Fakultät Bauingenieurwesen, Institut für Massivbau, Prof. M.

Curbach

Bridge Loads
Dr.-Ing. Patricia Garibaldi

Dresden, May 6th, 2019

Applicable codes:
• Live load on bridges: Eurocode 1-Part 2 (EC1-2)
• Temperature: Eurocode 1-Part 1-5 (EC1-1-5)
• Snow: Eurocode 1-Part 1-3 (EC1-1-3)
• Wind: Eurocode 1-Part 1-4 (EC1-1-4)

Include modifications as required by German Annex: DIN EN 1991-2:

2010 (12), and other applicable annexes.

Including relevant loads for roadway, railway bridges, and pedestrian

bridges as well as non-dynamic loads induced by pedestrians and tra.

Concrete bridges Folie 2

Classification of loads:

Loads can be classified according to the following

criteria:
• Situation (normal, extraordinary, earthquake)
• Ocurrence (permanent, variable)
• Frequency

Concrete bridges Folie 3

Classification of loads based on frequency of ocurrence:

Frequency

Characteristic value - 1000 years

Non-often value - 1 year
Often value - 1 week
Quasi permanent value - exceeds 50%
probability

Concrete bridges Folie 4

Permanent loads – Typical values

Dead weight:
• Reinforced concrete γ = 25 KN/m3
• Steel γ = 78.5 KN/m3

Additional permanent loads:

(usually applied as superimposed loads, at end of construction)
 Pavement (asphalt) γ = 24 KN/m3
• Railing (each) 0.5 KN/m
• Steel guardrail (each) 0.5 KN/m
 Cap, parapet, concrete barrier γ = 25 KN/m3

Concrete bridges Folie 5

Permanent loads – Typical layout (asphalt)

Concrete bridges Folie 6

Permanent loads – Typical layout (barriers)

Concrete bridges Folie 7

Permanent loads – Typical values (cont.)
Ground motion:
• Probable and possible soil settlements „s“
• Difference in soil settlements „Δs
• Data are provided by geotechnical experts. Horizontal soil
supports stiffness can be calculated from he modulus of
subgrade (horizontal springs), for example, in the case of pile
foundations:
ks,k = Es,k / Ds

ks,k = Modulus of horizontal subgrade reaction of soil

Es,k = Young’s modulus of soil (provided by geotechnical
engineer)
Ds = Diameter of pile

Consider also skin friction and ultimate bearing capacity of soil

and foundation elements.
Concrete bridges Folie 8
Live loads for roadway bridges

Scope of DIN EN 1991-2:

• Span lengths <200 m

• Roadway widths < 42 m

In other cases, bridge specific load assumptions shall be made,

because recommendations according to EC1, may be too
conservative.

Impact factors and mutiple presence factors are already included in

the live load model definitions.

Concrete bridges Folie 9

Live loads

• Notional lanes
• Live load models
Tandem system
Uniform loads
• Horizontal lanes
Breaking loads
Centrifugal forces
• Fatigue load models
• Railway loads
• Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 10

Notional lanes
In general, notional lanes have a width, we = 3 m.

For narrower roadway widths, the notional lanes width are

defined according to Table 4.1, below.

Concrete bridges Folie 11

Notional lanes
For the general case, where wo ≥ 6m, the number of notional
lanes, „n“, is defined as:

n = integer (wo/we)

where:

wo: width of roadway (distance between curbs with h≥7 cm)

we: width of nomimal lane = 3 m

The reamining area is called the „residual area.“

But, how is the roadway width actually defined?

Concrete bridges Folie 12

Notional lanes
Roadway width definition according to EC1-2, section 4.2.3, (page
32)

Concrete bridges Folie 13

Notional lanes
Roadway width definition according to EC1-2, section 4.2.3, (page
32)

Concrete bridges Folie 14

Notional lanes

Concrete bridges Folie 15

Live loads

• Notional lanes
• Live load models
Tandem system
Uniform loads
• Horizontal lanes
Breaking loads
Centrifugal forces
• Fatigue load models
• Railway loads
• Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 16

Live load models

Live load models are composed of a combination of double axle load

(tandem system), that represent an idealized design truck, and uniform
distributed loads that account for the effect of cars, smaller trucks or
crowds of people.

•Loads are further modified by adjustment factors that may be defined

by each country.
•The applicability of the load models can also be further defined by each
country.
•In the case of Germany, factors in the Eurocode for the load model 1 are
overrided by the values given in the national German annex.
•Load models 2 and 3 are not considered in Germany. It is assumed that
load model 2 is included in load model 1.
•The effect of special trucks on the existing and aging infrastructure,
such as those considered in model 3, is still being investigated in
Germany, and for now, there are not freely allowed on roads.

Concrete bridges Folie 17

Live load models
according to EC1-2, section 4.3.1, (page 35)

Concrete bridges Folie 18

Live load models
Live load models shall be applied to create the worse adverse
effect.

Different live load models may be combined when required by the

geometry of the bridge and the use of the structure (pedestrian
loads for example).

Live load model 4 shall only be considered as a transient

condition, for global checks.

Concrete bridges Folie 19

Live load models – Model 1

Concrete bridges Folie 20

Live load models – Model 1

Concrete bridges Folie 21

Live load models – Model 1
Characteristic values of axle loads Qik, include each a pair of
wheel loads. In the case of model 1, the wheel are assumed to
have a tire contact area of 0.4 m x 0.4 m. For load model 2, the
tire contact are is assumed to be 0.35 m x 0.6 m. The adjustment
factors given in th Eurocode (shown below) are superseded.

Concrete bridges Folie 22

Live load models – Model 1
Adjustment Factors with German national annex:

Tanden System 𝛼𝛼Qi

Lane 1 1.0
Lane 2 1.0
Lane 3 1.0
Other lanes 0.0

Uniform Load 𝛼𝛼qi qi

Lane 1 1.33 (9 kN/m2) = 12 kN/m2
Lane 2 2.40 (2.5 kN/m2)= 6 kN/m2
Lane 3 or more 1.20 (2.5 kN/m2)= 3 kN/m2
Residual area 1.20 (2.5 kN/m2)= 3 kN/m2

Concrete bridges Folie 23

Live loads – Example layout (UDL system)

Concrete bridges Folie 24

Live loads – Example layout (Tandem system)

Concrete bridges Folie 25

Live load models – Model 1
Arrangement of loads to investigate the local effect, for example
the transverse analysis of structure.

Concrete bridges Folie 26

Live load models – Model 2

Concrete bridges Folie 27

Live load models – Model 3
Special vehicles (example)

Concrete bridges Folie 28

Live load models – Model 3
Special vehicles (example)

Concrete bridges Folie 29

Live load models – Model 3
Special vehicles combined with Model 1

Concrete bridges Folie 30

Live load models – Model 4

Live load models 4 controls for very long bridges, specially in urban
areas.

Concrete bridges Folie 31

Live load models –Tire distribution pressure

Concrete bridges Folie 32

Live loads

• Notional lanes
• Live load models
Tandem system
Uniform loads
• Horizontal lanes
Breaking loads
Centrifugal forces
• Fatigue load models
• Railway loads
• Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 33

Horizontal loads – Breaking loads
Loads induced by breaking and accelerating:

60% of the tandem system of lane 1

10% of the UDL of lane 1

Concrete bridges Folie 34

Horizontal loads – Breaking loads
Example (all piers have neoprane bearings and can resist the breaking loads)

Distribute QLK along the

whole length of the
structure, and then,
apply a fraction of the
total load only to the
bearings that are
supporting the breaking
force. Use the tributary
span length
corresponding to the
pier resisting the loads.

Concrete bridges Folie 35

Horizontal loads – Centrifugal forces
The centrifugal force Qtk should be taken as a transverse force acting
at the finished carriageway level and radially to the axis of the
carriageway.
Notice the decrease in load as the radius increases.

Concrete bridges Folie 36

Multi-component actions – Load combinations

Concrete bridges Folie 37

Accompanying value of a variable action: (ψ Qk)

Source: Leonardo da Vinci Pilot Project CZ/02/B/FP -134007.

Development of skills facilitating the implementation of the Eurocodes.
Handbook 1- Guide to interpretative document for essential

Slide 38
Live loads

• Notional lanes
• Live load models
Tandem system
Uniform loads
• Horizontal lanes
Breaking loads
Centrifugal forces
• Fatigue load models
• Railway loads
• Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 39

Fatigue load models (example)

Concrete bridges Folie 40

Railway loads (Annex D & E, 12 types), as an example:

Concrete bridges Folie 41

Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 42

Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 43

Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 44

Pedestrian bridge loads

Concrete bridges Folie 45

Pedestrian bridge loads
Service vehicles are usually maintenance, fire or emergency vehicles.

Concrete bridges Folie 46

Temperature
Eurocode 1 – Part 1-5. Effect are dependant of location, seasonal
changes, and boundary conditions. The following cases are
considered:

Concrete bridges Folie 47

Temperature Coefficients of linear expansion

Concrete bridges Folie 48

Temperature

Three diferent types of bridge decks are considered:

Concrete bridges Folie 49

Temperature

Temperature ranges - linear expansion – case (a)

(expansion shall be measured using the length from the point of zero
movement in the structure, to the point of interest):
Te, max Te,min
Group 1 +51°C -26°C

Group 2 +41°C -20°C

Group 3 +37°C -17°C

Air temperature +37°C -17°C

Mean temperature +10°C

Concrete bridges Folie 50

Temperature

Linear temperature variation along height (case c):

Concrete bridges Folie 51

Temperature Gradient case (d)
(Example, not eurocode values)

Concrete bridges Folie 52

Temperature Gradient

Concrete bridges Folie 53

Temperature Gradient

Concrete bridges Folie 54

Temperature Gradient

Concrete bridges Folie 55

Snow Loads – Eurocode 1 Part 1-4
Wind Loads - Eurocode 1 Part 1-5

Concrete bridges Folie 56

Inter-relationship
between design
and construction

Concrete bridges Folie 57

Inter-relationship between design and
construction

Concrete bridges Folie 58

Time Dependent Effects (creep and shrinkage)

T = INITIAL

T = INFINITY
say (10000 days)

Concrete bridges Folie 59

Time Dependent Effects (creep and shrinkage)

Typical parameters, (example):

Concrete bridges Folie 60

 Worst live load effects
Live load effects are ussually maximized (or minimized) by proper
placement of live load to create maximum (or minimum) effects.

This is usually done with the help of influence lines

Concrete bridges Folie 61

Muller Breslau Principle

The influence line follows the profile of the deflected

shape of a structure generated by releasing the restraint
corresponding to the action and applying a unit displacement or
rotation in the direction of the action.

Concrete bridges Folie 62

 Design Example by Parsons and
Brickerhoff , Proposed AASHTO-PCI-ASBI
Standard Box Girder, 1996

Application and Live Load to Produce Maximum Positive Moment – Longitudinal Direction

Concrete bridges Folie 63

 Design Example by Parsons and
Brickerhoff , Proposed AASHTO-PCI-ASBI
Standard Box Girder, 1996

Application and Live Load to Produce Maximum Negative Moment – Longitudinal Direction

Concrete bridges Folie 64

Live Load Distribution (AASHTO Example)

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Folie 65
Live Load – Influence Lines

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Folie 66
Live Load – Influence Lines

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Concrete bridges Folie 67

Live Load – Influence Lines

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Concrete bridges Folie 68

Live Load Distribution

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Concrete bridges Folie 69

Live Load – Influence Lines

Design Example by Parsons and Brickerhoff , Proposed

AASHTO-PCI-ASBI Standard Box Girder, 1996

Concrete bridges Folie 70

Worst live load effects
Live load effects are ussually maximized (or minimized) by proper placement of
live load to create maximum or minimum effects.

Notice the difference between the following terms

(as related for example to moment)

Moment Diagram – Moment at every point in the structure when a load is placed
at a fixed location.

Influence line for maximum moment at a given point – Moment at a single point
created by a unit load moving along the length of the structure.

Moment envelope – Compilation of all maximum load effects along the length of
the structure, created by various load combinations that maximize the effect at
each point.

Concrete bridges Folie 71

Worst live load effects
Moment diagram, when a unit load is place at 0.4 L of span 1

Concrete bridges Folie 72

Worst live load effects
influence diagram at 0.4 L of span 1
Example: Span 1= 12 m, Span 2 = 14.4 m

Concrete bridges Folie 73

Worst live load effects
Moment envelope for a uniform distributed unit lane load

Concrete bridges Folie 74

Worst live load effects
Using influence charts to estimate the
profile and value of influence ordinates.

Concrete bridges Folie 75

 In this table,
Worst live load effects coefficient values have
Using influence charts to estimate the been normalized, with
profile and value of influence ordinates. respect to the shortest
length span L1, and by the
(Tables give a influence coefficient) use of a unit load.
Therefore, the actual
resulting in a given
structure, with a shortest
span = L1,
longest span L2= 1.2 . L1
due to a:
Moment concentrated load =P, or
diagram
Load at uniform load = w
0.4 of
span 1
is given by:

Moment:
M= P.(coefficient). L1
M=w.(coefficient).L12

Shear
Moment Influence diagram for
Envelope moment V= P.(coefficient)
due to at 0.4 of span 1
lane V= w. (coefficient)
load

Concrete bridges Folie 76

Self-study

Give it a try!!

Find the moment envelopes and shear

envelopes for a continuous double span
bridge. Each span measures 12 m.
Consider live load model 1 only.

Concrete bridges Folie 77