CE 410 CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN

RAIROAD STATION BRIDGE REPORT

REFORM CONSTRUCTION
Burak Can GLEN
oruh DURMU
Halil DEMRC
mer Ege ADALIER
Safiye Bircan IIK

INSTRUCTOR:
Alp CANER

Table of Contents
1.

INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 5
a.

Introduction to Railway Structures:...............................................................6

b.

Major bridge components:............................................................................ 7

2.

DESIGN CRITERIA............................................................................................. 9
a.

General View of the project:..........................................................................9

b.

Live Load....................................................................................................... 9

c.

Dead Loads:................................................................................................ 10

d.

Determining the ideal section.....................................................................12

3.

PIER DESIGN................................................................................................... 14
a.

General....................................................................................................... 14

b.

Live Load Arrangement............................................................................... 14

c.

Design Stage............................................................................................... 17

4.

FOUNDATION DESIGN..................................................................................... 21
1.

General....................................................................................................... 21

2.

Soil Investigation and Soil Properties..........................................................21

3.

Determination of Dimension of Pile Cap......................................................22

4.

Punching Shear Check................................................................................ 23

5.

Determination of Vertical Load Capacity of Single Pile................................24

5.

COST ESTIMATION.......................................................................................... 27

6.

FUTURE PROGRESS PLAN............................................................................... 31

7.

CONCLUSION.................................................................................................. 31

8.

REFERENCES.................................................................................................. 32

List of Figures
Figure 1 Model of Rail Road Station........................................................................4
2

Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure

2 Model of Rail Road Station........................................................................5

3 Model of Rail Road.................................................................................... 5
4 Cooper E80 Load Distribution...................................................................9
5 Cooper E80 Live Load Arrangement.........................................................9
6 I-Section.................................................................................................. 12
7 A-A and B-B Section................................................................................ 14
8 Live Load Alternative 1...........................................................................14
9 Live Load Alternative 2...........................................................................14
10 Live Load Alternative 3.........................................................................15
11 Live Load Alternative 4.........................................................................15
12 Live Load Alternative 5.........................................................................16
13 B-B Section Live Load Arrangement......................................................17
14 Column Head Dimensions.....................................................................18
15 Column Dimensions.............................................................................. 20
16 Plan View of Foundation........................................................................24
17 Side View of Foundation........................................................................24

List Of Tables
Table 1 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials........................................................12
3

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

2 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials........................................................12

3 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials........................................................13
4 Calculations to Find Moment....................................................................17
5 Finding Moment at A-A Section.................................................................18
6 Determination of Column Head Cross Section..........................................19
7 Determination of Column Dimensions......................................................20
8 Determination of Column Dimensions......................................................20
9 Soil Characteristic for Sand......................................................................22
10 Soil Characteristic for Clay.....................................................................22
11 Soil Characteristic for Clay.....................................................................22
12 SPT N-Average........................................................................................ 23
13 Determination of Footing Dimensions....................................................23
14 Punching Shear Calculations..................................................................24
15 Pile Capacity Calculations......................................................................24
16 Consolidation Settlement Calculations...................................................25

1. INTRODUCTION

Objective of this project is designing an elevated railroad station bridge. The project is
originally located in Astana, KAZAKHSTAN. The following figures are taken from the
original project.

Figure 1 Model of Rail Road Station

Figure 2 Model of Rail Road Station

Figure 3 Model of Rail Road

This report consists of;

The identification of the project
Loads and load combinations (for preliminary design stage)
Specifications used
Structural and geotechnical analysis and results
Structural and foundation design calculations
Cost estimations and future works

a. Introduction to Railway Structures:

Railway structures involve wide array of construction intended to support the track itself
or house railway operations. Common examples of track carrying structures are : bridges,
trestles, viaducts, culverts, scales, inspection pits, unloading pits and similar construction.
Common examples of helper structures are : drainage structures, retaining walls, tunnels,
snow sheds, repair shops, loading docks, passenger stations and platforms, fueling facilities,
towers, catenary frames etc.

When designing railway structures, the various sources of their loads must be considered, as
they would be with any other similar, non-railway structure.

Considered loads are :

the dead load of the structure itself

live loads from the carried traffic
dynamic components of the traffics (impact, centrifugal, lateral and longitudinal forces
environmental considerations (wind, snow and ice, thermal, seismic and stream flow
loads)

In this very project, dead load consists of footings, columns, deck, ballast, ballast
protection wall, traverse and rails. Seismic load and impact factor are also to be considered. In
preliminary stage, seismic load is not taken into account.
Railway structures must perform under heavier loads. They have longer service lives.
They have different maintenance constraints compered to their highway counterparts.
(Because of these properties, railway structure design is influenced by maintenance issues
more than roadway structures.)
The high deflections in railway structures are not acceptable (in order to prevent
derailment). Hence, stability matters. That is why, maintenance concerns and fatigue
considerations need more attention and must be done in detail compared to the highway
industry. Different standards and specifications must be used. Welded connections and
continuous spans are good options for railway structures.

b. Major bridge components:

In general terms, the major components of track carrying structure are very similar to their
non-railway counterparts. Determination of the type of construction and type of material is
important. Generally, these are limited to timber, concrete and steel, or a combination of the
three. Each material has its specific advantages. Timber is economical, but has strength and
life limitations. Using structural timber is getting harder to accomplish for railway structures
in terms of its size and grade. Concrete is also economical, but its has a poor strength to
weight ratio. Steel has a good strength to weight ratio, but is expensive. The material chosen
for the spans will generally determine the designation of the bridge.
i. Bridge deck :
The bridge deck is a major portion of a bridge which can be considered as-sort of- the surface
of the bridge, that carries track rails. In such case, the engineer may not think of the typical
railroad bridge as having a deck, while designing. Railroad bridges are designed as either
open deck or ballast deck structures. Some bridges use direct fixation of the rails to the
supporting structure. Open deck bridges have ties supported directly on load-carrying
elements of the structure (such as girders) The dead loads for open deck structures are
significantly less than for ballast deck structures. However, open decks transfer more of the
dynamic effects of live load into the bridge than ballast decks, as they can transfer the
7

dynamic effecs of impact coming from the bridge to the railway, which is not desired for this
kind of an elevated railway bridge project. Ballast deck bridges have the track rails supported
on ballast, which is carried by the structural elements of the bridge. Ballast deck structures
offer advantages in ride and maintenance requirements. Unlike open decks, the track
alignment on ballast deck spans can be handled using standard track maintenance equipment.
Most railroads currently prefer ballast decks for new structures.
ii. Ballast : Ballast is the component of the structure composed of broken, sharp, strong,
angular stones-such as basalt or granite- which spreads the effects transferred from traverse
(such as vibration) without being exposed to permenant settlement and deflection. In brief,
ballast provides an elastic bed for the railway, thanks to its ability to distribute the incoming
load homogenously by the friction between stones. Ballast also serves as drainage and
protects the deck from mud, freeze, and decay by intercepting rail tracks from soil. The
depth of ballast must be between 30-60 cm. Ballast must be homogenous in terms of particle
size, with particles capable of passing through 6 cm sieve and not pass through 3 cm sieve.

iii. Traverse:
Traverse is the type of structure that transfers the load from specified load model and transfer
it through wider surface (ballast) and provides stability to track rails. It is essential for
eccentricity of the railway. The distance between the centroids of two traverse can be taken as
62-63 cm. For the Ankara-Eskiehir high-speed train railway, this distance is taken as 60 cm.
Traverse has to be made with a concrete stronger than Portland. Traverse also has an
advantage of minimizing noise and impact. Traverse can be preferred as timber, steel, plastic,
concrete monoblocks, or pre-stressed blocks. Timber is preferred due to its elasticity and the
fact that it does not damage ballast. Its maintenance is easy and cheap, however, timber
traverse is effected by moisture easily and is weak against drainage and fire, not to mention its
short life-time. Steel traverse is easier to produce, compared to timber. However, the
possibility of abrasion is significant which may reduce strength, and cause cracking where the
traverse are settled. To prevent this, connections must be done properly. Also, due to the lightweight property of steel traverse, stability can not be maintained as much as it is by timber or
concrete. All types of traverse have advantages and disadvantages due to the type of the
project, however, it must be considered that for the high-speed train railways, concrete
monoblock types are mostly preferred around the world, which is also suitable for this project.
This is because concrete monoblock traverse provides extreme stability due to its heavy
weight, and protection for gauge. For an elevated high-speed railway bridge, stability is the
most important case.

2. DESIGN CRITERIA
In design stage, as code, The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way
Association AREMA is chosen. AREMA is a simple and valid code for this type of design.
While designing an appropriate girder to be used, sections are chosen based on limitations of
AREMA. For the preliminary design stage, dead loads and live loads, and impact effects are
considered. Although seismic actions are to be taken into account, they have not been touched
upon during preliminary stage.

a. General View of the project:

The elevated bridge designed to have a total length of 500m, composed of identical spans
having 25m length, 9m width. Below the station, free space is to be evaluated for parking lot.
Hence, in this report, all of the calculations done and information given are based on a single
25m span. (KOLON BOYUTLARI, NE KADARI TOPRAK NDE, FOOTING/PIER NE
BOKSA ONLARIN BOYUTLARI). The structure is carried by five identical I-beam girders
between each column, made by A588 weathering steel. All of the loads above are carried by
these girders. Ballast type deck is preferred, having a thickness of 0.3m. Deck is made of C55
concrete. Ballast is composed of broken basalt stones, having a thickness of 0.5 m. Traverse is
preferred as monoblock concrete. In preliminary stage, rail tracks have not been identified
properly.

b. Live Load
For live load, two types of train models are considered; that are LM-71 and Cooper E-80
Models. Firstly, LM-71 is taken. However, since Cooper E-80 Model gives a heavier live
load and is appropriate for all AREMA limitations, Cooper E-80 is decided to use, to be on the
safe side.

Figure 4 Cooper E80 Load Distribution

In the figure below, the portion that creates the maximum moment on mid-span is shown.
According to this loading, for 25 m span, 4210 kN/lane is obtained. Two lanes are to be
designed; total live load is 8420 kN.
Mmax(Mid-span)=11520 kNm (One lane)
Mmax(Mid-span)=23040 kNm (Two lanes)
Mmax(Mid-span)=23040/5=4608 kNm per girder

We multiply live load by 1.33 to take into account impact effect

Figure 5 Cooper E80 Live Load Arrangement

c. Dead Loads:
Ballast: It must be noted that since the designed bridge is straight for 500m, no anti-drainage
plates are needed.
For ballast, basalt is taken as stone type, having basalt(broken)=1.954 t/m3. Dimensions of volume
of ballast is 25m*9m*0.5m, thus, the ballast volume is;
25*9*0.5=112.5 m3
The void ratio of basalt is 0.37, which indicates that 112.5*(1-0.37)=71 m 3 of crushed basalt
stone is needed.
Total ballast weight (One span): 1.954*71=139 t*9.96=1385 kN
Load per girder: 1385/5=277 kN per girder
Mmax(Ballast)=11*252/8=860 kNm per girder
Mmax(Ballast)=860*5=4300kNm

Traverse: As it is stated above, C55 concrete monoblocks are to be used. Not only
monoblocks are preferred universally for high-speed railways, but also suitable for this kind
of project due to its extreme stability. For this case, derailment is more critical than any other
railway project. Traverse are to be settled as there are going to be 60cm between centroids of
two traverse, and buried 10 cm to the ballast. The space between two traverse is taken as 30
cm. In such case, 42 traverse are to be settled for one lane, making 84 traverse for a 25 m
span.
The sections of traverse are;
10

Top width: 150 mm

Bottom width: 320 mm
Height: 20 cm
Mid-height: 17.5 cm
Length: 240 cm
Weight: 242 kg
Life-time: 20-30 years
Total weight (84 traverse): 20.33 tons (202.57 kN)
Mmax(Traverse)= (202.57/25)*252/8=632.8 kNm
Mmax(Traverse)=632.8/5=126.6 kNm per girder
Ballast protection wall: There is to be two platforms between railways, hence, designing
barriers is not necessary but using ballast protection wall. There are to be two walls near two
lanes, each having 30 cmx50 cm dimensions. (2 kN/m)
Mmax(walls)=(2*252/8)*2=312.5 kNm
Mmax(walls)=312.5/5=62.5 kNm per girder
Tracks: Two lanes are to be designed. For preliminary, the distributed load for rails is taken as
0.65*4 rails=2.6 kN/m
Mrail=0.52*252/8=203.1 kNm
Mrail=203.1/5=40.63 kNm per girder
Deck: Dimensions of the deck are to be 25m*9m*0.3m= 67.5 m3 (conc=25 kN/m3)
Total dead load by deck: 67.5*25=1687.5 kN
Dead load per girder: 1687.5/5=337.5 kN
Mmax(Deck)= (1687.5/25)*252/8=5273.4 kNm
Mmax(Deck)= 5273.4/5=1055.7 kNm per girder

Total Loads for a single span

LL: 8420 kN

11

Ballast: 1385 kN
Traverse: 202.57 kN
Ballast Protection Wall: 50 kN
Rail: 65 kN
Deck: 1687.5 kN
Girder: 761.2 kN
TOTAL LOAD: 12571.3 kN

d. Determining the ideal section

In order to determine the ideal section first we calculate the loads that are superimposed dead
load (including ballast, deck, rail and tie), live load and impact. We tried to satisfy the
requirement 0.55 Fy.. We formed an excel sheet, then, grouped the loads. We tried several
sections. First we try sections whose flange thicknesses are 12.14 cm and web thickness is 8
cm. These sections were capable of carrying the stress applied but due to welding problems
we could not choose these ones. Plates having thicknesses more than 5 cm are not suggested.
Top and bottom stresses of girder are calculated as fresh concrete on girder, and as stiff
composite structure. Due to this, neutral axis of the structure, hence, stress values at top and
bottom do change. Instead of calculating the capacity for every section picked, neutral axis of
every section, moment of inertia, and top and bottom stresses for each section is formulated
via Excel.

Table 1 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials

12

Table 2 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials

Table 3 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials

Moreover, as we proportioning our section we took into account some limits which are:
D
* tw

<150

bf
* 2tf

<12

13
Figure 6 I-Section

bf >

D
6

*tf > 1.1tw

After several trials we have chosen our section. Dimensions of
the section is:
*tf = 5 cm
*tw= 3 cm
*bf = 0.4 m
*D = 1.4 m
Our section also satisfy the limits we have covered above:
D
* tw

<150 ..........................

bf
* 2tf

<12 ...........................

bf >

D
6 ...........................

*tf > 1.1tw........................

(46.67)

(4)

(40cm> 23.3 cm)

(5cm>3.3cm)

Moreover we roughly checked buckling according to AREMA

3. PIER DESIGN
a. General
Designing the pier is one of the most important subject for the rail road. In preliminary design
stage, exact calculations were not done, however cross-sections are estimated with enough
accuracy. To design the cross-section several types of loads are needed.

14

First of all we decided to use Cooper E80 Train whose loads are determined by the AREMA.
After that, ballast, deck, rail and girder loads are determined. We make 2 analyses with 2
different girder loads. On the other hand, deck, rail and ballast loads are fixed to a value.

b. Live Load Arrangement

Cooper E80 train is the live load of the system. Therefore, we tried to find the appropriate live
load for the system. While designing the girders and the piers, different live load
arrangements have been used. Pier system expressed with two 12,5m girders standing on the
pier. Also these girders are supported by pins in order not to have moment at the supports
which is also the actual case. We analyze 5 different live load arrangements for B-B section as
it shown down:

Figure 7 A-A and B-B Section

Figure 8 Live Load Alternative 1

15

Figure 9 Live Load Alternative 2

Figure 10 Live Load Alternative 3

Figure 11 Live Load Alternative 4

16

Figure 12 Live Load Alternative 5

As it can be seen from the figures, to compute easily we do not divide the load according to
their affect but we divide it from the mid-point of the span to ease the preliminary
calculations.
Moreover combining these load combinations with each other we tried to find the most
appropriate live load arrangement for A-A section.

Table 4 Calculations to Find Moment

c. Design Stage
Column Head
After determining the live load and dead load; concrete column and the head of the column
was designed. To design the column head which is behave like beam we used the formulas
given in TS500. Kl value for materials that have been used (C50 and S420) is 150 mm 2/kN

17

and Km is equal to 119 mm 2/kN. (Uur Ersoy, 1984) We compare the calculated K which is
equal to:
b wd 2
K=
Md

Figure 13 B-B Section Live Load Arrangement

P1-2-3-4-5 values are calculated under the light of dead and live load and maximum moment
has been calculating according to these values.

Table 5 Finding Moment at A-A Section

After calculating the maximum moment we tried to find the best fitting cross-section. As it
seems from the table below, the best section is 2000mmx1300mm. So the column head will be
2000mmx1300mmx9000mm.
18

Figure 14 Column Head Dimensions

Table 6 Determination of Column Head Cross Section

Column
After preliminary design of the column head finished, column has been designed according to
the loads coming from the column head. Also to determine the column cross-sections we used
0,1*fcd*Ac=P (Karayollar Genel Mdrl, 2015) in order not to add moment interaction.
Moreover, at column section we roughly calculated reinforcing steel in order to estimate the
cost of the structure.

19

Table 7 Determination of Column Dimensions

Table 8 Determination of Column Dimensions

At the end of the calculations it has seemed that we need cross-sections with dimensions
1600mmx3600mm. And steel area estimated by assuming all moment carried by the steel
reinforcement and as it seen from the table above 32x32 steel needed. In calculations second
order moment has not calculated. They will be calculated in advanced design.

20

Figure 15 Column Dimensions

4. FOUNDATION DESIGN
1. General
According to calculation, 6 piles which is 12 m length 0.8 m diameter concrete piles were
designed for carrying nearly 12000 kN load which comes from structure. 2 piles were
designed in longitudinal direction of bridge whereas 3 piles were used in lateral direction of
bridge. Dimension of footing is 6m*6m. Necessary check was done according to TS500 code
for reinforcement calculation. Necessary explanations and soil constants can be found from
Soil Investigation and Soil Properties section.

2. Soil Investigation and Soil Properties

Site Works
Detailed subsoil observations and investigations were executed in order to determine subsoil
conditions. Geological units at the site are determined by using surface geology, boreholes
and geophysical measurements.
Within the scope of subsoil investigations, 19 boreholes having 451.1 m total length were
completed. Within boreholes systematically at every 1.5m SPT tests were performed.
Soil Profile
The site is mainly covered with a 0.5m thick top soil which is ballast material or vegetable
soil. Below top soil, light brown-brown-dark brown, medium dense, dense, very dense
gravelly clayey sand, sandy clayey gravel, silty gravel composite backfill material is
encountered down to 1,7 m to 3.4 m depth from the ground surface. Under this layer,
quaternary aged alluvial material greyish brown-brown-dark brown, medium stiff, stiff very
stiff gravelly clayey sand, clayey sand, sandy silty gravel, silt and clay encountered down to
21

3.1 m to 6.6 m depth from the ground surface. The grain size of gravel is observed medium
fine and partially coarse. At the bottom layer pinky, yellowish brown, very stiff partially
limestone creation clay and silty clay and at some level sandy gravel which belongs to
Glba Formation is encountered.
Laboratory Tests Results
According the tests results, soils compromising the upper clayey layer are classified mostly as
GC, SC with some GM. The underlying clay layer are mostly classified as CH and some CL
and. The characteristics of the soil are shown below.

Subsoil Units
Gravelly
Clayey Sand

Parameters
Internal Friction Angle
Cohesion
Unit Weight
Elastic Modulus

Symbol

Es

Proposed Value
35.0
0 kPa
19 kN/m3
30000 KPa

Symbol

Cu
Es

Proposed Value
0
15 kPa
19 kN/m3
150 KPa
35000 KPa

Symbol

Cu
Es

Proposed Value
0
25 kPa
19,5 kN/m3
225 KPa
60000 KPa

Table 9 Soil Characteristic for Sand

Subsoil Units
Clay 1

Parameters
Internal Friction Angle
Cohesion
Unit Weight
Undrained shear strength
Elastic Modulus

Table 10 Soil Characteristic for Clay

Subsoil Units
Clay 2

Parameters
Internal Friction Angle
Cohesion
Unit Weight
Undrained shear strength
Elastic Modulus

Table 11 Soil Characteristic for Clay

3. Determination of Dimension of Pile Cap

Calculations are based on location SK106 which is middle of the construction area. The SPT
values, N30 and N60 values which are calculated according to N30 values are below. Peck
and Hanson and Thornburn charts are used by determining of square footing dimension.
no(SK106 depth(m N30(field o'

CN

N1

N60

Nave(B=7m Nave(B=6m)
22

1,5

20

28,5

34

57

4,5

28

85,5

25

109

7,5

12

122,5

9,3

23

138,7

10,5

30

149,5

8
9

12,4
13,5

34
25

166,6
176,5

10

15,4

29

193,6

11

16,5

37

203,5

12

18,5

27

221,5

13

19,5

32

230,5

14

21,5

23

248,5

15
16

22,5
24,3

26
34

257,5
273,7

17

25,5

31

284,5

18

27,1

50

298,9

19

28,5

50

311,5

20

30

45

325

1,83196
2
1,29539
3
1,05768
4
0,93675
4
0,88363
1
0,83042
5
0,79986
8
0,75770
7
0,73615
0,70288
8
0,68557
8
0,65713
1
0,64417
4
0,62040
6
0,60946
7
0,591155
0,57982
6
0,56568
7
0,55412
8
0,54249
7

36

27

44

33

29

21

23

17

10

19

14

23

17

25
18

18
13

20

15

25

18

17

12

20

15

14

10

15
20

11
15

17

12

28

21

27

20

24

18

38

38

Table 12 SPT N-Average

Total
Load(KN)

(qn)all(KN/m2 qnet(KN/m2
Gw(m) H(m)
B(m)
depth(m)
Cw
)
)
320,061224
15683
5,5
1
7
3,5 0,7812
326,5416
5
23

qall>qnet

OK

Table 13 Determination of Footing Dimensions

4. Punching Shear Check

The check was done according to TS500 prevision.
Vpc > Vpd
Vpc = * fctd * Up * d
Up = 2*((3,1+1)+(1,6+1))

d=1m

= 1.0
Vpd = N1-Fa
Fa= qsp (b+d)(h+d)

PUNCHING

fctd(Mpa Vpc(KN Vpd(KN

Fa(KN)
fcd(Mpa) )
)
)
N(KN)
3411,85265
29662,1 11046,1
3
40 2,213594
6
5 14458
Vpc>Vpd OK
Table 14 Punching Shear Calculations

5. Determination of Vertical Load Capacity of Single Pile

Accordingly the requirement calculation is carried out below for vertical load capacity of a
single pile.

Qult = Qs + Qp
Qult = Ultimate Bearing Capacity
Qs = Bearing due to friction
Qp = Bearing due to tip
Qs = fs * As (for sand)
fs = v * K * tan ()
Qs = *cu* As (for clay)
Qp = Nc* cu* Ap
24

Pile
Capacity
Qult(KN) Qp(KN)
Qs(KN) Qs2(KN) Qs1(KN)
2795,5599 824,668071 1970,89 1722,37 248,513
7
6
2
8
7
Cu

6 Piles

Qtotal(KN)
16773,3598

Ks
150

Nc

D(m)

0,5

v0'
7
92,25
tan()
0,43
0,49
Depth(m)
1
12

Qtotal>Total
Load
OK

Table 15 Pile Capacity Calculations

Consolidation settlement due to piles were calculated below by using 2:1(V:H) pressure
distribution.
(Soed=H*mv*)
consolidation
settlement
mv(clay1)

mv(clay2)
5,50E8,00E-05
05

2(Kp 3(Kp
a)
a)
70,878 41,243
169,2885815
61
92

1(Kpa)

Soed (cm)
1,10E-01
Table 16 Consolidation Settlement Calculations

Consolidation settlement is 0,1 cm, therefore structure is safe. The drawings of the structure
are showed on the next page.
25

Figure 16 Plan View of Foundation

Figure 17 Side View of Foundation

26

5. COST ESTIMATION
In this step of the project, only the material costs are calculated. At the final design, the
quantity take off calculations will be performed and total cost estimation will be submitted.
Beam Section
Dimensions of the beam:
*tf = 5 cm
*tw= 3 cm
*bf = 0.4 m
*D = 1.4 m
*Hi = 1.3 m
Cross Sectional Area = (0.05*0.4)*2+(1.3*0.03) = 0.079 m2
Length of span = 25 m
Number of sections in span = 5
Volume of steel = 25*5*0.079 = 9.875 m3
Number of span = 20
Total volume of steel = 20*9.875 = 197.5 m3
Weight of steel = 197.5*7850/1000 = 1550.4 tons
Unit price of weathering steel is 2300 TL/ton
Steel price = 2300*1550.4 = 3 565 920 TL

Column Section
Dimensions of the rectangular column:
*a = 3.1 m
*b= 1.6 m
27

*h= 10.5 m
Cross Sectional Area = 3.1*1.6 = 4.96 m2
Volume of column = 4.96* 10.5 = 52.08 m3
Number of columns = 20
Dimensions of the column head:
*a = 9 m
*b= 2 m
*h= 1.3 m
Cross Sectional Area = 2*9 = 18 m2
Volume of column = 18* 1.3 = 23.4 m3
Total volume of concrete for column = 20*(52.08+23.4) = 1509,6 m3
Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3
Concrete price for column = 1509.6 * 120 = 181 152 TL
Steel Reinforcement
For column we used 3230 steel
For column head we used 4530 steel
Unit mass per meter for 30 steel =3.30 kg/m
Length of reinforcement used for column = 11 * 32 =352 m
Length of reinforcement used for column head = 1.5 * 45 = 67.5 m
Total reinforcement used for one pier = 352+67.5 = 419.5 m
For 20 pier = 20* 419.5 = 8390 m
Reinforcement weight = 8390*3.3 = 27 687 kg
Unit price of reinforcement is 1700 TL/ton
Reinforcement price = 27687 /1000*1700 = 47 068 TL
Excavation
Volume of excavation = 3.5*8*8 = 224 m3
Unit Price of excavation = 2,6 TL /m3
28

Number of footing = 20
Excavation Price = 20*224*2,6 = 11 648 TL

Deck
Cross Sectional Area = 0.3*9 = 2.7 m2
Span length = 25
Volume of concrete = 25* 2.7 = 67.5 m3
Number of span = 20
Total volume of concrete for deck = 20*67.5 = 1350 m3
Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3
Concrete price for column = 1350 * 120 = 162 000 TL
Ballast
Cross Sectional Area = 0.5*9 = 4.5 m2
Span length = 25
Volume of ballast to be filled = 25* 4.5 = 112.5 m3
ebasalt(rockfill) = 0.37
Volume of basalt to be used = 112.5*(1-0.37) = 71 m3
Number of span = 20
Total volume of basalt = 20*71 = 1420 m3
Weight of basalt = 1420*1954/1000 = 2774.7 tons
Unit price of basalt is 26 TL/ton
Basalt price = 26*2774.7= 72 142.2 TL
Traverse
Weight of one traverse = 0.242 tons
Number of traverse in one span (Two lanes) = 84
Weight of traverse in one span = 84*0.242 = 20.33 tons
Number of span = 20
29

Total weight of traverse = 20*20.33 = 406.6 tons

Unit weight of traverse (C55) is 2.51 tons/m3
Volume of traverse = 406.6 / 2.51 = 162 m3
Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3
Concrete price for traverse = 162 * 120 = 19 440 TL
Ballast Protection Wall
Cross Sectional Area = 0.3*0.5 = 0.15 m2
Number of wall in one span = 2
Span length = 25
Volume of two walls = 2*25* 0.15 = 7.5 m3
Number of span = 20
Total volume of concrete for deck = 20*7.5 = 150 m3
Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3
Concrete price for column = 150 * 120 = 18 000 TL
Rail
Estimated rail weight = 20 * 6.53= 130.6 tons ( two lanes- four rail)
Unit price of rail is 1638 TL/ton
Steel price = 1638 * 130.6 = 213 923 TL
Total Cost =3 565 920+181 152+47 068+11 648+162 000+72 142+19 440+18 000+213
923=4 291 293 TL
Considering malfunction Total Cost will be about 5 500 000 TL

30

6. FUTURE PROGRESS PLAN

Bumper design. ( bumper is a device to prevent railway vehicles from going past the end of a
physical section of track. )
Bracing for girders ( in order to prevent buckling)
Detailed buckling checks
Secondary moments effects for columns
Detailed reinforcement calculations for columns
Earthquake effects
Precautions must be taken considering columns being damaged in case of a car accident
Secondary settlement calculation for foundation
Calculation of moment capacity of pile groups.

7. CONCLUSION

AREMA is chosen in design stage

Span length is 25 m.
Cooper E80 is used for live load calculations.
For ballast, basalt is taken as stone type
C55 concrete monoblocks are to be used as traverse.
The space between two traverse is taken as 30 cm.
Tracks: Two lanes are to be designed. For preliminary, the distributed load for rails is taken as

0.65*4 rails=2.6 kN/m

Deck: Dimensions of the deck are to be 25m*9m*0.3m= 67.5 m3 (conc=25 kN/m3)
Total Loads for a single span 12571.3 kN
Determined section dimensions of girder are tf = 5 cm, tw= 3 cm, bf = 0.4 m, D = 1.4 m
Determined section dimensions of column head are H= 1.3m B=2m , L=9m.
Determined section dimensions of column are H=10.5m, B=1.6m, L=3.1m.
Dimensions of pile cap are H=1m, B=7m.
Dimensions of pile are H=12m, D=1m

31

8. REFERENCES

Karayollar Genel Mdrl. (2015). Trkiye Kpr Mhendisliinde Tasarm ve

Yapma likin Teknolojilerin Gelitirilmesi Teknik Klavuzu. Ankara.

Uur Ersoy, G. . (1984). Reinforced Concrete. Ankara: METU Press.

AREMA ( The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association)

TS500, Betonarme YaplarnTasarm ve Yapm Kurallar, 2000
Birand, A., Ergun, U., Erol, O., CE366 Foundation Engineering 1 Lecture Notes, 2011

Balast ve Traverse. (tarih yok). 03 29, 2015 tarihinde Megep:

http://megep.meb.gov.tr/mte_program_modul/moduller_pdf/Balast%20Ve
%20Travers.pdf adresinden alnd

Karayollar Genel Mdrl. (2015). Trkiye Kpr Mhendisliinde Tasarm ve

Yapma likin Teknolojilerin Gelitirilmesi Teknik Klavuzu. Ankara.

Practical Guide. (tarih yok). 03 15, 2015 tarihinde Arema:

https://www.arema.org/publications/pgre/Practical_Guide/PGChapter8.pdf adresinden
alnd

Wai-Fah Chen, L. D. (1999). Brigde Engineering Handbook. Florida: CRC Press LLC.

32