A Check of the Design of an
I-Beam Highway Bridge
A Thesis Submitted to

The Faculty of
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
of
AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE

by

Charles Victor KleEac Jr.

Candidate for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science

September 1948

THESIS

c-l

Acknowledgement

The author wishes to acknowledge his indebt-
edness to Mr. W. A. Bradley, Department of Civil Engin-
eering, Michigan State College for his generous donation
of time and knowledge without which the preparation of

this thesis would not have been possible.

$301331

r

513' [“5723 11‘1““. ,-‘ ,- V'-
Outline of Procedurehs_ 5)w’; b_ a»" a 3'

rib ~“
’0

’ ‘
,,

E; . a. .
-._ ‘¢ H :; .'

n v . V F '. 5'11”" t‘. 3
“ "" " '2‘. a, 'a’ a $1,.“

II Bridge Railing '5 "‘ ”
V 1 .,
A Loading 5&1ch «59%,;

1 Live Load

["1’4‘913 - 5'
.’

1 g. f r l f ham
‘0’“ r f L.'x f. ‘1
gm

   

2 Dead Load
B Check Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete
III Sidewalk and Curb
A Loading
1 Live Load
2 Dead Load
B Check Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete
IV Floor Slab
A Loading
1 Live Load
2 Dead Load
B Check Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete
V Girder Design
A Loading
1 Live Load
2 Dead Load

:4.

s

'4

O

b

4

$3.

I
'2

u
\

4

c .

o

,, -.. ,g.‘_ -r”
‘.'.'.AL.‘-.‘

:1 ‘fl"‘ ‘ tg‘E‘:

 

Outline of Procedure

V Girder Design (con't)
B Size of Beam Required
C Size of Diaphragms Required
D Size of Hitchangles Required
E Spacing of Rivets
VI Abutment Design
A Loading
1 Live Load
2 Dead Load
B Files
1 Resistance
2 No. of Files
C Footing
l Toe Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete
2 Heel Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete
D Wall
1 Stem Reinforcing Steel
and Concrete

VII Summary and Conclusions

Introduction

The purpose of this thesis is to check the design of
a single span simply supported highway bridge.

This bridge as proposed will be constructed on the
relocation of U.S. highway number 31, also to be known as
the Muskegon East Belt Road, where it crosses Black Creek
in Fruitport Township, Muskegon County, in the state of
Michigan. Previous to the opening of this new highway it
has been necessary for all thru traffic to travel over
the already congested streets of Muskegon. Thus, by the
construction of the East Belt Road this situation will be
greatly alleviated.

The centerline of this highway makes a 56 degree angle
with the abutment wall which runs parallel to the flow of
the Black Creek. The span length from center to center of
bearings is 57'-l" exact and the overall width of roadway
from curb to curb is 42'-O" exact.

The drainage area tributary in this crossing is 56
square miles and the waterway area required based on Talbot's
formula ( using c'= 0.1) is 260 square feet.

The existing bridge one mile downstream has a tributary
drainage area of 57.5 square miles, provides 246 square feet
and appears adequate. The proposed structure provides 238
square feet.

All of the above mentioned conditions concerning the
site and the river were taken into account both in the

analysis and the design of the bridge.

Symbols

A Area
b breath or width
d depth of beam to center of steel
e eccentricity of application of load
f unit stress
I moment of inertia
3 ratio of lever arm of resisting
couple to depth, d
k ratio of depth of neutral axis to
depth, d
L length in feet
1 length in inches
M moment
n ratio of modulus of elacticity of
steel to the modulus of elacticity
of concrete
R reaction
v unit shear
w load per unit of length
z section modulus
¢ round
u bond
Abbrevations
M.S.H.D. Michigan State Highway Department
A.A.S.H.O. American Association of State High-
way Officials
A.I.S.C. American Institute of Steel Construct-

ion

The specifications and maximum unit stresses used are
those of the Michigan State Highway Department published
in 1944 and from the specification for highway design
published by the American Association of State Highway
Officals in 1944.

fc' 3000 psi
fc 1200 psi
fs 18000 psi

J .867

k .400
n 10

V 60 psi
v 90 psi
u 150 psi

u 300 psi (where special anchorage

is provided)

Piles 20 ton per square foot supported
Loading H 20 S 16-44

Shear 13500 psi power driven rivets
Shear 10000 psi unfinished bolts '

Design of Railing

Substantial railings shall be provided along each side
of the bridge for the protection of traffic. The top of
railing shall not be less than 3'-0" above the top of curb
and when on a sidewalk, not less than 3'-0" above the top
of the sidewalk. Railings shall contain no cpening of great-
er width than eight (8) inches. Ample provision shall be
made for inequality in the rate of movement of the railing
and the supporting superstructure, due to temperature or
erection conditions.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 25 p. 10)

Railings shall be designed to resist a horizontal
force of not less than 150 pounds per lineal foot, applied
at the top of the railing, and a vertical force of not less
than 100 pounds per lineal foot. For railings adjacent to
the roadway, the bottom rail shall be designed for a hor-
izontal force of 300 pounds per lineal foot of rail.

(M.S.H.D. Spec 35 p. 14)
Railings:
Bolts 3/4" ¢ in single shear capacity 4420 #
(for 10,000 psi steel)
Load 300 x 8.167/2 = 1225 #
Strap shear capacity
(1 3/4 - 13/16)5/8 x 10000 = 5860 #

Design of Railing

Using 50 pounds per lineal foot as the dead weight
of the railing

(M.S.H.D. Standard Design of Railing)

500#

50#[;//////////,///////7
304#

Load: 304 x 8.16'7/2 =—. 1240#

 

Bolts control as they have minimum capacity
1 (max) 1 7/8" + 3/3" = 29;"

f (horizontal) 1225 x 2.25 x 6
.625 x 1e75 8650 p81
f (vertical) 1225 §_2.25 x 6 4050 psi

 

6 x 1.75 x (6.25)

 

f (total) 12700 psi
f (allowable) 18000 psi

Design of Railing

l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rail: Lower rail only considered (max. case) For the first
computation only the two side channels are considered
to simplify the computations.

Horizontal bending 8.167 - 2 x 1 5/8 = 7.901

M = w1‘/8 =. 500 x (7.90)‘x 12 = 28100 in. lbs.
8

A.= 2 x 1.46 2.92 sq. in. e = 2.06 Ig _ 2 x .25 =

.50":

I)

I = Ac + Ig 2.92 x (2.05) + .50==12.89 in.

Mc/I .= 28100 x 2.5g = 5450 psi
12.89

9.9
(I

18000 psi allowable
Since the stresses are so low we may neglect the t0p
channel of the lower railing in the design. This top channel
would increase the strength at the railing which is already

{’330% over designed.

 

 

 

 

 

. i . i RC 5 Intermediate Posts
0 t r
P
r ‘ { b 16"
d 9%"

As 2 x .44 0.88 sq. in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

se
; (2 bars in compression)
. (2 bars in tension)
[r r
k = 1 = 1 =- .400
fa/nfc + 1 1800/10 x 1200 + 1
.1 = (1 - k/s) == (1 - .400/5) = .867
Bending moments:
150 x 9.54 x 52 = _ 45800"#
300 x 9.54 x 5 = l4500"£_
= 60100"#

Total

 

4.92 inches required

ll

d 2%0100/2880 x .867
9.50 inches actual

M/Asjd = 60100/.88 x .867 x 9.5 - 8500 psi

fs =
18000 psi all.

Posts

The posts are able to bear a far greater load then
that to which they are subjected. The actual stressin the
steel of the post is only 46% of the allowable stress.

The railing and posts are greatly over designed,
however, a large post of this greater size is obviously
to produce a more massive appearance and greater arch-

itectural beauty throughout.

Design of Sidewalk and Curb

 

 

 

 

 

_ _ —‘_"'('"

Curbs shall be designed to resist a force of not

 

 

less than five hundred (500) pounds per lineal foot of
curb applied at the t0p of the curb.
(M.S.H.D. Spec. 56 p. 14)

The specified roadway loading shall apply to all
sidewalks constructed without guard rails between the
sidewalk and roadway to prevent encroachment of road-
way loads.

As this sidewalk is fully supported the use of this
part of the bridge serves only as an additional safety
measure for pedestrians and as a more or less decorative
mmasure. The only steel actually required is temperature

steel with the other being more or less superfuloue.

Design of Concrete Slab

 

36 WP 230

 

'1
L.

Calculate bending moment by A.A.S.H.O. art. 5.2.2 p. 138

Main reinforcing perpendicular to center line of roadway.

Distribution of wheel loads
For span 2-7 ft.
E = 0.65 + 2.5
Bending moment for freely supported span
M a 0.25 x P/E x s x (100 + I + 10% for
longitudional forces)

Bending moment for continuous span
M . 0.2 x P/E x s x (100 + I + 10% for

lonitudional forces)

Where,
E a width of slab over which wheel load is distributed
P a maximum wheel load in pounds

s a distance between flanges plus % width of girder

flanges

1., L + 20
6L + 20

Design of Concrete Slab

The forces due to traction or sudden braking of vehicles
shall be considered as longitudinal forces having a magnitude
of 10% of the gross live load that can be placed in one
traffic line.This load shall be assumed as acting in the

direction of traffic movement and applied at the top of

pavement.
(M.S.H.D. Spec. 38 p. 15)
Design
E =.O,6 x 5 e 2.5 -= 5.5 ft.
m = 0.25 x 16000/5.5 x 5 x 1.51 = 4760 ft. 153.

 

d =YM7R‘; 2 '_V(4760 x 12)/(208 x 127:.- 4.78 in.
For slabs the distance from the surface of the concrete
either top or bottom, to the center of the nearest bar
shall be not less than one and one-half times the diameter
of the bar nor less than one and one-half inches.
Thickness required: 4.78 + 1.50 == 6.28 in.
Actual: 7.00 in.

As = M/fsjd = (4760 x 12)/(18000 x 7/8 x 5.5) =-
.663 sq. in. requieed

1.000 sq. in. actual
Steel at bottom of slab for lateral distribution.

Percent of main steel required
loo/G = loo/i5 = 44.8%
(A.A.S.H.0. art. 3.2.2 p. 140)

As a .663 x .448 a .296 sq. in./ft. required

Design of Concrete Slab

Slabs designed for bending moment in accordance
with the foregoing shall be considered satisfactory
in bond and shear.

(A.A.S.H.O. art. 5.2.2 (d) p. 140)

Diaphragm Design

The forces due to wind and lateral vibrations shall
consist of a horizontal moving load equal to 30 pounds
per square foot on 1% times the area of the structure as
seen in elevation, including the floor system and railing
and on one-half the area of all trusses and girders in
excess of two in the span.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 38 p. 15)

(a) Size, Rivets shall be of the size specified
but generally shall be 3/4 inch or 7/8 inch in diameter.

(b) Pitch of Rivets, The minimum.distance between
centers of rivets shall be three times the diameter of the
rivet but preferably shall be not less than the following:

For 3/4 inch diameter rivets - 2% inches

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 92 p. 59 - 40)

Diaphragms shall be provided at the third points of
all I-beams spans of forty feet or more.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 124 p. 48)

(a) Design, Lateral, longitudinal and transverse
bracing shall be composed of angles or other shapes and
shall have riveted connections.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 123 p. 48)

The end connections angles of floorbeams and string-

ers shall be not less than 3/8 inch in finished thickness.
(M.S.H.D. S pec. 120 p. 47)

Diaphragm Design

Area of structure as seen in elevation

7.833 x 59.582 468 square feet
1.5 x 468 702 square feet
.5 x 6 x 3 x 57 512 square feet

 

Total effective area 1214 square feet

Moving load 30 x 1214 36420 pounds

Area required End diaphragm

56420/18000 = 2.02 square inches required

Area furnished

4" x 4" x 3/8" furnishes 2.86 square inches

The intermediate diaphragms meet all the necessary
specifications provided by the M.S.H.D. for depth of web,
size of angles, pitch of rivets, depth of hitchangles,

and number of stiffeners.

Girder Design

Main trusses and girders shall be space a sufficient
distance apart center to center to be secure against over-
turning by the assumed lateral and other forces.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 76 p.36)

For the calculation of stresses, span lengths shall be
assumed as follows:

Beams and girders, distance between centers of
bearings.
(M.S.H.D. Spec. 77 p.36)

Rolled beams shall be proportioned by the moments of
inertia of their net sections.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 80 p.36)

For structures with concrete slab floors without separ-
ate wearing surface, a minimum allowance of 20 pounds per
square foot of roadway shall be made, in addition to the
weight of any monolithically placed concrete wearing surface,
to provide for future wearing surface.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 30 p.12)

When provision is made for three or more lanes of traf-
fic, the design shall provide for the following percentages
of the simultaneous maximum loading of all lanes:

For four or more traffic lanes--------80%

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 33 p.13-l4)
Using H-20 s 16-14 loading from.appendix A AASHO page 229

Girder Design

Dead Load:

 

Slab 4.98 x 7.5/12 x 1 x 150 467#/' span
Girder (assumed 36 WP 250) 2504/: span
Future wearing surface 20 x 4.98 ._100fi/' span

Total Dead Load 797#/' span

Dead Load Moment
3885000 in. lbs.

M = w1‘/8 =-(797 x 12 x 57)/8
Live Load Moment
‘M = 385400 x 12 x .80 - 3600000
Impact 3600000 x .21 ' 757000
Total live load moment 4357000 in lbs.

 

Total moment 8242000 in. lbs.

2 required 8242000/18000 = 456 in.’

Deck plate girders with compression flanges contin-
uously stayed in a concrete slab may have a depth not
less than 1/20 Span.

(M.S.H.D. Spec. 79 p. 36)

(57.08 x 12)/20 = 54.2 in.

It is therefore necessary to use a 36 inch beam.

2 furnished by 36 WP 230 is 835.5 in.

Girder Design
Check deflection

Beam loaded as max. bending moment.

'( <
M?
'5‘ 115' $2
(Lzu‘ 1 115' 2.331355 n. ' i
, , ' #
57.08'

1

deflection @ midpoint (x 1/2) :: Pbx (l -b -x )
6EI1

16(16.85 x 12)(28.54 x 12)(467000-41000-117500)

 

 

 

 

 

= .186 in.
6 x 30 x 10 x 14990 x (57.08 x 12)
16(26.21 x 12)(28.54 x 12)(467000-99000-1175OQ) 255 1
= O n.
6 x 30 x 10 x 14990 x (57.08 x 12)
$12.21 x 12)(28.54 x 12)(467000-21500-117500) __ 038 1
- 0 no
6 x 30 x 10 x 14990 x (57.08 x 12)
Total L.L. Deflection .459 in.
Impact (21%) .096 in.
Total Deflection .555 in.

Live load plus impact deflection 11/1000 span length
Allowable deflection (57.08 x 12)/1000 =.— .684 inches
A 36 WP 230 beam is the smallest beam which does not

exceed the allowable deflection.

Abutment Design

Retaining walls, abutments and structures built to re-
tain fills shall be designed to resist pressures determined
in accordance with the "Rankine" theory of pressure distri-
bution in noncohesive granular material, provided that no
structure shall be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure
of less than 30 pounds per square foot.
Loading

Dead load (superstructure)

 

Total concrete 194/2 x 27 x 150 210500 pounds
Total steel 144100 x 5 72050 pounds
Total 7. 282550 pounds

Out to out of wings 86.875

Then 282550 x 1/86.875 5250 #/t

Live load

One lane reaction 60400 #

Total live load 60400 x 4 x .8 == 193000 pounds
Then 195000 x 1/86.875 = 2220 #/v

Surcharge

Face to face of rail 45' 0"

Then (45 x 4)0)/86.875 z: 210 4/.
Trial section:
Toe projection 2' 0"
Wall 2: 4"

Heel projection 2' 8"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L LELL
I‘ T

J Surcharge
1
:9 (d)
6'
u
L )
”€141.17:
_ 1'1
(c) (b) ‘
21
K) .
0 g 267' -1a.531:a.q‘_
9.
1
F
- i
a) .
3. c '1
n j
342‘ g
4.0' J£L5 1T'Q

 

E

Abutment Design

 

Overturning Thrust Moment

P ) 542 x 10.25/2 = 1750 #9 x 5.42 = 6000'#
P ) 138 x 10.25 ‘= 1415 # x 5.12 == 7240'#
M(0I) = M(OIII) '= 13420'#

P ) 70 x 10.25 : 717 # x 5.12 3 3670'fi
M(OII) =1 16910'#

Stability Weight Moment

a ) 7 x 2.5 x 150 2620 # x 3.50 : 9180'#
b ) 7.75 x 2.33 x 150 2710 # x 3.17 1: 8600'#
c ) 7.75 x 2.67 x 100 2070 # x 5.66 ‘= 11720'#
d ) 2.67 x 4.15 x 100 1110 f x 5.66 = 6270'fi
W(I) = 8510 # M(SI) = 35770 '#

Dead Load 3250 # x 3.17 == 10600'f
W(IV) 3’ 11760 # x M(SIV)= 46370'#

Surcharge 2.67 x 2.1 = 561 # x 5.66 = 5170'#
W(II) =1 12321 # M(II) = 49540'#

W(IV) =. 11760 # M(SIV)= 46370'#

Live Load 2220 f’x 3.17 = 7040'g

MIN) = 15980 #

M(SIII)=53410'#

Abutment Design

Case I

Case

Case

Case

No load or live load surchage

M(SI) 55770'#

M(OI) 152401g

M(I) 22550'# 5(1) = 22530/8510 = 2.65' 0K
II

Superstructure dead load and live load surcharge

M(SII) 49540'#

m(011) 16910'g

m(11) 32630'# R(II) = 32630/12321=-2.65' 0K
III

Superstructure dead load and live load, no surcharge
M(SIII) 53410'#

M(OIII) 13240'f

M(III) 40170'# R(III) .4 40170/13980= 2.87' 0K

IV

Superstructure dead load, no live load or surcharge
R(IV) = 46370/11760=3.95 OK

Note: Case IV assumes that theearth exerts no

horizontal force against the abutment wall.

Abutment Design

Maximum abutment load WIII 13980 #
Bearing capacity of piles: 20 ton 40,000 #
72—0" 59.40.53 A

 

-——+L—+——+

'— " space: A]

Center of gravity of piles

 

‘Hq'

 

¥
7

I

2.83

 

 

 

Back 5.5 x l

5.5
Front 1.5 x 2 =_§_.9_
i 8.5
8.5/3'= 2.83 feet from face of footing
I = Ad
Back 1 x 2.67 = 7.12
Front 2 x 1.33‘=‘§;§§
. I = 10.68"
Load on pile P/A t.Mc/I
Case 11 12521 x 7 + 12521 x 7 x .18 x 1.55

 

3 10.68
28750 4- 1935 5 30685 # OK Front row
28750 .. 12321 x 7 x .18 x 2.67
10.68
28750 - 3880 = 24870 # 0K Back row

Abutment Design

Case III

Case IV

13980 x 7 ‘1» 13980 x 7 x .06 x 1.33

3 10.68
32500 —- 730 x 31770 # 0K Front row
32500 *‘ 1470 :' 33970 # 0K Back row

11760 x 7 -+ 11760 x 7 x 1.12 x 1.33
3 10.68

27400 ,— 11500 15900 ‘# 05 Front row

0|

27400 'f 23000 “ 50400 # orerstressed 26%

Note: Case IV, back row is overstressed by 26%
but this does not consider the horizontal
force exerted by the earth.(M.S.H.D.

allows 33% overstress in this case.)

Abutment Design
Reinforcement
Toe: Case 11

Pile load 30685 #

 

 

‘ [ Pile Spacing 3.5'
Load/ft. of wall 30685/3.5

.e'lsd

' 8750 #

 

Less wt. conc. 750

A A A

.13'

 

 

 

 

; Shear 8000 #

 

 

 

Moment 8750 x .5 -750 x 1 =
3625 '#

A8 * M/fBJdr-= 3525 x 12 = .132 sq. in.
18000 x 7/8 x 21

use 3/4" ¢ bars@ l'-0" centers
A8 2 e44 sqe ine E0 “ 2e4 1ne
p .1 .44/12 x 21 = .00175

 

 

 

 

fs = 3625 x 12 = 4440 p51
.44 x e944 1 21

fc =.fsk/n(1- k) 4 4440 X .169 z 91 p31

8.31

v : V/bjd : 8000 : 35 p81.
12 x .944 x 21

u == V/EOJd = 8000 = 165 psi
2.4 x .944 x 21

300 psi

(allowable)

Abutment Design
Heel: Case IV (bottom steel)
Pile load 50400 #
l Pile spacing 7.0'

 

 

(
I Load/ft. of wall 50400/7 7200#
I
I

1-75'

Less: ftg.(2.5 x 2.67 x 150)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a
C 4E— 1000 #
‘te
' (c) 2070 #
"w

\b“ 1“ an (d) 1110 #
~ 1 4180f
Shear 3020#

Moment = 7200 x 14 - 4180516 -= 54000 w#

Use 3/4" ¢ bars @ 2'-0" centers from.every other toe bar

 

As = .22 sq. in. BO 5 1.2" np= .0088
k =V2pn 4 (pn)z - pn = .124 ,1 =~ .959
fs ; 34000

 

= 7680 psi 0K
.22 x .959 x 21

 

 

f0 2. 7680 x .124 .__ 110 psi OK
8.76
v t: 3020 : 12.5 p81 0K

12 x .959 x 21

u = 5020
1e2 x e959 x 21

7 125 psi 0K

Abutment Design

Heel:

Case II

(top steel)

 

 

he

 

 

L

 

 

 

 

 

Pile load 24870 #
Pile spacing 7.0'
Load/ft. of wall 24870/7 = 5550#

Surcharge 561 #
(c) - 2070 #
(d) 1110 #
Footing 1000 g

4741 #

3550 f
Shear 1191 #

Moment 4741 x 16 - 3550 x 14 =
26200"#

As : 26200 1 .06 :1
18000 x 7/8 x 26

Use 3/4" ¢ @ 2'-0" centers

All unit stresses are OK by

inspection.

Abutment Design

5811:

 

1 g has

135'

 

138

 

 

 

 

fs . 6720 x 12
.22 x .857 x 25

 

 

fc ; 17100 x .429 7%
5.71
v = 2070 ,_
12 x .857 x 25
u ;— 2070

 

1.2 x .857 x 25

Use 3/4" 0 @ 2'-0" centers

Shear

 

1070 x 3.87 4140'#

1000 x 2.58 2580'fi
2070 # Moment 6720'#

6720 x 12

18000 x 778 x 25 2 '205

3/4" 0 @ 2'-0" centerss
.22 sq. 1n. E0 3 102 in.

.857 k =. .429
'22 = .000733

12 x 25

17100 psi OK

1280 psi 0K

8.07 psi OK

80.7 psi OK

 

H.

 

”LO“ L-L- 5 uacn.

w=\OO 3w‘: “WE
‘

“-00 x zh_5-
Cb\.67 " 30?

 

List: . 530.10'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'm
a
_:JL__ -
(L
aha-601.0
L #‘V"-——->-
‘— RDWY,
.04.
A ‘1
J
ELE'V. 5 82.0. _.
.D 77W -
a! L e i . ‘# . . on
9 [Te '0 r v 2 - e ‘8 a .
(9) L. 3|-8" To
'co) ‘ —‘\/"_+
1 Row Y.
(a)
)

 

 

Cuh=383

“Vance

 

 

) V suav.575.7(

 

Abutment Design

Wing Wall

4)
b)
c)

d)

r)

8)

Overturning

385 x 11e5 x é‘

105 x 7.69 x 5

Stabilizing

2.5 x 7 x 150

1.5 x 7.75 x 150

7.75 x .83 x 150 x%
7.75 x 2.67 x 100
7.75 x .83 x 100 x i
1.25 x 2.67 x 100 x %
5.79 x 2 x 100

Thrust Moment
2200 # x 3.83 = 8420'#
M(OI) = 8420'#

396 # x 2.56 t 1013'fi

M(OII) : 9432'#

Weight Moment
2620 # x 3.50 = 9200'#
1745 # x 2.75

482 # x 3.78

4800'#
1825'#

2070 # x 5.67 =11750'#
1500'#

521 # x 4.05
1020'#

h

167 # x 6.11
758 x 1.00 = 758'fi

w = 8163 #M(SI'II') =
30653'#

Abutment Design

Wing

Case

Case

Case

Wing

Wall Stability:
I!
No live load surcharge

M(SI') 30653'#

M(OI') 8420'fi

M(I') 22233'# R(I') :; 22233
8163
II'

With live load surcharge
M(SII') 30653'#
M(OII') 9452'#

M(II') 21221'# R(II') = 21221
8163
IV'

No earth thrust

R(IV') 2 M

8163

Wall Reinforcing Steel:

2 2.72' OK
-= 2.58' 0K
2 3.75' OK

By a comparison of main wall and wing wall loads it

is seen that the main wall is designed for a more severe

condition of loading than would come on the wing. Further,

it can also be seen that the same steel is used in the

wall

of the wing as that used in the wall of the main wall;

therefore, the stresses in the wing wall are OR by inspect-

ione

Conclusion

As the thesis progressed remarks were inserted in
their related sections; however, it may be well to call
attention to several items which are of standard design.
Such items as the railing, posts, curb, concrete slab,
and diaphragms are of Michigan State Highway Department
standard; therefore, it will be noted that because they
are designed for the most severe conditions they are
overdesigned for this structure. The Highway Department
through years of experience has found that the labor
saving in design work far overshadows that saving in

material if each item is to be designed separately.

As an overall conclusion it may be said that the
entire structure is adequately designed and the above

named sections are well overdesigned.

Bibliography

"Specifications for the Design of Highway Bridges"-
Michigan State Highway Department
"Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges"-
American Association of State Highway Officals
"Reinforced Concrete Design Handbook"-
American Concrete Institute
"Steel Construction Manual"
- American Institute of Steel Construction
Sutherland and Reese, "Reinforced Concrete Design"

Second Edition.

 

.(lilr! .4.. ‘4.1¥i‘|‘1t‘f1.’31lil.nfii.‘efiri’
I (ll ,nu. I s . .

<(1'111....‘3 t '0. . a

  

'.-

SBWC¢ fi/amfl‘g

 

 

3‘ l U a?! 9. 0.2.1547 .0.I 10.607.41.10 a‘..‘.‘o.?.’01..l‘v§leoloo. ....| c v o

 

7- 8
( l5
. I" I7
v 9
S I:\\:
R I ((74
~>a_ l4
M 3
Q "0
1.: 3
A .. ..‘.|‘ 9
. l2
c; 1|
m 3