IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.
Table 4.1 Table 4.1 Response Reduction Factors (R) Col indicating
Page 26
'R' WITH R without
'R' BRIDGE COMPONENT DUCTILE ductile detailing
WITHOUT DETAILING ( for bridges in
DUCTILE zone II only is
'R' WITH
DETAILING deleted in view
BRIDGE COMPONENT DUCTILE Substructure
(for
DETAILING of the notes
Bridges in
(i) Masonry / PCC Piers, Abutments 1.0 below the table
Zone II
are revised
only) (ii) RCC Wall piers and abutments transverse
direction (where plastic hinge cannot 1.0
Substructure
develop)
(i) Masonry / PCC Piers, Abutments 1.0 1.0 (iii) RCC Wall piers and abutments in
longitudinal direction (where hinges can 3.0
(ii) RCC Wall piers and abutments transverse
develop)
direction (where plastic hinge cannot 1.0 1.0
develop)
(iv) RCC Single Column 3.0
(iii) RCC Wall piers and abutments in
longitudinal direction (where hinges can 3.0 2.5 (v) RCC/PSC Frame ( Refer Note VI) 3.0
develop)
(vi) Steel Framed 3.0
(iv) RCC Single Column 3.0 2.5
(vii) Steel Cantilever Pier 1.5
(v) RCC/PSC Frame ( Refer Note VI) 3.0 2.5
Bearings and Connections (see note(V) also) 1.0
(vi) Steel Framed 3.0 2.5
Stoppers (Reaction Blocks)
Those restraining dislodgement or drifting 1.0
(vii) Steel Cantilever Pier 1.5 1.0
away of bridge elements.
Bearings and Connections (see note(V) also) 1.0 1.0

Stoppers (Reaction Blocks)

Those restraining dislodgement or drifting 1.0 1.0
away of bridge elements.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.
Notes below Notes: Notes :
table 4.1, i. Bracing and bracing connection primarily carrying horizontal
i) Bracing and bracing connection primarily carrying
Page 26 & 27 Existing Note
seismic force for steel and steel composite superstructure, R
horizontal seismic force for steel and steel no iii is
factor shall be taken as 3 where ductile detailing is adopted. separated in
composite superstructure, R factor shall be taken as
two parts as
ii. Response reduction factor is not to be applied for calculation
3 where ductile detailing is adopted. plastic hinges
of displacements of elements of bridge as a whole. can be
ii) Response reduction factor is not to be applied for
proposed in
iii. When elastomeric bearings are used to transmit horizontal
calculation of displacements of elements of bridge zone II also and
seismic forces, the response reduction factor (R) shall be taken hence new note
as a whole.
v is added
as 1.0 for all substructure. In case substructure and
iii) When elastomeric bearings are used to transmit
foundation will remain in elastic state, no ductile detailing is The note IX is
horizontal seismic forces, the response reduction
line with
required.
factor (R) shall be taken as 1.0 for all substructure. provision given
iv. Ductile detailing is mandatory for piers of bridges located in in Euro code
iv) In case substructure & foundations are designed
and such
seismic zones III, IV and V where plastic hinges are likely to
with R=1, no ductile detailing is required. situation are
form and when adopted for bridges in seismic zone II, for which largely
v) Where plastic hinges are likely to be formed in
prevalent
“R value with ductile detailing” as given in Table 4.1 shall be
any seismic zone (including zone 2), ductile
used.
detailing is mandatory at locations of plastic
v. Bearings and connections shall be designed to resist the lesser
hinges.
of the following forces, i.e., (a) design seismic forces obtained
vi) Bearings and connections shall be designed to
by using the response reduction factors given in Table 4.1 and
resist the lesser of the following forces, i.e., (a)
(b) forces developed due to over strength moment when hinge
design seismic forces obtained by using the
is formed in the substructure. For calculation of overstrength
response reduction factors given in Table 4.1 and
moments, (Mo) shall be considered as Mo=γ o MRd γo =
(b) forces developed due to over strength moment
Overstrength factor & MRD is plastic moment of section, for
when hinge is formed in the substructure. For
calculation of overstrength moments, (Mo) shall be
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.
detail refer Chapter 7 . Over-strength factors for Concrete
members: γo= 1.35 & for Steel members: γo = 1.25
vi. The shear force for over strength moments in case of
cantilever piers shall be calculated as MRD/h, “h” is height
shown in Fig 7.1 in Chapter 7. In case of portal type pier
capacity of all possible hinges need to be considered.
Vii Capacity Design should be carried out where plastic hinges are
likely to form.
considered as Mo=γo MRd γo = Overstrength factor
& MRD is plastic moment of section, for detail refer
Chapter 7 . Over-strength factors for Concrete
members: γo= 1.35 & for Steel members: γo =
1.25
vii) The shear force for over strength moments in case
of cantilever piers shall be calculated as Mo/h, “h” is
height shown in Fig 7.2 in Chapter 7. In case of
portal type pier capacity of all possible hinges need
to be considered.
viii) Capacity Design should be carried out where plastic
hinges are likely to form.
ix) The value of R factor for ductile behavior
specified in Table 4.1 may be used only if the
location of relevant plastic hinges are accessible
for inspection and repair. Otherwise, under
situation of inaccessibility of plastic hinges the
value of Table 4.1 shall be multiplied by 0.6;
however, R value less than 1.0 need not be used.

Fig 5.1 (a) Natural period T,5 Editorial

and (b) Page Natural period T, secs
35
Clause 5.3 Editorial
Page 38 In bridges where pier height are high……. In bridges where pier heights are high……
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.

Clause 6.3.1 v. The capacity protected regions of substructure/foundation can

Sr. V, Page be designed elastically without ductility provisions. v.The capacity protected regions of substructure may be Foundation
No 41 designed without ductility provisions. word is deleted
as foundation
require ductility
provision and
covered in
chapter 7

Clause 6.3.2, Force demands for essentially elastic components adjacent to ductile
Page 42 components should be determined by capacity-design principle, that
is, joint-force equilibrium conditions; considering plastic hinge capacity
at hinge location multiplied by over strength factor. The over strength
factors should not be used where plastic hinges are not likely to be
formed. Force demands calculated from linear elastic analysis should
not be used in capacity protected regions
Clause 6.4.3 v. Wherever the elastomeric bearings are used, these
(v), Page 43 bearing shall accommodate imposed deformations and
normally resist only non-seismic actions. The resistance
to seismic action is provided by structural connections
of the deck to piers or abutments through suitable means.
In case, in-plane horizontal seismic forces are to be
transmitted using these elastomeric bearings, they shall be
checked using minimum dynamic frictional value and
minimum vertical loads, including combined effect of vertical
and horizontal components of earthquake. In such cases
suitable devices for preventing dislodgement of
superstructure shall be provided.
Force demands for essentially elastic components adjacent Plastic hinges
to plastic hinges should be determined by capacity-design is the
principle, that is, joint-force equilibrium conditions; appropriate
considering plastic hinge capacity at hinge location words and
multiplied by over strength factor in-principal direction of hence change
earthquake. The over strength factors should not be used is done
where plastic hinges are not likely to be formed. Force
demands calculated from linear elastic analysis should not
be used in capacity protected regions
First para is
deleted in view
that elastomeric
bearing can
resist both
v. In case, in-plane horizontal seismic forces are to be
seismic and
transmitted using elastomeric bearings, they shall be non -seismic
checked using minimum dynamic frictional value and forces which
minimum vertical loads, including combined effect of covered in
vertical and horizontal components of earthquake. In chapter -3
such cases suitable devices for preventing clause 3.4.2
dislodgement of superstructure shall be provided.
Where high damping elastomeric bearings are used to
resist seismic action, these may be designed to act as
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.
Where high damping elastomeric bearings are used to resist seismic isolation bearing for which Chapter-10 shall be
seismic action, these may be designed to act as seismic referred.
isolation bearing for which Chapter-8 shall be referred.
Clause 6.4.4 6.4.4 Foundation 6.4.4 Foundation The line is
Page 43 deleted as all
i. Force demands on foundations should be based on capacity i. Force demands on foundations should be based on type of
design principle that is, plastic capacity of bases of columns/piers capacity design principle that is, plastic capacity of bases of foundation can
multiplied with an appropriate over strength factor. Foundation columns/piers multiplied with an appropriate over strength not remain
factor. Pile foundations may experience limited inelastic essentially
elements should be designed to remain essentially elastic. Pile
deformations; in such cases these should be designed and elastic and the
foundations may experience limited inelastic deformations; in such
detailed for ductile behavior pile foundation
cases these should be designed and detailed for ductile behavior
is specifically
covered in next
sentence
Clause 7.3 The final step in the design is to determine the forces in the members The final step in the design is to determine the forces in the This is to clarify
(e), Page 47 adjacent to plastic hinge which are to remain elastic, by capacity design members adjacent to plastic hinge which are to remain that
procedure explained in the following section. This includes sections of elastic, by capacity design procedure explained in the combination of
pier outside the plastic hinge and the foundations following section. This includes sections of pier outside the component
plastic hinge and the foundations. For this purpose, the motion is not
combination of component of motion as given clause applicable while
4.2.2 for capacity design effects is not applicable carrying out
capacity design.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Clause No. & Existing Modification Proposed Justification

Page No.
Fig 7.2 page Plastic hinges
56 shown in piles
are deleted
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No Existing Clause Modification Justification
Clause 8.3.2 Cl. 8.3.2 Force Transfer mechanism from bearing to Cl. 8.3.2 Force Transfer mechanism from bearing to para -2 of
Page 58 abutment and pier abutment and pier clause is
The transfer of force through connection between The transfer of force through connection between deleted
substructure and superstructure is an important aspect in substructure and superstructure is an important aspect in elastomeric
design of substructure. The connections between supporting design of substructure. The connections between bearing can
and supported members shall be designed in order to ensure supporting and supported members shall be designed in be used in
structural integrity and avoid unseating under extreme order to ensure structural integrity and avoid unseating seismic zone
seismic displacements. The piers shall be designed to under extreme seismic displacements. The piers shall be IV & V
withstand shear forces corresponding to the pier’s plastic designed to withstand shear forces corresponding to the
hinge capacity. The maximum induced shear pier’s plastic hinge capacity. The maximum induced shear
in the piers shall be limited to the plastic hinge moment (or in the piers shall be limited to the plastic hinge moment (or
moments) divided by the height of pier as ascertained in moments) divided by the height of pier as ascertained in
Chapters 4 and 7. Chapters 4 and 7.

For Seismic Zone IV and V, use of elastomeric bearings In seismic design, the fixed bearing shall be checked for
for resisting horizontal seismic actions by shear full seismic force along with braking / tractive force,
deformation, shall not be permitted. In such cases PoT, ignoring the relief due to frictional forces in other free
POT Cum PTFE and Spherical Bearings shall be adopted bearings. The structure under the fixed bearing shall be
over elastomeric bearings for resisting seismic loads. designed to withstand the full seismic and design braking /
tractive force.
In seismic design, the fixed bearing shall be checked for full
seismic force along with braking / tractive force, ignoring the
relief due to frictional forces in other free bearings. The
structure under the fixed bearing shall be designed to
withstand the full seismic and design braking / tractive force.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS

Replace existing Table 5.3 :- Method of Analysis on various Type of Bridges

Span Pier Height Method of analysis in Seismic Zone Justifications

Type of Bridge Remarks
Length/Condition II & III IV & V
Simply Supported individual span 0 to 60m Up to 30m ESAM/ERSM ESAM/ERSM Both methods are
Above 30 m ERSM ERSM applicable
Simply Supported individual span 60 to 150m Up to 30m ESAM/ERSM ERSM
Above 30 m ERSM ERSM
Individual Span > 150m Up to 30m ESAM ERSM Extradosed bridge is
added under this
Above 30 m ERSM ERSM
category
<150m between exp. All heights ERSM ERSM
Right Bridge joints.
Continuous/Integral
or Skew Up to >150m between exp. All heights ERSM ERSM* Spatial Variation of
Bridges/Extradosed bridges
30 ◦ or curved joints ground motion to be
span having considered
radius more
than 100m Refer Note 3
Bridges Located on Geological All heights
All Spans ERSM* ERSM*
discontinuity
Major Bridges in "Near field or
Bridges on soils consisting of marine
#site Specific
clay or loose sand ( eg where soil up All Spans All heights ERSM* ERSM#
Spectrum preferable
to 30m depth has an avg SPT
value≤10)
- Both methods are
Filled up Arch ESAM/ERSM ESAM/ERSM
applicable
Arch Bridges
All other Arch - ERSM ERSM
Difference in Pier Heights/Stiffness Large All heights ERSM ERSM Refer Note 4
Curved in Plan < 100 m radius All heights ERSM ERSM*
Bridge With Skew Angle >30 ◦ All heights ERSM ERSM*
Cable Stay, Suspension spans Main Span <600m #site Specific
All heights ERSM* ERSM# Spectrum for zone
IV & V preferable
Evaluation of Reference To
Bridges founded on site with sand or poorly graded sand liquefaction potential Appendix A-5
with little or no fines or in liquefiable soil in all seismic All heights ERSM ERSM shall be carried out
zones as given in
Appendix A5
Bridges with shock transmission units (STU), Seismic #site Specific
All heights ERSM# ERSM#
isolation devices or Seismic dampers etc Spectrum preferable
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause
No. / Page Existing Clause
No.
Clause 9.2.5.1 Member Strength in Compression
9.2.5.1,
Page When ratio of required compressive strength of the
# 80 member, Pr to design axial compressive strength (without
elastic buckling) Pd (i.e., Pr / Pd) is greater than 0.4, the
required axial compressive strength of member in the
absence of applied moment shall also be determined from
the load combination given in 9.2.3. The required strength
so determined need not exceed the maximum load
transferred to the member considering 1.25 times over
strength of the connecting beam or bracing element.
Clause 9.2.3 Load and Load Combinations
9.2.3,
Page # 1. Earthquake loads and response reduction factor shall
79-80 be as per these guideline.
2. In the limit state design of frames resisting earthquake
loads, in addition to the load combinations given in
Table B.1 to B.4 of Annexure-B of IRC 6, the following
load combination shall also be considered as required
in 9.2.5.1, 9.2.6.2 and 9.2.7.3:
a) 1.2 Dead Load (DL) + 0.5 Live Load (LL) ±2.5
Earthquake Load (EL); and
Modification Justification
9.2.5.1 Member Strength in Compression The clause is
modified to bring
When ratio Pd (i.e., Pr / Pd) is greater than 0.4, the required more clarity
compressive strength of member shall be taken as greater
of (a) & (b) below:
a) Factored compressive load. Pr as per Table B2 of
IRC:-6
b) Minimum of (i) & (ii) below
i) Strength required using load combination
given in clause 9.2.3
ii) Direct factored load on column + maximum
load transferred to column by connected
beams and/or bracings considered over
strength (1.25 times nominal strength ) of
such beam/bracing.
Where Pd is design axial compressive strength without
elastic buckling
9.2.3 Load and Load Combinations Changing load
combinations to
1. Earthquake loads and response reduction factor make it uniform with
shall be as per these guideline. IRC :-6 load
combination.
2. In the limit state design of frames resisting
earthquake loads, in addition to the load
combinations given in Table B.1 to B.4 of
Annexure-B of IRC 6, the following load
combination shall also be considered as required
in 9.2.5.1, 9.2.6.2 and 9.2.7.3:
a) 1.35 Dead Load (DL) + 1.75 Surfacing+ 0.2 Live
Load (LL) + 2.5 Earthquake Load (EL); and
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause
No. / Page Existing Clause Modification Justification
No.
b) 0.9 Dead Load (DL) & 2.5 Earthquake Load(EL). b) 1.0 Dead Load (DL)+ 1.0 Surfacing + 2.5
Earthquake Load(EL).
Clause iii. Bolted joints shall be designed not to share load in iii. Bolts used in connections shall not be considered as Sentence added to
9.2.4 (iii), combination with welds on the same faying surface sharing the load in combination with welds on same faying bring more clarity
Page # surface. However, connections that are welded to one
80 member and bolted to the other member are permitted.
9.2.7.2 iii) The rigid and semi-rigid connections should be iii) The rigid and semi-rigid connections should be Changing load
(iii), designed to withstand a shear resulting from the load designed to withstand a shear resulting from the load combinations to
below combination 1.2 DL + 0.5 LL plus the shear combination 1.35 DL + 1.75 Surfacing + 0.2 LL plus the make it uniform with
second corresponding to the design moment defined above in (i) shear corresponding to the design moment defined above IRC :-6 load
combination
para- and (ii) respectively. in (i) and (ii) respectively.
Page 86
9.2.7.3- The connection shall be designed to withstand a shear The connection shall be designed to withstand a shear Changing load
third resulting from the load combination resulting from the load combination combinations to
para- 1.2DL + 0.5LL plus the shear resulting from the 1.35 DL + 1.75 Surfacing + 0.2LL plus the shear resulting make it uniform with
page 87 application of 1.2MP in the same direction, at each end of from the application of 1.2MP in the same direction, at IRC :-6 load
combination
the beam (causing double curvature bending). The shear each end of the beam (causing double curvature
strength need not exceed the required value bending). The shear strength need not exceed the
corresponding to the load combination in 9.2.3 required value corresponding to the load combination in
9.2.3
Clause 9.2.7.1 Moment resisting frames shall be designed so that 9.2.7.1 Moment resisting frames shall be designed so that
9.2.7.1, plastic hinges form in the beams or in the connections of the plastic hinges form at the base of column or in the beams Clause earlier taken
Page beams to the columns, but not in the columns. Depending on not supporting the superstructure or in their connection to from IS:800 may not
# 85 the detailing, a moment resisting frame can be classified as column. Plastic hinge should not form in the beam directly be relevant for
supporting superstructure or at other location in the Bridges. Philosophy
either an ordinary moment frame (OMF) or a special moment
column. Depending on the detailing, a moment resisting frame for bridge design is
frame (SMF). Moment resisting frames are usually provided in can be classified as either an ordinary moment frame (OMF) different
the steel piers, end diaphragms of girder bridges and end or a special moment frame (SMF). Moment resisting frames from buildings and
portals (for wind) of through open web girder bridges. A higher are usually provided in the steel piers, end diaphragms of hence clause is
value of R is assigned to the SMF but more stringent ductility girder bridges and end portals (for wind) of through open web revised. Modification
detailing requirements need to be satisfied so as to achieve the girder bridges. A higher value of R is assigned to the SMF but is in line with
required plastic joint rotation θp (see Figure 9.5) more stringent ductility detailing requirements need to be
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause
No. / Page Existing Clause Modification Justification
No.
satisfied so as to achieve the required plastic joint rotation θp international
(see Figure 9.5) standards.

Clause No. Remarks / Reasons

Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
The chapter deals
Chapter 10,
with both isolation as
Title, Page SEISMIC ISOLATION DEVICE SEISMIC ISOLATION & DAMPING DEVICES
well as damping
# 89
device.
This chapter deals with the design of bridges This chapter deals with the design of bridges incorporating All the base isolation
incorporating Seismic Insolation Devices. Some of the Seismic base Isolation & damping devices. Some of the devices have the
currently known seismic isolation devices are: currently known seismic isolation devices are: same mechanism of
i) Hydraulic Viscous Damper i) Low damping Elastomeric Bearing seismic force
ii) Elastomeric Bearing Damper (Low Damping ii) High Damping Rubber Bearing (HDR) reduction; this
Elastomer) iii) Lead-Rubber Bearing (LRB) mechanism is simply
iii) High Damping Elastomeric Bearing Damper iv) Friction Pendulum System ( FPS) the period elongation
iv) Lead-Rubber Bearing Damper Following types of damping devices in isolation system or period shift of the
10.1- v) Friction Damper may be adopted system. The method
General, i) Viscous Damper of introducing
from 2nd Provision of isolation devices is optional and it may be ii) Friction Damper damping used along
para-Page decided by the designer on a case to case basis. Various iii) Visco Elastic Damper with various isolation
89 types of isolation devices have different mechanism iv) Hysteresis damper devices for
of seismic force reduction. Seismic Isolation devices Provision of isolation devices is optional and it may be controlling
covered in this chapter are permitted to be used for decided by the designer on a case to case basis. Seismic displacement can be
comparatively rigid structures where fundamental time Isolation devices covered in this chapter are permitted to different.
period ‘T’ of the structure without incorporation of seismic be used for comparatively rigid structures where
isolation devices is less or equal to 1.0 sec. In the case of fundamental time period ‘T’ of the structure without
Type III soft soil, seismic isolation devices shall be incorporation of seismic isolation devices is less or equal
avoided. to 1.0 sec. In the case of Type III soft soil, seismic isolation
devices shall be avoided.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
Reduction of response is achieved through either of
the following phenomena: The Reduction of response and control of
displacement in isolation system can be achieved by
i) By lengthening of the fundamental period of following methods:
the structure (effect of period shift in the i) By lengthening of the fundamental period of the
response spectrum), which reduces forces but structure (effect of period shift in the response
increases displacements; spectrum), which reduces forces but increases
ii) By increasing the damping, which reduces displacements;
displacements and may reduce forces; ii) By introducing a damping device in parallel
iii) By a combination of the two effects with isolation devices, the displacement at the
(preferred). isolation level can be limited and arrived at
acceptable level.;
iii) Instead of introducing separate damping
device one may adopt HDR or LRB which can
serve both as isolation bearing as well as a
damping device. Similarly FPS can serve both
Isolation Devices provide single or combination of the the purpose of period elongation as well as
following functions: damping

iv) Vertical-load carrying capability, combined Isolation Devices provide single or combination of the
with high lateral flexibility and high vertical following functions:
rigidity;
v) Energy dissipation (hysteretic, viscous, i) Vertical-load carrying capability, combined with
frictional); high lateral flexibility and high vertical rigidity;
vi) Lateral restoring capability; ii) Energy dissipation (hysteretic, viscous,
vii) Horizontal restraint(sufficient elastic stiffness) frictional);
under non-seismic service horizontal loads iii) Lateral restoring capability;
iv) Horizontal restraint (sufficient elastic stiffness)
Strength and integrity of the Isolation Device used is of under non-seismic service horizontal loads
utmost importance, due to the critical role of its
displacement capability for the safety of the bridge. For all Strength and integrity of the Isolation Device used is of
types of Isolation Devices excepting simple elastomeric utmost importance, due to the critical role of its
low damping bearings and flat sliding bearings, the displacement capability for the safety of the bridge. For all
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
design properties shall be verified through established types of Isolation Devices excepting simple elastomeric
test methods. low damping bearings and flat sliding bearings, the design
properties shall be verified through established test
methods.
Below Displacement spectra
Table 10.1 TD = value defining the …..spectrum TD = Refer fig 10.2 not covered, hence
Page # 91 taken from EC2
Eq. 10.5, 0.10 0.10
neff = neff = ≥0.4 It is In line with EC8
Page # 91 0.05 +  eff 0.05 +  eff
Ground
ag =design ground acceleration on rocky substrata
Clause ag = design ground acceleration on rock or hard soil acceleration is not
10.3, ‘ag’ corresponding to the importance category of the related to
depending upon the seismic zone
definition, bridge importance
Page # 92 category in IRC
code.
• The word
“displacement”
removed, not being
relevant.
• Figure replaced by
the one shown in
fig. 5.1b to be in
Fig. 10.2,
harmony with the
Title, Page
previous clauses of
# 92
the guidelines.
• TB, TC and TD
indicated in fig.
10.2 are close to
Figure 10.2: Acceleration Spectra those in Fig. 3.1
and Table 3.2 of
EN1998-1:2004(E).
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
In our case TB
(=0.15 sec) will be
same for all
substrata types. TC
will vary (0.4 sec
for Type I, 0.6 sec
for Type II and
0.75 sec for Type
III) for different
substrata types. TD
(= 2.0 sec) will be
same for all
substrata types.
Note 2: Maximum Teff shall be restricted to 4 sec. Brides with Note 2: Maximum Teff shall be restricted to 4 sec. Bridges with
Note 2
higher Teff need special precautions due to very low stiffness higher Teff need special precautions due to very low stiffness Editorial Correction
Page 92
against horizontal action against horizontal action
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change

The texts written in

this figure is not
legible. Increase Font
Size

Fig. 10.3,
Page # 93
Replace existing Fig 10.3

10.7 Properties of Isolation Devices 10.7 Properties of Isolation Devices

Clause Design properties of the Seismic Isolation Devices shall
10.7, Page be obtained from the supplier. There are different sets of
# 95 proprieties for different types of Seismic Isolation
Devices. Some of them are as follows:
Some Contents of
Design properties of the Seismic Isolation Devices shall be clause 10.8 are
obtained from the supplier. There are different sets of brought in clause
proprieties for different types of Seismic Isolation Devices. 10.7
Some of them are as follows:
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No.
Existing Clause
/ Page No.
In case of low-damping elastomeric bearing (viscous
damping ratio   0.06), high-damping elastomeric
bearing (viscous damping ratio  equal to 0.10 to 0.20)
and lead-rubber bearing, damping ratio of the composite
material and other related parameters are needed for
analysis and design of the structure incorporating such
Seismic Isolation Devices.
In case of Fluid Viscous Dampers, viscous force
displacement parameters, viscous resistance, maximum
displacement after incorporating the device into the
structure, velocity of movement etc are needed for
analysis and design of the structure incorporating such
devices.
In case of Friction Sliding Dampers with flat or curved
(preferred) surface, parameters such as dynamic sliding
friction, maximum displacement after incorporating the
device into the structure etc are needed for the design of
structure incorporating Friction Sliding Dampers
Remarks / Reasons
Proposed Modification
for Change
In case of low-damping elastomeric bearing (viscous
damping ratio   0.06), high-damping elastomeric bearing
(viscous damping ratio  equal to 0.10 to 0.20) and lead-
rubber bearing, damping ratio of the composite material
and other related parameters are needed for analysis and
design of the structure incorporating such Seismic
Isolation Devices.
In case of Fluid Viscous Dampers, viscous force
displacement parameters, viscous resistance, maximum
displacement after incorporating the device into the
structure, velocity of movement etc are needed for analysis
and design of the structure incorporating such devices.
In case of Friction Sliding Dampers with flat or curved
(preferred) surface, parameters such as dynamic sliding
friction, maximum displacement after incorporating the
device into the structure etc are needed for the design of
structure incorporating Friction Sliding Dampers.
The required increased reliability of isolating system
shall be implemented by designing each isolator ‘i’
for increased displacement dbi,a
dbi,a = y ISdbi,d Eq. 10.15
Where y Is is an amplification factor (taken as 1.50) that is
applied only on the design displacement dbi,d in each
isolation device i resulting from one of the procedures
specified in 10.2.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
The maximum total displacement of each isolation device
in each direction shall be obtained by adding to the above
increased design seismic displacement, the offset
displacement potentially induced by:
a) the permanent actions
b) the long-term deformations (post-
tensioning, shrinkage and creep for
concrete decks) of the superstructure, and
c) 50% of the thermal action
All component of the isolating system shall be capable of
functioning without any unacceptable deformations at the
total maximum displacements.
Note: The maximum reaction of hydraulic viscous dampers
(see Eq. 10.11) corresponding to the increased
displacement dbi,a may be estimated by multiplying the
reaction resulting from the analysis times y IS  b / 2 where  b
is the exponent of velocity of viscous damper.
10.7.1 Variations in Properties of Seismic Isolation &
Damping Devices
Nominal properties of the components of these To cater to variations
devices undergo changes due to ageing, temperature, in material
loading history, contamination and wear. Usually properties due to
higher properties of components lead to higher design ageing, temperature,
forces and lesser properties lead to larger loading history,
displacements. Hence, two sets of values, namely contamination and
upper bound design properties (UBDP) and lower wear.
bound design properties (LBDP) need to be
considered in the analysis and design. However, in
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
case the design displacements calculated using
Fundamental mode analysis based on UBDP and
LBDP do not differ by more than 15%, response
spectrum analysis or Time-history analysis may use
nominal design properties.
For determination of variation in properties, if required
to be used in the analysis, specialist literature may be
followed.

Clause 10.8 Verification of Bridge Sub-structure and
10.8 Superstructure with Isolating System
Page 96 dbi,a = y ISdbi,d Eq. 10.15
Where y Is is an amplification factor (taken as 1.50) that is
applied only on the design displacement dbi,d in each
isolation device i resulting from one of the procedures
specified in 10.2.
The maximum total displacement of each isolation device
in each direction shall be obtained by adding to the above
increased design seismic displacement, the offset
displacement potentially induced by:
d) the permanent actions
e) the long-term deformations (post-
tensioning, shrinkage and creep for
concrete decks) of the superstructure,
and
f) 50% of the thermal action
10.8 Verification of Bridge Sub-structure and
Superstructure with Isolating System
The Seismic internal forces EEA, derived from analysis, in
To make the
the substructures and superstructure due to the design
clause in line with
seismic action alone, shall be derived from the results of
Euro code and
an analysis in accordance with 10.2. The design seismic
removing the
forces EE due to the design seismic action alone, may be
contents related to
derived from the forces EEA, after division by the Response
design of isolators
Reduction Factor ‘R’ =1, i.e. FE = FE.A/q with R = 1.0. All
which shall be
members of the structure should be verified to have an
covered by
essentially elastic behaviour as per the relevant clauses.
relevant bearing
The design horizontal forces of supporting members (piers
committee
or abutments) carrying sliding bearings shall be derived
from the maximum friction values as per relevant clauses
of the bearing design code.
In the case of sliding bearings as mentioned above and
when the same supporting member also carries viscous
fluid dampers, then the design horizontal seismic force of
the supporting member in the direction of the action of the
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
All component of the isolating system shall be capable of damper should be increased by the maximum seismic
functioning without any unacceptable deformations at the force of the damper, refer eqn. 10.16.
total maximum displacements.
When single or multiple mode spectral analysis is carried
Note: The maximum reaction of hydraulic viscous out for isolating systems consisting of combination of
dampers (see 10.11) corresponding to the increased elastomeric bearings and fluid viscous dampers supported
displacement dbi,a may be estimated by multiplying the on the same supporting elements(s), the phase difference
reaction resulting from the analysis times y IS  b / 2 where between the maxima of the elastic and the viscous
elements may be taken into account, by the following
 b is the exponent of velocity of viscous damper.
approximation. The seismic force should be determined as
Isolation devices consisting of simple low-damping the most adverse of those corresponding to the following
elastomeric bearings should be verified for the action characteristic states:
effects in accordance with relevant clauses of the bearing
design code, taking partial factor for material y m = 1.15.
For simple low damping elastomeric bearings, in addition a. At the state of maximum displacement. The
to the above verification, the following condition should be damper forces are then equal to zero.
verified: b. At the state of maximum velocity and zero
displacement, when the maximum damper
q,d ≤ 2.0 Eq. 10.16
forces should be determined by assuming
Where q,d is the shear strain calculated in accordance the maximum velocity to be:
with relevant clauses of the bearing design code. In this i.  max = 2dbd / Teff Eq. 10.16
context the movements x.d and  yd should be taken
equal to the maximum total relative displacements in the Where dbd is the maximum damper displacement
horizontal directions x and y. corresponding to the design displacement dcd of the
isolating system.
No uplift of isolators carrying vertical force shall be
permitted in the seismic design combination. c) At the state of the maximum inertial force on the
superstructure, that should be estimated as
Sliding elements shall be designed as per relevant follows:
clauses of the bearing design code.
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
The Seismic internal forces EEA, derived from analysis, in Fmax = ( f1 + 2b f 2 )Se M d Eq. 10.17
the substructures and superstructure due to the design
seismic action alone, shall be derived
Where Se is determined from Table 10.1
from the results of an analysis in accordance with 10.2.
The design seismic forces EE due to the design seismic f1 = cos[arctan(2b)] Eq. 10.18a
action alone, may be derived from the forces EEA, after
division by the Response Reduction Factor ‘R’ =1, i.e. FE f 2 = sin[arctan(2b)] Eq. 10.18b
= FE.A/q with R = 1.0. All members of the structure should
be verified to have an essentially elastic behaviour as per
the relevant clauses. The design horizontal forces of Where b is the contribution of the dampers to the effective
supporting members (piers or abutments) carrying sliding damping  of expression 10.1.
eff
bearings shall be derived from the maximum friction
values as per relevant clauses of the bearing design At this state the displacement amounts to f d and the
1 cd
code.
velocity of the dampers to  = f 2 max

In isolating systems consisting of a combination of fluid

In the case of sliding bearings as mentioned above and
viscous dampers and elastomeric bearings, without sliding
when the same supporting member also carries viscous
elements, the design horizontal force acting on supporting
fluid dampers, then the design horizontal seismic force of
element(s) that carry both bearings and dampers for non-
the supporting member in the direction of the action of the
seismic situations of imposed deformation actions
damper should be increased by the maximum seismic
(temperature variation, etc.) should be determined by
force of the damper, see eqn. 10.17.
assuming that the damper reactions are zero.
When single or multiple mode spectral analysis is carried
out for isolating systems consisting of combination of
elastomeric bearings and fluid viscous dampers
supported on the same supporting elements(s), the
phase difference between the maxima of the elastic and
the viscous elements may be taken into account, by the
following approximation. The seismic force should be
 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
determined as the most adverse of those corresponding
to the following characteristic states:
a. At the state of maximum displacement. The
damper forces are then equal to zero.
b. At the state of maximum velocity and zero
displacement, when the maximum damper
forces should be determined by assuming the
maximum velocity to be:

 max = 2dbd / Teff Eq. 10.17

Where dbd is the maximum damper

displacement corresponding to the design
displacement dcd of the isolating system.
c. At the state of the maximum inertial force on
the superstructure, that should be estimated
as follows:

Fmax = ( f1 + 2b f 2 )Se M d Eq. 10.18

Where Se is determined from Table 10.1

f1 = cos[arctan(2b)] Eq. 10.19a

f 2 = sin[arctan(2b)] Eq. 10.19b

 IRC:- SP-114-2018- Amendments Approved by B2 committee for consideration of BSS
Clause No. Remarks / Reasons
Existing Clause Proposed Modification
/ Page No. for Change
Where b is the contribution of the dampers to the
effective damping  eff of expression 10.1.

At this state the displacement amounts to f1d cd and the

velocity of the dampers to  = f 2 max

In isolating systems consisting of a combination of fluid

viscous dampers and elastomeric bearings, without
sliding elements, the design horizontal force acting on
supporting element(s) that carry both bearings and
dampers for non-seismic situations of imposed
deformation actions (temperature variation, etc.) should
be determined by assuming that the damper reactions are
zero.
Flow chart is not
Flow Chart, Flow Chart for analysis of bridges involving seismic isolators
Deleted Flow Chart required as there are
Page # 97 is shown below :
only two variables.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

The revision of appendices A1 to A5

S. Existing Revised Appendices Justification

No. Appendices
1 Appendix A1 to A4 Appendix A1 to A4 revised The Appendices and worked out examples are
Page No. 99 to 130 in the following pages …… updated & elaborated due to inadvertent
mismatch with clauses in the code, and to bring
more improvement in modelling process

2 Appendix A-5 – Worked Out Example revised Worked out example is revised due to publication
Page 136- & Replace with the new of amendment in clause A-5.1.1 & A-5.1.2 in Jan
Illustration of example 2019
liquefaction of soil
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Appendix-A1 (Reference Clause 5.2.1)

Illustration of Elastic Seismic Acceleration Method (ESAM)
The elastic seismic acceleration method presented here illustrates the computation of seismic forces in accordance with method
specified in clause 5.2.1 of Chapter 5. Application of this method is presented fora simple bridge having a simply supported
spans resting on elastomer bearings as shown in Fig. A1.1 below. In this method, fundamental time period "T" is calculated by
using expression given in clause 5.2.1 and corresponding Sa/g is worked out using Spectra shown in Fig. 5.1 (a) of Chapter 5.

WORK FLOW FOR CALCULATING THE BASE SHEAR WITH ESAM

Step 1: Define Seismic parameters

The variables involved in finding out the seismic coefficient are as follows:

o Direction for Seismic Analysis = Longitudinal

o Zone factor, Z
The bridge is located in zone III.
Therefore, as per Table 4.2: Z = 0.16

o Importance factor, I
The bridge is categorized as Seismic class "Important bridges".
Therefore, as per Table 4.3: I = 1.2

o Response reduction factor, R

As per Table 4.1, Note iii: R =1

o Average response acceleration coefficient, Sa/g

The soil strata is categorized as Medium stiff soil sites.
Therefore, as per clause 5.2.1: Sa/g = 2.5 ; 0 < T < 0.55s
= 1.36 / T ; 0.55s < T < 4.00s
= 0.34 ; T > 4.00s

Step 2: Define member Idealization

Fig. A1.1:
TYPICAL ELEVATION
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Fig. A1.2:
TYPICAL TRANSVERSE CROSS SECTION
OF THE BRIDGE

Fig. A1.3: Fig. A1.4: Fig. A1.5:

LOAD IDEALIZATION DEFLECTION OF PIER & BEARING VARIATION OF SEISMIC
COEFFICIENT
Note:
For the purpose of this analysis, pier is assumed to be fixed at top of open foundation and mass is lumped at top of bearing i.e.,
10.05m above top of open foundation.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Step 3: Define member stiffness

o The stiffness of Elastomeric bearing is calculated based on the Shear rating of the bearing as follows:

RXY = Resultant of the forces resisting to translatory motion,

n = Total number of bearings on pier cap =4

A = Total plan area of bearing = 500 x 500

G = Shear modulus of bearing (IRHD 50) = 0.7 Mpa

vXY = Maximum resultant horizontal relative displacement obtained by

vectoral addition of vX & vY
(for stiffness computation – unit deflection)

Te = Total thickness of elastomer in shear = 50 mm

4 𝑥 500 𝑥 500 𝑥 0.7

RXY/vXY = (n A G vXY)/Te (refer IRC 83 Part-II) =
50

= 14000 N/mm

= 14000 kN/m

o Summary of member stiffness:

Grade of Modulus of
Member Dimension Section Properties concrete Elasticity
(Mpa) (Gpa)
Pier cap Depth 1.5 m Area 11.2 m2
Width 4.0 m Ixx 7.32 m4 35 32
Length 2.8m Iyy 14.93 m4
Pier Area 3.14 m2
Ixx / Iyy 0.78 m4
Diameter 2.0m 35 32
Cracked 4
Ixx / Iyy 0.59 m
Foundation Depth 1.5 m Area 16.0 m2
Width 4.0 m Ixx 21.33 m4 35 32
Length 4.0m Iyy 21.33 m4
Elastomeric Thickness 0.05 m
bearing Width 0.5 m Rxy / vxx 14000 kN/m N/A N/A
Length 0.5 m

Note:
o The stiffness of pier is reduced by 25% to cater for cracking of the element during seismic case. The same can be
modified based on the actual cracked stiffness with the help of rigorous analyses.
o All other components are assumed to be uncracked. The same can be modified based on the actual cracked stiffness
with the help of rigorous analyses.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Step 4: Define Member Loads

Mass of superstructure (including deck slab) = 5000 kN

Mass of crash barrier = 480 kN

Mass of wearing course = 570 kN

Mass of CWLL (as applicable) = N.A.

Total mass from superstructure = 6050 kN

Mass of pier cap = 11.20 x 1.50 x 25

= 420 kN

Mass of pier = 3.14 x 8.50 x 25

= 667.25 kN

Step 5: Calculate time period & Base shear

A) Calculation of time period by approximate method:

A.1 Calculate equivalent stiffness of system:

Stiffness of Elastomeric bearing, K1 = 14000 kN/m

3𝐸𝐼
Stiffness of Pier, K2 =
𝐿3

3 𝑥 3.2 𝑥 107 𝑥 0.59

=
10.053

= 55709 kN/m

1
Equivalent stiffness of system = 1 1
+
𝐾1 𝐾2
1
= 1 1
14000
+ 55709

= 11188.3 kN/m

Hence, the force in kN required to be applied for 1mm horizontal deflection:

F = 11188.3/1000
= 11.19 kN

Note:

o The stiffness of pier cap is not considered separately for the sake of simplicity.
o The length L is taken from the top of bearing to the top of foundation.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

A.2 Calculate the dead load idealized as a lumped mass:

The dead load idealized as a lumped mass, D = Mass from superstructure +

Mass of pier cap +
Half mass of pier
= 6050 + 420 + 333.6
= 6803.6 kN

𝐷
The time period based on the approximate method, T =2𝑥 √
1000 𝐹

6803.6
=2𝑥 √
1000 𝑥 11.19

= 1.56 sec
B) Calculation of Base shear:
Since time period is 1.56 sec, as per clause 5.2.1: Sa/g = 1.36 / T; 0.55s < T < 4.00s

B.1 Calculate Sa/g = 1.36⁄𝑇

= 1.36⁄1.56

= 0.87

Z S
( ) ( a)
2 g
B.2 Calculate design seismic acceleration coefficient (Ah) = R
( )
I

0.16
( ) (0.87)
2
= 1
(1.2)

= 0.084
B.3 Calculate base shear:
Loads Design seismic acceleration Seismic force
S. No. Component coefficient (Ah)
(kN) (kN)
1 Superstructure 5000.0 0.084 418.60

2 Crash barrier 480.0 0.084 40.19

3 Wearing course 570.0 0.084 47.72

4 CWLL 0.0 0.084 0.00

5 Pier cap 420.0 0.084 35.16

6 Pier above GL (7.5m) 588.8 0.084 49.29

7 Pier below GL (1m) 78.5 0.083 6.52

8 Foundation 600.0 0.081 48.77

Base Shear: 646.24

Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Appendix-A2 Example 1 (Reference Clause 5.2.2)

Illustration of Elastic Seismic Response Spectrum Method (ERSM)
In this example, a bridge with two span continuous superstructure resting on fixed and free bearings is analyzed for assessment
of seismic forces with ERSM as per clause 5.2.2 and Fig. 5.1(b) of Chapter 5. Fig. A.2.2.1 shows the bridge elevation with pile
foundation. The example illustrates the mathematical modelling, member properties for analysis, loading, determination of
natural frequency, mode shapes and calculation of base shear by using a commercial software.

WORK FLOW FOR CALCULATING THE BASE SHEAR WITH ERSM

Step 1: Define Seismic parameters

The variables involved in finding out the seismic coefficient are as follows:

o Direction for Seismic Analysis = Longitudinal

o Zone factor, Z
The bridge is located in zone III.
Therefore, as per Table 4.2: Z = 0.16

o Importance factor, I
The bridge is categorized as Seismic class "Important bridges".
Therefore, as per Table 4.3: I = 1.2

o Response reduction factor, R

As per Table 4.1: R =3

o Average response acceleration coefficient, Sa/g

The soil strata is categorized as Medium stiff soil sites.
Therefore, as per clause 5.2.2: Sa/g = 1 + 15T : T < 0.10s
= 2.5 ; 0.10s < T < 0.55s
= 1.36 / T ; 0.55s < T < 4.00s
= 0.34 ; T > 4.00s
Step 2: Define member Idealization

Fig. A2.2.1:
TYPICAL ELEVATION
 Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Fig. A2.2.2: Fig. A2.2.3: Fig. A2.2.4:

TYPICAL TRANSVERSE CROSS MEMBER VARIATION OF SEISMIC
SECTION OF THE BRIDGE IDEALIZATION COEFFICIENT
Notes:
o The depth of fixity is calculated based on IS 2911 (Part 1/Sec 2). In this example it is assumed as 6m from
base of pile cap.
o The pile is modelled as a free-standing element from bottom of pile cap to depth of fixity.
o The base of pile is assumed as fixed at the depth of fixity.

Step 3: Define member stiffness

o Summary of member stiffness:
Grade of Modulus of
Member Dimension Section Properties concrete Elasticity
(Mpa) (Gpa)
Pier cap Depth 1.5 m Area 12.6 m2
Width 4.5 m Ixx 8.23 m4 35 32
Length 2.8m Iyy 21.26 m4
Pier Area 4.91 m2
Ixx / Iyy 1.92 m4
Diameter 2.5m 35 32
Cracked 4
Ixx / Iyy 1.44 m
Pile cap Depth 1.8 m Area 26.01 m2
Width 5.1 m Ixx 56.38 m4 35 32
Length 5.1 m Iyy 56.38 m4
Area 1.13 m2
o Pile Diameter 1.2m Ixx / Iyy 0.10 m4 35 32
 Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Notes:
o The stiffness of pier is reduced by 25% to cater for cracking of the element during seismic case. The same can
be modified based on the actual cracked stiffness with the help of rigorous analyses.

o All other components are assumed to be uncracked. The same can be modified based on the actual cracked
stiffness with the help of rigorous analyses.

Step 4: Define Member Loads

Mass of superstructure (including deck slab) = 5000 kN x 2

= 10000 kN

Mass of crash barrier = 480 kN x 2

= 960 kN

Mass of wearing course = 570 kN x 2

= 1140 kN

Mass of CWLL (as applicable) = N.A.

Total mass from superstructure = 12100 kN

Mass of pier cap = 12.60 x 1.50 x 25

= 472.5 kN

Mass of pier = 4.91 x 1.0 x 25

= 122.8 kN/m

Mass of pile cap = 26.01 x 1.80 x 25

= 1170.5 kN

Mass of pile = 1.13 x 1.0 x 25

= 28.3 kN/m

Step 5: Calculate time period & Base shear

C) Calculation of time period by commercial software:

o The number of modes to be used in the analysis for earthquake shaking along a considered
direction, should be such that the sum total of modal masses of these modes considered is at least
90 percent of the total seismic mass.

o The mode shapes, time periods & participation factor are calculated with the help of a commercial
software.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Mode Shape – 1 Mode Shape - 2

Summary of Time period & Modal participation factor:

Time Participation factor Design seismic

Frequency (%) acceleration
Mode Period Sa/g
(Cycles/Sec) coefficient (Ah)
(Sec) Individual Cumulative
1 0.48 2.10 85.01 85.01 0.65 0.021

2 7.29 0.14 14.97 99.98 2.50 0.080

The shear force & bending moment diagram as output from the commercial software is shown below:

Bending moment at
pier base: 5724kNm
Shear force at pier base:
283kN

For foundation design, capacity design shall be done as per Clause 7.3.4.3 (iv) of IRC:114
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

APPENDIX –A-3
(Reference Clause 7.3)

ILLUSTRATION OF CAPACITY DESIGN METHOD FOR MEMBERS WITH

DUCTILE BEHAVIOUR

This Appendix includes worked out example for Capacity Design to be followed for checking the
member sections adjacent to ductile components/plastic hinges in accordance with method
described in Chapter 7.

The procedure for Capacity design mainly includes the following steps:
➢ Design of Section with IRC:112 for Load Combinations of IRC:6 by Limit State Method

➢ Design of Plastic Hinge including its location, height and ductile detailing as specified in Clause 7.5.2
& 7.5.4 of Guidelines

➢ Determination of MRd, Design Flexural Strength of section in Longitudinal and Transverse directions
at location of plastic hinge for reinforcement and dimensions provided

➢ Computation of Over Strength Moment Mo by multiplying MRd with Over Strength Factor ϒo

➢ Computation of Capacity design Moment, Mc and Shear Vc for the member sections outside the plastic
hinge

➢ Design of Section outside plastic hinge for Mc & Vc in accordance with Clause 7.5.3

➢ Design of Foundation for Moment Mo and Shear Vc computed at base of pier

➢ Capacity Design Effects shall be treated as Ultimate loads

A typical pier analysed and designed for Capacity Design is shown in Fig.A3-1 and Fig.A3-2.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Fig.A3-1 Section in Transverse Direction

Fig.A3-2 Section in Longitudinal Direction (both bearings fixed)

Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

1. Material Properties:
Grade of concrete for Substructure fck = 45 N/mm2
Grade of concrete for Pile foundation fck = 35 N/mm2
Grade of steel reinforcement for Substructure and Pile
fy = 500 N/mm2
foundation
Clear Cover to reinforcement for Pile foundation c = 75 mm
Clear Cover to reinforcement for Substructure c = 40 mm
Gross Area of Pier section Ac = 3570000 mm2

2. Calculation of Seismic Forces:

Table 1: Un-Factored loads from Superstructure at bearing level
Sr. P HL HT ML MT
Description
No. (kN) (kN) (kN) (kNm) (kNm)
1 Dead Load (DL) – Each Superstructure 7710 0 0 0 0
2 SIDL (permanent) SIDL-F-Each side 700 0 0 0 0
3 SIDL (Surfacing) SIDL-V-Each side 620 0 0 0 0
4 Live load (LL) Reaction Without Impact Factor
i Pmax(LL) Q1 1982 0 0 238 3164
ii Max MT(LL) Q2 1321 0 0 159 4416
iii Max ML(LL) Q3 1326 0 0 1061 2121

Where, SIDL - Super Imposed Dead Load

P - Axial Force
HT - Horizontal Force along Transverse Direction
HL - Horizontal Force along Longitudinal Direction
MT - Transverse moment
ML - Longitudinal moment
Pmax(LL) - Maximum Vertical load case
Max MT(LL) - Maximum Transverse moment case

Max ML(LL) - Maximum Longitudinal moment case

Superstructure Mass for longitudinal seismic (DL + SIDL) = 18060 KN

Superstructure Mass for transverse seismic (DL+SIDL+0.2 x LL) = 9426 KN

T, Time Period of the system along Longitudinal Direction = 1.18 sec

T, Time Period of the system along Transverse Direction = 0.75 sec
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Taking
Zone factor = 0.24
Importance factor = 1.2
Response Reduction factor, R = 3
Considering medium type soil
Ah Long = 0.164
Ah Trans = 0.263
Load Factor for Seismic Combination = 1.5
Base Shear un-factored Seismic Combination in Longitudinal Direction:
Due to superstructure= 987.3 KN with lever arm=10.5m above pier base
Due to pier+ pier cap=61.23 KN with lever arm=6.0m above pier base
Factored Ultimate Base shear with R=1 =1.5*(987.3+61.23)*3=4718 KN (1)

Base Shear un-factored Seismic Combination in Transverse Direction:

Due to superstructure= 826.38 KN with lever arm=12.5m above pier base
Due to pier+ pier cap=98.19 KN with lever arm=6.0m above pier base
Factored Ultimate Base shear with R=1 =1.5*(826.38+98.19)*3=4161 KN (2)

Table 2: Braking forces at the base of Pier-unfactored

Sr. P HT ML MT
Description HL (kN)
No. (kN) (kN) (kNm) (kNm)

1 Braking Force under seismic Combination, Fb

i Pmax(LL) 0 284 0 2982 0

ii Max MT(LL) 0 208 0 2184 0

iii Max ML(LL) 0 284 0 2982 0

Table 3: Summary of forces at the base of Pier ULS Seismic with R=3
Sl. P HL HT ML MT
Description
No (kN) (kN) (kN) (kNm) (kNm)

1 Earthquake along Longitudinal Direction

1.35(DL+SIDL-F) + 1.75(SIDL-V) + 0.2(Q1) + 0.2(Fb)
a 14347 1630 416 16745 5546
+ 1.5Feq
1.35(DL +SIDL-F) + 1.75(SIDL-V) +0.2(Q2) + 0.2(Fb)
b 14215 1614 416 16569 5797
+ 1.5Feq
1.35(DL +SIDL-F) + 1.75(SIDL-V) +0.2(Q3) + 0.2(Fb)
c 14216 1630 416 16909 5338
+1.5Feq
2 Earthquake along Transverse Direction
1.35(DL +SIDL-F) + 1.75(SIDL-V) + 0.2(Q1) + 0.2(Fb)
a 14347 529 1387 4878 17011
+ 1.5Feq
1.35(DL +SIDL-F) + 1.75(SIDL-V) + 0.2(Q2) + 0.2(Fb)
b 14215 513 1387 4862 17262
+1.5Feq
1.35(DL +SIDL-F) +1.75(SIDL-V) + 0.2(Q3) + 0.2(Fb)
c 14216 529 1387 5042 16803
+1.5Feq
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

3. Design of Section:
The reinforcement detailing of the Pier section at the base and at the curtailment level is shown in Figure A3- 3.
Curtailment level is assumed to be 6m above the ground level.

At the base of Pier

At curtailment level
Figure A3- 3: Reinforcement Detailing of the Pier Section

4. Design Flexural Strength of Section:

At ULS, the design flexural strength of the section in orthogonal directions is estimated for
maximum vertical load case.
In computing MRd, biaxial moment under the permanent effects and seismic effects
corresponding to the design seismic action in the selected direction shall only be considered
as per clause 7.3.4.2.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Ultimate axial force, NED (At the base of Pier) = 14347 kN

Design Flexural Strength along Longitudinal Direction, MRd,L = 27660 kNm
Design Flexural Strength along Transverse Direction, MRd,T = 29390 kNm
Distance between ground level to the top of Pier Cap, h = 10.25 m
Moment due to Live Load (Longitudinal Direction) = 0.2 x = 48 kNm
238
Moment due to Live Load (Transverse Direction) = 0.2 x 3164 = 634 kNm
Maximum Braking Force = 0.2 x 284 = 57 kN

Factored Moments (ULS) due to non-seismic actions, i.e. live load and braking force :-
Along Longitudinal Direction = 48 + 57 x 10.25 = 632 kNm
Along Transverse Direction = 634 kNm

5. Over Strength Moment, Mo:

The procedure to calculate the capacity moment and shear is applied separately for each of
the two horizontal components of the design seismic action. As per clause 7.3.4.2 (a) the
over-strength moment of the sections due to plastic mechanism is obtained by multiplying
the design flexural strength of the section with appropriate over-strength factors.

Over-strength factor for concrete substructures, γo = 1.35

As per clause 7.3.4.2 (b) of this Guideline, the over strength factor has to be multiplied
with a factor ‘K’ if the value of normalized axial force ‘ηk’ is greater than 0.08.
Where, ηk= NED/Acfck = (14682 x 1000) / (3570000 x 45)
= 0.091 > 0.08
Since the value of normalized axial force, ηk, is more than 0.08, the over-strength factor
requires modification as below:
K = [1+2(ηk - 0.08)2] = 1.0002
Thus, γo = 1.0002 x1.35 = 1.35

Fig. A3-4 Capacity Moment Diagram

Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

The over-strength factor to be considered for Pier section = 1.35

Over strength moment at the base of Pier along Longitudinal Direction, M o,L = 1.35 x 27660
= 37341 kNm
Over strength moment at the base of Pier along Transverse Direction, Mo,T = 1.35 x 29390
= 39677 kNm

6. Capacity Design:

6.1 For Capacity Design Moment Mc:

Curtailment of longitudinal bars, if any, should be done at such a level that the design flexural strength of the section
at the curtailed level (MRd,curtailed) should be greater than the capacity moment (M c) at the curtailed level (Refer
Fig.A3-4 )

Ultimate axial force, NED (At curtailment level) = 13893 kN

Design Flexural Strength at curtailed level along Longitudinal Direction, MRd,L, = 22840 kNm
Design Flexural Strength at curtailed level along Transverse Direction, M Rd,T, = 25980 kNm
Capacity moment at curtailed section along Longitudinal Direction, = 15483 kNm
Mc,L, curtailed = 37341 x (10.25-6)/10.25 <22840 kNm
(MRd long)
Capacity moment at curtailed section along Transverse Direction, = 17420 kNm
Mc,T, curtailed = 39677 x (10.25-6)/10.25 <25980 kNm
(MRd trans)
Hence, the design flexural strength of the section at curtailed level is more than the capacity moment at the same level.

➢ Within members having plastic hinges, the Mc at the vicinity of hinge shall not be taken greater than MRd
of the hinge -Clause 73.4.2(d) of Guidelines.

6.2 For Capacity Design Shear Vc in Pier

As per section 7.8 of this Guideline, the increase of moments of plastic hinges, ΔM, is obtained by deducting the
moment due to non-seismic actions, i.e. live load and braking force (considering appropriate load factors) from the
over-strength moment of the section along both the directions. The increase in moment of plastic hinge is:

Along Longitudinal Direction, ΔM L = 37341 - 632 = 36709 kNm

Along Transverse Direction, ΔMT = 39677 - 634 = 39043 kNm

As per clause 7.3.4.2 (e), Capacity Design shear corresponding to this increase in moment is Obtained as:

Vc = (∑ΔM) / h where ∑ΔM = ∑Mo

Shear Along Longitudinal Direction = ΔM L / h = 36709/10.25 = 3582 kN (3)

Shear Along Transverse Direction = ΔMT / h =39043/10.25 = 3810 kN (4)

The factored shear due to non-seismic actions (braking force for this example) is then added to the shear due to
design seismic forces so as to obtain the Final Capacity design shear along both the directions.
Final Capacity Design Shear in Longitudinal Direction = 3582+ 57 = 3639 kN
Final Capacity Design Shear in Transverse Direction = 3810 kN

Checks should be carried out to ensure that the plastic hinge region, pier sections beyond plastic hinge region and
foundation have shear strength greater than the Final Capacity Design shear Vc of the section along both the directions.
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

6.3 Bearings:

Bearings and connections are to be designed for lesser of the following forces:

(i) Seismic forces obtained using Response reduction factor, R=1 as applicable for assessment of bearings.
(ii) Forces developed due to over strength moment when hinge is formed in the substructure

Hence the design seismic forces for bearing design are:

Along Longitudinal Direction, lesser of (1) and (3) = 3582 kN

Along Transverse Direction, lesser of (2) and (4) = 3735 kN

6.4 Capacity check for Pile Foundation:

The foundation is capacity protected by designing it for Over strength Moment Mo and Capacity Design Shear V c in
both the directions separately. The summary of forces acting at the base of pile cap for the considered maximum
vertical load case in Longitudinal and Transverse is given in Table 4. The number of piles is considered as 4 at a
spacing of 4.5m in both directions.

Table 4: Summary of forces at the base of Pile cap

P HL HT ML MT Reactions on Pile in kN
Hor. Load on
Description Pile,
kN kN kN kNm kNm P1 P2 P3 P4 kN

Longitudinal
17218* 3639 0 37341 634 8524 8383 226 -85 910
Seismic Case
Transverse
17157* 57 3810 48 39677 8704 -115 8693 -125 953
Seismic Case
• Including soil weight above pile cap

The depth of fixity is assumed to be 9 m from the pile cap bottom. The reduction factor for fixed head pile is assumed
to be 0.8 as per Fig. 5 of IS 2911(Part 1/Sec 2).

Maximum moment on a pile is observed to be

Along Longitudinal Direction = 910 x 9/2x 0.8 = 3276 kNm

Along Transverse Direction = 953 x 9/2x 0.8 = 3431 kNm

The pile diameter is assumed to be 1.2m and the corresponding reinforcement assumed is 19 numbers of (32+20mm)
bundled bars. For the above said pile, the capacity at the minimum axial load i.e. -85 kN and -125 kN along
longitudinal and transverse direction respectively is found out to be 3575 kNm and 3484 kNm respectively. The
capacity of the Pile for longitudinal and transverse seismic case is more than the maximum moment on the pile.
 Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

APPENDIX - A4
(Reference Clause 4.8)

ILLUSTRATION OF HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES ON BRIDGE SUBSTRUCTURE &

FOUNDATION

Example : Calculation of hydrodynamic forces in case of a bridge with Well Foundation,

located in Seismic Zone IV, with design horizontal seismic coefficient, Ah = (Z/2) x (I/R) x
(Sa/g) = 0.12 [i,e. Assuming Sa/g = 2.5; I=1.2; Z=0.24; R=3.0 : Ah = (0.24/2) x (1.2/3.0) x 2.5]

Design parameters : Pier Diameter, d1 = 2.4m; Pier Height below HFL, h = 6.218m, Well
Diameter, d2 = 5.5m, Overall height from HFL to Scour Level, H = 31.09m, Well Height upto
scour level = (H-h) = 24.872m [Refer Fig. A4-1]

Hydrodynamic force on pier, F1 = CehWe 2.4m

(a) Pier Portion: H.F.L

h=6.218m
Pier
For pier portion consider enveloping cylinder of height h
r1
and radius r1.
ℎ 6.218
For pier portion, 𝑟 = 1.2 = 5.181 > 4.0, 𝐶𝑒 = 0.73
1
(Refer Table 4.4)
(H-h)=24.872m
H=31.09m
Weight of water in enveloping cylinder for pier
𝜋
𝑊𝑒1 = 4 × 2.42 × 6.218 × 1.0 = 28.129𝑡
r2
Hydrodynamic force on pier, F1 = Ceh We1 Well
F1 = 0.73 x 0.12 x 28.129 = 2.464t
Scour level
1.2𝐹 2.464
For Pier, 𝑃𝑏1 = ℎ 1 = 1.2 × 6.218 = 0.475 𝑡/𝑚 5.5m
Resultant force at base of pier
= C 3 F1 Fig. A4-1
= 1.0 x 2.464t = 2.464t
Point of application of resultant force from base of pier
= C4 h
= 0.4286 X 6.218 = 2.665m
Bending moment at the base of pier (Well cap level) due to hydrodynamic force on pier
= 2.464 x 2.665 = 6.566tm
The force distribution is worked out in Table 1, below, and shown in Fig. A4-2
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Table 1: Force Distribution on pier (Refer portion A-B-C in Fig. A4-4)

C1 C1h C2 C2 Pb1 (t/m)
0.1 0.6218 0.410 0.195

h=6.218m
0.2 1.2436 0.673 0.319
0.3 1.8654 0.832 0.395
0.4 2.4872 0.922 0.438
0.5 3.1090 0.970 0.460 Base of Pier
0.6 3.7308 0.990 0.470 0.475t/m
0.8 4.9744 0.999 0.474
1.0 6.2180 1.000 0.475
Fig. A4-2

(b) Well Portion:

For well portion consider enveloping cylinder of height H and radius r2. Deduct from it the
enveloping cylinder of height h and radius r2 to determine hydrodynamic effect on well portion
only. Thus hydrodynamic force on well portion is obtained as follows:

For well foundation,

ℎ 6.218
= = 0.2
𝐻 31.090

𝐻 31.09
= = 11.305 > 4.0, 𝐶𝑒 = 0.73
𝑟2 2.75

Hydrodynamic force on well portion only= F2 –F3, Where:

F2 = force acting on complete height H, enveloping radius r2 (Refer portion A-B-D in Fig. 4)
F3 = force acting on pier height h, enveloping radius r2(Refer portion A-E-F in Fig. 4)

F2 = Ceh We2
We2 =  x 2.752 x 31.09 = 738.645 t
F2 = 0.73 x 0.12 x 758.645 = 64.705 t

Point of application of F2 (resultant on H) from scour level (C1 = 1.0),

C4H = 0.4286 x 31.09 = 13.325 m

Resultant force on height h (for C1 = h/H = 0.2)

F3 = C3 F2
F3 = 0.093 x 64.705 = 6.017 t

Point of application F3 (resultant on h) from scour level (for C1 = 0.2)

= C4 H = 0.8712 x 31.09 = 27.085 m
 Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

The net hydrodynamic force acting on well portion only

F2 – F3 = 64.705-6.017 = 58.688 t

Bending moment at scour level due to hydrodynamic force on well

=F2 x 13.325 - F3 x 27.085
= 64.705 x 13.325 – 6.017 x 27.085
= 699.224tm

Total shear force and bending moment at scour level

Total shear force at scour level

i
= Hydrodynamic force on pier + Hydrodynamic force on well
= 2.464 + 58.688 = 61.152 t

Total bending moment at scour level

= Moment of force F1 + Net Moment of force F2 and F3
= 2.464 (2.665 + 24.872) + 699.224
= 67.851 + 699.224 = 767.075t

The force distribution for well portion (C1 = 0.2 to C1 = 1.0) is worked out in Table 2 and also
shown in Fig. A4-3.
𝐹 1.2×64.705
𝑃𝑏2 = 1.2 𝐻2 = = 2.497 𝑡/𝑚
31.09
1.680t/m
Table 2: Force Distribution on well
C1 C1h C2 C2 Pb2(t/m)
0.2 0.6218 0.673 1.680
0.3 9.3270 0.832 2.077
24.872m

0.4 12.436 0.922 2.302

0.5 15.545 0.970 2.422
0.6 18.654 0.990 2.472
0.8 24.872 0.999 2.472
1.0 31.090 1.000 2.497
2.497 t/m

Fig. A4-3
Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

Fig. A4-4 below shows the final forces acting in pier and well foundation
2.4m

H.F.L A

h=6.218m
h=6.218m
Pier

r1 F1 =2.464t
B C D
0.475t/m 1.205t/m
(H-h)=24.872m

31.09m
H=31.09m

r2 F2-F3=58.668t

Well

Scour level E F
5.5m 2.497 t/m

Fig. A4-4 : Hydrodynamic Force on Pier & Foundation

 Guideline for Seismic Design of Bridges

APPENDIX A-5 – ILLUSTRATION OF LIQUEFACTION OF SOIL

Depth of water table : 0.00 m

Saturated density (t/m )

Observed SPT Value (N)

Earth quake magnitude

Relative Density, Dr%

Effective overburden
Depth below EGL, m

SPT corrected (N 1)60

Submerged Density

acceleration amax /g

Cyclic Stress ratio

2
Fine Content ( % )

pressure (s v), t/m

EarthQuake Zone

Total overburden
Stress reduction
coefficient (rd)
Type of Strata

Peak ground

Conclusion
2

CRRM = 7.5
(s v ), t/m

(N1)60cs
(CSR)
(t/m )

N C60
3

CRR
MSF
(Mw )

FOS
'

C60
CN

Kσ

Kα
α

f
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
1.50 SM 6 1.95 0.95 16.00 IV 0.24 6.50 0.99 2.93 1.43 0.32 1.70 1.06 6.36 10.81 2.77 1.05 14.16 0.15 21.83 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.44 0.22 0.69 Liquefiable
3.00 SM 7 1.97 0.97 17.00 IV 0.24 6.50 0.98 5.88 2.88 0.31 1.70 1.06 7.42 12.61 3.01 1.06 16.38 0.17 25.88 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.44 0.25 0.81 Liquefiable
4.50 SM 11 1.97 0.97 17.00 IV 0.24 6.50 0.97 8.84 4.34 0.31 1.52 1.06 11.66 17.71 3.01 1.06 21.79 0.24 37.35 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.44 0.34 1.12 Non Liquefiable
6.00 SM 14 1.97 0.97 15.00 IV 0.24 6.50 0.95 11.79 5.79 0.30 1.31 1.06 14.84 19.50 2.50 1.05 22.94 0.26 41.38 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.44 0.37 1.22 Non Liquefiable
7.50 SM 16 1.97 0.97 15.00 IV 0.24 6.50 0.94 14.75 7.25 0.30 1.17 1.06 16.96 19.93 2.50 1.05 23.38 0.26 42.33 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.44 0.38 1.27 Non Liquefiable

For Column 10 For Column 19

𝑟𝑑 = 1.0 − 0.00765𝑧 , for z ≤ 9.15m 𝛽 = 1.0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶 ≤ 5%
𝑟𝑑 = 1.174 − 0.0267𝑧 , for 9.15m < z ≤ 20m 𝐹𝐶 1.5
𝛽 = [0.99 + ( )] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 5% ≤ 𝐹𝐶 < 35%
1000
𝛽 = 1.2 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶 ≥ 35%
For Column 11
Total overburden pressure= saturated density (4) X depth of soil layer(1) For Column 20
𝑁1 (60)cs = α + β𝑁1 (60)
For Column 12
Effective overburden pressure= submerged density (5) X depth of soil layer(1)
For Column 21
1 𝑁1 (60)cs 50 1
For Column 13 𝐶𝑅𝑅7.5 = + + −
(60)cs) (34− 𝑁1 135 [10.𝑁1 (60)cs+45]2 200
𝜏𝑎𝑣 𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝜎𝑣
𝐶𝑆𝑅 = = 0.65 ( ) ( ′ ) 𝑟𝑑
𝜎𝑣′ 𝑔 𝜎𝑣 For Column 23
f=0.8-0.7, for Dr=40%-60%a
For Column 14 f=0.7-0.6, for Dr=60%-80%,
𝐶𝑁 = (100/𝜎𝑣′ )0.5 ≤ 1.7

For Column 15 For Column 24

C60=CHT CHW CSS CRL CBD =1.06 𝜎′
𝐾𝜎 = ( 𝑣𝑜⁄𝑃 )(𝑓−1)
Assuming, CHT=1.33 (For Donut hammer with trip/auto) 𝑎

CHW=0.998 (For hammer weight of 63.5kg and height of fall of 760mm) For Column 26
CBD= 1.05 (For Borehole diameter= 150mm) 𝑀𝑆𝐹 = 102.24/𝑀𝑊 2.56

CRL=0.85 (For Rod Length of 5m) Considering Earthquake Magnitude (MW) as 6.5
CSS=0.9 (For Non-Standard Sampler used with liner) For Magnitude of Earthquake reference to ANNEX-A of IS 1893(Part 1)-2016 shall be made.

For Column 17 For Column 27

N1(60)=N.C60.CN CRR = (CRR7.5).(MSF)K𝜎 Kα

For Column 18 For Column 28

𝛼 = 0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶 ≤ 5% 𝐶𝑅𝑅
𝐹𝑂𝑆 =
190 𝐶𝑆𝑅
𝛼 = exp [1.76 − ( 2 )] 𝑓𝑜𝑟 5% ≤ 𝐹𝐶 < 35%
𝐹𝐶
𝛼 = 0.5 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶 ≥ 35%