This document provides a design summary for Bridge 205 of the I-35W Extension Project. The project involved designing pre-tensioned prestressed concrete girders for the seven spans of the bridge using PGSuper software. Span 2, the longest at 230.58 feet, required 15 Tx70 girders to meet stress limits, while the other spans used mostly 5 Tx54 girders, except Span 4 which used 5 Tx70 girders. Analysis was performed for moments, shears, stresses, deflections and other limit states. Design details such as mild steel reinforcement, girder schedules, and shop drawings are provided to summarize the project.
Grillage Analysis of T-Beam bridge, Box culvert and their Limit State Design; components of Bridges and loads acting on bridges are presented in this slide.
Bridges: Classification of bridges β with respect to construction
materials, structural behavior of super structure, span, sub structure,
purpose. Temporary and movable bridges. Factors affecting site
selection. Various loads/stresses acting on bridges. Bridge hydrology β
design discharge, water way, afflux, scour depth, economical span.
Bridge components β foundation, piers, abutments, wing wall, approach,
bearings, floor, girders, cables, suspenders. Methods of erection of
different types of bridges. River training works and maintenance of
bridges. Testing and strengthening of bridges. Bridge architect.
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF A PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAM USING FRP TENDONGirish Singh
Β
Concrete prestressed structural components exist in buildings and bridges in different forms. Understanding the response of these components during loading is crucial to the development of an overall efficient and safe structure. Different methods have been utilized to study the response of structural components. Experimental based testing has been widely used as a means to analyse individual elements and the effects of concrete strength under loading.
While this is a method that produces real life response, it is extremely time consuming, and the use of materials can be quite costly. In this paper we used finite element analysis to study behaviour of these components. The use of computer software (Ansys) to model these elements is much faster, and extremely cost- effective. To fully understand the capabilities of finite element computer software (Ansys), we look back to experimental data and simple analysis.
Data obtained from a finite element analysis package is not useful unless the necessary steps are taken to understand what is happening within the model that is created using the software. Also, executing the necessary checks along the way, is key to make sure that what is being output by the Ansys is valid.
This paper is a study of prestressed concrete beams using finite element
analysis to understand the response of prestressed concrete beams due to transverse loading and to analyse the behaviour of FRP material under these circumstances.
This paper also includes the comparison of steel and FRP on the same module and also gives the final load v/s deflection curve under the both linear and non-linear properties of the materials.
Grillage Analysis of T-Beam bridge, Box culvert and their Limit State Design; components of Bridges and loads acting on bridges are presented in this slide.
Bridges: Classification of bridges β with respect to construction
materials, structural behavior of super structure, span, sub structure,
purpose. Temporary and movable bridges. Factors affecting site
selection. Various loads/stresses acting on bridges. Bridge hydrology β
design discharge, water way, afflux, scour depth, economical span.
Bridge components β foundation, piers, abutments, wing wall, approach,
bearings, floor, girders, cables, suspenders. Methods of erection of
different types of bridges. River training works and maintenance of
bridges. Testing and strengthening of bridges. Bridge architect.
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF A PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAM USING FRP TENDONGirish Singh
Β
Concrete prestressed structural components exist in buildings and bridges in different forms. Understanding the response of these components during loading is crucial to the development of an overall efficient and safe structure. Different methods have been utilized to study the response of structural components. Experimental based testing has been widely used as a means to analyse individual elements and the effects of concrete strength under loading.
While this is a method that produces real life response, it is extremely time consuming, and the use of materials can be quite costly. In this paper we used finite element analysis to study behaviour of these components. The use of computer software (Ansys) to model these elements is much faster, and extremely cost- effective. To fully understand the capabilities of finite element computer software (Ansys), we look back to experimental data and simple analysis.
Data obtained from a finite element analysis package is not useful unless the necessary steps are taken to understand what is happening within the model that is created using the software. Also, executing the necessary checks along the way, is key to make sure that what is being output by the Ansys is valid.
This paper is a study of prestressed concrete beams using finite element
analysis to understand the response of prestressed concrete beams due to transverse loading and to analyse the behaviour of FRP material under these circumstances.
This paper also includes the comparison of steel and FRP on the same module and also gives the final load v/s deflection curve under the both linear and non-linear properties of the materials.
ANALYSIS & DESIGN ASPECTS OF PRE-STRESSED MEMBERS USING F.R.P. TENDONSGirish Singh
Β
The purpose of this investigation is mainly a brief explanation about the advantages of FRP over steel. The various uses and advantages of FRP are explained in this project. In this project, we have taken a section of 3m length, 200mm width and 300mm depth and using a parabolic tendon of eccentricity 100mm at the centre. We have design the section for FRP as well as steel with the above data. The final stresses obtained is being verified with the help of Ansys software. We have shown the result of steel straight tendon only in this mini project.
Spring 2015 problems for the course Rak-43.3110 Prestressed and precast concrete structures, Aalto University, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering. European standards EN 1990 and EN 1992-1-1 has been applied in the problems.
Strengthening structures via external bonding of advanced fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) composite is becoming very
popular worldwide during the past decade because it provides a more economical and technically superior alternative
to the traditional techniques in many situations as it offers high strength, low weight, corrosion resistance, high fatigue
resistance, easy and rapid installation and minimal change in structural geometry. Although many in-situ RC beams
are continuous in construction, there has been very limited research work in the area of FRP strengthening of continuous
beams.
SterlingPT Pvt. Ltd, previously known as Post Tension Services Pakistan Pvt. Ltd. (PTSP) specializes in design and installation of Post Tensioning (PT) systems throughout Pakistan. SterlingPT is an engineering franchise of Sterling Engineering and Design Group Ltd. (www.segoc.com). A USA based company with extensive Post Tensioning (PT) design and construction experience.
SterlingPT typically reviews the structural design of the project with structural engineer and determine the feasibility use of PT. If PT is deemed feasible, SterlingPT submits the proposal defining in detail the SterlingPT scope of work. The quote typically includes providing the cost for PT cables, all accessories, PT System installation and its stressing.
The design of the PT is in accordance with relevant ACI and IS codes. Typically, SterlingPT requires 3 to 4 weeks to deliver Post Tensioned cables after receipt of order.
We have been working in Pakistan since 2009 and have done number of successful projects. Our experience to date in the Pakistan market has yielded some following valuable information.
. PT reduces self-weight of structure,
. Cost of reinforcement is typically up to 25% less than that of conventional reinforcing,
. Formwork can be stripped after 7days,
. PT cable strength is four times greater than that of conventional re-bar strength,
. Effective in Parking Structures, Residential and Industrial Structures, Walls, Columns and Slabs,
Nemetschek Scia, Enabling Innovation in ConstructionNemetschek Scia
Β
A quick introduction to Nemetschek Scia, our customers and the constructions they develop using our Structural Analysis and Design Software for Construction and Engineering.
Prepared a 2D stick model of the bridge in SAP2000 using the properties mentioned in the FHWA Bridge document
Designed the bridge for linear and nonlinear structural models to conduct analyses
Performed different analyses on the bridge β multimode analysis, pushover analysis, time history analysis and capacity spectrum analysis
Compared the shear force, bending moment, axial force and displacement values for each abutment and pier from all analyses and critically assessed the bridge performance
CD 357 revision 1 Bridge expansion joints -web.pdfSaritaJoshi5
Β
Design Manual for Roads & Bridges Expansion joints
This document sets out the requirements for the design and specification of expansion joints for use in highway bridge decks. It also provides supporting advice on the selection, installation, management and maintenance of various types of expansion joints.
Replaces (formerly BD 33/94, BA 26/94, IAN 168/12, IAN 169/12)
Revision 1 (March 2020) Revision to update references only. Revision 0 (May
2019) CD 357 replaces BD 33/94, BA 26/94, IAN 168/12 and IAN 169/12.
This full document has been re-written to make it compliant with the new Highways
England drafting rules.
This document is published by Highways England.
This document supersedes BD 33/94, BA 26/94, IAN 168/12 and IAN 169/12, which are withdrawn.
Contractual and legal considerations
This document forms part of the works specification. It does not purport to include all the necessary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for applying all appropriate documents applicable to
their contract.
Structural Health Monitoring of a Cable-Supported Zhejiang Bridge Abdul Majid
Β
The Zhijiang Bridge is a cable-stayed bridge built recently over the Hangzhou Qiantang River. It
has an arched twin-tower space and a twin-cable plane structure. The integrated system of
structural health monitoring and intelligent management for Zhijiang Bridge includes an
information acquisition system, data management system, evaluation and decision-making system,
and application service system. The monitoring components include the working environment of
the bridge and various factors that affect bridge safety. The integrated system also includes a
forecasting and decision-making module for real-time online evaluation, which provides warnings
and makes decisions based on the monitoring information. The monitoring information, evaluation
results, maintenance decisions, and warning information can be input simultaneously into the
bridge monitoring center and traffic emergency center to share the monitoring data. The
installation of long-term structural health monitoring (SHM) systems to long-span cable-supported
bridges has become a trend to monitor loading conditions, assess performance, detect damage, and
guide maintenance. SHM systems can be used to investigate highway loading, railway loading,
wind characteristics, and temperature effects.
1. Term Project: CE 5309/4363 Prestressed Concrete
Design of Bridge 205 of I-35W Extension Project and
Design of Post Tensioned Two-Way Slab
Submitted to:
Dr. Shih Ho Chao
Department of Civil Engineering
By: Group 5
Anaimallur Mani,Lokesh Kumar
Gurjar, Santosh Mahendra
Kintner, Courtney Lynn
Mukati, Gaurav Singh
Rampurawala, Sameer
Tuladhar, Shuveksha
Nukala, Vishwas
May 5, 2016
2. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
1
Abstract
This project provides an opportunity to implement the knowledge gained through the prestressed
concrete design course on a real world situation. The problem statement requires group members
to divide the tasks such as planning project schedule, software analysis and preparation of design
calculations, specifications and report. Also from a technical viewpoint, by designing bridge
girders and parking floor slab with material and geometrical constraints, provides the necessary
experience for the group members in their engineering careers. It provides a more detailed study
of the various provisions in the code and its commentary. Also the recommendations stated by
various authors in field of prestressed concrete design and its practice is another addition from the
project. The invaluable benefits gained through this experience boosts the designing skills and
problem solving abilities of the group and this will surely enhance their knowledge in future design
and construction works.
The term project includes two tasks. The first task is a bridge design with pre-tensioned bridge
girders and the second task involves a building design with post-tensioned two-way slabs. The
design and analysis of the given structure is performed as per the guidelines and requirements
stated in the American Concrete Institute Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete of
(ACI 318) and American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO
LRFD Bridge Design Specifications).
3. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
2
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... 1
List of Figures................................................................................................................................ 4
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 4
Part 1: Bridge 205 of I-35W Extension Project Design Using PGSuper ................................. 5
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 6
1.1 Project Scope ..................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Software............................................................................................................................. 6
2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Study of Plan and General Arrangement ........................................................................... 6
2.2 Design Parameters ............................................................................................................. 6
2.3 PGSuper Analysis and Design Procedure.......................................................................... 7
3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ................................................................................................... 11
4. DESIGN SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 12
5. SHOP DRAWINGS................................................................................................................ 15
6. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................... 15
Part 2: Designof Post-Tensioned Two Way Slab for Oak Creek Village Apartments Using
ADAPT-PT .................................................................................................................................. 16
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 17
1.1 Project Scope ................................................................................................................... 17
1.2 Software........................................................................................................................... 17
2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 17
2.1 Study of Plan.................................................................................................................... 17
2.2 Design Parameters ........................................................................................................... 18
2.3 ADAPT-PT Analysis and Design Procedure................................................................... 19
2.4 Calculation of effective prestressing force (fse)................................................................... 20
3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ................................................................................................... 22
3.1 Design Moment ............................................................................................................... 22
4. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
3
3.2 Check for stresses: ........................................................................................................... 23
3.3 Deflection: ....................................................................................................................... 24
4. DESIGN SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 24
4.1 Number of Strands............................................................................................................... 24
4.2 Tendon Profile ................................................................................................................. 25
4.3 Shear Design for punching shear..................................................................................... 25
4.4 Longitudinal Reinforcement............................................................................................ 26
4.5 Materials Summary.......................................................................................................... 26
4.6 Summary Report:............................................................................................................. 27
5. SHOP DRAWINGS........................................................................................................... 28
6. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................... 28
WORK DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................... 29
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 30
APPENDIX A-1: BRIDGE GIRDER DESIGN REPORT OUTPUT.................................... 31
APPENDIX A-2: BRIDGE GIRDER DESIGN MANUAL CALCULATIONS ................... 34
A. Calculation of Flexural Strength for Span 2- Girder A........................................................ 34
B. Live Load Distribution Factor for an Interior Beam (For Span 5 β Girder D) ................... 35
C. Live Load Distribution Factor for an Interior Beam (For Span 1 β Girder D)................... 36
APPENDIX A-3: BRIDGE GIRDER SHOP DRAWINGS .................................................... 38
APPENDIX B-1: SLAB DESIGN.............................................................................................. 39
INPUT DRAWINGS FOR OAKLAND CREEKS....................................................................... 39
APPENDIX B-2: SLAB DESIGN SHOP DRAWINGS .......................................................... 40
5. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
4
List of Figures
Figure 1: Overall Plan..................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Cross-Sectional View for Spans 1,3,5,6 and 7 ................................................................ 9
Figure 3: Cross-Sectional View for Span 2 .................................................................................... 9
Figure 4: Cross-Sectional View for Span 4 .................................................................................... 9
Figure 5: Cross section and Debonding Pattern for Span 2 Girder A........................................... 10
Figure 6: Longitudinal View of Span 1- Girder A........................................................................ 10
Figure 7:Moment Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1) .................................................. 11
Figure 8: Shear Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1)...................................................... 11
Figure 9: Displacement Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1)......................................... 12
Figure 10: Plan View .................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 11: Elevation View ............................................................................................................ 18
Figure 12: Adapt Model................................................................................................................ 19
Figure 13: Moment Diagram ........................................................................................................ 22
Figure 14: Stress Diagrams........................................................................................................... 23
Figure 15: Deflection.................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 16: Tendon Height Diagram.............................................................................................. 25
List of Tables
Table 1: Girder Design Summary (All Spans).............................................................................. 12
Table 2: Mild Steel Reinforcement Design for Span 1- Girder A ................................................ 13
Table 3: Distribution Factor for an Interior Beam........................................................................ 13
Table 4:Sample Girder Schedule .................................................................................................. 14
Table 5: Sample Shear Reinforcement Detail............................................................................... 14
Table 6: Camber and Deflections.................................................................................................. 14
Table 7: Prestress Force and Strand Stresses for Span 1- Girder A.............................................. 15
Table 8:Allowable Stress limits .................................................................................................... 19
Table 9: Number of Strands and Tendon Force ............................................................................ 24
Table 10:Critical Section Stresses ................................................................................................ 25
Table 11: Punching Shear Reinforcement .................................................................................... 25
Table 12: Longitudinal Reinforcement......................................................................................... 26
6. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
5
Part 1: Bridge 205 of I-35W Extension Project
Design Using PG Super
7. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
6
1. INTRODUCTION
The main objective of this project is to design all the simply supported pre-tensioned prestressed
concrete TxDOT I-girders for the seven-span Bridge 205 of I-35W extension project in the most
economical way. The minimum number of strands, minimum number of girders, or minimum
weight, or a combination of these items is to be found and also to replace the steel plate girders at
the second span by prestressed TxDOT I-girders.
1.1 Project Scope
The project scope is to study general arrangement plan, perform analysis in PGSuper and design
all 7 spans using AASHTO LRFD and TxDOT specifications for presressed concrete bridges.
Finally prepare shop drawings and specifications along with a manual design check.
1.2 Software
The analysis was performed by using PGSuper (Prestressed Girder Superstructure Design and
Analysis), V. 2.9 (AASHTO LRFD 2014) for bridge design. Autodesk AutoCAD 2016 is used to
prepare structural drawings (shop drawings) and specifications
2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY
2.1 Study of Plan and General Arrangement
Bridge 205 is a southbound bridge on North Tarrant Expressway Segment 3A North that is 900.35'
long with 7 spans. It is on a horizontal curve with a radius of 5,800' and a vertical curve with an
entrance grade of +3% and an exit grade of β 2.46%. The second span utilizes steel girders to cross
the 230.56' between bents 2 and 3. Every other span on the bridge uses Tx54 girders. Six of the
seven bents are placed at a skew angle. The bridge has SSTR rails on either side of the deck and
an 8 ft CLF-RO fence on either side of spans 2 and 3. The overall width of the bridge varies in
span 1 and span 7 from 52'-8'' to 53'-5''. In spans 2-6, the overall width of the bridge is a constant
53'-5''.
2.2 DesignParameters
The design was based on TxDOT 2013 Bridge Design manual. As per the project statement, the
design was based on an overall bridge length of 900.35', overall width of bridge of 53'. and a
roadway width of 51'. TxDOT T551 railing was used which has a weight of 382 plf. A typical
8. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
7
composite cast-in-place deck that is 8'' thick was used with a strength of f'c=4 ksi, Ec=3605 ksi.
The various type of TxDOT girder was used for each span as per need for the most economical
design.
The girders were designed with f'c = 8.5 ksi, f'ci= 6 ksi, Ec= 5255 ksi initially but it was changed
as per the requirement. The limitation of the practical length of a precast prestressed concrete
girder is 230'. The location of the piers was not allowed to change so we had to use the same seven
span as in the original design drawings. The width of the bridge was also not allowed to be
changed.
2.3 PGSuper Analysis and DesignProcedure
The PG Super software has a built in material library and modeling template. All 7 spans are
modeled according to the alignment given in the Bridge 205 plans. The overall plan and a cross
section view of span 1 is shown in figures 1 and 2. An initial trial is performed by modeling the
similar cross-sections and number of girders for all spans as given in input drawings of Bridge
205. Multiple iterations of specification checks are performed with numerous checks to optimize
the design and meet project objectives. Girder size, number of strands, amount of mild steel
reinforcement and debonding patterns are tried in various combinations to come up with our final
design. The following are the checks PG Super does when analyzing the bridge. A sample of the
output from some of these checks can be found in Appendix A-1.
ο· Strand Stresses [5.9.3]
ο· Stress Check for Service I for Casting Yard Stage (At Release) [5.9.4.1.2]
ο· Stress Check for Service I for Deck and Diaphragm Placement (Bridge Site 1)
ο· Stress Check for Service I for Final without Live Load (Bridge Site 2) [5.9.4.2.1]
ο· Stress Check for Compressive Stresses for Service I for Final with Live Load (Bridge Site 3)
[5.5.3.1]
ο· Stress Check for Tensile Stresses for Service III for Final with Live Load (Bridge Site 3)
[5.9.4.2.2]
ο· Stress Check for Compressive Stresses for Fatigue I for Final with Live Load (Bridge Site 3)
[5.5.3.1]
9. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
8
ο· Positive Moment Capacity for Strength I Limit State for Final with Live Load Stage (Bridge
Site 3) [5.7]
ο· Ultimate Shears for Strength I Limit State for Bridge Site Stage 3 [5.8]
ο· Horizontal Interface Shears/Length for Strength I Limit State [5.8.4]
ο· Longitudinal Reinforcement for Shear Check - Strength I [5.8.3.5]
ο· Optional Live Load Deflection Check (LRFD 2.5.2.6.2)
ο· Girder Dimensions Detailing Check [5.14.1.2.2]
ο· Stirrup Detailing Check [5.8.2.5, 5.8.2.7, 5.10.3.1.2]
ο· Camber Check
Span 2 proved to be the most difficult span to design due to its length of 230'. The original plans
for Bridge 205 show this span using steel plate girders to make transportation and construction
feasible at site. Initial design started with 6-Tx70 girders and continued until the maximum number
of girders could fit within the width of the bridge while keeping in mind the minimum spacing
requirement of 3.5β. Due to its long span, the stress limits in concrete at initial and service stage
had to be increased beyond the project permissible values, as allowed by Dr. Chao. The final fβci
and fβc in our design are 9 ksi and 15 ksi, respectively. Eventually 15-Tx70 girders were required
in Span 2 (Figure 3 and 4) to ensure the capacity to demand ratio was equal to or greater than 1.0
for various stress stages and girder locations listed below.
A similar approach is used to design the remaining spans and designs for every span are grouped
to streamline the designs and achieve feasibility in construction planning. 5-Tx54 girders were
safe in every span except for Span 4. For Span 4 the maximum number of girders for Tx54 with
the minimum spacing was unsafe, hence increased the girder size to 8-Tx62. An optional design
with 5-Tx70 was checked for span 4 and was finalized since the material weight was significantly
lower than 8-Tx62 (Figure 5).
10. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
9
Figure 1: Overall Plan
Figure 2: Cross-Sectional View for Spans 1,3,5,6 and 7
Figure 3: Cross-Sectional View for Span 2
Figure 4: Cross-Sectional View for Span 4
11. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
10
Figure 5: Cross section and Debonding Pattern for Span 2 Girder A
Figure 6: Longitudinal View of Span 1- Girder A
12. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
11
3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
The analysis was carried out in PG Super Software. Below are graphs depicting the shear and
moment diagrams as well as the displacement diagram for Span 1 Girder A.
Figure 7:Moment Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1)
Figure 8: Shear Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1)
13. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
12
Figure 9: Displacement Results at MidspanβExterior Girder (Span 1)
4. DESIGN SUMMARY
All girders used normal weight concrete and 270 ksi low-lax strands. A summary of design
specifications for all 7 spans is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Girder Design Summary (All Spans)
Span 1 Span 2 Span 3 Span 4 Span 5 Span 6 Span 7
Length of Span 102.5 ft 230.58 ft 111.17 ft 130 ft 98.09 ft 114 ft 114 ft
Girder Type TX 54 TX 70 TX 54 TX 70 TX 54 TX 54 TX 54
Number of Girders 5 15 5 5 5 5 5
Spacing 12 ft 3.52 ft 12 ft 7 ft 12 ft 12 ft 12 ft
Number of Strands 48 70 48 56 48 54 54
Dia. of Strands 0.6β 0.7β 0.6β 0.7β 0.6β 0.6β 0.6β
Straight Strands 40 70 40 40 40 46 46
Harped Strands 8 54 8 8 8 8 8
Debonded Strands 0 22 0 12 0 0 0
14. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
13
Table 2 shows a sample calculation of Mild Steel Reinforcement for a Span 1 Girder A.
Table 2: Mild Steel Reinforcement Design for Span 1- Girder A
Table 3 shows a comparison of Live Load Distribution Factors calculated by PG Super for two
sample interior beams with manual calculations.
Table 3: Distribution Factor for an Interior Beam
Distribution Factors Span/Girder Calculated PGSuper
Live Load Distribution Factor for Moment
(Strength and Service Limit States)
1D
0.8542
0.8042*
0.845
Live Load Distribution Factor for Moment
(Strength and Service Limit States)
5D 0.8612 0.908
*reduction of LLDF for moment in longitudinal beam on skewed supports
15. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
14
Table 4 show the sample girder schedule for span 1 which is extracted from the PGSuper
software.
Table 4:Sample Girder Schedule
Table 5 shows the sample shear reinforcement detail.
Table 5: Sample Shear Reinforcement Detail
Table 6: Camber and Deflections
16. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
15
Table 7: Prestress Force and Strand Stresses for Span 1- Girder A
5. SHOP DRAWINGS
CAD drawings of Span 1 Girder A were developed using the design developed in PG Super. A
cross section view, elevation view and shear stirrup details have been included in the shop
drawings. They can be found in Appendix A-3.
6. CONCLUSION
In summary, we optimized the design of this bridge to use only prestressed concrete girders and to
be the most economical design possible. In doing this, we used 5-Tx54 girders in all spans except
for Spans 2 and 4, which used 15 and 5 Tx70 girders, respectively. This design allowed our bridge
to be as lightweight as possible, while remaining safe for traffic.
17. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
16
Part 2: Design of Post-Tensioned Two Way Slab for
Oak Creek Village Apartments Using ADAPT-PT
18. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
17
1. INTRODUCTION
The main objective of this project is to design the post-tensioned two-way slab for the Oak Creek
Village Apartments by using ADAPT/PT 2015 software. This is a slab of a two story garage
building. We were assigned to carry out the design for the strip with 3 spans and a cantilever to
the left of the span.
1.1 Project Scope
The project scope is to study floor plan, perform analysis and design of the two-way slab using
ADAPT/PT 2015 software and ACI 318-2014 specifications for prestressed concrete building
design to find the number of strands, tendon layout and the amount of post tensioning force
required to balance the service load on the slab.
1.2 Software
The analysis was performed by using ADAPT-PT (AASHTO LRFD 2014) for slab design.
Autodesk AutoCAD 2016 is used to prepare structural drawings (shop drawings) and
specifications
2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY
2.1 Study of Plan
According to the plan there are 3 continuous spans of 29 ft. and a cantilever of 16.96 ft. to the left
of the spans. The width of cantilever span and first two continuous spans are 14 ft. while for the
third span it is 27 ft. For cantilever span and first two continuous spans the slab width of 14 ft.
spans on left side of the columns as on the right side there is a ramp, while for the third 27ft. span
the slab spans on both sides of the column with span width of 13 ft. on the right side. According
to the plan the columns supporting the slab have the size of 2ft. X 2ft. and a height of 12 ft.
19. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
18
Figure 10: Plan View
Figure 11: Elevation View
2.2 DesignParameters
The design was based on ACI 318-2014 Building Design Manual. As per the project statement,
the design was based on an overall slab thickness of 8-in. For design of slab the concrete strength
fβc = 4 ksi, fβci = 3 ksi, Ec = 3605 ksi. was initially used but it was changed within the limits later.
No drop panels or transverse beams were allowed to use. A 0.5-in. diameter, Grade 270 low-
relaxation strands with initial prestress = 0.8 fpu were used. Superimposed dead load = 20 psf
(uniform) and live load = 40 psf (uniform) was given. The PT tendons were assumed to end at an
intermediate coupler and there was no effect on the slab beyond the coupler. The stress limits
according to ACI are summarized below in Table 8.
20. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
19
Table 8:Allowable Stress limits
Limits Values
Tension stress limits βπβ² π
At Top 6.000
At Bottom 6.000
Compression stress limits / f'c At all locations 0.450
Tension stress limits (initial) βπβ² π
At Top 3.000
At Bottom 3.000
Compression stress limits (initial) / f'c At all locations 0.600
2.3 ADAPT-PT Analysis and Design Procedure
All 3 continuous spans and cantilever are modeled according to given plans. The 3D view of the
slab modelled in ADAPT-PTRC 2015 is shown in figure below. Multiple iterations are performed
to optimize the design and meet project objectives. In order to design the post tension slabs we
need to input the value of effective prestressing force (fse) after all the losses. For this all the
calculations are shown below.
Figure 12: Adapt Model
23. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
22
3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
3.1 DesignMoment
The moment diagram is shown in Figure 13 which shows positive and negative moments at the
supports and midspan.
LOAD COMBINATION: Envelope
Moment Diagrams
Project: "Design Of Two-Way Slabs" / Load Case: Envelope
Moment Drawn on Tension Side
Figure 13: Moment Diagram
24. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
23
3.2 Check for stresses:
According to ACI 318-2014 the checks for limiting stresses at service are given by ADAPT-PT
are as follows:
Figure 14: Stress Diagrams
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
L-Cant SPAN1 SPAN2 SPAN3
Stress Diagrams
Project: "DesignOfTwo-WaySlabs" /LoadCase:Envelope
Tensile Stress Positive
Stress[psi]
AllowableStresses TopMax TopMin
-1000
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
L-Cant SPAN1 SPAN2 SPAN3
Stress Diagrams
Project: "DesignOfTwo-WaySlabs" /LoadCase:Envelope
Tensile Stress Positive
Stress[psi]
AllowableStresses BottomMax BottomMin
25. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
24
3.3 Deflection:
The figure 15 shows the deflection for all the three spans.
Figure 15: Deflection
4. DESIGN SUMMARY
4.1 Number of Strands
The number of strands as per the design parameters, loading and the strength and geometry of the
slab was calculated by the ADAPT-PT. The number of strands was 17.
Table 9: Number of Strands and Tendon Force
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
Left Cantilever Span1 Span2 Span3
Deflection Diagrams
File: final safe adapt dgn
Deflection[in]
ServiceEnv. MaxTotal ServiceEnv. MinTotal
26. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
25
4.2 Tendon Profile
The tendon profile of one of the strands is as shown in the figure below.
Figure 16: Tendon Height Diagram
4.3 Shear Designfor punching shear
The results of shear design carried out by ADAPT-PT are as follows The 2-way shear also known
as punching shear was checked near the edge of the columns. Based on the stresses shown in Table
10, shear studs rails were not provided.
Table 10:Critical Section Stresses
Label Layer
Con
d.
Factored
shear
Factored
moment
Stress
due to
shear
Stress
due to
moment
Total
stress
Allowable
stress
Stress
ratio
k k-ft ksi ksi ksi ksi
1 1 1 -97.63 -163.60 0.09 0.068 0.159 0.244 0.653
2 1 1 -92.69 +4.83 0.09 0.002 0.089 0.244 0.365
3 1 1 -138.31 +197.59 0.13 0.082 0.212 0.230 0.920
4 1 2 -85.47 -209.04 0.12 0.097 0.215 0.268 0.799
Table 11: Punching Shear Reinforcement
Reinforcement option: Shear Studs
Stud diameter: 0.5
Number of rails per side: 2
Col. Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist Dist
in in in in in in in in in in
1
2
3
4
27. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
26
Dist. = Distance measured from the face of support
Note: Columns with --- have not been checked for punching shear.
Note: Columns with *** have exceeded the maximum allowable shear stress
4.4 Longitudinal Reinforcement
This provision is in place to control cracking and increase ductility of the structure since
unbounded steel is still elastic at the time concrete crushes. The following longitudinal
reinforcement shown in Table 12 is provided. A visual representation of this reinforcement can be
seen in the shop drawings in the appendix.
Table 12: Longitudinal Reinforcement
Span ID Location From Quantity Size Length Area
ft ft in2
CL 1 TOP 0.00 4 6 31.50 1.76
1 2 TOP 17.85 3 6 22.50 1.32
2 3 TOP 17.85 3 6 22.50 1.32
3 4 TOP 17.85 3 6 11.50 1.32
CL 5 TOP 7.48 3 6 18.50 1.32
1 6 TOP 20.75 3 6 16.50 1.32
2 7 TOP 20.75 3 6 16.50 1.32
3 8 TOP 20.75 3 6 8.50 1.32
CL 9 BOT 0.00 6 8 104.00 4.74
4.5 Materials Summary
From this design the following quantities of materials will be needed.
1. Concrete
Total volume of concrete = 1527.03ft3 (56.56 yd3)
Area covered = 1832.44 ft2
2. Mild steel
Total weight of rebar = 2392.63 lbs
Average rebar usage = 1.31 psf, 1.57 pcf
3. Prestressing material
Total weight of tendon = 930.0 lb
Average tendon usage = 0.51 psf, 0.61 pcf
28. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
27
4.6 Summary Report:
ADAPT - STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SOFTWARE SYSTEM
ADAPT-PT Version "2015" Date: "05 - 01 - 2016" Time: "21:36" File: final safe adapt dgn
1 - PROJECT TITLE: "Design Of Two-Way Slabs"
1.1 Design Strip: Group-5
1.2 Load Case: Envelope
2 - MEMBER ELEVATION
[ft] 16.96 29.00 29.00 29.00
L-Cant SPAN 1 SPAN 2 SPAN 3
3 - TOP REBAR
3.1 ADAPT selected
3.2 ADAPT selected
3.3 Num. of layers
1 4#6X31'6" 2 3#6X22'6" 3 3#6X22'6" 4 3#6X11'6"
5 3#6X18'6" 6 3#6X16'6" 7 3#6X16'6" 8 3#6X8'6"
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 - TENDON PROFILE
4.1 Datum Line
4.2 CGS Distance A [in]
4.6 CGS Distance B [in]
4.10 CGS Distance C [in]
4.14 Force/Width [kips/ft]
4.3 Force A [kips]
4.7 Force B [kips]
4.11 Force C [kips]
5.005.005.00 9.00
433.872
3.50 9.00
433.872
3.503.50 9.00
433.872
1.751.75 5.00
433.872
30.99 30.99 30.99 16.07 .00
5 - BOTTOM REBAR
5.1 ADAPT selected
5.2 ADAPT selected
5.3 Num. of layers
9 6#8X104'0"
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 - REQUIRED & PROVIDED BARS
6.1 Top Bars
[ in2]r e q u i r e d
p r o v i d e d
6 . 2 B o t t o m B a r s
m a x
m a x
0.0
1.6
3.2
1.2
2.4
3.6
4.8
2.83
0.00
2.83
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.61
4.30
7 - PUNCHING SHEAR
OK=Acceptable
RE=Reinforce
NG=Exceeds code
NA=not applicable
or not performed
0.00
0.00
0.65
- 97.63
- 163.60
OK
0.37
- 92.69
4.83
OK
0.92
- 138.31
197.59
OK
0.80
- 85.47
- 209.04
OK
7.1 Stress Ratio
Shear Force [kips]
Bending Moment [kips*ft]
7.2 Status
8 - LEGEND Stressing End Dead End
9 - DESIGN PARAMETERS
9.1 Code: American ACI318 (2011)/IBC (2012) f'c = 8000 psi fy = 60 ksi (longitudinal) fy = 60 ksi (shear) fpu = 270 ksi
9 . 2 R e b a r C o v e r : T o p = 1 i n B o t t o m = 1 i n R e b a r T a b l e :
10 - MATERIAL QUANTITIES
CONCRETE
Total volume of concrete = 1527.0 ft3
Area covered = 1832.4 ft2
M I L D S T E E L
T o t a l w e i g h t o f r e b a r = 2 3 7 4 . 8 l b
Average rebar usage = 1.296 lb/ft2, 1.555 lb/ft3
P R E S T R E S S I N G S T E E L
T o t a l w e i g h t o f t e n d o n = 9 3 0 . 0 l b
Average tendon usage = 0.508 lb/ft2, 0.609 lb/ft3
11 - DESIGNER'S NOTES
29. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
28
5. SHOP DRAWINGS
A CAD drawing of tendon profile and longitudinal reinforcement details have been included in
the shop drawings. They can be found in Appendix B-2.
6. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the final design of the post tensioning two-way slab was carried out with the help
of ADAPT-PT. The minimum number of strands required to compensate the service loading in the
slab was found to be 17 in the particular strip. The strands were arranged with 4 strands banded
together in the direction of the strip. The strands in the transverse direction was equally spaced at
a distance of 3.2 ft. The limits of the stresses calculated was determined to be within the
permissible limits of 125 ksi to 300 ksi in the post tensioned strands. In this case, shear studs were
not required since the allowable stress is greater than the provided stress and safe in punching
shear.
30. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
29
WORK DISTRIBUTION
AnaimallurMani,Lokesh
Kumar
Adapt PT Model
Preparation ofSlabReport
Calculationof prestresslosses for
slab
Optimising bridge design
Gurjar, Santosh Mahendra
Adapt PT Model
Manual calculation ofgirder
flexural strength
Preparation ofSlabReport
Optimising bridge design
Kintner,CourtneyLynn
Group Coordination
Modelling inPG Super,
Optimising bridge design
Preparation ofBridge Report
Shop drawings
Mukati, Gaurav Singh
Calculationof prestresslosses
for slab
Optimising bridge design
Preparation ofPresentation
Rampurawala, Sameer
Modelling inPG Super, Optimising
bridge design
Calculationof prestresslosses for
slab
Preparation ofBridge Report
Tuladhar, Shuveksha
Group Coordination
Modelling inPG Super, Optimising
bridge design
Calculationof Live LoadDistribution
Factors
Preparation ofBridge and Slab
report
Shop drawings andOverall Review
of Report/Presentation
Nukala, Vishwas
Preparation ofPresentation
AdaptPT Model
Optimising bridge design
Group 5
Work
Distribution
31. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
30
REFERENCES
AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). 2014.
AASHTO LRFD.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2014. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
and Commentary. ACI 318-14.
Chao, Shih Ho. CE 5309 Spring 2016 Class Lecture Notes.
Naaman, Anthoine E. 2012. Prestressed Concrete Analysis and Design. Third Edition.
TxDOT (Texas Department of Transportation). 2013. TxDOT Bridge Design Manual.
32. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
31
APPENDIX A-1: BRIDGE GIRDER DESIGN REPORT OUTPUT
33. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
32
34. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
33
35. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
34
APPENDIX A-2: BRIDGE GIRDER DESIGN MANUAL
CALCULATIONS
A. Calculationof Flexural Strength for Span 2- Girder A
dp = 70β7.129 + 8 = 70.871 inch
bs = 3.75 ft fβc = 15ksi Ξ²1 = 0.65 kc = 0.28
A = 9636 in2 yb = 31.91 inch yt = 38.09 inch I = 628747in4
Sb = 19703 in3 H = 70in Aβs = #4-6 = 1.2 in2 As = 0 inch2
fy= 60 ksi dβs = 1.75 inch
Aps = 70 X 0.294 = 20.58 in2
fps = fpu(1β(kc/dp) fps = 270 β 1.067 C
Aβs f'y = 72 kft tf = 3.5 inch bw = 9 inch bf = 36.67 inch
Assuming rectangular section behavior
0.85 X 15 X 3.75 X 12 X 0.65C = 20.58 X (270 β 1.067 C) -72
C = 34.4in > 8 inch
Our assumption is wrong.
Assuming T Section behavior
0.85 X 15 X 9 X 0.65 X C + 0.85 X 15 X (36.67-9) X 3.5 = 20.58 X (270 β 1.067 C) β 72
C = 44 inch
a = 0.65 X 44 = 28.61 inch
fps = 270β1.067(44) = 223.052 ksi
Mn = 20.58 X 223.052 X (70.871-28.61/2)-72 X (1.75-28.61/2) + 0.85 X 15 X (36.67-9) X 3.5
Mn = 21816.65 kft
Calculating Π€ factor:
Ξ΅t = 0.003 X (70.871-34.4)/34.4 = 0.00318 < 0.005 hence transition section.
Π€ = 0.75 + 0.25(0.00318-0.002)/(0.005-0.002) = 0.848
Π€Mn = 0.848 X 21816.65 = 18500.51 kft
From PGSuper ΡMn = 20243.38 kft
36. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
35
B. Live Load Distribution Factorfor an Interior Beam(For Span 5 β Girder
D)
Beam type: I girder TX54
Type of cross-section: k
Span Length = 98.09 ft
No. of beams (Nb) = 5
S = 12 ft
Live Load Distribution Factor for moment:
(
πΎ π
12.0 πΏ π‘ π
3 )
0.1
= 1.09 From AASHTO table 4.6.2.2.1.3
1. One Lane Design Load:
π·πΉπππ‘ = 0.06 + (
π
14
)
0.4
(
π
πΏ
)
0.3
(
πΎπ
12.0 πΏ π‘π
3
)
0.1
= 0.06 + (
12
14
)
0.4
Γ (
12
98.09
)
0.3
Γ 1.09
= 0.6057
2. Two Lane Design Load:
π·πΉπππ‘ = 0.075 + (
π
9.5
)
0.4
(
π
πΏ
)
0.2
(
πΎπ
12.0 πΏ π‘π
3
)
0.1
= 0.075 + (
12
9.5
)
0.4
Γ (
12
98.09
)
0.2
Γ 1.09
= 0.8612
Reduction of LLDF for moment in longitudinal beam in skewed supports
ΞΈ = 24.973o which is less than 30o
So, reduction is not required.
37. CE 5309 Prestressed Concrete Design Group 5
Project Final Report Spring 2016
36
C. Live Load Distribution Factor for an Interior Beam(For Span 1 β Girder
D)
Beam type: I girder TX54
Type of cross-section: k
Span Length = 102.52 ft
No. of beams (Nb) = 5
S = 12 ft
Live Load Distribution Factor for moment:
(
πΎ π
12.0 πΏ π‘ π
3 )
0.1
= 1.09 From AASHTO table 4.6.2.2.1.3
1. One Lane Design Load:
π·πΉπππ‘ = 0.06 + (
π
14
)
0.4
(
π
πΏ
)
0.3
(
πΎπ
12.0 πΏ π‘π
3
)
0.1
= 0.06 + (
12
14
)
0.4
Γ (
12
102 .52
)
0.3
Γ 1.09
= 0.5985
2. Two Lane Design Load:
π·πΉπππ‘ = 0.075 + (
π
9.5
)
0.4
(
π
πΏ
)
0.2
(
πΎπ
12.0 πΏ π‘π
3
)
0.1
= 0.075 + (
12
9.5
)
0.4
Γ (
12
102.52
)
0.2
Γ 1.09
= 0.8542
Reduction of LLDF for moment in longitudinal beam in skewed supports
ΞΈ = 37.164o which is greater than 30o
So, reduction is required.