 are applied as normative.

5.6.2.2 Collision forces on decks


(1) NOTE 1 For collision forces on decks, the prescriptions of 4.7.2.2 are applied as normative.

5.6.3 Accidental presence of vehicles on the bridge


(2) NOTE 2 The accidental load model must be described for the individual project. If no information is available and if no permanent obstacle prevents a vehicle being driven onto the bridge deck, the use of the load model 5.6.3 (2) is recommended (fig. 5.2), including a braking force associated with the load model equal to 60% of the vertical load.

5.7 Dynamic models of pedestrian loads


(3) NOTE The dynamic models of pedestrian loads and associated comfort criteria may be defined for the individual project in accordance with EN 1990 Annex A2.

13

Section 6 Rail traffic actions and other actions specifically for railway bridges
6.1 Field of application (2) NOTE (3) NOTE
This National Annex defines no alternative model.

The loading and characteristic values of actions for special types of railways are specified, if needed, for the individual project, in particular for tramways, metro and railways having not the standard track gauge of 1,435 m.

The loading requirements for the design of temporary railway bridges, which may (7) NOTE generally be based on this document, are specified, if needed, for the individual project. Special requirements may also be given for the individual project for temporary bridges depending upon the conditions in which they are used (e.g. for skew bridges).

6.3 Vertical loads - Characteristic values (static effects) and eccentricity and distribution of loading 6.3.2 Load Model 71
(3) NOTE The classification factor is specified for each railway line by the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1. For a normal exploitation, a value 1,00 is mandatory.

6.3.3 Load Models SW/0 and SW/2


(4) NOTE The use of load model SW/2 is determined for each railway line by the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.3.6 Distribution of axle loads by the rails, sleepers and ballast 6.3.6.3 Transverse distribution of actions by the sleepers and ballast
(5) NOTE For all bridges, the calculation must cover both situations with full-length sleepers (mono-block) or duo-block sleepers, because the situation can vary during the bridges life.

6.4 Dynamic effects (including resonance) 6.4.4 Requirement for a static or dynamic analysis
(1) NOTE (1) NOTE 1 than 63. The use of the flow chart in Figure 6.9 is normative. The influence of the skew may be considered as negligible if the skew angle is greater

(1) NOTE 5 Frame bridges and portal bridges in reinforced or prestressed concrete are considered as continuous bridges (for the case v < 200 km/h)

6.4.5 Dynamic factor (2, 3)

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 14

6.4.5.2 Definition of the dynamic factor (3) NOTE The use of the dynamic factor 2 instead of 3 is submitted to the agreement of the
Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.5.3 Determinant length L (1) NOTE The values given in Table 6.2 are recommended. The relevant authority referred to in
Table 6.2 is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.6 Requirements for a dynamic analysis 6.4.6.1 Loading and load combinations 6.4.6.1.1 Loading
(6) Table 6.4 NOTE The individual project may specify additional requirements relating to the application of HSLM-A and HSLM-B to continuous and complex structures. (7) NOTE The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.6.1.2 Load combinations and partial factors


(3) Table 6.5 The relevant authority referred to in the note is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.6.3 Bridge parameters 6.4.6.3.1 Structural damping


(3) NOTE The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1, which can in particular agree alternative safe lower bound values for very slender steel bridges.

6.4.6.3.2 Mass of the bridge


(3) NOTE The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.6.3.3 Stiffness of the bridge


(3) NOTE 1 The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1. (3) NOTE 2 The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

6.4.6.4 Modelling the excitation and dynamic behaviour of the structure


(4) NOTE The relevant authority to agree the method of dynamic analysis is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1. This authority can also specify alternative increased values according Figure 6.15. (5) NOTE is determined by Annex C as agreed by the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 15

6.5 Horizontal forces - characteristic values 6.5.1 Centrifugal forces


(2) NOTE The individual project may specify an increased value of ht for some traffic types, e.g. double stacked containers.

6.5.3 Actions due to traction and braking


(5) NOTE The individual project may specify additional requirements for taking into account the effects of braking for loaded lengths greater than 300 m.

6.5.4 Combined response of structure and track to variable actions 6.5.4.1 General principles
(5) NOTE The requirements for non-ballasted track may be specified for the individual project.

6.5.4.3 Actions to be considered


(2) NOTE 1 The values given in EN 1991-1-5 for TN are normative. (2) NOTE 2 For simplified calculations a temperature variation of the superstructure of TN = 35C may be taken into account.

6.5.4.4 Modelling and calculation of the combined track/structure system


(2) NOTE 1 The values of longitudinal resistance used for the analysis of rail/ballast/bridge stiffness 1 must be agreed by the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure .

6.5.4.5 Design criteria


NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify additional design criteria, in particular for the infrequent combination (see 6.8.3.3).

6.5.4.5.1 Track
(2) NOTE For ballasted tracks with additional lateral restraints to the track and for directly fastened tracks the minimum value of track radius may be reduced with the agreement of the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 (2) NOTE For other track construction standards (in particular those that affect lateral resistance) and other types of rail it is recommended that the maximum additional rail stresses is specified in the individual project.

6.5.4.6 Calculation methods 6.5.4.6.1 Simplified calculation method for a single deck
(1) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify alternative criteria determining when it is not necessary to check the rail stresses (4) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify alternative values of k determining the characteristic longitudinal forces FTk per track due to temperature variation (according to 6.5.4.3) acting on the fixed bearings

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 16

6.6 Aerodynamic actions from passing trains 6.6.1 General


(3) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure may specify alternative values for the equivalent loads.

6.7 Derailment and other actions for railway bridges 6.7.1 Derailment actions from rail traffic on a railway bridge
(2)P NOTE For Design Situation I, the loading situation of figure 6.25 is applicable, where each of the 2 arrows correspond to a force x kacc x model LM71 by rail (as axles of 125 kN and 80 kN/m) For Design Situation II, the loading situation to consider is the following one : - 2 axles of load model LM71 positionned as in figure 6.27, the force on each being equal to x kacc - the remaining load model LM71 is applied to the rails as in the non accidental situations. The coefficient kacc takes into account the eventual dynamic magnification and the statistically influence of the frequent loads, with the value kacc = 1. (4)P In figure 6.27, the legend of (1) is max. 1,5s or less if against wall like in figure 6.26 (6) NOTE For the loads on the other tracks, see 6.8 and EN 1990 Annex A2 ANB. (8)P NOTE 1 The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify the requirements to mitigate the consequences of a derailment for structural elements which are situated above the level of the rails. (8)NOTE 2 The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify requirements to retain a derailed train on the structure.

6.7.3 Other actions


(1)P NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify requirements including actions for any Accidental Design Situation to be taken into account.

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 17

6.8 Application of traffic loads on railway bridges 6.8.1 General


(11)P NOTE For bridge decks carrying one or more tracks the checks for structural clearance requirements shall be made with the number of tracks loaded with all associated relevant traffic actions in accordance with Table 6.10add ANB. Where required by 6.3.2(3) classified loads shall be taken into account. The checks of the drainage conditions are normally not relevant.

Table 6.10add ANB - Number of tracks to be loaded for checking structural clearance requirements Limit State and associated acceptance criteria Number of tracks on the bridge 1 SLS Checks 1 2 1
3

6.8.2 Groups of Loads - Characteristic values of the multicomponent action (2) NOTE The values in Table 6.11 are normative, unless other values are specified by the Authority
in charge of the railway infrastructure for an individual project.
1

6.8.3 Groups of Loads - Other representative values of the multicomponent actions 6.8.3.1 Frequent values of the multicomponent actions
(1) NOTE The rules given in this clause are considered as normative.

6.8.3.2 Quasi-permanent values of the multicomponent actions


(1) NOTE The rules given in this clause are considered as normative.

6.8.3.3 ANB Infrequent values of the multicomponent actions


(1) Where Groups of Loads are taken into account, the same rule as in 6.8.2(1) above is applicable by applying the factors given in Table 6.11 for each Group of Loads, to the infrequent values of the relevant actions considered in each Group of Loads.

6.9 Traffic loads for fatigue


(6) NOTE The design working life for which the fatigue damage is to be assessed is 100 years, unless otherwise specified for the individual project. (7) NOTE The individual project may specify a special traffic mix to carry out the fatigue assessment.

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 18

Annex A
(normative for Belgium)

Models of special vehicles for road bridges


The Annex B of EN 1991-2 has a normative character in Belgium. A.2 (1) and Table A.1 and A.2 The special vehicles 2400/300 and 3600/300 are added to the list of special vehicles of Annex A, in order to correspond to the former Belgian standard NBN B03-101. For a bridge classification, the special vehicles 2400/200/200, 3000/200/200 and 3600/200/200 should best be avoided. A.3 (3) to (6) For a bridge classification, one of the two following situations can be used in the calculation, and must be clearly communicate by the designer to the bridge owner and to the relevant authorities (including the authorities in charge of exceptional transport) : Situation 1 (mostly used in the past) : - the special vehicle is the only traffic load on the bridge - the special vehicle is supposed to move at low speed (< 5 km/h) - the special vehicle is supposed to move in a special vehicles notional lane, fixed on the bridge (e.g. by the distance of the middle of the lane to the parapets). - the width of the special vehicles notional lane is the sum of : - the vehicles width (3 m for 150 kN or 200 kN axle-lines, 4,5 m for heavier axle-lines) - the influence of an eccentricity, equal 2 x 0,5 m when the bridge deck has max. 3 physical traffic lanes (the hard shoulder being considered as a physical lane) or equal to 2 x 1m for wider bridge decks. Situation 2 (recommended) : A.3 (3) to (6) are applied, when the special vehicle is supposed to move at the normal speed (70 km/h)

19

Annex B
(informative)

Fatigue life assessment for road bridges Assessment method based on recorded traffic
The Annex B of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.

20

Annex C
(normative)

Dynamic factors 1 + for Real Trains


(3)P NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify whether expression (C.1) or (C.2) may be used. Without specifications, expression (C.1) is recommended. The same Authority agrees the dynamic analysis for determining '

Annex D
(normative)

Basis for the fatigue assessment of railway structures


D.2 General design method
(2) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may prescribe the value for Ff. The recommended value is Ff = 1,00.

Information can be acquired at Infrabel (//www.infrabel.be) 21

Annex E Limits of validity of Load Model HSLM and the selection of the critical Universal Train from HSLM-A
The Annex E of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.

Annex F Criteria to be satisfied if a dynamic analysis is not required


The Annex F of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.

Annex G Method for determining the combined response of a structure and track to variable actions
The Annex G of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.

Annex H Load models for rail traffic loads in Transient Design Situations
The Annex H of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.

22

National Annex M Load models for movable bridges


This Annex includes additional non-contradictory information on movable bridges, having a normative character in Belgium. Note to the Belgian working team in charge of the National Annex: Normally there is no place in this document to other informations than those related to traffic load. Detailed description of other loads should not be included here, as it was in the NAD of the former ENV 1991-3. However, the information about wind load on movable bridges may be shifted in the National Annex of EN 1991-1-4, chapter 8, note 1 of 8.1(1).

23

National Annex R (informative) Load models for existing bridges


This Annex includes additional non-contradictory information on existing bridges, in view of their repair or upgrade, having a normative character in Belgium. The bridges classes should be defined here. The following explicative figure is to be added in the National Annex:
W

H a rd s h o u ld e r

R e a l s lo w la n e

R e a l fa s t la n e

P o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 1 CLASS 1 (E u ro p e a n ) p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 2

CLASS 2 ( B e lg ia n )

p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 1 p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 2

The factors Qi are taken as 0,8 for existing bridges.( Belgian class 2) Refer to Annexes M and N of the former ENV 1991-3 + NAD for models on bridges of classes 3 and 4.

24

Annex T Load models on retaining walls, tunnels and underground structures


This Annex includes additional non-contradictory information on retaining walls, tunnels and underground structures, having a normative character in Belgium. Refer to Annex O of the former ENV 1991-3 + NAD for equivalent load on backfilled structures.

25