“Analysis and Design of T-Beam Girder

and Box Girder Bridge”

Submitted by Under the Guidance of

AMIT SAXENA Dr. (Ms) SAVITA MARU
(0701CE08ME01) Prof. in (Civil Engg. Dept.)

Department of Civil Engineering,

Ujjain Engineering Collage, Ujjain (M.P.)
2012-2013
 Contents

• Introduction
• Bridge
• Superstructure
• Design
• Results and Discussion
• Conclusions
Introduction
Bridge - life line of road network.
 Importance.
Design of 25 m span two lane simply supported bridge super structure
Suitable choice for 25m span- T- Beam and Box Girder bridge
 T-Beam girder bridge construction – easy
Box girder sophisticated and costly formwork.
 Analysis for dead load and IRC moving load.
Dead load calculation – manually
Live load - linear analysis by software Staad Pro.
Bridge
 Definition – structure that crosses over a river, bay, or other obstruction.
Purpose - Permits the smooth and safe passage of vehicles, trains, and pedestrians.
Bridge parts - Upper part - the superstructure- deck, floor system, and the main trusses
Lower part – substructure- piers, columns, footings, piles, and abutments.

Elevation view of a typical Bridge

Superstructure
“Structural parts of the bridge that provide the horizontal span.“
The portion of the bridge above the bridge bearings.

Simple RCC Bridge Arch Bridge T-Beam Box Girder

Girder Bridge Bridge

Cable Stayed Bridge Suspension Bridge

 Superstructure Cont….
Type of superstructure and Suitable span(IRC:SP:54-2000)

Type of superstructure Span length

(i) RCC single or multiple box 1.5 to 15 m
(ii) Simply supported RCC slabs 3 to 10 m
(iii) Simply supported RCC T -Beam 10 to 25 m
(iv) Simply supported PSC Girder bridge 25 to 45 m
(v) Simply supported RCC voided slabs 10 to 15 m
(vi) Continuous RCC voided slabs 10 to 20 m
(vii) Continuous PCC voided slabs 15 to 30 m
(viii) RCC box section : Simply supported/ balanced cantilever 25 to 50 m
continuous
(ix) PSC box section : Simply supported/ balanced cantilever 35 to 75 m
(x) PSC cantilever construction/ continuous 75 to 100 m
(xi) Cable stayed bridge 200 to 500 m
(xii) Suspension bridge 500 m
 Superstructure Cont….

T-Beam Girder POSITIVE POINTS

 Simple geometry.
 Easy to cast at site.
 Most widely adopted.
 Slab acts monolithically with
beams.

NEGATIVE POINTS
 Cross - beam requirement gives
less clean appearance.

Main Components of T-Beam Girder

 Superstructure Cont….

Box Girder POSITIVE POINTS

 High torsional strength.
 Suitable for curved bridges.
 Minimal maintenance problems.
 Good appearance.

NEGATIVE POINTS
 Heavy units for erection.
 Inefficient at short spans.

Main Components of Box Girder

Design

Longitudinal section of T-Beam Girder Bridge

Plan of T-Beam Girder Bridge

 Design Cont…

Cross section of T-Beam Girder Bridge at 0.25L, 0.50L and 0.75L

Cross section of T-Beam Girder Bridge at 0.0L and 1.0L

 Design Cont…

Longitudinal section of Box Girder Bridge

Plan of Box Girder Bridge

 Design Cont…

Cross section of Box Girder Bridge at 0.25L, 0.50L and 0.75L

Cross section of Box Girder Bridge at 0.0L and 1.0L

 Design Cont…
 Dead Load :
 Self weight of Superstructure + load of railing, kerb, and wearing coat.
Superstructure dead load =
• cross sectional area of concrete section x density of concrete (IRC: 6-
2010)
• Dead Load of kerb and wearing coat - same procedure as above
• weight of railing - 0.3 T/m as per IRC: 6-2010 Clause 206.
Philosophy - working stress method of design
Bending moments = [wl/4{l-(x\2)}]
 Shear forces = [w{(l/2)-x}] at each one tenth of effective span.

Showing tenth effective span

 Design Cont….
Live Load :
As per IRC:6-2010

Class A Loading

Class 70R Loading

 Design Cont….
Staad model :
• Linear model on Staad Pro.
• Member property
• Support

• Live load bending moments & shear forces

Class A Forward Direction

Class 70R Forward Direction

 Design Cont….
Impact factor :
•As per IRC-6:2010

For IRC Class A loading

If = A
B+L
Where
If = impact factor
A = constant, 4.5 for RCC bridges, 9.0 for steel bridges
B = constant, 6.00 for RCC bridges, 13.50 for steel bridges
L = span in m.
 Design Cont….
For IRC Class 70R loading

Impact percentage for Highway Bridges (Clause 208.2 IRC 6:2010)

 Design Cont…
Lateral distribution coefficents of live load :
• Morrice Little method has been adopted.
• Actual bending moments and shear forces.

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

 Design Cont…
Design moment and shear force:

Design moment = DLBM + LLBM x IM x LD

Design shear = DLSF + LLSF x IM x LD

Where ,
IM= Impact factor
LD=Lateral distribution factor
Results and Discussion
Dead load

• T-Beam Girder has produced less moment than Box Girder units.
 Results and Discussion Cont….
Dead load

• T-Beam Girder has produced less shear than Box Girder

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Live load

• Bending moment on T-Beam Girder formed more.

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Live load

• Live load shear forces for Box Girder is less

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Dead Load and Live Load

• Bending moment due to combine load of Box Girder is less.

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Dead Load and Live Load

• Shear force due to combine load of T-Beam Girder is more.

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Moment capacity and Shear resistance

• T-Beam girder are more resistance capacity of moment for 25 m span.

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Moment capacity and Shear resistance

• T-Beam girder capacities to resist the shear are more.

 Results and Discussion Cont….
Quantity Comparison

• Quantity of concrete is almost same

• Quantity of steel has more in Box Girder Bridge.
 Results and Discussion Cont….
Cost Comparison
• Consider local SOR rates
• Cost of Box Girder Bridge has more
Conclusion

The following conclusion are drawn upon -

i. Service Dead load bending moments and Shear force for T-beam girder
are lesser than two cell Box Girder Bridge. Which allow designer to have
lesser heavier section for T-Beam Girder than Box Girder for 25 m span.
ii. Moment of resistance of steel for both has been evaluated and
conclusions drawn that T-Beam Girder has more capacity for 25 m span.
iii. Shear force resistance of T-Beam Girder is more compared to two cell
Box Girder for 25 m span.
iv. Cost of concrete for T-Beam Girder is less than two cell Box Girder as
quantity required by T-beam Girder.
v. Quantity of steel for T-beam Girder is less so cost of steel in T-Beam is
less as compared to two cells Box Girder Bridge.
References

1. IRC 6-2010, “Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road

Bridges”, Section II, loads and stresses, The Indian Roads Congress,
New Delhi, India, 2010.
2. IRC: 21-2000, “Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road
Bridges, Section III, Cement Concrete (Plain and Reinforced)”, The
Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi, India, 2000.
3. IRC:SP: 54-2000 “Project Preparation Manual for Bridge”, The Indian
Roads Congress, New Delhi, India, 2000.
4. M.G Aswani . (1995), “Design of Concrete Bridges, 2nd edition, Nai
Sarak, KHANNA Publishers”
5. American Association of State Highway Officials. (1998), “LRFD
Bridge Design Specification”, 2nd edition, Washington ,AASHTO
6. D Johnson Victor (2007), “Essential of Bridge Engineering”6th edition
 References Cont….

7. V. K. Raina, (2007)“Concrete Bridge practice analysis, Design and

Economics”, 2nd edition
8. N. Krishna Raju, (2010), “Design of Bridges”, 4th edition
9. T. R. Jagadeesh & M. A. Jayaram, (2010), “Design of Bridge
Structures”, 2nd edition
10. Structure engineering research center, Roorkee, U.P., “Design tables for
concrete bridge deck slabs”
11. S Ramamrutham, “Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures”, 10th
edition
Publication

IJREAT International Journal of Research in Engineering & Advanced

Technology, Volume 1, Issue 2, April-May, 2013 ISSN: 2320 - 8791
www.ijreat.org
Comparative Study of the Analysis and Design of T-Beam Girder and
Box Girder Superstructure
Published by: PIONEER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT GROUP
(www.prdg.org)
Thank You