LRFD Design Example


 2020

Bent Cap Analysis and Design

with GFRP Reinforcement

8/3/2020 [Link] 1
 Preface
Given the document "Bent Cap Analysis and Design with GFRP
Reinforcement " developed by Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT), the work of University of Miami, Department of
Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering (CAE), is to:

 Edit the given example to account for properties of Glass Fiber

Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) bars.

 Update the given example according to AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE

DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, 8th Edition, 2017

 Improve the given example with notes, comments and drawings.

Coral Gables, FL
August, 2020

Antonio Nanni, Professor & Chair

Nafiseh Kiani, PhD Candidate

8/3/2020 [Link] 2
 Bent-Cap Analysis & Design

Run the appropriate worksheets by double clicking the icons below. Modify the input data as required &
execute <calculate worksheet> (Ctrl + F9) twice to save/view information. When finished, close the worksheet
window without saving to return to this screen. Project information is stored in the Project Data File (.dat file),
so Mathcad worksheets should not be saved, unless permanent modifications are intended.

PART 1: LOAD GENERATOR

PART 2: FRAME ANALYSIS

PART 3: DESIGN & AASHTO BDS CHECKS

Steel Rebar GFRP

PART 4: CONNECTION DESIGN

Grouted Duct Pile Pocket Pile Pocket w/ CMP

.

For a list of assumptions/limitations of the current program, click on...... Program Assumptions
For a list of recent changes to the program, click on...... Program Changes
.

8/3/2020 [Link] 3
 Intermediate Bent-Cap Analysis & Design
Part 1. Load Generator

Project =
Designed By =
Checked By =
Back Checked By =

Data Files Folder

Change Folder

D:\PhD-Nafis\2-Spring-2020\Research\FDOT Course\Bent Cap\HRB\Mathcad-01\BentCapV1.0-NK\

Open Existing Data File (optional)

Bent Cap Example - Trial [Link] Refresh List

Halls River Phase [Link]
[Link] Load Data
[Link]
US90 [Link]
US90 [Link]

Input Data

Superstructure (Symmetrical)
Girder type For steel or custom beams not shown
FIB-45
under Girder type, input the beam properties
FIB-54
under the Loads collapsed region.
FIB-63
FIB-72
FIB-78
FIB-84
FIB-96
CUSTOM

Cap Skew................................... 0 Degrees

Average Haunch Thickness................... 1.14 inches

Barrier Height............................. 32 inches

Barrier weight per SDG Table 2.2-1......... 420 lb/ft

Slab Thickness (including sacrificial 8.5 inches

wearing surface)...........................

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 1

 Length of back station span................ 37.17 feet

Length of ahead station span............... 37.17 feet

Total Number of Beams in Typical Section... 9

Centerline-to-centerline beam spacing...... 6.63 feet

Curb-to-curb roadway width................. 40 feet

Distance from coping to roadway edge....... 10.56 feet

Exterior Beam Interior Beam

Dead load of Wearing Surfaces and Utilities
per beam line.............................. 165 lb/ft 150 lb/ft

Additional dead load of structural Exterior Beam Interior Beam

components and nonstructural attachments 20 20
lb/ft lb/ft
per beam line(i.e. SIP forms)..............

Substructure (Symmetrical about CL of Superstructure)

Number of columns, minimum of 2 required... 6

Effective length of columns................ 33.7 feet See bent cap model

Column spacing............................. 10.38 feet

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 2

 1 = Round
Column type................................ 2
2 = Square

Column Diameter/Width...................... 18 inches

Cap Height................................. 36 inches

Cap Width.................................. 48 inches

Cap Length................................. 59.9 feet

Average pedestal height.................... 4 inches

Pedestal Width............................. 30 inches In direction of cap width

Pedestal Length............................ 34 inches In direction of cap length

Beam bearing pad Length .................. 22 inches In direction of cap length

Min.28-day compressive strength for cap.... 5.5 ksi

Min.28-day compressive strength for cols... 6 ksi

Correction factor for source of aggregate.. 1 [SDG 1.4.1]

Concrete unit weight for calculating Ec.... 0.145 kcf

Concrete unit weight for calculating

dead loads................................. 0.150 kcf [SDG Table 2.2-1]

Additional Input for Centrifugal Force (CE)

Input a Radius of 0 for bridges
Radius of curvature of traffic lane........ 0 feet
with no horizontal curve.
If the highway design speed is not specified, it should be conservatively taken as the maximum specified in the AASHTO
publication, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (70 mph).
Highway design speed....................... 50 mph
The total CE load shall be distributed to bent caps based on the superstructure continuity and the relative stiffness of the
bent caps in the direction of CE load.
Distribution Factor for CE load to 1 Minimum 0
intermediate bent cap ..................... Maximum 1

Additional Input for Braking Force (BR)

The total BR load shall be distributed to bent caps based on the superstructure continuity and the relative stiffness of the
bent caps in the direction of BR load.
Distribution Factor for BR load to 1 Minimum 0
intermediate bent cap ..................... Maximum 1

Length of bridge for BR load calculation 185.83 (typically length of

feet
(length of lane load)...................... continuous deck)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 3

 Additional Input for Wind on Structure (WS)

Low Member elevation....................... 8.10 feet

Elevation of low ground or water level..... 0.06 feet

Design Wind Speed (mph) per SDG 2.4.1...... 130 mph

Total depth of superstructure (barrier,

5.24 feet
deck, haunch, beam and superelevation).....

Additional Input for Water Load (WA)

NOTES:
 Current version of Load Generator focuses on design and analysis of Bent-Cap, which is typically controlled by
Strength I and Service I, III limit states with water load of 100 year Basic Flood. The flood elevation is typically
below the bottom of cap. Thus, calculation of WA is omitted in current version.
 To consider WA load (e.g. existing bridges with flood elevation above the bottom of cap), directly input the WA load
acting on the bent-cap that is under consideration.

100 year event: parallel to the bent-cap... 0 kip

100 year event: perpendicular to the 0 kip

bent-cap ..................................

500 year event: parallel to the bent-cap... 0 kip

500 year event: perpendicular to the

0 kip
bent-cap ..................................

Additional Input for Force Effect due to Uniform Temperature (TU)

NOTES:
 TU load is typically perpendicular to the plane of bent-cap and thus resisted by cantilever columns. Calculation of
TU is omitted in current version.
 To consider TU load (e.g. bridges with big skew), directly input the TU load acting on the bent-cap that is under
consideration.

TU load in the longitudinal direction of

0 kip
the bridge ..............................

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 4

 Set Output Data

Save Data File (optional)

File Name [Link]

Note: You can specify an output folder location by using the Change Folder feature above.

Initialize Data

Intermediate Precast Bent Cap - Part 1 - Load Generator

This worksheet computes all the loads on the bent cap from the beam reactions. Live loads are generated for each beam
using the lever rule and tributary area methods.

Initialize Program Data

Superstructure:
BeamType  inpBeamType  9
Girder type

Skew  str2num ( inpSkew )  deg  0  deg Cap skew

 
thaunch  str2num inpthaunch  in  1.14 in Average Haunch Thickness

h barrier  str2num inphbarrier   in  32 in Barrier Height

wbarrier  str2num inpwbarrier plf  420  plf Barrier weight per SDG Table 2.2-1

tslab  str2num  inptslab  in  8.5 in Slab Thickness (including sacrificial wearing

surface)
[Link]  str2num [Link]  plf  165  plf
Additonal DL due to wearing surface and utilities
[Link]  str2num [Link]  plf  150  plf

 
[Link]  str2num [Link]  plf  20 plf Additional DL structural components and
non-structural attachments
[Link]  str2num  [Link]  plf  20 plf

 
[Link]  str2num inpL [Link] ft  37.17 ft Length of back station span

 
[Link]  str2num inpL [Link] ft  37.17 ft Length of ahead station span

#Beams  str2num( inp#Beams)  9 Total Number of Beams in Typical Section

 
Spacingbeam  str2num inpSpacing beam  ft  6.6 ft Centerline-to-centerline beam spacing


[Link]  str2num [Link]  ft  40 ft Curb-to-curb roadway width

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 5

 
d [Link]  str2num [Link]  ft  10.56 ft  Distance from coping to roadway edge

Substructure:

#Cols  str2num( inp#Cols)  6 Number of columns, minimum of two required

 
Lcol  str2num inpL col  ft  33.7 ft Column effective length


Spacingcol  str2num inpSpacing col  ft  10.38 ft  Column spacing

ColType  str2num( inpColType)  2 Column type: 1-round, 2-square


Wcol  str2num inpWcol  in  18 in  Column Diameter/Width


Hcap  str2num inpHcap  in  36 in  Cap Height


Wcap  str2num inpWcap  in  48 in  Cap Width

 
Lcap  str2num inpL cap  ft  59.9 ft Cap Length


Hpedestal  str2num inpHpedestal  in  4  in  Pedestal Height


Wpedestal  str2num inpWpedestal  in  30 in  Pedestal Width


Lpedestal  str2num inpL pedestal  in  34 in  Pedestal Length

 
Lpad  str2num inpL pad  in  22 in Beam Bearing Pad Length along length of cap

[Link]  str2num  [Link] ksi  5.5 ksi

Min.28-day compressive strength for cap


[Link]  str2num [Link] ksi  6.0 ksi Min.28-day compressive strength for columns

 
K1  str2num inpK1  1 Correction factor when claculating Ec

wc  str2num  inpwc  1000pcf  145  pcf Unit weight of concrete for calculating Ec


γconc  str2num inpγ conc  1000pcf  150  pcf  Unit weight of concrete for calculating dead loads

Additional Input for Centrifugal Force (CE)

Radius  str2num( inpRadius)  ft  0 ft Radius of curvature of traffic lane (ft)

ft

[Link]  str2num [Link]  mph  73.33
s
 Highway design speed (ft/s)


DF CE  str2num inpDFCE  1  Distribution Factor for CE load to intermediate
bent cap

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 6

 Additional Input for Braking Force (BR)


DF BR  str2num inpDFBR  1  Distribution Factor for BR load to intermediate
bent cap

[Link]  str2num inpL [Link]  ft  185.83 ft  Length of bridge for BR load calculation

Additional Input for Wind on Structure (WS)


ElevLM  str2num inpElev LM  ft  8.1 ft  Low Member Elevation


Elevground  str2num inpElev ground  ft  0.06 ft  Elevation of low ground or water level

 
Vmax  str2num inpVmax  mph  130  mph Maximum Wind Speed (mph) per SDG 2.4.1-2


Depthsuper  str2num inpDepth super  ft  5.24 ft  Total depth of superstructure

Additional Input for Water Load (WA)

 
PWA.x.100  str2num inpPWA.x.100  kip  0  kip
100 year event: parallel (x-direction) to the cap
PWA.z.100  str2num  inpPWA.z.100   kip  0  kip 100 year event: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

PWA.x.500  str2num inpPWA.x.500   kip  0  kip 500 year event: parallel (x-direction) to the cap

PWA.z.500  str2num  inpPWA.z.500   kip  0  kip 500 year event: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

Additional Input for Force Effect due to Uniform Temperature (TU)

 
PTU  str2num inpPTU  kip  0  kip TU load in the longitudinal direaction of bridge

Initialize Data

Loads: DC&DW, LL, CE, BR, WS, WL, WA, TU

2 0.33
 wc   [Link] 
Ecap  120000K1       ksi  4428 ksi Bent cap modulus of elasticity [LRFD [Link]]
 1000pcf   ksi 
2 0.33
 wc   [Link] 
Ecol  120000K1       ksi  4557 ksi Column modulus of elasticity
 1000pcf   ksi 

[Link]  [Link]
Lspan   37.17 ft Tributary Span Length
2

[Link]  d [Link]  2  [Link]  61.12 ft Total bridge width

[Link]  ( #Beams  1 )  Spacingbeam

d [Link]   4.04 ft Distance from coping to centerline of first beam
2

Lcap  ( #Cols  1 )  Spacingcol

[Link]   4 ft Length of cap overhang - See Bent Cap Model
2

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 7

 Beam Properties

h beam  21.3in
For steel or custom beams, input beam height
tfbeam  24.38in
For steel or custom beams, input beam top flange width
wbeam  181plf
For steel or custom beams, input beam self weight

 "Beam" "Height" "top flange" "Self weight" 

 
 "AASHTO II" 36 12 384.4 
 "FIB 36" 36 48 840.2 
 "FIB 45" 45 48 905.8 
 
 "FIB 54" 54 48 971.4 
 "FIB 63" 63 48 1037.1 
Properties   
"FIB 72" 72 48 1102.7
 
 "FIB 78" 78 48 1146.4 
 "FIB 84" 84 48 1190.2 
 
 "FIB 96" 96 48 1277.7 
 h beam tfbeam wbeam 
 "Custom" 
 in in plf 

h beam  Properties  in
inpBeamType 2 2 h beam  21.3 in
tfbeam  Properties  in
inpBeamType 2 3 tfbeam  24.38  in

wbeam  Properties  plf wbeam  181  plf

inpBeamType 2 4

Dead Loads at Each Beam Reaction (DC) [LRFD 3.5.1]

γconc  150  pcf Concrete density (SDG Table 2.2-1)

Interior girders:

 
[Link]  Spacingbeam tslab  thaunch  tfbeam  γconc  wbeam  914  plf

Exterior girders:

[Link]   [Link]  Spacingbeam 0.5   tslab  thaunch tfbeam  γconc  wbeam  991  plf

assign DC loads into a per girder vector

i  1  #Beams

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 8

  2  wbarrier 
[Link]  Lspan  [Link]   [Link] if i = 1  i = #Beams
i  #Beams 
 2  wbarrier 
Lspan  [Link]   [Link] otherwise
 #Beams 

Dead Load Reactions of structural components and non-structural attachments at each beam.

T
[Link]  ( 41.06 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 41.06 )  kip

Dead Loads at Each Beam Reaction (DW) [LRFD 3.5.1]

[Link]  Lspan [Link] if i = 1  i = #Beams

i
Lspan [Link] otherwise

Dead load Reaction of Wearing Surfaces and Utilities at each beam

T
[Link]  ( 6.13 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 6.13 )  kip

Dead Load of Substructure (DC) [LRFD 3.5.1]

[Link]  γconc  Hcap Wcap Lcap  107.82 kip

Bent cap self weight

[Link]  γconc  Wpedestal Lpedestal  Hpedestal  #Beams  3.19 kip Pedestals self weight

[Link]  [Link]
[Link]   1.85 klf
Lcap Total substructure dead load

Live Loads (LL) [LRFD 3.6.1]

Impact  1.33 Dynamic Load Allowance

wlane  0.64 klf Design lane load

Plane  wlane Lspan  23.79  kip Total lane load on bent cap

 
Lshort  min [Link] [Link]  37.17 ft Shorter span length

 
Longer span length
Llong  max [Link] [Link]  37.17 ft

 Llong  4ft   Load on the bent cap due to one design tandem
Ptandem  25kip  25kip max  0  47.31  kip
 Llong  
For maximum reaction of one design truck at an interior bent cap, place design truck at the following two locations

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 9

 Load on the cap due to one design truck

 Llong  14ft    Llong  28ft   Lshort  14ft  

[Link]  32kip  32kip  max  0  8kip max   L  0  56.93  kip
Llong Llong
      short  

For maximum reaction of truck train at an interior bent cap, place design trucks at the following location

Load on the cap due to two design trucks

 Lshort  14ft    Lshort  28ft  

[Link]  32kip  32kip  max  0  8kip max  0   53.92
 Lshort    Lshort  
 Llong  50ft    Llong  64ft    Llong  78ft  
 8kip  max  0  32kip max  0  32kip max  0
Llong Llong Llong
        

Live load + impact per lane of traffic loaded. May be design tandem with lane load, one truck load with lane load or
two trucks load with lane load, whichever controls. This load multiplied by the distribution and multiple presence
factors will determine the live load from each beam to the bent cap..

[Link]  Plane  Impact Ptandem  86.71  kip

[Link]  Plane  Impact [Link]  99.51  kip

 
[Link]  0.9 Plane  Impact [Link]  85.95  kip


[Link]  max [Link] [Link] [Link] 

[Link]  99.51  kip

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 10

 Xbeam  x  d [Link]
1
for i  2  #Beams
x x  Spacingbeam
i i 1
x

T
Xbeam  ( 4.04 10.67 17.3 23.93 30.56 37.19 43.82 50.45 57.08 ) ft

 [Link] 
#Lanes  floor 3 Number of design lanes (LRFD 3.6.2)
 12 ft 

LRFD [Link] The loads shall be assumed to occupy 10.0-ft transversely within a design lane
LRFD [Link].4 The design lane load shall consist of a load of 0.64-klf uniformly distributed in the longitudinal
direction. Transversely, the design lane load shall be assumed to be uniformly distributed over a 10.0-ft width..
LRFD [Link].1 The design truck or tandem shall be positioned transversely such that the center of any wheel
load is not closer than 2.0-ft from the edge of the design lane.

When one lane is loaded, the distance the left wheel can travel [Link]  4ft  6ft  30 ft

For 0.5ft station increments, the required number of increments is

 [Link]  10ft 
#Incrementsliveload  Ceil 2  60
 0.5ft 
To reduce computing time for really wide bridges, limit #Incrementsliveload to a max of 80. And a min of 10 for really narrow bridges.

 
#Incrementsliveload  min max #Incrementsliveload 10 80  60  
[Link]  10ft
Station increment Δx1   0.51 ft
#Incrementsliveload  1

When two lanes are loaded, first place the second truck in the left most position of the 2nd lane (wheel load 2 ft from the
lane left edge) and move the 1st truck from the left most to the right most position within the 1st lane at 0.5ft increments
(4 stations at 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5ft). Then move the two trucks together across the bridge. Similarly at the right end of the
bridge.

When two lanes are loaded, the distance the two trucks travel together is [Link]  2  12ft  16 ft

[Link]  2  12ft
Station increment Δx2   0.31 ft
#Incrementsliveload  8  1

When three lanes are loaded, place the 1st truck in the right most position of 1st lane, 2nd truck in the left most postion
of 2nd lane and 3rd truck in the left position of 3rd lane while traveling across the bridge with half of the total number of
increments. Then place the 2nd truck in the right most position of 2nd lane (1st truck right most and 3rd truck left most)
while travelling across the bridge.
When three lanes are loaded, the distance the three trucks can travel together is [Link]  3  12ft  4 ft

[Link]  3  12ft
Station increment Δx3   0.14 ft
0.5#Incrementsliveload  1

Four or more lanes loaded generally does not control due to a lower multipresence factor. Thus NOT considered.

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 11

 #Lanes LL  min( 3 #Lanes )  3 Max number of design lanes considered for LL

Function below creates a matrix of wheel load point distances

(referenced from the left coping), for each case of loaded lanes (rows).

location of each truck wheel measured from the bridge coping i = Index number = increment
j = Lanes Loaded = row number

[Link]( i)  if #Lanes LL  3

I  i if i  0.5#Incrementsliveload

I  i  0.5#Incrementsliveload otherwise

x  d [Link]  4ft  Δx3 ( I  1 )

3 1
x  d [Link]  12ft  2ft  Δx3 ( I  1 ) if i  0.5#Incrementsliveload
3 3
x  d [Link]  12ft  4ft  Δx3 ( I  1 ) otherwise
3 3
x  d [Link]  24ft  2ft  Δx3 ( I  1 )
3 5
for j  1  3
x x  6ft
3 2 j 3 2 j  1
if #Lanes LL  2

if i  4
x  d [Link]  2ft  0.5ft ( i  1 )
2 1
x  d [Link]  12ft  2ft
2 3
if 4  i  #Incrementsliveload  4

x  d [Link]  4  ft  Δx2 ( i  4  1 )
2 1
x  d [Link]  12ft  2ft  Δx2 ( i  4  1 )
2 3

otherwise
x  d [Link]  [Link]  24ft  4  ft
2 1
x
2 3  
 d [Link]  [Link]  12ft  2ft  0.5ft i  #Incrementsliveload  4 
 
for j  1  2
x x  6ft
2 2 j 2 2 j  1
if #Lanes LL  1

x  d [Link]  2ft  Δx1 ( i  1 )

1 1
x x  6ft
1 2 1 1
x

 12.56 18.56 0 0 0 0 

[Link]( 1 )  12.56 18.56 24.56 30.56 0 0  ft
 
 14.56 20.56 24.56 30.56 36.56 42.56 
8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 12
  42.56 48.56 0 0 0 0 

[Link] #Incrementsliveload  30.56 36.56 42.56 48.56 0 0  ft
 
 18.56 24.56 30.56 36.56 40.56 46.56 
Function below creates a matrix of distribution factors for a given increment i given the number of lanes loaded and
beam number. The size of the matrix is number of lanes loaded (rows) by number of beams (columns).

[Link]( i)  X  [Link]( i)

for j  1  #Lanes LL

for k  1  #Beams
df 0
j k
for m  1  j  2
if k = 1
df  df  1.0 if X  Xbeam
j k j k j m k
Xbeam X
k 1 j m
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
j k j k Spacingbeam k j m k 1

if 2  k  #Beams
X  Xbeam
j m k 1
df  df  if Xbeam X  Xbeam
j k j k Spacingbeam k 1 j m k

Xbeam X
k 1 j m
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
j k j k Spacingbeam k j m k 1

if k = #Beams
X  Xbeam
j m k 1
df  df  if Xbeam X  Xbeam
j k j k Spacingbeam k 1 j m k

df  df  1.0 if X  Xbeam
j k j k j m k
df

 0 0.71 1.1 0.19 0 0 0 0 0 

[Link]( 1 )   0 0.71 1.1 1.1 1.1 0 0 0 0
 
 0 0.41 1.1 1.4 1.19 1.1 0.81 0 0 

Multiple Presence Load Intensity Reduction Factor (LRFD 3.12.1

fMPfactor( i)  1.2 if i = 1
1.0 if i = 2
0.85 if i = 3
0.65 if i  4

Function below computes the service load for each beam (columns) and number of lanes loaded (row) for a given live

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 13

 load increment i.

fP ServiceI( i)  DF  [Link]( i)

for j  1  #Lanes LL

for k  1  #Beams
DF
j k
p  1.0 fMPfactor( j )  [Link]
j k 2
p

 0 42.69 65.38 11.35 0 0 0 0 0


fP ServiceI( 1 )  0 35.57 54.48 54.48 54.48 0 0 0 0   kip
 
 0 17.48 46.31 59.07 50.33 46.31 34.25 0 0 

Function below finds the maximum service loads per beam with the corresponding increment and number of lanes loaded

[Link]  for k  1  #Beams

M k
1 k
maxP  1  kip
for i  1  #Incrementsliveload

P  fP ServiceI( i)

for j  1  #Lanes LL

if P  maxP
j k
maxP  P
j k
P
j k
M 
2 k kip
M i
3 k
M j
4 k
M

 1 2 8 9  
3 4 5 6 7 "Beam number"

 0 42.7 65.4 73.6 73.9 73.6 65.4 42.7 0   "Max beam LL (kip)" 
[Link] 
0 1 1 16 37 45 51 60 0   "Increment" 
0 1   "number of lanes loaded" 
 1 2 2 2 1 1 0  
Matrix of Live Loads at each girder

[Link]  p service  fP ServiceI( 1 )

for i  2  #Incrementsliveload


p service  stack p service fP ServiceI( i) 
p service

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 14

 [Link]  BigMatrix{180,9} lbf

Fatigue Loads (FatLL) [LRFD 3.6.1]

ImpactFat  1.15 Dynamic Load Allowance

For maximum reaction of one fatigue truck at an interior bent cap, place truck at the following three locations

Load on the cap due to one fatigue truck

 Llong  30ft    Llong  44ft  

Pfat.truck1  32kip  32kip max  0  8kip max  0  38.17  kip
 Llong    Llong  

 Llong  30ft    Lshort  14ft  

Pfat.truck2  32kip  32kip max  0  8kip max  0  43.16  kip
Llong Lshort
     

 Lshort  30ft    Llong  14ft  

Pfat.truck3  32kip  32kip max  0  8kip max  0  43.16  kip
 Lshort    Llong  

 
[Link]  max Pfat.truck1 Pfat.truck2 Pfat.truck3  43.16  kip

[Link]  [Link] ImpactFat  49.63  kip

Location of each truck wheel measured from the bridge coping

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 15

 [Link]( i)  x  d [Link]  2ft  Δx1 ( i  1 )
1
x  x  6ft
2 1
x

 12.56  ft  42.56  ft
[Link]( 1 )   
 18.56 
 
[Link] #Incrementsliveload   
 48.56 

Function below creates a matrix of distribution factors for a given increment i given the number of lanes loaded and
beam number. The size of the matrix is number of lanes loaded (rows) by number of beams (columns).

[Link]( i)  X  [Link]( i)

for k  1  #Beams
df  0
k
for m  1  2
if k = 1
df  df  1.0 if X  Xbeam
k k m k
Xbeam X
k 1 m
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
k k Spacingbeam k m k 1

if 2  k  #Beams
X  Xbeam
m k 1
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
k k Spacingbeam k 1 m k

Xbeam X
k 1 m
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
k k Spacingbeam k m k 1

if k = #Beams
X  Xbeam
m k 1
df  df  if Xbeam  X  Xbeam
k k Spacingbeam k 1 m k

df  df  1.0 if X  Xbeam
k k m k
df

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 16

 Function below computes the fatigue load on each beam for a given live load increment i.

fP Fatigue( i)  DF  [Link]( i)

for k  1  #Beams
DF
k
p  1.0 [Link]
k 2
p

Matrix of Fatigue Live Loads at each girder

T
[Link]  p service  fP Fatigue( 1 )

for i  2  #Incrementsliveload

p service  stack p service fP Fatigue( i)

T
 
p service

Centrifugal Forces (CE) [LRFD 3.6.3]

The centrifugal force acts in the transverse (X) direction.

4
fconstant  Factor per LRFD 3.6.3
3

 fconstant [Link] 
2
Cfactor  if  Radius = 0  ft 0  0 Centrifugal factor
 g  Radius 

PCE  Cfactor ( 8kip  32kip  32kip )  #Lanes  fMPfactor( #Lanes )  0  kip Total Centrifugal force

PCE.z  PCE DF CE sin( Skew)  0  kip Centrifugal force perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap length

PCE.x  PCE  DFCE  cos( Skew)  0  kip Centrifugal force parallel (x-direction) to the cap length

Lateral loads on the superstructure create moments in the substructure due to moment arms. Moments caused by
longitudinal forces along the bridge (perpendicular to the cap for small skews) are resolved into beam vertical reactions
that are relatively small for long spans. Additionally, the beam reactions from ahead span and back span on intermediate
bent caps are in opposite directions and may cancel out for continuouse loading resulting in a net torsional effect on the
cap. Thus, vertical reactions due to moments caused by lateral force components that are perpendicular
to the cap are ignored for cap design.
armCE  6  ft  tslab  thaunch  h beam  8.58 ft Moment Arm

M CE.x  PCE.x  armCE  0  kip  ft Moment parallel to cap

The following function computes beam vertical reactions due to moments caused by lateral force components that are

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 17

 parallel to the cap length (x-direction), assuming a rigid deck.

fP beam( M )  for k  1  #Beams

d  Xbeam  0.5 Xbeam  Xbeam 
k k 1 
#Beams 
for k  1  #Beams
M
Pbeam  d
k

k 2
d

Pbeam


[Link]  fP beam M CE.x  Beam reactions due to moment of CE force
T component that is parallel to the cap length
[Link]  ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )  kip (x-direction)

Braking Force (BR) [LRFD 3.6.4]

Force per Lane:

[Link]  .25 ( 32kip  32kip  8kip )  18 kip

[Link]  .05 ( 32kip  32kip  8kip )  wlane [Link]  9.55 kip

 

[Link]  .25( 25kip  25kip)  12.5 kip

[Link]  .05 ( 25kip  25kip)  2wlane Lspan  4.88 kip

 
Total Braking force

 
PBR  max [Link] [Link] [Link] [Link]  #Lanes  fMPfactor( #Lanes )  45.9 kip

The braking force is transferred to the pier by the bearing pads. The braking forces need to be resolved along
the direction of the skew for design of the cap.

PBR.z  PBR DF BR cos( Skew)  45.9 kip Total Braking force perpendicular (z-direction) to
the cap

PBR.x  PBR DFBR sin( Skew)  0  kip Total Braking force parallel (x-direction) to the
cap

armBR  6  ft  tslab  thaunch  h beam  8.58 ft Moment Arm

M BR.x  PBR.x armBR  0  kip  ft Moment parallel to cap


[Link]  fP beam M BR.x  Beam reactions due to moment of CE force
T component that is parallel to the cap
[Link]  ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )  kip

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 18

 Wind Load on Structure (WS) LRFD 3.8
Structure must be checked for aeroelastic stability per LRFD 3.8.3:
  Llong Llong  
CheckAeroelasticStability  if max    30 "Okay" "Re-analyze"

  [Link] hbeam  thaunch  tslab  

CheckAeroelasticStability  "Okay"

Depthsuper  5.24 ft Depth of superstructure

2
Areawind  Lspan Depthsuper  194.77 ft Area of the superstructure exposed to wind

Design 3-second gust wind speed for different load combinations [LRFD Table [Link].2-1]

 Vmax   130   "Strength III" 

   
 80mph   80   "Strength V" 
V    mph
 70mph   70   "Service I" 
 0.75V   97.5   "Service IV" 
 max     

h  ElevLM  Elevground  8.04 ft Height to bottom of girder

 
z  h  .5 Depthsuper  10.66 ft Height to centroid of area
assumes wind above Flood Plain
2
  max z 33  
   ft  
    7.35
 2.5 ln Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient - Strength
Kz 
  0.0984   1
III and Service IV
478.4

 Kz   1   "Strength III" 
   
1.0   1   "Strength V" 
Kz   
 1.0   1   "Service I" 
K  1  "Service IV" 
 z    

zsub  z  10.66 ft Height for substructure Kz

2
   zsub   
  max 33  
 2.5 ln  ft    7.35 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient for
substructure - Strength III and Service IV
[Link] 
  0.0984   1
478.4

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 19

  [Link]   1   "Strength III" 
   
 1.0   1   "Strength V" 
[Link]  
 1.0   1   "Service I" 
K     "Service IV" 
 [Link]   1   

G  0.85 Gust Effect factor

[Link]  1.3 Pressure Coefficient, superstructure

[Link]  1.6 Pressure Coefficient, substructure

WS Loads from Superstructure:

w  1  4
2
 Vw 
[Link]  0.00256  Kz     G [Link] psf Wind pressure
w w  mph 

 47.88   "Strength III" 

18.1   "Strength V" 
[Link]    psf
 13.86   "Service I" 
 26.93   "Service IV" 
   

WS sup  [Link]  Depthsuper Wind load

w w

 0.25   "Strength III" 

0.09   "Strength V" 
WS sup    klf
 0.07   "Service I" 
 0.14   "Service IV" 
   

The wind pressure on the superstructure consists of transverse (x-direction) and longitudinal (z-direction) components.
For prestressed beam bridges, the following
0  1.0 0.0 
 15   0.88 0.12
 wind pressures factors are given to account
    for the angle of attack [SDG Table 2.4.1-3]
Windskew   30  WindFactor   0.82 0.24 
 45   0.66 0.32 
   
 60   0.34 0.38 

Conservatively apply the max transverse and longitudinal components concurrently.

 0.25 
1 0.09 
WS [Link]  WS sup max WindFactor   
   0.07   klf Transverse wind load on superstructure
 0.14 
 

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 20

  0.1 
2 0.04 
WS [Link]  WS sup max WindFactor   
  0.03   klf
Longitudinal wind load on superstructure

 0.05 
 
 9.32 
3.53 
[Link]  WS [Link]  Lspan    kip Total transverse superstructure WS load at int. cap
 2.7 
 5.25 
 

 3.54 
1.34 
[Link]  WS [Link]  Lspan    kip Total longitunidal superstructure WS load at int. cap
 1.03 
 1.99 
 

 9.32 
3.53 
[Link].x  [Link]  cos( Skew)  [Link]  sin( Skew)    kip
 2.7 
 5.25 
 

Total superstructure WS force perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap  3.54 

1.34 
[Link].z  [Link]  cos( Skew)  [Link]  sin( Skew)    kip
 1.03 
 1.99 
 
Vertical wind load

 20   "Strength III" 
0  "Strength V" 
Pvert     psf
0  "Service I" 
 10   "Service IV" 
   

 45.44 
0 
[Link]  Pvert Lspan [Link]    kip Total vertical wind load at int. cap
 0 
 22.72 
 

Depthsuper [Link] Moment of WS force component

M [Link].z  [Link].x   [Link]  cos( Skew) that is parallel to the cap
2 4

 718.7 
9.24 
M [Link].z   ft kip
 7.07 
 360.88 
 

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 21

 [Link]  fP beam M [Link].z  Beam reactions due to moment of WS force
w  w  component that is parallel to the cap

T 
[Link]  7.23 5.42 3.61 1.81 1.59  10
 15 
1.81 3.61 5.42 7.23  kip
1

T
[Link]  ( 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.02 0 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.09 )  kip
2

T
[Link]  ( 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.07 )  kip
3

T
[Link]  ( 3.63 2.72 1.81 0.91 0 0.91 1.81 2.72 3.63 )  kip
4

Loads on Substructure:
2
 Vw 
[Link]  0.00256 [Link]     G [Link] psf Wind pressure on substructure
w w  mph 

 58.92   "Strength III" 

22.28   "Strength V" 
[Link]    psf
 17.06   "Service I" 
 33.14   "Service IV" 
   
Conservatively apply the max transverse and longitudinal components concurrently.

 58.92 
1 22.28 
p [Link]  [Link] max WindFactor   
   17.06   psf Transverse wind presure on substructure
 33.14 
 

 22.39 
2 8.47 
p [Link]  [Link] max WindFactor   
  6.48   psf
Longitudinal wind presure on substructure

 12.59 
 
 58.92 
22.28 
p [Link].x  p [Link]  cos( Skew)  p [Link]  sin( Skew)    psf Max wind presure parallel to cap
 17.06 
 33.14 
 
 22.39 
8.47 
p [Link].z  p [Link]  cos( Skew)  p [Link]  sin( Skew)    psf Max wind presure perpendicular to cap
 6.48 
 12.59 
 

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 22

  0.71 
0.27 
[Link]  p [Link].x Hcap Wcap    kip
 0.2  WS force on cap: parallel (x-direction) to the cap
 0.4 
 

 4.02 
1.52 
[Link]  p [Link].z Hcap Lcap    kip WS force on cap: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap
 1.16 
 2.26 
 
 0.45 
0.17 
[Link]  p [Link].x Wcol  ElevLM  Hcap  Elevground  
WS force on one column:
 kip
 0.13  parallel (x-direction) to the cap
 0.25 
 
 0.17 
0.06 
[Link]  p [Link].z Wcol  ElevLM  Hcap  Elevground  
WS force on one column:
 kip
 0.05  perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap
 0.1 
 

Total substructure WS force parallel (x-direction) to the cap (Half of the WS on columns is to be applied at cap)

 2.04 
0.77 
[Link].x  [Link]  [Link] #Cols    kip
 0.59 
 1.15 
 
Total substructure WS force perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap (Half of the WS on columns is to be applied at cap)

 4.53 
1.71 
[Link].z  [Link]  [Link] #Cols    kip
 1.31 
 2.55 
 

Summary of WS Loads
Total WS force parallel (x-direction) to the cap

 11.37   "Strength III" 

4.3   "Strength V" 
PWS.x  [Link].x  [Link].x    kip
 3.29   "Service I" 
 6.39   "Service IV" 
   

Total WS force perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 23

  8.07   "Strength III" 
3.05   "Strength V" 
PWS.z  [Link].z  [Link].z    kip
 2.34   "Service I" 
 4.54   "Service IV" 
   

Wind on Live Load (WL) [LRFD [Link]]

The LRFD specifies that wind load should be applied to vehicles on the bridge..

0  .100 0 
   
 15   .088 .012
 kip
Skewwind   30  WindLRFD   .082 .024  
ft
 45   .066 .032 
   
 60   .034 .038 

Conservatively apply the max transverse and longitudinal components concurrently.

1
WLtrans  max WindLRFD   0.1 klf Transverse WL
 
2
WLlong  max WindLRFD   0.04 klf Longitudinal WL
 

[Link]  WLtrans Lspan  3.72 kip Total transverse WL load at int. cap

[Link]  WLlong Lspan  1.41 kip Total longitunidal WL load at int. cap

PWL.x  [Link] cos( Skew)  [Link] sin( Skew)  3.72 kip Total WL force parallel (x-direction) to the cap

PWL.z  [Link]  cos( Skew)  [Link] sin( Skew)  1.41 kip Total WL force perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

armWL  6  ft  tslab  thaunch  h beam  8.58 ft Moment Arm

M WL.z  PWL.x armWL  31.89  kip ft Moment f WL force component that is parallel to the
cap


[Link]  fP beam M WL.z  Beam reactions due to moment of WL force
component that is parallel to the cap
T
[Link]  ( 0.32 0.24 0.16 0.08 0 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 )  kip

Water Load on Structure (WA) [LRFD 3.7]

PWA.x.100  0  kip Total WA force on cap, 100 year event: parallel (x-direction) to the cap

PWA.z.100  0  kip Total WA force on cap, 100 year event: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

PWA.x.500  0  kip Total WA force on cap, 500 year event: parallel (x-direction) to the cap

PWA.z.500  0  kip Total WA force on cap, 500 year event: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 24

 Force Effect due to Uniform Temperature (TU) [LRFD 3.12]

PTU  0  kip Total TU force on cap

PTU.x  PTU sin( Skew)  0  kip Total TU force on cap: parallel (x-direction) to the cap

PTU.z  PTU cos( Skew)  0  kip Total TU force on cap: perpendicular (z-direction) to the cap

Loads: DC&DW, LL, CE, BR, WS, WL, WA, TU

Strength, Service and Extreme Event Limit States

Load factors per LRFD Table 3.4.1-1 and SDG Table 2.4.1-1:

DC DW LL CE BR WA WS WL TU

 1.25 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.2   "Strength I max vertical" 
   
 1.25 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.2
  "Strength III max vertical" 
 1.25 1.5 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2   "Strength V max vertical" 
 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2   "Service I" 
   
1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.2  "Service III"
γs    
 1.0 1.0 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0   "Sustained load: DL+0.2LL" 
 0.9 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.2
  "Strength I min vertical" 
   
 0.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.2   "Strength III min vertical" 
 0.9 1.5 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2   "Strength V min vertical" 
   
 1.0 1.0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0   "DL+Fatigue I" 

#LimitStates  rows( γs)  10

LS  1  #LimitStates

Factored total load: parallel to cap

Pcap.x  for LS  1  #LimitStates
PWS  0

PWS  PWS.x if LS = 2  LS = 8
1
PWS  PWS.x if LS = 3  LS = 9
2
PWS  PWS.x if LS = 4
3
P  γs P  γs P  γs P  γs P 
LS LS 4 CE.x LS 5 BR.x LS 6 WA.x.100 LS 7 WS
 γs P  γs P
LS 8 WL.x LS 9 TU.x
P
LS
 Round P  LS
0.01kip 
P

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 25

 T
Pcap.x  ( 0 11.37 8.02 7.01 0 0 0 11.37 8.02 0 )  kip

Factored total load: perpendicular to cap

Pcap.z  for LS  1  #LimitStates
PWS  0

PWS  PWS.z if LS = 2  LS = 8
1
PWS  PWS.z if LS = 3  LS = 9
2
PWS  PWS.z if LS = 4
3
P  γs P  γs P  γs P  γs P 
LS LS 4 CE.z LS 5 BR.z LS 6 WA.z.100 LS 7 WS
 γs P  γs P
LS 8 WL.z LS 9 TU.z
P
LS
 Round P  LS
0.01kip 
P

T
Pcap.z  ( 80.32 8.07 66.43 49.65 36.72 0 80.32 8.07 66.43 0 )  kip

Factored cap uniform self weight

wcap.y  γs w
LS LS 1 [Link]


wcap.y  Round wcap.y 0.001klf 
T
wcap.y  ( 2.32 2.32 2.32 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.85 )  klf

Function for Limit State Vertical Superstructure Loads per Beam Line (Column)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 26

  
fP LimitState( LS)   T LS
γ  γs
#rows  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8

#rows  rows [Link] if LS = 10
#rows  rows [Link] otherwise

mPLL  [Link] if LS = 10

mPLL  [Link] otherwise

[Link]  [Link] if LS = 2  LS = 8
1
[Link]  [Link] if LS = 3  LS = 9
2
[Link]  [Link] if LS = 4
3
for j  1  #Beams otherwise
[Link]  0
j
for i  1  #rows
for j  1  #Beams
Pbeam  γ   [Link]   γ   [Link]   γ   mPLL   γ   [Link]  
i j 1 j 2 j 3 i j  4 j
 γ   [Link]   γ   [Link]   γ  [Link]
5 7 8
  j j j
Pbeam  Round Pbeam 0.01 kip
i j  i j 
i
P T
 beam 
Pbeam

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 60.53 130.81 170.53 75.97 56.11 56.11 56.11 56.11
2 60.53 118.36 151.46 151.46 151.46 56.11 56.11 56.11
3 60.53 86.7 137.16 159.48 144.19 137.16 116.06 56.11
fP LimitState( 1 )  4 60.53 122.8 170.53 83.98 56.11 56.11 56.11 56.11  kip
5 60.53 111.8 151.46 158.03 151.46 56.11 56.11 56.11
6 60.53 85.16 137.16 159.48 142.65 138.7 117.6 56.11
7 60.53 114.79 170.53 92 56.11 56.11 56.11 56.11
8 60.53 105.23 151.46 164.59 151.46 56.11 56.11 ...

Matrix for all Limit States Vertical Superstructure Loads per Beam Line (Column)
[Link]  for i  1  rows( γs)
LoadCase  fP LimitState( i)
i
LoadCase

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 27

  {180,9}   "Strength I max vertical" 
   
 {1,9}   "Strength III max vertical" 
 {180,9}   "Strength V max vertical" 
 {180,9}   "Service I" 
   
 {180,9}   "Service III" 
[Link]   kip
 {180,9}   "Sustained load: DL+0.2LL" 
 {180,9}   "Strength I min vertical" 
   
 {1,9}   "Strength III min vertical" 
 {180,9}   "Strength V min vertical" 
   
 {60,9}   "DL+Fatigue I" 
Strength, Service and Extreme Event Limit States

Coordinates for Bridge Superstructure and Substructure Section

XY coordinates for superstructure cross section view

(origin at left coping of deck, X-direction parallel to bridge transverse direction)

tdeck  tslab  8.5 in

h beam  21.3 in

Xdeck  0  in Ydeck  h beam  thaunch

1 1
Xdeck  d [Link]  2  [Link] Ydeck  Ydeck
2 2 1

Xdeck  Xdeck Ydeck  Ydeck  tdeck  h barrier

3 2 3 1

Xdeck  Xdeck  d [Link] Ydeck  Ydeck

4 3 4 3

Xdeck  Xdeck Ydeck  Ydeck  h barrier

5 4 5 4

Xdeck  Xdeck  [Link] Ydeck  Ydeck

6 4 6 5

Xdeck  Xdeck Ydeck  Ydeck  h barrier

7 6 7 5

Xdeck  Xdeck Ydeck  Ydeck

8 1 8 7

Xdeck  Xdeck Ydeck  Ydeck

9 1 9 1

T
Xbeam  ( 4.04 10.67 17.3 23.93 30.56 37.19 43.82 50.45 57.08 ) ft

k  1  #Beams Ybeam  h beam

k

xy coordinates for substructure section view (origin at left fascia of cap, x-direction parallel to cap)
[Link]
d [Link].x  0.5Lcap   0.61 ft
cos( Skew)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 28

 Xdeck
x deck   d [Link].x y deck  Ydeck
cos( Skew)
Xbeam y beam  Ybeam
x beam   d [Link].x
cos( Skew)

ip  1  #Cols

x col  [Link]  ( ip  1 )  Spacingcol

ip

T
x col  ( 4 14.38 24.76 35.14 45.52 55.9 ) ft y col  Lcol
ip

 0 ft 
x cap  L   0  ft 
 cap  y cap   
 0  ft 
Coordinates for Bridge Superstructure and Substructure Section

Write data out

Write Data out

x deck x beam x cap x col
DataOut  DataOut  DataOut  DataOut 
1 ft 2 ft 3 ft 4 ft

y deck y beam y cap y col

DataOut  DataOut  DataOut  DataOut 
5 ft 6 ft 7 ft 8 ft

Hcap Wcap Wcol

DataOut  DataOut  DataOut  DataOut  ColType
9 ft 10 ft 11 ft 12

Hpedestal Lpad
DataOut  DataOut 
13 in 14 in

[Link] [Link]
DataOut  DataOut 
15 ksi 16 ksi

Ecap Ecol γconc

DataOut  DataOut  DataOut 
17 ksi 18 ksi 19 pcf

DataOut  OutputDataFile
20

PRNPRECISION  6

Data  WRITEPRN ( "data\[Link]" DataOut)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 29

   [Link] 
  
  kip 
  wcap.y 
  
  klf 
Data  WRITEPRN "data\[Link]" 
  Pcap.x 
  
  kip 
  Pcap.z 
  
  kip 

Write data out

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 30

 Calculate Worksheet

Bridge Cross Section

0 20 40 60

 10
feet

 20

 30

feet
Deck
Beam
Column
Cap

Summary of unfactored cap loads

Summary of unfactored Vertical loads from Superstructure at each girder:

T
[Link]  ( 41.06 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 41.06 )  kip

T
[Link]  ( 6.13 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 6.13 )  kip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 0 42.69 65.38 11.35 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 35.57 54.48 54.48 54.48 0 0 0 0
[Link]   kip
3 0 17.48 46.31 59.07 50.33 46.31 34.25 0 0
4 0 38.11 65.38 15.93 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 31.82 54.48 58.24 54.48 0 0 0 ...

 1 2 8 9  
3 4 5 6 7 "Beam number"

 0 42.7 65.4 73.6 73.9 73.6 65.4 42.7 0   "Max beam LL (kip)" 
[Link] 
0 1 1 16 37 45 51 60 0   "Increment" 
0 1   "number of lanes loaded" 
 1 2 2 2 1 1 0  

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 31

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 0 17.74 27.17 4.72 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 15.84 27.17 6.62 0 0 0 0 0
[Link]   kip
3 0 13.94 27.17 8.52 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 12.03 27.17 10.43 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 10.13 27.17 12.33 0 0 0 0 ...

T
[Link]  ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )  kip

T
[Link]  ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )  kip

T 
[Link]  7.23 5.42 3.61 1.81 1.59  10
1
 15
1.81 3.61 5.42 7.23  kip  for Strength III

T
[Link]  ( 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.02 0 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.09 )  kip for Strength V
2

T
[Link]  ( 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.07 )  kip for Service I
3

T
[Link]  ( 3.63 2.72 1.81 0.91 0 0.91 1.81 2.72 3.63 )  kip for Service IV
4

T
[Link]  ( 0.32 0.24 0.16 0.08 0 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 )  kip

Self weight of cap and pedestals:

[Link]  1.85 klf

Summary of unfactored lateral loads on cap:

Parallel to cap: Perpendicular to cap:

PCE.x  0  kip PCE.z  0  kip

PBR.x  0  kip PBR.z  45.9 kip

for Strength III

 11.37   8.07 
4.3  3.05  for Strength V
PWS.x    kip PWS.z    kip
 3.29   2.34  for Service I
 6.39   4.54 
    for Service IV

PWL.x  3.72 kip PWL.z  1.41 kip

PWA.x.100  0  kip PWA.z.100  0  kip

PWA.x.500  0  kip PWA.z.500  0  kip

PTU.x  0  kip PTU.z  0  kip

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 32

 Summary of factored cap loads

 {180,9}   2.32   "Strength I max vertical" 

     
 {1,9}   2.32   "Strength III max vertical" 
 {180,9}   2.32   "Strength V max vertical" 
 {180,9}   1.85   "Service I" 
     
 {180,9}   1.85   "Service III" 
[Link]   kip wcap.y   klf
 {180,9}   1.85   "Sustained load: DL+0.2LL" 
 {180,9}   1.67   "Strength I min vertical" 
     
 {1,9}   1.67   "Strength III min vertical" 
 {180,9}   1.67   "Strength V min vertical" 
     
 {60,9}   1.85   "DL+Fatigue I" 

 0   80.32   "Strength I max vertical" 

     
 11.37   8.07   "Strength III max vertical" 
 8.02   66.43   "Strength V max vertical" 
 7.01   49.65   "Service I" 
     
 0   36.72   "Service III" 
Pcap.x   kip Pcap.z   kip
 0   0   "Sustained load: DL+0.2LL" 
 0   80.32   "Strength I min vertical" 
     
 11.37   8.07   "Strength III min vertical" 
 8.02   66.43   "Strength V min vertical" 
     
 0   0   "DL+Fatigue I" 

Graphical Display of Wheel Loads

Choose a specific location (increment) to display the wheel load locations

Increment  24

Choose the number of lanes loaded to display (up to 3 loaded lanes)

#LanesLoaded  1

Set Variables to Display LL

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 33

 Bridge Cross Section with Live Load Locations

Deck
Beam
20 Wheel Load
feet

10

0 20 40 60

feet

Beam forces for chosen increment and number of lanes loaded

T
[Link]  ( 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.5 59.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 )  kip

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 1 - 34

 Intermediate Bent-Cap Analysis & Design
Part 2. Frame Analysis

Project =
Designed By =
Checked By =
Back Checked By =

Read In Geometry and Loads From Bent Cap Load Generator

DataFile  "[Link]"

LEGEND: input data is gray results and warnings are yellow

TopCol 
Fixed or Pinned connection of columns to bent cap

Typically for cap design, the beam loads are treated as concentrated loads for
BeamLoad  simplicity and conservatism. When the center line of beam is close to face of
support, the shear demand is overly conservative. Thus, a distributed option is
given that treats the beam load as a line load over a width of (bearing pad width
+ 2 * pedestal height). When the concentrated loading case is selected, the
program assumes a small positve number (3 in) for the distributed width.
Distributed width of beam load
Wload  ( 3in) if BeamLoad = "Concentrated"
max 3in Lpad  2  Hpedestal otherwise

Wload  30 in

Bridge Cross Section

0 20 40 60

 10
feet

 20

 30

feet
Deck
Beam
Column
Cap

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 1

 Model
[Link]  4 ft Spacingcol  10.38 ft [Link]  4 ft

Lcol  33.7 ft

#Beams  9 Number of beams

Spacingbeam  6.63 ft Spacing of beams (along length of cap)

#Cols  6 A minimum of two columns required

Spacingcol  10.38 ft Spacing of columns

Lcap  59.9 ft Length of cap

[Link]  4 ft See Bent Cap Model (minimum length is half of column width)

[Link]  5.5 ksi Min.28-day compressive strength for cap

Ecap  4428 ksi Modulus of elasticity of cap

Wcap  4 ft Width of cap
Hcap  3 ft Height of cap
2
Acap  1728 in Cross sectional area of cap beam
4
Icap  186624 in Moment of inertia of cap

[Link]  6.0 ksi Min.28-day compressive strength for columns

Ecol  4557 ksi Modulus of elasticity of columns

Wcol  18 in Width/Diameter of the column

ColType  2 Column type: 1-round, 2-square

2
Acol  324  in Cross sectional area of column
4
Icol  8748 in Moment of inertia of column
Develop Stiffness Matrix, Member Force Matrix and Solve for Cap Moment & Shear Forces

Define Member Stiffness Matrix

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 2

 nm  #Cols  1  7 Number of members
ndf  ( nm  1 )  3  24 Number of degree of freedom

K( m)  L  [Link] if m = 1  m = nm
L  Spacingcol otherwise
for i  1  6
for j  1  6
k 0
i j
if 1  m  nm
Ecap Acap in
k  
1 1 L kip
k  k
1 4 1 1
12Ecap Icap in
k  
2 2 3 kip
L
6Ecap Icap 1
k  
2 3 2 kip
L
k  k
2 5 2 2
k k
2 6 2 3
4Ecap Icap 1
k  
3 3 L kip in
k  k
3 5 2 3
2Ecap Icap 1
k  
3 6 L kip in
k k
4 4 1 1
k k
5 5 2 2
k  k
5 6 2 3
k k
6 6 3 3
T
kkk
for j  1  6
k
j j
k 
j j 2
k

Define Structure Stiffness Matrix

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 3

 S  for i  1  ndf
for j  1  ndf
S 0
i j
for m  1  nm
for i  1  6
for j  1  6
S  K( m)
( m 1)  3 i ( m 1)  3 j i j
for m  1  nm  1
if TopCol = "Pinned"
3Ecol Icol in
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )  
3 m 1 3m 1 4 4 1 1 3 kip
Lcol
Ecol Acol in
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )  
3m 2 3m 2 5 5 2 2 Lcol kip
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )
3m 2 3m 3 5 6 2 3
S S
3m 3 3m 2 3m 2 3m 3
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )
3m 3 3m 3 6 6 3 3

otherwise
12Ecol Icol in
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )  
3 m 1 3m 1 4 4 1 1 3 kip
Lcol
Ecol Acol in
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )  
3m 2 3m 2 5 5 2 2 Lcol kip
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )
3m 2 3m 3 5 6 2 3
S S
3m 3 3m 2 3m 2 3m 3
4Ecol Icol 1
S  K( m)  K( m  1 )  
3m 3 3m 3 6 6 3 3 Lcol kip  in
6Ecol Icol 1
S  
3m 1 3m 3 2 kip
Lcol
S S
3m 3 3m 1 3m 1 3m 3
S

Member Fixed-end Force Vector due to Partial Uniform Loads (Beam Vertical Loads)

T
[Link]( LS m)  P  [Link]
LS

if m = 1
x1  0
x2  Lcap oh
8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 4
 [Link]

if 1  m  nm
x1  [Link]  ( m  2 )Spacingcol
x2  x1  Spacingcol

otherwise
x1  [Link]  ( m  2 )Spacingcol
x2  x1  [Link]
L  x2  x1
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for lc  1  #LoadCases
for i  1  6
Qf 0
i lc

for n  1  #Beams


a  max x1 x beam  0.5Wload  x1
n 
b  min x2 x beam  0.5Wload   x1
n

if a  b
P
n lc
q
Wload
b
q  2 1
Qf  Qf    x  ( L  x ) dx 
3 lc 3 lc 2  kip  in
L a
b
q  2 1
Qf  Qf    x  ( L  x ) dx 
6 lc 6 lc 2 a kip  in
L
b
q  2 1
Qf  Qf    ( L  x )  ( 3x  L  x ) dx 
2 lc 2 lc 3  kip
L a
b
q  2 1
Qf  Qf    x  ( x  3L  3x ) dx 
5 lc 5 lc 3  kip
L a
Qf

[Link]( 1 1 )  BigMatrix{6,180}

Member Fixed-end Force Vector due to Uniform Loads

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 5

 Ff.w( LS m)  w  wcap.y
LS

L  [Link] if m = 1  m = nm
L  Spacingcol if 1  m  nm
L  0 otherwise
Qf  0
1

1 1
Qf   w L
2 2 kip
1 2 1
Qf   w L 
3 12 kip in
Qf  0
4

1 1
Qf   w L
5 2 kip
1 2 1
Qf    w L 
6 12 kip  in
Qf

 0 
 4.63 
 
 37.07 
Ff.w( 1 1 ) 
 0 
 4.63 
 
 37.07 

Member Fixed-end Force Vector

Ff ( LS m)  F1  [Link]( LS m)
F2  Ff.w( LS m)
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for lc  1  #LoadCases
lc lc
Ff  F1  F2
Ff

Ff ( 1 1 )  BigMatrix{6,180}

Structure Fixed-end Force Vector

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 6

 Pf ( LS)  for m  1  nm
F  Ff ( LS m)
m
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for lc  1  #LoadCases
Pf
1 lc  11 lc
 F

Pf  F 
2 lc 1 2 lc

Pf  F 
3 lc 1 3 lc

for m  1  nm  1
Pf
3m 1 lc  m4 lc  Fm11 lc
 F

 F 
m 5 lc  m 1 2 lc
Pf  F
3m 2 lc

 F 
m 6 lc  m 1 3 lc
Pf  F
3m 3 lc

Pf  F 
3nm 1 lc nm 4 lc

Pf  F 
3nm 2 lc nm 5 lc

Pf  F 
3nm 3 lc nm 6 lc

Pf

Pf ( 1 )  BigMatrix{24,180}

Form the Joint Load Vector

Pcap.x
LS
P( LS)  X
kip
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for i  1  ndf
for lc  1  #LoadCases
P 0
i lc
for m  1  nm  1
for lc  1  #LoadCases
X
P 
3m 1 lc #Cols
P

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 7

 P( 1 )  BigMatrix{24,180}

Solve for Joint Displacements

1
D( LS)  S   P( LS)  Pf ( LS) 

D( 1 )  BigMatrix{24,180}

Member End Displacements

U( LS m)  DD  D( LS)
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for i  1  6
for lc  1  #LoadCases
U  DD
i lc 3( m 1)  i lc
U

U( 1 1 )  BigMatrix{6,180}

Compute Member End Forces

F( LS m)  K( m)  U( LS m)  Ff ( LS m)

F( 1 1 )  BigMatrix{6,180}

Matrix to store Member End Forces

MEF  for LS  1  #LimitStates

for m  1  nm
MEF  F( LS m)
LS m
MEF

Compute Forces Transferred to Columns

Function to compute the forces transferred to columns

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 8

 fCOL( LS)  #LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for n  1  #Cols
for lc  1  #LoadCases
ColP  LS n5 lc kip  MEFLS n12 lc kip
n lc
 MEF

  MEF
LS n 6 lc
 kip  in   MEF
LS n 1 3 lc
ColM  kip  in
n lc

T
 ColP ColM 
 
 kip kip in 

Axial Force at Top of Column Bending Moment at Top of Column

ColP  for LS  1  #LimitStates ColM  for LS  1  #LimitStates

ColP  fCOL( LS)  kip ColM  fCOL( LS)  kip in
LS 1 LS 2
ColP ColM

Compute Bent Cap Shear and Moment Diagrams

Critical sections for max negative bending: center of colunms (left and right)

Critical sections for max positive bending: center of beams

Critical sections for max shear: face of columns (left and right)

#Sections  4  #Cols  3  #Beams  51 Number of sections along the cap

X  for i  1  #Beams
X  x beam  0.5Wload
3 i 2 i

X  x beam
3 i 1 i

X  x beam  0.5Wload
3 i i

n  3  #Beams
for j  1  #Cols
X  x col  0.5Wcol
n 4 j  3 j

X  x col  0.01ft
n 4 j  2 j

X  x col  0.01ft
n 4 j  1 j

X  x col  0.5Wcol
n 4 j j

X  sort ( X)
X

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 9

 1 
X  max X 0
1  X
#Sections
 min X  #Sections
Lcap 
T
X  ( 2.18 3.25 3.43 3.99 4.01 4.68 4.75 8.81 10.06 11.31 13.63 14.37 14.39 15.13 15.44 16.69 17.94 22.0

Function to compute shear and moment demand at cap sections

T
fVM( LS)  P  [Link]
LS

w  wcap.y
LS

#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for s  1  #Sections
m  1 if X  [Link]
s

 Xs  [Link] 
m  ceil   1 if [Link]  Xs  Lcap  [Link]
 Spacingcol 
m  nm otherwise
x left  0 if m = 1
x left  [Link]  ( m  2 )  Spacingcol otherwise
2
Vleft   MEF
T
 kip
 LS m 
3
M left   MEF
T
 kip in
 LS m 
Xfs  X
s s
"Redefine section coordinates to be at face of support if the section falls within faces of supports"
for i  1  #Cols
Xfs  x col  0.5Wcol if x col  0.5Wcol  X  x col
s i i s i

Xfs  x col  0.5Wcol if x col  X  x col  0.5Wcol

s i i s i

for lc  1  #LoadCases
V
s lc
 Vleft  w X  x left
lc  s 
Vfs
s lc
 Vleft  w Xfs  x left
lc  s 
w
   
2
M  M left   X  x left  Vleft  X  x left
s lc lc 2 s lc s

w
   
2
Mfs  M left   Xfs  x left  Vleft  Xfs  x left
s lc lc 2 s lc s

for n  1  #Beams
P
n lc
q
Wload


a  max x left x beam  0.5Wload
n 
b  min X x b  0 5Wl d 
8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 10
 
b  min X x beam  0.5Wload
s n 

bfs  min Xfs x beam  0.5Wload
s n 
if a  b
V V  q  ( b  a)
s lc s lc
a  b
M M  q  ( b  a)   X  
s lc s lc s
 2 
if a  bfs
Vfs  Vfs  q  ( bfs  a)
s lc s lc

 q  ( bfs  a)   Xfs 
a  bfs 
Mfs  Mfs 
s lc s lc s
 2 
T
 V Vfs M Mfs 
 
 kip kip kip in kip in 

Matrix to store shear and moment demands for all limit states

VM  for LS  1  #LimitStates
VM  fVM( LS)
LS
VM

Shear Diagram Shear Diagram on the basis of shear at faces of support

V  for LS  1  #LimitStates Vfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates
V
LS
 VM    kip
LS 1
Vfs
LS
 VM  LS 2   kip
V Vfs

Moment Diagram Moment Diagram on the basis of moment at faces of support

M  for LS  1  #LimitStates Mfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates

M
LS
 VM    kip in
LS 3
Mfs
LS
 VM    kip in
LS 4

M Mfs

Function to compute shear and moment envelopes along cap sections, and the correponding controlling load case

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 11

 Envelope( A LS)  #LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  #FatLLCases if LS = 10
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 8
for s  1  #Sections
max  A
s s 1
max_lc  1
s
min  A
s s 1
min_lc  1
s
for lc  2  #LoadCases if #LoadCases  1
if A  max
s lc s
max  A
s s lc
max_lc  lc
s
if A  min
s lc s
min  A
s s lc
min_lc  lc
s
T
( max max_lc min min_lc )

Matrices of shear and moment envelopes along cap sections, and the corresponding cotrolling load case
All matrices: #LimitStates x #Sections

maxV_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

maxV  for LS  1  #LimitStates
LS  VLS 
LS  VLS  max_lc  Envelope LS 2
max  Envelope LS 1  kip 
 kip 
T
T max_lc
max  kip

minV  for LS  1  #LimitStates minV_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  VLS  LS  VLS 

min  Envelope LS 3 min_lc  Envelope LS 4
 kip   kip 
T T
min  kip min_lc

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 12

 maxVfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates maxVfs_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  VfsLS  LS  VfsLS 

max  Envelope LS 1 max_lc  Envelope LS 2
 kip   kip 
T T
max  kip max_lc

minVfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates minVfs_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  VfsLS  LS  VfsLS 

min  Envelope LS 3 min_lc  Envelope LS 4
 kip   kip 
T T
min  kip min_lc

maxM  for LS  1  #LimitStates maxM_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  MLS  LS  MLS 

max  Envelope LS 1 max_lc  Envelope LS 2
 kip in   kip in 
T T
max  kip  in max_lc

minM  for LS  1  #LimitStates minM_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  MLS  LS  MLS 

min  Envelope LS 3 min_lc  Envelope LS 4
 kip in   kip in 
T T
min  kip  in min_lc

maxMfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates maxMfs_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  MfsLS  LS  MfsLS 

max  Envelope LS 1 max_lc  Envelope LS 2
 kip in   kip in 
T T
max  kip in max_lc

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 13

 minMfs  for LS  1  #LimitStates minMfs_lc  for LS  1  #LimitStates

LS  MfsLS  LS  MfsLS 

min  Envelope LS 3 min_lc  Envelope LS 4
 kip in   kip in 
T T
min  kip in min_lc

Develop Stiffness Matrix, Member Force Matrix and Solve for Cap Moment & Shear Forces

Summary Results

Coordinates used to sketch the columns

XX  for j  1  #Cols YY  for j  1  #Cols
XX  x col  0.5Wcol YY 0
4( j  1)  1 j 4( j  1)  1
XX  x col  0.5Wcol YY  5000
4( j  1)  2 j 4( j  1)  2

XX  x col  0.5Wcol YY  5000

4( j  1)  3 j 4( j  1)  3

XX  x col  0.5Wcol YY 0
4( j  1)  4 j 4( j  1)  4

XX YY

Summary Results
Limit State Strength I (max vertical load)

Strength I Moment Envelope (including CL of Support)

400
300
200
100

0 29.95 59.9
 100
 200
 300
 400

Max Moment (kip-ft)

Min Moment (kip-ft)
Face of Supports

Maximum Moment (inlcuding CL of support) Minimum Moment (inlcuding CL of support)

Moment value
  
StrI_maxM  max maxM  T  1   356.35 kip ft StrI_minM  min minM

 T  1   217.25 kip ft

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 14

 Section #
  
StrI_maxM_s#  matchStrI_maxM  maxM  T  1   ( 26 ) 
StrI_minM_s#  matchStrI_minM  minM  T  1    23 
 29 
Location
StrI_maxM_loc  X
 StrI_maxM_s#1  29.95 ft StrI_minM_loc  X
 StrI_minM_s#1  24.77 ft
Load case
  
StrI_maxM_lc   maxM_lcT 1   StrI_maxM_s#1  71 StrI_minM_lc   minM_lcT 1   StrI_minM_s#1  167


Strength I Moment Envelope (at Face of Support)

400
300
200
100

0 29.95 59.9
 100
 200
 300
 400

Max Moment (kip-ft)

Min Moment (kip-ft)
Face of Supports

Maximum Moment (at face of support) Minimum Moment (at face of support)
Moment value
  

StrI_maxMfs  max maxMfs
T  1   356.35 kip ft 

StrI_minMfs  min minMfs
T  1   164.87 kip ft
Section #
  
StrI_maxMfs_s#  matchStrI_maxMfs  maxMfs  T  1  StrI_minMfs_s#  match

11  StrI_minMfs  minMfs
 
 T  1 
12
StrI_minMfs_s#   
StrI_maxMfs_s#  ( 26 )
 40 
Location  41 
StrI_maxMfs_loc  X StrI_minMfs_loc  X 
 StrI_maxMfs_s#1  29.95 ft  StrI_minMfs_s#1  13.63 ft
Load case
 1 1
 maxMfs_lc    StrI_maxMfs_s#1
T  
 minMfs_lc    StrI_minMfs_s#1
T 
StrI_maxMfs_lc  StrI_minMfs_lc 
StrI_maxMfs_lc  71 StrI_minMfs_lc  104

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 15

 Strength I Shear Envelope (at Face of Support)
200
150
100
50

0 29.95 59.9
 50
 100
 150
 200

Max Shear (kip)

Min Shear (kip)
Face of Supports

Maximum Shear (at face of support) Minimum Shear (at face of support)

Shear value
  

StrI_maxVfs  max maxVfs
T  1   161.97 kip 

StrI_minVfs  min minVfs
T  1   161.97 kip
Section #

  
StrI_maxVfs_s#  matchStrI_maxVfs  maxVfs  T  1    13  StrI_minVfs_s#  matchStrI_minVfs minVfsT 1    38 
 14   39 
Location
StrI_maxVfs_loc  X
 StrI_maxVfs_s#1  14.39 ft StrI_minVfs_loc  X
 StrI_minVfs_s#1  44.77 ft
Load case
  
StrI_maxVfs_lc   maxVfs_lcT 1   StrI_maxVfs_s#1  28 StrI_minVfs_lc  minVfs_lcT 1   StrI_minVfs_s#1  151

Limit State Strength III (max vertical load)

Maximum Shear (including CL of support) Minimum Shear (including CL of support)

  

StrIII_maxV  max maxV
T  2   71.49  kip 

StrIII_minV  min minV
T  2   74.47  kip
Maximum Shear (at face of support) Minimum Shear (at face of support)
 2 
StrIII_maxVfs  max maxVfs  T    56.8 kip


StrIII_minVfs  min minVfs
T  2   68.45  kip
Maximum Moment (including CL of support) Minimum Moment (including CL of support)
 2 2
StrIII_maxM  max maxM  T  
  77.76  kip ft

StrIII_minM  min minM T  
  119.1  kip ft

Maximum Moment (at face of support) Minimum Moment (at face of support)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 16

   
StrIII_maxMfs  max maxMfs  T  2   77.76  kip ft StrIII_minMfs  min minMfs

 T  2   81.46  kip ft
Limit State Strength V (max vertical load)
Maximum Shear (including CL of support) Minimum Shear (including CL of support)

  
StrV_maxV  max maxV  T  3   162.89 kip StrV_minV  min minV 
 T  3   167.66 kip
Maximum Shear (at face of support) Minimum Shear (at face of support)

 3 3

StrV_maxVfs  max maxVfs
T 
  136.32 kip


StrV_minVfs  min minVfs
T 
  141.7  kip
Maximum Moment (including CL of support) Minimum Moment (including CL of support)

  
StrV_maxM  max maxM  T  3   289.39 kip ft StrV_minM  min minM

 T  3   201.51 kip ft
Maximum Moment (at face of support) Minimum Moment (at face of support)

 3 3

StrV_maxMfs  max maxMfs
T 
  289.39 kip ft


StrV_minMfs  min minMfs
T 
  146.03 kip ft

Max/Min Factored Shear and Moment of Strength I, III and V at Bent Cap Sections
s  1  #Sections
Including CL of support
[Link]  max maxV
s  1 s maxV2 s maxV3 s [Link]  min minV
s  1 s minV2 s minV3 s
[Link]  max maxM maxM maxM  [Link]  min minM minM minM 
s 1 s 2 s 3 s s 1 s 2 s 3 s
At face of support
[Link]  max maxVfs
s  1 s
maxVfs
2 s
maxVfs
3 s  [Link]  min minVfs
s  1 s
minVfs
2 s
minVfs
3 s 
[Link]  max maxMfs
s  1 s
maxMfs
2 s
maxMfs
3 s  [Link]  min minMfs
s  1 s
minMfs
2 s
minMfs
3 s 
Factored Moment of Service I at Bent Cap Sections
Including CL of support
[Link]  maxM [Link]  minM
s 4 s s 4 s
At face of support
[Link]  maxMfs [Link]  minMfs
s 4 s s 4 s

Factored Moment of Service III at Bent Cap Sections

Including CL of support
[Link]  maxM [Link]  minM
s 5 s s 5 s
At face of support
[Link]  maxMfs [Link]  minMfs
s 5 s s 5 s

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 17

 Moment of Sustained Load: DL+0.2LL at Bent Cap Sections
Including CL of support
[Link]  maxM [Link]  minM
s 6 s s 6 s
At face of support
[Link]  maxMfs [Link]  minMfs
s 6 s s 6 s

Moment of DL+Fatigue I at Bent Cap Sections

Including CL of support
[Link]  maxM [Link]  minM
s 10 s s 10 s
At face of support
[Link]  maxMfs [Link]  minMfs
s 10 s s 10 s

Factored Design Forces at Top of Columns

Maximum Axial Load at top of columns
maxColP  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
 n
 max ColP
T 
maxColP
LS n  LS  
for LS  7  9
 n
 T  
maxColP  max ColP
LS 3 n  LS  
maxColP

Col #: 1 2 ....
 141.06 236.72 267.86 267.86 236.72 141.06   "Strength I max vertical" 
 87.84 105.84 111.19 114.98 117.9 114.89   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
128.57 208.2 232.65 232.32 208.17 135.42   "Strength V max vertical" 
maxColP    kip
 116.07 209.08 239.9 239.9 209.08 116.07   "Strength I min vertical" 
 62.84 78.2 83.22 87.02 90.26 89.88
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 103.56 180.56 204.69 204.36 180.53 110.42   "Strength V min vertical" 

Minimum Axial Load at top of columns

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 18

 minColP  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
 n
 min ColP
T 
minColP
LS n  LS  
for LS  7  9
 n
 T  
minColP  min ColP
LS 3 n  LS  
minColP

Col #: 1 2 ....
 90.52 107.42 117.52 117.52 107.42 90.52   "Strength I max vertical" 
 87.84 105.84 111.19 114.98 117.9 114.89   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
89.57 108.45 116.68 116.35 108.42 96.43   "Strength V max vertical" 
minColP    kip
 65.53 79.77 89.56 89.56 79.77 65.53   "Strength I min vertical" 
 62.84 78.2 83.22 87.02 90.26 89.88
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 64.57 80.81 88.71 88.38 80.78 71.43   "Strength V min vertical" 

Maximum Moment at top of columns (in the plane of bent-cap)

maxColM  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
 n
 max ColM
T 
maxColM
LS n  LS  
for LS  7  9
 n
 max ColM
T 
maxColM
LS 3 n  LS  
maxColM

Col #: 1 2 ....

0 1  "Strength I max vertical" 

 10 8 8 6   "Strength III max vertical" 
 30 32 32 32 32 33   
 
14 16 17 18 23 23   "Strength V max vertical" 
maxColM   ft kip  "Strength I min vertical" 
 10 8 8 6 0 1 
 "Strength III min vertical" 
 30 
32 32 32 32 32  
   "Strength V min vertical" 
 14 16 17 18 23 23 

Maximum Moment at top of columns (in the plane of bent-cap)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 19

 minColM  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
 n
 min ColM
T 
minColM
LS n  LS  
for LS  7  9
 n
 T  
minColM  min ColM
LS 3 n  LS  
minColM

Col #: 1 2 ....
 1 0 6 8 8 10   "Strength I max vertical" 
 30 32 32 32 32 33   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
21 22 28 29 29 30   "Strength V max vertical" 
minColM   ft kip
 1 0 6 8 8 10   "Strength I min vertical" 
 30 32 32 32 32 32
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 21 22 28 29 29 30   "Strength V min vertical" 

Factored Shear Force at top of columns (in the plane of bent-cap)

ColVx  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
Pcap.x
LS
ColVx 
LS n #Cols
for LS  7  9
Pcap.x
LS
ColVx 
LS  3 n #Cols
ColVx

Col #: 1 2 ....
 0 0 0 0 0 0  "Strength I max vertical" 
 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34   "Strength V max vertical" 
ColVx    kip
 0 0 0 0 0 0   "Strength I min vertical" 
 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34   "Strength V min vertical" 

Factored Shear Force at top of columns (perpendicular to bent-cap)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 20

 ColVz  for n  1  #Cols
for LS  1  3
Pcap.z
LS
ColVx 
LS n #Cols
for LS  7  9
Pcap.z
LS
ColVx 
LS  3 n #Cols
ColVx

Col #: 1 2 ....

 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39   "Strength I max vertical" 

 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07   "Strength V max vertical" 
ColVz    kip
 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39 13.39   "Strength I min vertical" 
 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07 11.07   "Strength V min vertical" 

Factored Column Net Axial Force (for pile pocket connection punching shear check)

Net column axial force for punching shear check (column axial force subtract what is directly on top of column)

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 21

 PunchingV  j 0
for LS  1 2 3 7 8 9
#LoadCases  #LLCases
#LoadCases  1 if LS = 2  LS = 6  LS = 8
for lc  1  #LoadCases
"V is the shear diagram along all cap sections"
lc
VV  V  LS
for n  1  #Cols
Xleft  x col  0.5Wcol
n

Xright  x col  0.5Wcol

n

"find the shear at left and right of column"

Vleft  lookup Xleft X VV
Vright  lookup Xright X VV
PV  Vright  Vleft
lc n 1 1

j j 1
for n  1  #Cols

PunchingV
j n
 max PV 
n

PunchingV

Col #: 1 2 ....

 102.96 233.24 224.05 224.05 233.24 102.96   "Strength I max vertical" 

 99.24 233.24 224.05 224.05 233.24 102.96   "Strength III max vertical" 
   
90.7 204.73 195.21 194.83 204.7 97.08   "Strength V max vertical" 
PunchingV    kip
 87.16 206.58 200.05 200.05 206.58 87.16   "Strength I min vertical" 
 83.44 206.58 200.05 200.05 206.58 87.16
  "Strength III min vertical" 
   
 74.89 178.06 171.21 170.84 178.03 81.28   "Strength V min vertical" 
Summary Results

Write Design Forces Out

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 22

 Choose a Limit State to Display the Shear and Moment Envelops
Calculate Worksheet
Choose a Design Limit State
LS  LS  1

Shear Envelope
200

150

100

50

0 29.95 59.9
 50

 100

 150

 200

Max Shear including CL of Support (kip)

Min Shear including CL of Support (kip)
Max Shear at Face of Support (kip)
Min Shear at Face of Support (kip
Face of Supports

Moment Envelope
400

300

200

100

0 29.95 59.9
 100

 200

 300

 400

Max Moment including CL of Support (kip-ft)

Min Moment including CL of Support (kip-ft)
Max Moment at Face of Support (kip-ft)
Min Moment at Face of Support (kip-ft)
Face of Supports

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 23

 Choose a Specific Load Case to Display the Shear and Moment Diagrams
#LoadCases  if ( LS = 10 #FatLLCases if ( LS = 2  LS = 8 1 #LLCases) )  180

Choose a Live Load Case

LoadCase  95 LS  1

Factored beam loads LoadCaseT LoadCase  4

 [Link] T   ( 60.53 122.8 170.53 83.98 56.11 56.11 56.11 56.11 60.53
 LS 

Factored Lateral Load Pcap.x  0  kip

on Bent Cap LS

Shear Diagram for Selected Limit State & Load Case

200

150

100

50

0 29.95 59.9
 50

 100

 150

 200

Shear Including CL of Support (kip)

Shear at Face of Support (kip))
Face of Support

Moment Diagram for Selected Limit State & Load Case

400

300

200

100

0 29.95 59.9
 100

 200

 300

 400

Moment Including CL of Support (kip-ft)

Moment at Face of Support (kip-ft))
Face of Supports

8/3/2020 [Link] Part 2 - 24

 Intermediate Bent-Cap Analysis & Design
Part 3. Code Checks (GFRP)

Project =
Designed By =
Checked By =
Back Checked By =

Read In Geometry and Design Loads

DataFile  "[Link]" Load Data

GFRP Design References

 FDOT Structures Manual, Volume 4, 2018
 FDOT Specifications Section 932-3, July 2018
 AASHTO Bridge Design Specifications for GFRP Reinforced Concrete, 2nd Edition

Bent Cap and Column Properties

Hcap  3 ft Height of bent cap

Wcap  4 ft Width of bent cap

Lcap  59.9 ft Length of bent cap

[Link]  4 ft Length of cap overhang

Wcol  1.5 ft Column diameter/width

ColType  2 Column type: 1-round; 2-square

#Cols  6 Number of columns

Spacingcol  10.38 ft Spacing of columns

[Link]  5.5 ksi Minimum 28-day compressive strength for substructure

Ecap  4428 ksi Modulus of elasticity for concrete substructure

[Link]  6.0 ksi Minimum 28-day compressive strength for substructure

Ecol  4557 ksi Modulus of elasticity for concrete substructure

γconc  150  pcf Unit weight of reinforced concrete

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 1

 Tapered Ends/Voids in Bent Cap (input 0 if not applicable)

Height of taper................... 0 ft

Length of taper................... 0 ft

Height of void.................... 0 ft

Width of void..................... 0 ft

Length of void.................... 0 ft

Tapered ends/Voids inputs

Check tapered ends geometry

ChecktaperGeo  if  Htaper  Hcap  Ltaper  [Link]  .5Wcol "OK" "NG"   "OK"

Check voids geometry

CheckvoidGeo  if  Hvoid  Hcap  1.5ft  Wvoid  Wcap  1.5ft  Lvoid  Spacingcol  Wcol  12in "OK" "NG"   "OK"

[Link]  4 ft Spacingcol  10.38 ft

Hvoid  0 ft
Htaper  0 ft

Ltaper  0 ft Lvoid  0 ft Wvoid  0 ft

2-Point Support/Pickup Locations (for Precast Bent Cap only, input 0 if not applicable)
Distance of support/pick-up
0 ft
location to cap end...............

Design Loads - Moments and Shears (Torques not considered)

Critical section for shear should be at face of support.

Conservatively take design negative moment at the CL of support; Except for bent caps built integrally with supports
(full moment connection), design may be based on the moments at face of support.

2 1 - at center line of support

Critical section for flexural design..
2 - at face of support

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 2

Reinforcement (Symmetrical to CL of Bent Cap)
A few recommendations on bar size and spacing are available to minimize problems during casting.
 Use the same size and spacing of reinforcing for both the negative and positive moment regions. This
minimizes construction errors where the top steel is mistakenly placed at the bottom or vice versa.
 If this arrangement is not possible, give preference to maintaining the same spacing between the top and
bottom reinforcement. Same grid pattern allows grouted ducts placement and the concrete vibrator to be
more effective in reaching the full depth of the cap, especially for multi-layer reinforcing.

GFRP Material and Design Properties

CE = Environmental reduction factor ... 0.7 [AASHTO Table 2.4-1]

Ef = Tensile modulus of elasticity..... 6500 ksi [FDOT Specs 932]

Nominal Area of GFRP reinforcing bars Minimum Guaranteed Tensile Load of GFRP reinforcing bars
[FDOT Spec 932-3] [FDOT Spec 932-3]

2
A( Bar)  0.049in if Bar = 2 PT( Bar)  6.1kip if Bar = 2
2 13.2kip if Bar = 3
0.11in if Bar = 3
21.6kip if Bar = 4
2
0.20in if Bar = 4 29.1kip if Bar = 5
2 40.9kip if Bar = 6
0.31in if Bar = 5
2 54.1kip if Bar = 7
0.44in if Bar = 6
66.8kip if Bar = 8
2
0.60in if Bar = 7 82.0kip if Bar = 9
2 98.2kip if Bar = 10
0.79in if Bar = 8
2 0 otherwise
1.00in if Bar = 9
Tensile Strength of GFRP reinforcing bars
2
1.27in if Bar = 10
PT( Bar)
0 otherwise ffu( Bar) 
A( Bar)

Diameter of GFRP reinforcing bars Bend radius of GFRP reinforcing bars [FDOT
[FDOT Specs 932] Developmental Standards D21310]

d ( Bar)  1.128  in if Bar = 9 r( Bar)  1.5in if Bar = 2

1.27 in if Bar = 10 2.25in if Bar = 3
Bar 2.25in if Bar = 4
 in otherwise
8 2.25in if Bar = 5
2.25in if Bar = 6
3in if Bar = 7
3in if Bar = 8
4.5in if Bar = 9
5in if Bar = 10
0 otherwise

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 3

 Flexural reinforcement

dB dC dC

dE dE

t1
t2
Spa skin

b2
b1

Flexural reinforcement can be placed up to 2 layers in current version.

Top Reinforcement (Negative Moment)

8 Size of top reinforcing bars (A, B & C), Bar#top

4 Distance from c.g. of 1st layer bars to 0 Distance from c.g. of 2nd layer bars to
cap top face (in), t1 c.g. of 1st layer bars (in.), t2

Bottom Reinforcement (Positive Moment)

8 Size of bottom reinforcing bars (D & E), Bar#bot

4 Distance from c.g. of 1st layer bars to 0 Distance from c.g. of 2nd layer bars to
cap bottom face (in.), b1 c.g. of 1st layer bars (in.), b2

Bars A: Continuous Top Reinforcement

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 4

 Bars A placed in 1st Layer Bars A placed in 2nd Layer
8 Number of bars, #BarsA1 0 Number of bars, #BarsA2

Bars B: Supplemental Top Reinforcement over Exterior Columns

15 Length of Bars B beyond CL of Exterior Column (in.), d B

Development Length not considered in current version, input length of portion that is cosidered fully developed.

Bars B placed in 1st Layer Bars B placed in 2nd Layer

4 Number of bars, #BarsB1 0 Number of bars, #BarsB2

Bars C: Supplemental Top Reinforcement Centered on CL of Interior Columns

15 Length of Bars C beyond CL of Interior Column (in.), d C
Development Length not considered in current version, input length of portion that is cosidered fully developed.

Bars C placed in 1st Layer Bars C placed in 2nd Layer

4 Number of bars, #BarsC1 0 Number of bars, #BarsC2

Bars D: Continuous Bottom Reinforcement

Bars D placed in 1st Layer Bars D placed in 2nd Layer

8 Number of bars, #BarsD1 0 Number of bars, #BarsD2

Bars E: Supplemental Bottom Reinforcement Centered on Interior Spans

15 Distance from CL of column to end of Bars E (in.), d E
Development Length not considered in current version, input distance to portion that is considered fully
developed.
Bars E placed in 1st Layer Bars E placed in 2nd Layer
4 Number of bars, #BarsE1 0 Number of bars, #BarsE2

Spacing of Flexural Reinforcement

For crack control check, the bar spacing is calculated assuming a uniform distribution of bars on the 1st layer.
Designer/user to calculate the actual spacing of bars if bars are not evenly distributed or bundled together. The
maximum allowable spacing is plotted along the cap under the "Crack Control" section and the maximum allowable
spacing at the most critical cap section is reported at the end of the program.

3 Concrete cover on the two sides (in.)

Shear Reinforcement
In order to maintain a level of flexibility for modeling and to allow for multiple spacings for shear reinforcement along

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 5

 the cap, the spacing of the stirrups over the pile (non-critical fo shear) is assumed to be the same as the first zone beyond
the face of the pile.

Zone V1 Zone V2 Zone V3

4 Size of stirrup bar, Bar#V1 4 Size of stirrup bar, Bar#V2 4 Size of stirrup bar, Bar#V3

4 No. of bar legs, #LegsV1 4 No. of bar legs, #LegsV2 4 No. of bar legs, #LegsV3

4 Spacing (in.), Spa V1 6 Spacing (in.), Spa V2 12 Spacing (in.), Spa V3

36 Length of Zone V1 (in.), LV1 36 Length of Zone V2 (in.), LV2

Zone V4 (Cap overhang) Zone V5 (Cap overhang)

4 Size of stirrup bar, Bar#V4 4 Size of stirrup bar, Bar#V5

4 No. of bar legs, #LegsV4 4 No. of bar legs, #LegsV5

12 Spacing (in.), Spa V4 12 Spacing (in.), Spa V5

36 Length of Zone V1 (in.), LV4

Skin Reinforcement
5 Size of bar, Bar#skin

2 Number of bars on each side face, #Barsskin

8 Spacing of skin reinforcement (in.), Spa skin Calculate Worksheet

Reinforcement inputs

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 6

 d B  1.25 ft d C  1.25 ft d C  1.25 ft

d E  1.25 ft d E  1.25 ft

t1  4  in
t2  0  in
Spa skin  8  in

b2  0  in
b1  4  in

LRFD Moment, Shear, Min & Max Reinforcement, and Lifting Moment Checks

Design Sections
Cap Design Sections at increment  0.5ft

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 7

 X1  X1  0
1

 [Link]  0.5Wcol 
n  ceil 1
 increment 
for i  1  n if n  1
X1  increment i
1 i

 Spacingcol  Wcol 
m  ceil 1
 increment 
for j  1  #Cols  1
for k  1  m
X1  [Link]  Spacingcol ( j  1 )  0.5Wcol  increment k
n 1 m ( j  1)  k
for i  1  n if n  1
X1  [Link]  Spacingcol ( #Cols  1 )  0.5Wcol  increment i
n 1 m j  i
X1  Lcap
2n 2 m j
X1

Combine Cap Design Sections based on increments with Critical Sections based on demands

Xdesign  stack( X1 X)

Xdesign  sort  Xdesign

#AllSections  rows Xdesign  150

Function to convert design forces at critical sections to be at all design sections based on interpolation

AllDesignSections ( V)  for i  1  #AllSections

VV  0
i
s  rows( X)
for j  1  s  1
VV  V if Xdesign  X  0.0001ft
i j i j

Vj1  Vj  X
X  
VV  V  design X if X  Xdesign  X
i j X i j j i j 1
j 1 j
VV  V if Xdesign  X  0.0001ft
i s i s
V
 
s
VV   Lcap  Xdesign if Xdesign  X
i Lcap  X i i s
s
V
1
VV   Xdesign if Xdesign  X
i X i i 1
1
VV

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 8

 maxVu  AllDesignSections  maxVu Max Shear - Strength I, III, & V

minVu  AllDesignSections  minVu Min Shear - Strength I, III, & V

maxMu  AllDesignSections  maxMu Max Positive Moment (+M) - Strength I, III, & V

minMu  AllDesignSections  minMu Max Negative Moment (-M) - Strength I, III, & V

maxMSerI  AllDesignSections  maxMSerI Max Moment (+M) - Service I

minMSerI  AllDesignSections  minMSerI Max Negative Moment (-M) - Service I

maxMSL  AllDesignSections  maxMSL Max Positive Moment of Sustained Load - DL+0.2LL

minMSL  AllDesignSections  minMSL Max Negative Moment of Sustained Load - DL+0.2LL

maxMFatI  AllDesignSections  maxMFatI Max Moment (+M) - DL+Fatigue I LL

minMFatI  AllDesignSections  minMFatI Max Negative Moment (-M) - DL+Fatigue I LL

Depth of Cap

d cap  for i  1  #AllSections

Htaper
d cap  Hcap  Htaper  Xdesign  if Xdesign  Ltaper
i i Ltaper i

Htaper
i 
d cap  Hcap  Xdesign  Lcap  Ltaper 
i L taper
if Xdesign  Lcap  Ltaper
i

d cap  Hcap otherwise

i

d cap

Width of the web

b [Link]  for i  1  #AllSections
b [Link]  Wcap
i

for j  1  #Cols  1
Voidstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
Voidend  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
b [Link]  Wcap  Wvoid if Voidstart  Xdesign  Voidend
i i

b [Link]

Flexural Design

Flexural Resistance [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.6]

With multiple layers of reinforcement, because FRP materials have no plastic strain region, the stress in each

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 9

 reinforcement layer will vary depending on its distance from the neutral axis. The analysis of the flexural capacity should
be based on a strain compatibility approach.

For failure mode of concrete crushing For failure mode of FRP rupture
C = α1 [Link] Wcap β1 c C = α1 [Link] Wcap β1 cb

ε cu
T1 = Af1 Ef    d cap  b1  c T1 = Af1 ffu
c
ε cu  dcap  b1  b2  cb
T2 = Af2 Ef    d cap  b1  b2  c T2 = Af2 ffu
c  dcap  b1  cb
[Link]  5.5 ksi

   [Link]  10ksi   
α1  minmax0.85  0.02   0.75 0.85  0.85 Stress block factor
   ksi   

   [Link]  4ksi   
β1  minmax0.85  0.05   0.65 0.85  0.78 Stress block factor
   ksi   

ε cu  0.003 Ultimate strain in concrete

Design tensile strength of GFRP

[Link]  CE ffu Bar#bot  59.19  ksi [Link]  CE ffu Bar#top  59.19  ksi

Design tensile strain at rupture of GFRP

[Link] [Link]
ε [Link]   0.009 ε [Link]   0.009
Ef Ef

Distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis at balanced strain condition

ε cu ε cu
[Link]  dcap  b1 [Link]  dcap  t1
ε cu  ε [Link] ε cu  ε [Link]

Area of GFRP bars

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 10

 [Link]  for i  1  #AllSections
[Link]  A Bar#bot  #BarsD1
i

[Link]  A Bar#bot  #BarsD2

i

for j  1  #Cols  1
BarEstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d E
BarEend  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  d E
if BarEstart  Xdesign  BarEend
i

[Link]  A Bar#bot  #BarsD1  A Bar#bot  #BarsE1

i

[Link]  A Bar#bot  #BarsD2  A Bar#bot  #BarsE2

i

 [Link] [Link] 

[Link]  for i  1  #AllSections

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA1
i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA2

i

for j  1  #Cols
if j = 1
BarBstart  0
BarBend  [Link]  d B
if BarBstart  Xdesign  BarBend
i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA1  A Bar#top  #BarsB1

i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA2  A Bar#top  #BarsB2

i

if j = #Cols
BarBstart  Lcap  [Link]  d B
BarBend  Lcap
if BarBstart  Xdesign  BarBend
i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA1  A Bar#top  #BarsB1

i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA2  A Bar#top  #BarsB2

i

otherwise
BarCstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d C
BarCend  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d C
if BarCstart  Xdesign  BarCend
i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA1  A Bar#top  #BarsC1

i

[Link]  A Bar#top  #BarsA2  A Bar#top  #BarsC2

i

 [Link] [Link] 

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 11

 Area of GFRP bars provided on 1st layer Area of GFRP bars provided on 2nd layer

[Link]  [Link] [Link]  [Link]

1 1 1 2

[Link]  [Link] [Link]  [Link]

1 1 1 2

Function to solve for distance of extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis

Guess value c  5in

Given

 ε cu   ε cu 
α1 [Link] Wcap β1 c = Af1 Ef   ( d  b1  c)  Af2 Ef   ( d  b1  b2  c) for compression controlled case
 c   c 
func Af1 Af2 d b1 b2  Find( c)

cpos  for i  1  #AllSections cneg  for i  1  #AllSections


cpos  func [Link] [Link] d cap b1 b2
i i i i  i 
cneg  func [Link] [Link] d cap t1 t2
i i i 
cpos  [Link] if cpos  [Link] cneg  [Link] if cneg  [Link]
i i i i i i i i

cpos cneg

i  1  #AllSections

 ε cu 
[Link]  [Link]  minEf 
i i c 
 d cap  b1  cpos [Link]
i i 
 posi 
 ε cu
[Link]  [Link]  minEf 
d cap  b1  b2  cpos  
 
i i
 d cap  b1  b2  cpos [Link]
i i  cpos
 i
i i d cap  b1  cpos
i i   


i 
M [Link]  [Link]  d cap  b1  0.5β1 cpos  [Link]  d cap  b1  b2  0.5β1 cpos
i i i  i  i i 
 ε cu 
[Link]  [Link]  minEf 
i i c 
 d cap  t1  cneg [Link]
i i 
 negi 
 ε cu
[Link]  [Link]  minEf 
d cap  t1  t2  cneg  
 
i i
 d cap  t1  t2  cneg [Link]
i i  cneg
 i
i i d cap  t1  cneg
i i   


i 
M [Link]  [Link]  d cap  t1  0.5β1 cneg  [Link]  d cap  t1  t2  0.5β1 cneg
i i i  i  i i 
Tensile strain in extreme tension GFRP at nominal resistance

d cap  b1  cpos d cap  t1  cneg

i i i i
ε [Link]   ε cu ε [Link]   ε cu
i cpos i cneg
i i

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 12

 Strength reduction factor for flexure

fϕ ε ft ε fd  0.55 if ε ft  ε fd

 ε ft 
 1.55  ε  if 0.8 ε fd  ε ft  ε fd
 fd 

0.75 otherwise

i 
ϕpos  fϕ ε [Link] ε [Link]
i  
ϕneg  fϕ ε [Link] ε [Link]
i i 
Factored flexural resistance

M [Link]  ϕpos  M [Link] M [Link]  ϕneg  M [Link]

i i i i i i

Check M r  M u

[Link]  Check  "OK" [Link]  Check  "OK"

for i  1  #AllSections for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if M [Link]  maxMu Check  "NG" if M [Link]  minMu
i i i i

Check Check

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

Demand to capacity ratio

maxMu minMu
i i
[Link]  [Link] 
i M [Link] i M [Link]
i i

Maximum demand to capacity ratio

max [Link]  0.48 max [Link]  0.24

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 13

 Flexural Design
1000

500
kip-ft

0 30 60

 500

 1000

feet (along cap)

Envelope of Moment Demand - Maximum
Positive Moment Resistance
Envelope of Moment Demad - Minimum
Negative Moment Resistance

Cracking Moment

fr  7.5 [Link] psi  556  psi Modulus of Rupture

Scap  for i  1  #AllSections Section modulus of cap

1
 
2
Scap  Wcap d cap
i 6 i

for j  1  #Cols  1
Voidstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
Voidend  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
1 1 1
 
2 3
Scap  Wcap d cap  Wvoid Hvoid  if Voidstart  Xdesign  Voidend
i 6 i 6 d cap i
i

Scap

M cr  fr Scap Cracking moment

max M cr  480.57 kip  ft Maximum cracking moment along the cap

Minimum GFRP Reinforcement [AASHTO BDS for GFRP [Link]]

Required flexural resistance for minimum reinforcement

i 
M [Link]  min 1.33 maxMu 1.6 M cr
i i  i 
M [Link]  min 1.33 minMu 1.6 M cr
i i 

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 14

 max M [Link]  473.94 kip ft max M [Link]  219.27 kip ft

Check minimum GFRP reinforcement

[Link]  Check  "OK" [Link]  Check  "OK"

for i  1  #AllSections for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if M [Link]  M [Link] Check  "NG" if M [Link]  M minAf
i i i

Check Check

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

Crack Control [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.6.7]

CrackLimit  0.028in limiting crack width

Cb  0.83 the bond reduction factor

ϕMcr  0.25 cracking moment coefficient

Ef Modular ratio
n   1.47
Ecap

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 15

 Function to calculate reinforcing stress under service loads
Note: In lieu of the requirements of [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.6.7] or [ACI [Link].1], the stress in the tension
reinforcing should be derived based on gross section properties when the moment due to Service I loading conditions is
less than 1/4 of the cracking moment. The cracking moment is calculated based on the modulus of rupture, as specified
in Article [Link] of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

Commentary: Given that this is a serviceability check, the probability of cracking is extremely remote when the service
loads is less than a 1/4 of the cracking load.

fff  M d f d cap Scap k Icr M cr  0 if M  0 if moment is negative, stress is set to 0;
if moment is less than 1/4 of the cracking
M d f  0.5d cap
n  if 0  M  ϕMcr M cr moment, stress is calculated based on
Scap 0.5d cap uncracked section.

n df ( 1  k)
 M otherwise
Icr

For GFRP reinforcement stress under service load, lump sum mutiple layers of reinforcement at their centroid of gravity

d [Link] 
i  i 
[Link]  d cap  b1  [Link]  d cap  b1  b2
i  i  d [Link] 
i  i 
[Link]  d cap  t1  [Link]  d cap  t1  t2
i  i 
i [Link]  [Link] i [Link]  [Link]
i i i i

Reinforcement ratio

[Link]  [Link] [Link]  [Link]

i i i i
ρpos  ρneg 
i Wcap d [Link] i Wcap d [Link]
i i

   
2 2
k pos  2  ρpos  n  ρpos  n  ρpos  n k neg  2  ρneg  n  ρneg  n  ρneg  n
i i i i i i i i

The cracked moment of inertia

1
  k     1  k 
3 3 2 2
[Link]  Wcap d [Link] pos  n  [Link]  [Link]  d [Link] pos
i 3 i i i i i i

1
  k     1  k 
3 3 2 2
[Link]  Wcap d [Link] neg  n  [Link]  [Link]  d [Link] neg
i 3 i i i i i i

Stress in the bottom reinforcing due to Service I limit state moment


[Link]  fff maxMSerI d [Link] d cap Scap k pos [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  8.96 ksi

Stress in the top reinforcing due to Service I limit state moment

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 16

 
[Link]  fff minMSerI d [Link] d cap Scap k neg [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  0.15 ksi

Distance from extreme tension fiber to center of closest bar

d [Link]  b1  4  in d [Link]  t1  4  in

Ratio of distance between n.a. and tension face to distance between n.a. and centroid of reinforcement
d cap  k pos  d [Link]
i i i d cap  k neg  d [Link]
ζpos  i i i
i d [Link]  k pos  d [Link] ζneg 
i i i i d [Link]  k neg  d [Link]
i i i

Limit on d.c

 Cb Ef  CrackLimit   Cb Ef  CrackLimit 

d [Link]  if  [Link] = 0 100in   d [Link]  if  [Link] = 0 100in  
i i 2  [Link]  ζpos i i 2  [Link]  ζneg
 i i   i i 
min d [Link]  7.37 in min d [Link]  100  in

[Link]  if  d [Link]  min d [Link] "OK" "NG"  [Link]  if  d [Link]  min d [Link] "OK" "NG" 

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

clear cover
[Link]  d [Link]  0.5 d  Bar#top  3.5 in
[Link]  d [Link]  0.5 d  Bar#bot  3.5 in

 Cb Ef  CrackLimit Cb Ef  CrackLimit 

[Link]  min1.15  [Link] 0.92  maximum spacing for
i
  [Link]  0.0001ksi
i   [Link]  0.0001ksi
i   crack control

min [Link]  10.63  in

 Cb Ef  CrackLimit Cb Ef  CrackLimit 

[Link]  min1.15  [Link] 0.92  maximum spacing for
i
  [Link]  0.0001ksi
i   [Link]  0.0001ksi
i   crack control

min [Link]  941.82 in

For crack control check here, the bar spacing is calculated assuming a uniform distribution of bars on the 1st layer.
Designer to calculate the actual spacing if bars are not evenly distributed or bundled together.

StirrupSize  max Bar#V1 Bar#V2 Bar#V3 Bar#V4 Bar#V5  4

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 17

 Spa [Link]  for i  1  #AllSections
Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#bot
Spa [Link] 
i #BarsD1  1
for j  1  #Cols  1
BarEstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d E
BarEend  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  d E
Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#bot
Spa [Link]  if BarEstart  Xdesign  BarEend
i #BarsD1  #BarsE1  1 i

Spa [Link]

Spa [Link]  for i  1  #AllSections

Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#top
Spa [Link] 
i #BarsA1  1
for j  1  #Cols
if j = 1
BarBstart  0
BarBend  [Link]  d B
Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#top
Spa [Link]  if BarBstart  Xdesign  BarB
i #BarsA1  #BarsB1  1 i

if j = #Cols
BarBstart  Lcap  [Link]  d B
BarBend  Lcap
Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#top
Spa [Link]  if BarBstart  Xdesign  BarB
i #BarsA1  #BarsB1  1 i

otherwise
BarCstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d C
BarCend  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  d C
Wcap  2  SideCover  2  d ( StirrupSize )  d  Bar#top
Spa [Link]  if BarCstart  Xdesign  BarC
i #BarsA1  #BarsC1  1 i

Spa [Link]

[Link]  Check  "OK" [Link]  Check  "OK"

for i  1  #AllSections for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if Spa [Link]  [Link] Check  "NG" if Spa [Link]  smax
i i i

Check Check

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 18

 [Link]  "OK"
"NG, bar spacing exceeds maximum" if [Link] = "NG"
"NG, additional reinforcement required" if [Link] = "NG"

[Link]  "OK"

[Link]  "OK"
"NG, bar spacing exceeds maximum" if [Link] = "NG"
"NG, additional reinforcement required" if [Link] = "NG"

[Link]  "OK"

Estimated Service I crack width

2
[Link]  Spa [Link]  2
[Link]  2
i
 ζpos  d [Link]
2
 
[Link]
2  Spa [Link] 
 
i
i C b E f i  2  [Link]  2  ζneg  d [Link]
i C b E f i  2 

Maximum Service I crack width

max [Link]  0.017  in max [Link]  0.000  in

Service I Crack Control

0.02

0.015
in

0.01

0.005

0 30 60

feet (along cap bottom)

Estimated Crack Width along Cap Bottom
Estimated Crack Width along Cap Top

Creep Rupture Limit State [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.5.3]

To avoid creep ruptureof the FRP reinforcement under sustained stresses or failure due to cyclic stresses and fatigue of the
FRP reinforcement, the stress levels in the FRP under these stress conditions should be limited.

Cc  0.30 Creep rupture reduction factor

Creep rupture stress limit of GFRP

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 19

 CreepLimitpos  Cc [Link] CreepLimitneg  Cc [Link]
i i

max CreepLimitpos  17.76  ksi max CreepLimitneg  17.76  ksi

Stress in the bottom reinforcing due to sustained load (DL+0.2LL)


[Link]  fff maxMSL d [Link] d cap Scap k pos [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  0.11 ksi

Stress in the top reinforcing due to sustained load (DL+0.2LL)


[Link]  fff minMSL d [Link] d cap Scap k neg [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  0.08 ksi

[Link]  Check  "OK" [Link]  Check  "OK"

for i  1  #AllSections for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if [Link]  Cc [Link] Check  "NG" if [Link]  Cc ffd
i i

Check Check

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

Checkcreep  "OK"
"NG, sustained tensile stress in bottom reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "NG"    [Link]
"NG, sustained tensile stress in top reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "OK"    [Link] = "N
"NG, sustained tensile stress in top and bottom reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "NG"    Check

Checkcreep  "OK"

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 20

 Creep Rupture Limit State
20

15
ksi

10

0 30 60

feet (along cap bottom)

Creep Rupture Stress in GFRP Closest to Bottom Surface
Creep Rupture Stress in GFRP Closest to Top Surface
Creep Rupture Stress Limit in GFRP Closest to Bottom Surface
Creep Rupture Stress Limit in GFRP Closest to Top Surface

Fatigue Limit State [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.5.4]

Cf  0.25 Fatigue rupture reduction factor

Fatigue rupture stress limit of GFRP

FatigueLimitpos  Cf  [Link] FatigueLimitneg  Cf  [Link]

i i

max FatigueLimitpos  14.8 ksi max FatigueLimitneg  14.8 ksi

Stress in the bottom reinforcing due to sustained load (DL+1.5FatigueLL)


[Link]  fff maxMFatI d [Link] d cap Scap k pos [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  5.94 ksi

Stress in the top reinforcing due to sustained load (DL+1.5FatigueLL)


[Link]  fff minMFatI d [Link] d cap Scap k neg [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]  0.11 ksi

[Link]  Check  "OK" [Link]  Check  "OK"

for i  1  #AllSections for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if [Link]  Cf  [Link] Check  "NG" if [Link]  Cf  f
i i

Check Check

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 21

 Checkfatigue  "OK"
"NG, tensile stress in bottom reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "NG"    [Link] = "OK
"NG, tensile stress in top reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "OK"    [Link] = "NG" 
"NG, tensile stress in top and bottom reinforcing exceeds limit" if  [Link] = "NG"    [Link]

Checkfatigue  "OK"

Fatigue Rupture Limit State

15

10
ksi

0 30 60

feet (along cap bottom)

Fatigue Rupture Stress in GFRP Closest to Bottom Surface
Fatigue Rupture Stress in GFRP Closest to Top Surface
Fatigue Rupture Stress Limit in GFRP Closest to Bottom Surface
Fatigue Rupture Stress Limit in GFRP Closest to Top Surface

Skin Reinforcement [LRFD [Link]]

d [Link]  Hcap  b1  2.67 ft

Distance from the extreme compression fiber to the
centroid of extreme tension steel element
d [Link]  Hcap  t1  2.67 ft

[Link]  if  d [Link]  3ft  d [Link]  3ft "Skin Reinf Required" "Skin Reinf Not Required" 

[Link]  "Skin Reinf Not Required"

Bar#skin  5 Size of bar

#Barsskin  2 Number of bars on each side face

A Bar#skin  #Barsskin 2
Askin   0.31 in Area of skin reinforcement to one side face of the
2 flexural tension side of the section (assume bars placed
through full depth of section)
d [Link]
h [Link]   1.33 ft Depth of the member on the flexural tension side of
2 the section over which the skin reinforcement should

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 22

 be applied
d [Link]
h [Link]   1.33 ft
2

Area of skin reinforcement required on each side face of the flexural tension side of the section

[Link]  0 if [Link] = "Skin Reinf Not Required"

  d [Link]  in2   [Link]  in2 [Link]  [Link] [Link]  [Link]

min0.012    30    h [Link] 0.012    30    h [Link]   
  in  ft    in  ft  4 4 
2
[Link]  0  in

[Link] Area Ratio of Shrinkage Reinforcement -

AreaRskin   0.00 Required to Provided
2
Askin  0.0001in

CheckAreaSkinReinf  if [Link] = "Skin Reinf Required"

"NG" if AreaRskin  1.005
"OK" otherwise
"Skin Reinf Not Required" otherwise

CheckAreaSkinReinf  "Skin Reinf Not Required"

Spa [Link]  0 if [Link] = "Skin Reinf Not Required"

 [Link] [Link] 
min  12in otherwise
 6 6 
Spa [Link]  0  in Required maximum spacing of skin reinforcement

Spa skin  8  in Actual spacing of skin reinforcement

Spa skin
SpaRskin   8000.00 Spacing Ratio of Shrinkage Reinforcement -
Spa [Link]  0.001in Provided to Required

CheckSpaSkinReinf  if [Link] = "Skin Reinf Required"

"NG" if SpaRskin  1.005
"OK" otherwise
"Skin Reinf Not Required" otherwise

CheckSpaSkinReinf  "Skin Reinf Not Required"

Shear Design [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.7]

Nominal Shear Resistance of the Concrete

The nominal shear resistance of the concrete shall be calculated as Eq. [Link]-1

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 23

 Vc = 0.0316 β fcb v d v

Where β = 5.0 k for concrete sections not subjected to axial tension and containing at least the minimum amount of
transverse reinforcement specified in Aticale [Link] using the simplified procedure
Critical section of shear is typically at face of support, where the moment is negative. Use k and d values calculated based on the negative
bending case.

β  5.0 k neg
i i


d v  max d [Link]  0.5β1 cneg 0.9 d [Link] 0.72 d cap
i i i i i 
b v  for i  1  #AllSections
Width of the web
b w  Wcap
i

for j  1  #Cols  1
Voidstart  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
Voidend  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  0.5 Spacingcol  Lvoid
b w  Wcap  Wvoid if Voidstart  Xdesign  Voidend
i i

bw

Vc  0.0316 β  [Link] ksi b v  d v

i i i i

max Vc  64.75  kip

min Vc  53.52  kip

Shear Resistance by Transverse Reinforcement

ffd( Bar)  CE ffu( Bar) Design tensile strength of GFRP

ffb( Bar)  min 0.05  0.3 1  ffd( Bar)

r( Bar)
Design tensile strength of the bend of GFRP
 d ( Bar) 
ffv( Bar)  min 0.004Ef ffb( Bar)  Tensile strength of GFRP for shear design

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 24

 VS  for i  1  #AllSections
Av  A Bar#V1  #LegsV1
i

Spa v  Spa V1
i

fv  ffv Bar#V1
i

for j  1  #Cols  1
ZoneV2 start1  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  LV1
ZoneV2 end1  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  LV1  LV2
ZoneV2 start2  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  LV1  LV2
ZoneV2 end2  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  LV1

  
if ZoneV2 start1  Xdesign  ZoneV2end1  ZoneV2 start2  Xdesign  ZoneV2end2
i i 
Av  A Bar#V2  #LegsV2
i

Spa v  Spa V2
i

fv  ffv Bar#V2
i

if ZoneV2end1  Xdesign  ZoneV2 start2

i

Av  A Bar#V3  #LegsV3
i

Spa v  Spa V3
i

fv  ffv Bar#V3
i

  
if 0  Xdesign  [Link]  LV4  Lcap  [Link]  LV4  Xdesign  Lcap
i i 
Av  A Bar#V5  #LegsV5
i

Spa v  Spa V5
i

fv  ffv Bar#V5
i

  
if [Link]  LV4  Xdesign  [Link]  Lcap  [Link]  Xdesign  Lcap  [Link]  LV4
i i 
Av  A Bar#V4  #LegsV4
i

Spa v  Spa V4
i

fv  ffv Bar#V4
i

 Avi fvi dvi 

Vf  min 0.25 [Link] ksi b v  d v 
i  Spa v i i
 i 
 Av Spa v fv Vf 
 2 in ksi kip 
 in 

2
Afv  VS  in
1 1 Area of shear reinforcement per location

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 25

 Spa fv  VS  in Spacing of shear reinforcement per location
1 2

ffv  VS  ksi Tensile strength of FRP in shear design

1 3

Vf  VS  kip
1 4 Shear resistance provided by FRP

Vn  Vc  Vf Shear strength

ϕv  0.75 Resistance factor for shear & torsion

Vr  ϕv Vn Factored resistance

i i

 
Shear demand
Vu  max maxVu  minVu
i i i

CheckV.r  Check  "OK" Check Vr  Vu

for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if Vr  Vu
i i

Check

CheckV.r  "NG"

Vu
i
DCRV  Demand to capacity ratio
i Vr
i

max DCRV  1.00 The maximum demand to capacity ratio

Shear Design
200

100
kip

0 30 60

 100

 200

feet (along cap bottom)

maxVu
minVu
Vr
Vr

Check Spacing of stirrups

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 26
 0.05 b v  Spa fv
i i
[Link]  Minimum transverse reinforcement
i ffv
i
ksi

[Link]  Check  "OK" Check Av  [Link]

for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if Afv  [Link]  Vu  0.5ϕv Vc
i i i i

Check

[Link]  "NG"

 d vi 
Spa max  min 24in Maximum transverse reinforcement spacing
i  2 

CriticalSpa [Link]  min Spa max  14.46  in The most critical spacing along cap sections

[Link]  Check  "OK"

Check shear reinforcement spacing
for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if Spa fv  Spa max
i i

Check

[Link]  "OK"

Check Longitudinal Reinforcement [AASHTO BDS for GFRP [Link]]

The check is applicable at the end bearing support areas. Therefore, this check is ignored.

Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement [AASHTO BDS for GFRP 2.9.6]

For conservatism, use the lowest ffu for the calculation of the minimum shrinkage and temperature reinforcement ratio

[Link]  59.19  ksi Strength of Positive Reinforcement

[Link]  59.19  ksi Strength of Negative Reinforcement

[Link]  ffd Bar#skin  65.71  ksi Strength of Skin Reinforcement

maxVbar  max Bar#V1 Bar#V2 Bar#V3 Bar#V4 Bar#V5  4 Maximum bar size of Shear Reinforcement

[Link]  ffd( maxVbar)  75.6 ksi Lowest Strength of Shear Reinforcement

[Link]  min [Link] [Link] [Link] [Link]  59.19  ksi

Design strength for calculation of Shrinkage and
Temperature Reinforcement Ratio (Lowest Strength

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 27

 of All Reinforcement for conservatism)

60ksi 29000ksi
ρ[Link]  0.0018   0.0081
[Link] Ef

ρ[Link]  max 0.0014 min ρ[Link] 0.0036   0.0036

ρ[Link]  Wcap Hcap 2

in Area of required minimum shrinkage and
[Link]   0.44
2  Wcap  Hcap ft temperature reinforcement per foot
[LRFD 5.10.8]

A Bar#top  #BarsA1 in
2
[Link]   1.58 Area of reinforcement near top surface
Wcap ft

A Bar#bot  #BarsD1 in
2
[Link]   1.58 Area of reinforcement near bottom surface
Wcap ft

A Bar#skin  #Barsskin  A Bar#top  A Bar#bot 2

in
[Link]   0.73 Area of reinforcement near side surface
Hcap ft

Ashrink.v  for i  1  #AllSections Area of shear reinforcement near surface

Av  A Bar#V1
(in^2/ft)
i

Spa v  Spa V1
i

for j  1  #Cols  1
ZoneV2start1  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  LV1
ZoneV2end1  [Link]  ( j  1 )  Spacingcol  LV1  LV2
ZoneV2start2  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  LV1  LV2
ZoneV2end2  [Link]  j  Spacingcol  LV1

  
if ZoneV2start1  Xdesign  ZoneV2 end1  ZoneV2start2  Xdesign  ZoneV2 end2
i i 
Av  A Bar#V2
i

Spa v  Spa V2
i

if ZoneV2 end1  Xdesign  ZoneV2start2

i

Av  A Bar#V3
i

Spa v  Spa V3
i

  
if 0  Xdesign  [Link]  LV4  Lcap  [Link]  LV4  Xdesign  Lcap
i i 
Av  A Bar#V5
i

Spa v  Spa V5
i

  
if [Link]  LV4  Xdesign  [Link]  Lcap  [Link]  Xdesign  Lcap  [Link]  LV4
i i 
Av  A Bar#V4
i

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 28

 i

Spa v  Spa V4
i

Av
i
Ashrink.v 
i Spa v
i

Ashrink.v

2
in
min Ashrink.v   0.2
Least amount of shear reinforcement
ft along the cap near surface (in^2/ft)

#AllSections

  
The area ratio of shrinkage
Ashrink.v i Xdesigni  Xdesigni 1  reinforcement uses the cummulative
2
i 2 in average area of reinforcment for all
[Link]   0.47 sections along the cap.
Lcap ft

2
in
Ashrink  min [Link] [Link] [Link] [Link]   0.47
Least amount of provided shrinkage
ft reinforcement of all surfaces both
directions
[Link]
AreaRshrink   0.94 Area Ratio of Shrinkage Reinforcement -
Ashrink Required to Provided

CheckAreaShrinkReinf  "NG" if AreaRshrink  1.005

"OK" otherwise

CheckAreaShrinkReinf  "OK"

Maximum spacing of shrinkage and

Spa [Link]  12in temperature reinforcement

Wcap
Spa [Link]   6  in Spacing of reinforcement near top surface
#BarsA1

Wcap
Spa [Link]   6  in Spacing of reinforcement near bottom surface
#BarsD1

Spa [Link]  Spa skin  8  in Spacing of reinforcement near side surface

Spa [Link]  max Spa fv  12 in

Spacing of shear reinforcement (max along the cap)

Spa shrink  max Spa [Link] Spa [Link] Spa [Link] Spa [Link]  12 in Critical spacing

Spa shrink
SpaRshrink   1.00 Spacing Ratio of Shrinkage Reinforcement -
Spa [Link] Provided to Required

CheckSpaShrinkReinf  "NG" if SpaRshrink  1.005

"OK" otherwise

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 29

 CheckSpaShrinkReinf  "OK"

Mass Concrete Provisions [SDG 3.9]

Surfacecap  2  Wcap Hcap   2Wcap  2Hcap  Lcap  862.6 ft

2
Surface area of bent cap

3
Volumecap  Wcap Hcap Lcap  718.8  ft Volume of bent cap

Volumecap
Mass concrete provisions apply if the volume to surface area ratio,  0.83 ft , exceeds 1 ft and the minimum
Surfacecap
dimension exceeds 3 feet

Volumecap
SDG3.9  "Use mass concrete provisions" if  1.0 ft  Wcap  3ft  Hcap  3ft
Surfacecap
"Use regular concrete provisions" otherwise

SDG3.9  "Use regular concrete provisions"

Lifting

Distleft  Dist Distright  Dist 2-point Support/pick-up locations

Moment & Stress Calculations

Lcap  59.9 ft Length of cap

Distb  Lcap  Distleft  Distright  59.9 ft

Dead load due to cap self weight

[Link]  γconc Wcap Hcap  1.8 klf (To be conservative, voids not considered)

[Link] Lcap
R1   53.91  kip Reactions
2

R2  R1  53.91  kip

M DC  for n  1  #AllSections
Xdesign
 
n
distr  [Link] Xdesign 
n n 2
mlifting  distr if Xdesign  Distleft
n n n

n 
mlifting  distr  R1 Xdesign  Distleft
n n  if X design
n 
 Distleft  Xdesign  Distleft  Distb
n 
mlifting  distr  R1  X design   R2X
 Distleft design  Distleft  Distb  if Xdesign   Distleft  Distb
n n n n n

mlifting

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 30

 i 
M DC  if Dist = 0 0 M DC
i  Set lifting moment to be 0 if input Dist = 0

IM  1.25 Dynamic impact allowance

M lifting  IM M DC Service I moment demand with dynamic impact allowance

M [Link]  1.25 IM M DC Strength I moment demand with dynamic impact

allowance

max M [Link]  0  kip ft Maximum Strength I lifting moment along the cap

min M [Link]  0  kip ft

Minimum Strength I lifting moment along the cap

[Link]  Check  "Not Applicable" if Dist = 0

otherwise
Check  "OK"
for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if M [Link]  M [Link]  M [Link]  M [Link]
i i i i

Check

[Link]  "Not Applicable"

Cracking Moment

max M cr  480.57 kip  ft

Crack Control Calculations (if cracked)

Stress in the bottom reinforcing due to Service I limit state moment


[Link]  fff M lifting d [Link] d cap Scap k pos [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]   0  ksi

Stress in the top reinforcing due to Service I limit state moment


[Link]  fff M lifting d [Link] d cap Scap k neg [Link] M cr
i i i i i i i i 
max [Link]   0  ksi

Estimated crack width at lifting

2
[Link]  Spa [Link] 
[Link]  2
i
 ζpos  d [Link]
2
 
[Link]
2  Spa [Link] 
i C b E f i  2  [Link]  2
i
 ζneg  d [Link]  
i C b E f i  2 

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 31

 max [Link]  0.000  in max [Link]  0.000  in

Check crack width against the max allowable of 0.028in recommended by AASHTO
CrackLimit  0.028  in

[Link]  Check  "Not Applicable" if Dist = 0

otherwise
Check  "OK"
for i  1  #AllSections
Check  "NG" if [Link]  CrackLimit  [Link]  CrackLimit
i i

Check

[Link]  "Not Applicable"

LRFD Moment, Shear, Min & Max Reinforcement, and Lifting Moment Checks

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 32

Summary of LRFD and SDG Checks

Positive Moment Negative Moment Save Data

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

max [Link]  0.48 max [Link]  0.24

The maximum demand
to capacity ratio

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

max [Link]  0.017  in max [Link]  0.000  in The maximum crack width

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

max [Link]  0.11 ksi max [Link]  0.08 ksi

The maximum stress under
sustained load (DL+0.2LL)

[Link]  "OK" [Link]  "OK"

max [Link]  5.94 ksi max [Link]  0.11 ksi

The maximum stress under
fatigue (DL+[Link])

Cf  [Link]  14.8 ksi Cf  [Link]  14.8 ksi Fatigue stress limit

Shear Checks

CheckV.r  "NG"

max DCRV  1.00 The maximum demand to capacity ratio

[Link]  "NG"

[Link]  "OK"
The allowable spacing for shear reinforcement at the
CriticalSpa [Link]  14.5 in most critical cap section

Skin Reinforcement Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement

CheckAreaSkinReinf  "Skin Reinf Not Required" CheckAreaShrinkReinf  "OK"

2
2 in
[Link]  0.00 in [Link]  0.44
ft
CheckSpaSkinReinf  "Skin Reinf Not Required" CheckSpaShrinkReinf  "OK"

Spa [Link]  0.00 in Spa [Link]  12.00  in

Lifting Checks Mass concrete requirements

[Link]  "Not Applicable" SDG3.9  "Use regular concrete provisions"

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 33

 [Link]  "Not Applicable"

Moment Design
800

400
kip-ft

0 30 60

 400

 800

feet (along cap)

Envelope of Moment Demand - Maximum
Envelope of Moment Demand - Minimum
Positive Moment Resistance
Negative Moment Resistance
Factored Lifting Moment (r=1.25)
Face of Supports

Shear Design
200

100
kip

0 30 60

 100

 200

feet (along cap)

Envelope of Shear Demand - Maximum
Envelope of Shear Demand - Minimum
Shear Resistance
Shear Resistance
Face of Supports

8/4/2020 [Link] Part 3 - 34