Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design

Copyright © Spannovation, 2020

All rights reserved.

All photos in this course were either taken by the Spannovation principals or
provided to us courtesy of our industry contacts. Where possible, these have
been referenced. Spannovation has not designed any of the bridges shown or
discussed in the course videos. The design examples are completely fictitious
and produced by the principals for educational purposes.
No part of this online course, presentation or educational material may be
reproduced or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, without written
permission from the author, Spannovation Bridge and Seismic School. In case
of photocopying, or other reprographic copying, a license must be obtained
from the Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency.
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design

Module A
Bridge Design Overview
2. An Introduction to Bridge Design

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design

Module A: Bridge Design Overview

2. An Introduction to Bridge Design

2.1 Code Design Philosophy

2.2 Design life

2.3 Highway Class

2.4 Limit States

a. General
b. Concrete Structures
c. Steel Structures
d. Wood Structures
e. Geotechnical

2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility
b. Fatigue and Service
c. Construction considerations
d. Economic considerations

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2 An Introduction to Bridge Design

• Bridge Design and Codes

 Bridges are important pieces of linear infrastructure and are

critical to the overall transportation system

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2 An Introduction to Bridge Design

• Bridge Design and Codes

 The Codes establish minimum design standards of design,

evaluation and rehabilitation of bridges

 The Codes generally do not address every design aspect of

every bridge type

 Additional or alternative design criteria may be included in the

project requirements or terms of reference by the
Owner/Authority having Jurisdiction

 In Canada, the bridge code is usually enforced through contract

(whereas the National Building code of Canada is adopted
through law)

 All Provinces except Manitoba use the Canadian Highway Bridge Design
Code, CAN/CSA-S6-19 (S6-19)

 The Provinces usually issue Supplements to the Code to provide

guidance and clarifications related to local bridge practices

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2 An Introduction to Bridge Design

• Bridge Design and Codes

 This course will use first principles as much as possible

 Primarily, we will rely on the Canadian Code, S6-19

 We will be referring to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design

Specifications, 8th Edition, 2017

 When appropriate, we will reference the British Columbia

Ministry of Transportation (BC MoTI) Supplement to
CAN/CSA-S6-14 (the Supplement)

 The BC MoTI Supplement to CAN/CSA-S6-19 is in production

currently and is therefore not referenced currently

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.1 Code Design Philosophy

• Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) S6-19

 Defines the primary concern of the code to be public safety

 Design is to be based on the consideration of limit states

including Ultimate (ULS), Service (SLS) and Fatigue (FLS)

 ULS ensures that the factored resistance is greater than the

total factored load effect

 SLS involves deflection and vibrations, crack control, and stress

control

 FLS considers material fatigue and fracture as appropriate and

applicable

 FLS and SLS are as important as ULS for structural design

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.1 Code Design Philosophy

• American Association of State and Highway Transportation

Officials (AASHTO) (2017)

 Guidance on constructability, inspectability, economy, and

aesthetics

 Considers all limit states to be of equal importance

• British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

(BC MoTI) Supplement to S6-14

 Clarifies that in case of inconsistency between the Code and the

Supplement, the Supplement shall take precedence

 After safety, total life cycle costs are a key consideration for
bridge design as per the MoTI supplement

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.1 Code Design Philosophy

• Code Guidance on Methods of Analysis

 Both CHBDC S6-19 and AASHTO (2017) generally require

elastic method of analysis.

 Second order analysis may be required for cases where

slenderness effects are high, and p-delta effects and buckling
can become an issue.

 Non-linear analysis such as inelastic static pushover analysis

(pushover analysis) or non-linear time history analysis is
required in several cases for seismic design (especially for
performance-based design).

 Simplified or refined analysis for live load demands in bridges

is required based on the structural configuration.

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.2 Design Life

• As per CHBDC S6-19, a new structure must be designed for a design

life of 75 years, unless otherwise approved

• In CHBDC S6-14, this value was increased from 50 years in S6-06

• This was to have higher durability, account for the desire to have
consistency with other codes (AASHTO 2017), and lower
maintenance and renewal costs with age of structure

• The BC MoTI Supplement to S6-14 specifies that all time dependent

calculations such as fatigue, corrosion, creep, etc. will be based on a
time frame of 100 years.

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.3 Highway Class

• Per CHBDC S6-19, the bridge design for a given structure is to be

based on a given Highway Class

• The Highway Class is determined from traffic counts and is based on

Average Daily Traffic, ADT (per lane) or Average Daily Truck Traffic,
ADTT (per lane)

• The Highway Class is indicative of truck loading frequency and the

loading intensity due to multiple truck presence

• ADTT is the more relevant criterion and should be preferred over

ADT when counts are available

• All new bridges must be designed based on a Highway Class A,

unless otherwise approved by the Owner

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.3 Highway Class

• Highway class A corresponds to an Average Daily Truck Traffic per

lane of more than 1000 vehicles or Average Daily Traffic of more
than 4000 vehicles per lane

 Highway Class A: ADTT per Lane > 1000

 Highway Class B: ADTT per Lane > 250-1000

 Highway Class C: ADTT per Lane: 50-250

 Highway Class D: ADTT per Lane < 50

• Highway class has an impact on the fatigue design of a structure.

• Highway class becomes more important for the evaluation of
bridges

Nc = 365*y*Nd* ADTTf ; ADTTf = p*ADTT (p = 1.0, 0.85,

0.8 for 1, 2 and 3 lanes, respectively)

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

a. General

• Limit States (LS): conditions beyond which a structure or

component no longer satisfies the design criteria

• Usual LS’s to be considered:

 Ultimate Limit State (AASHTO, 2017 also defines Extreme LS’s -

covered under ULS in S6-19)

 Service Limit State

 Fatigue Limit State (Fatigue and Fracture LS in AASHTO, 2017)

 Constructability aspects to be considered per S6-19; however,

Constructability is defined as a separate limit states in AASHTO
2017

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

a. General

• Ultimate Limit State (ULS)

 Factored ultimate resistance to always be larger than the

factored load effect for ULS

 Both local and global strength and stability must be

investigated

 Earthquake loads, and vessel collision are addressed under ULS

in S6-19 (Extreme Event LS in AASHTO, 2017)

• Fatigue Limit State (FLS)

 Restricts stress range due to one truck accounting for the

number of expected stress range cycles

 Fracture addressed in both S6-19 and AASHTO, 2017; material

toughness factors must be met

 Detailing is important for FLS to avoid stress concentrations

www.spannovation.ca/school
 Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

a. General

• Serviceability Limit State (SLS)

 Restricts stress, deformation, crack widths, structural steel

yielding, etc.

 Superstructure vibration is also a SLS consideration as it

relates to rider and pedestrian comfort

MSLS

Flexure and shear

cracking in a RC beam
Bottom flange yielding
under service moment

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

b. Concrete Structures

• SLS: Stress, deformation, cracking and vibration are considered

under SLS for concrete structures

• SLS - Cracking:

 Non-prestressed and partially pre-stressed components

generally allowed to crack

 Crack control is, however, very important for structural

durability

 Preferred to provide enough prestress to close cracks produced

under LL after LL removal (i.e. under permanent loads after LL
is off the bridge)

 Crack control requirements provided for components designed

using strut-and-tie

 Otherwise, crack control reinforcement to be based on concrete

surface categories and whether caused by load or deformations

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

b. Concrete Structures
• SLS – Stress:
 Stress limits provided for tendons (prior to transfer, jacking, at
transfer, after transfer, etc.)
 Prestressed concrete stress limits provided (at transfer and
during construction, tension at joints in segmental
construction, compression at SLS 1, compression due to DL +
effective prestress, etc.)

Stresses due to
effective prestress
and dead load

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

b. Concrete Structures
• SLS – Deformation:
 Short- and long-term deformations could affect structural
functionality (clearance reduction, water ponding, degraded
ride quality)
 Deflections and rotations to be calculated
 Ride quality degradation could be due to angular change or
excessive gap at expansion joints between adjacent spans
 Important to check bearing rotation for proper superstructure-
substructure clearance

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

b. Concrete Structures
• FLS – Stress:
 Straight rebar stress limits
 Rebar anchorages, connection and bend stress limits
 Tendon stress limits – depend on tendon radius of curvature,
tendons in corrugated pipes, tendons at coupler locations

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

c. Steel Structures

• SLS: Deflection, yielding, bolted joint slippage and vibration are

considered under SLS for steel structures
• SLS – Deflection and vibration: tied to superstructure vibration for
the appropriate level of pedestrian use (SLS 2, S6-19)
• SLS – Yielding:
 Service dead and live load stresses (SLS 1) to not exceed 0.9 Fy
in either flange
• SLS – Bolted joint slippage: splice connections and most other joints
to be designed as slip critical; necessary for deflection control,
loosening resistance under impact and vibration
• SLS – Bolted joint slippage prevention: improved fatigue
performance (slip reversal causes “fretting fatigue”)

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

c. Steel Structures

• FLS: Live load induced fatigue and distortion induced fatigue to be

considered

• FLS: Ordinary elastic analysis and structural mechanics principles

are required to determine fatigue stresses

• FLS: stress range to be equal to the algebraic difference of maximum

and minimum stress at a given point

• FLS: only stresses due to live load are to be considered for

determining the stress range

• FLS: when permanent load stress is compressive, load-induced

fatigue is to be ignored when σc > 2*σt Live

• FLS: Load stress range demand to be compared with stress range

resistance based on element detail

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

c. Steel Structures

• FLS: Distortion induced fatigue generally arises at connections of

main members with transverse elements such as diaphragms, cross
frames, floor beams, lateral bracing, etc.

• FLS: Distortion induced fatigue is controlled by appropriate

detailing of connection locations

• Fracture: Fracture control generally requires consideration of the

following:

 Designation of fracture critical and primary tension members

 Quality control during fabrication

 Appropriate toughness of steel and welding consumables

 Stress concentration and improper alignment control

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

d. Wood Structures
• SLS: Deflection and vibration: tied to superstructure vibration for
the appropriate level of pedestrian use (SLS 2, S6-19)
• SLS: Deflection limitation for SLS 1 – L/400 (using one truck
without DLA and E50)
• ULS: Components to be sized such that the sum of factored loads
effects is smaller than the factored resistance
• FLS: Not applicable directly for wood components; however,
consideration may be needed for steel elements in a wood bridge

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

e. Geotechnical

• Only SLS and ULS are to be considered for foundations and

geotechnical systems

• SLS considerations

 Ground deformations need to be accounted for – includes total

and differential settlements as well as lateral displacements

 Deformations should not cause rideability issues on the

bridge or at transitions between approach embankments and
bridge

 Deformations should not cause unacceptable misalignment,

distortion or tilting of the structure

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.4 Limit States

e. Geotechnical

• ULS considerations

 Geotechnical system stability including any adjacent slopes

 Bearing resistance

 Pullout or uplift resistance

 Sliding and passive resistance

 Horizontal shear resistance

 Liquefaction effects (where applicable)

 Deformations that lead to a ULS in the supported structure

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

• Adequate bridge design is not just preventing failure/collapse of the

structure

• Sound design practices include but are not limited to consideration

of:

 Redundancy and ductility

 Serviceability and fatigue considerations

 Detailing

 Constructability considerations

 Bridge economics

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Mianus River Bridge - Example of a non-redundant structure:

A pin-and-hanger bridge failure due to in-span hinge presence

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Mianus River Bridge - Example of a non-redundant structure:

A pin-and-hanger bridge failure due to in-span hinge presence

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

AASHTO requires that for all Limit States:

Σ ηi γi Qi ≤ φ Rn = Rr
Where;

ηi = ηR ηD ηI
ηi isa load modifier accounting for ductility, redundancy and
operational classification

ηR: factor related to redundancy

ηD: factor related to ductility
ηI: factor related to operational classification
Qi: force effect
Rn: Nominal resistance
Rr: Factored resistance
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Example 1: Load Modifier Calculation for Strength Limit States

Non-redundant member
Critical bridge
Conventional component design

Per AASHTO 2017 Clauses 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.3.3, and 1.3.2.1

Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Example 1: Load Modifier Calculation for Strength Limit States

Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Example 2: Load Modifier Calculation for Strength Limit States

Exceptional level of redundancy
Non-ductile connection design
Typical bridge

Per AASHTO 2017 Clauses 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.3.3, and 1.3.2.1

Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Redundancy and Ductility

Example 2: Load Modifier Calculation for Strength Limit States

Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

b. Fatigue and Service Considerations

• Good fatigue design basically restricts stress ranges due to a single

truck on structural elements coupled with the stress range cycles

• Different structural steel elements such as girder top and bottom

flanges, shear studs, slip-critical splices, etc. under service loads
must be considered

• Distortion-induced fatigue causes cracking in both longitudinal and

transverse members. Suitable detailing is necessary to avoid
localized distortion

• Similarly, steel reinforcement stresses in concrete elements and

tendon stresses in prestressed concrete girders must not exceed
specified limits

• Crack control reinforcement such as rebar in beam sides, minimum

steel in slabs and walls, minimum shear reinforcement,
reinforcement in anchorage zones to prevent bursting and spalling
are some examples for ensuring appropriate service behavior

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

b. Fatigue and Service Considerations

Important fatigue and service Considerations – a few examples

www.spannovation.ca/school
 Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

b. Fatigue and Service Considerations

Sketch adapted from Figure

3.1, Clause 3.4.4 of CSA-S6-
19

SLS 2: 0.9L, where the truck

load effect, L, includes the
dynamic load allowance

Deflection-frequency graph for superstructure vibration control – a critical service consideration

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

c. Construction Considerations

• Some of the constructability issues to consider:

 Sequence of construction

 Absence of restraint during construction stages

 Higher temporary forces

 Stress reversal

 Construction loads and failure consequences

 Section properties and strengths are lower before composite action

is established - Example: composite steel and precast concrete
girders

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

c. Construction Considerations

• Some of the constructability issues to consider (cont’d):

 Wet concrete acts as load and does not contribute to capacity

 Braces may be absent to resist compression flange buckling,

torques due to eccentric loading, etc.

 Construction loads such as deck machines, wind during

construction, etc. need to be carefully looked at.

 Stress reversal is a critical requirement for construction

 Construction Considerations – Add permanent material for

construction?

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

c. Construction Considerations

• Changes in loading effects need to be considered, e.g. deck casting in a

certain sequence can cause a very different set of stresses as compared to
a different sequence

Example of a Deck Placement Sequence for a 3-Span

Continuous Bridge

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

d. Economic Considerations

• Material weights

• Material costs

• Shipping costs and transportation logistics

• Superstructure versus substructure cost

• Constructability

 Storage

 Superstructure erection

 Substructure construction

www.spannovation.ca/school
 Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

d. Economic Considerations

Cs = C1 + C2*L

Superstructure Substructure Cp = C3 + C4/L

Cost ($) Cost ($)

Span (L) Span (L)

CTotal = C1 + C2*L + C3 + C4/L

Total CTotal, minimum

Cost ($)

Span (L)

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Economic Considerations

Bridge Costing Example – Steel and Concrete Girder Options

Steel Girder Bridge:

CT = 800 + 6L +1000 + 19000/L

Concrete Girder Bridge:

CT = 700 + 10L +1200 + 21000/L

www.spannovation.ca/school
Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design
2.5 Sound Design Practices

a. Economic Considerations

Bridge Costing Example – Steel and Concrete Girder Options

www.spannovation.ca/school
 Context-Sensitive Conceptual Bridge Design

THE END
Copyright © Spannovation, 2020

All rights reserved.

No part of this online course, presentation or educational material may be
reproduced or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, without written
permission from the author, Spannovation Bridge and Seismic School. In
case of photocopying, or other reprographic copying, a license must be
obtained from the Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency.