CHAPTER 4

THE LOAD PATH AND LOAD DISTRIBUTION

IN BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURES
[4]
4.1 INTRODUCTION
An efficient design of a bridge's superstructure is essential to achieving overall economy in
the whole bridge structure, in that the superstructure deadweight may form a significant
portion of the total gravity load that the bridge must transmit to the foundation. The low
initial cost of a lightweight superstructure will translate into an overall economy resulting
from reduced size of both the substructure and the foundation components. A clear
understanding of the structural behavior of superstructures under loads is essential for
efficient design.
A bridge superstructure is an integrated body of various members of reinforced concrete,
prestressed concrete, or steel in the form of slabs, stringers, floor beams, diaphragms, etc.
determination of forces in these components is essential for design purposes. The term !load
distribution! is often used in a generic sense to denote superstructural analysis i.e., the
determination of forces in and interaction among its components these two terms will be
used synonymously throughout this te"t.
The advent of computers has led the analysis of bridge superstructures from hand
calculations to methods that have made their comple" analysis possible without recourse to
complicated mathematical theory. #owever, a bridge engineer should be familiar with the
underlying theories, not only because they provide a necessary bac$ground to understanding
the physical behavior of superstructures and give a feel for the computer methods that are
based on the appro"imate solutions of these classical methods, but also because they are
useful in discerning the merits and applicability of various methods. Accordingly, an
overview of these methods is presented in this chapter.
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
4.2 BRIDGE GEOMETRY
A brief review of the principal types of superstructures from the viewpoint of geometric and
behavioral characteristics is presented in this section. /everal terms will be used in the
conte"t of this discussion. As shown in 3ig. 4.4, the term longitudinal is used to denote a
direction parallel to traffic, while transverse denotes a direction perpendicular to it. 3rom
geometric considerations, bridges are often described as normal 5or right6, s$ew, and curved.
-ormal, or right, bridges are those in which the longitudinal a"is of the bridge, which is
parallel to the longitudinal a"es of the slab, and the supporting, beams 5when present6 are
normal to the centerlines of supports 5abutments and7or piers6.
Figure 4.1 ,efinition of right and s$ew bridges
+ften, such a plan configuration may not be feasible because of human8created obstacles,
comple" intersections, space limitations, mountainous terrain, etc., and the result is a s$ew
bridge. A s$ew bridge, simple or continuous, is characterized by its longitudinal a"is, which
forms an acute angle, instead of a right angle, with the centerlines of the supports. Angle of
s$ew 5or s$ew angle6 is defined as the angle between the centerline of the supports and the
normal to the a"is of the bridge. The s$ew angles at the two end supports may not necessarily
be the same. .n bridge geometry with s$ewed but parallel lines of supports at the two
opposite ends is $nown as the standard s$ew. 0ridges with the line of support at one end
57
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
normal to the bridge a"is but with the other support s$ewed are half8s$ew, and those with
different s$ew angles at the two supports are $nown as trapezoidal s$ew. /$ew angle is an important
parameter affecting the analysis of the bridge structure, whether simple or continuous with
torsionally stiff girders, the s$ew angle can have a considerable effect on the shear and
bending moments in the girders. .t has been suggested that, for s$ew angles not e"ceeding 9:;
5<:; for slab8on8beam bridges, described later6, bridges can be safely designed as right or normal
bridges by simplified methods.
%urved bridges also referred to as horizontally curved bridges, have become almost
standard features of highway interchanges and urban e"pressways in recent times. They are
characterized by their out8of8straightness alignment, as viewed in the plan. %urved bridges result
from several factors, such as the design re=uirements for interchanges, the need for smooth
dissemination of congested traffic, right8of8way limitations, local topography and foundation
conditions, and aesthetics. .nitially, curved bridges comprised a series of straight girders used as
chords in forming a curved alignment. (ecent developments, however, have led to the
replacement of straight girders by curved girders. %urved geometry introduces considerable
comple"ity in bridge analysis, for curved girders are sub>ected not only to fle"ural stresses, but
also, due to the eccentricity of the mid span with respect to the supports, to very significant torsional
stresses. Accordingly, the methods of analysis used for straight bridges cannot be used for curved
bridges.
4. DIAPHRAGMS
,iaphragms are short structural members positioned transversely to and between ad>acent stringers
at various intervals and at abutments. They usually consist of channels, ? shapes, cross frames,
or solid vertical slabs 5in the case of concrete beams6. The purpose of providing diaphragms is to
ensure lateral distribution of live loads to various ad>acent stringers, which depends on both the
stiffness of the diaphragms relative to the connected stringers and the method of connectivity.
#owever, the e"tent of this structural contribution has not been =uantified. The diaphragm's
action comes into play when a load is placed on the dec$ and applied at the diaphragm location, a
condition seldom realized in practice. (esearch shows that a diaphragm under the load lessens the
load carried by the girder immediately under the vehicle by transferring portions of it to
ad>acent girders remote diaphragms do not participate in this distributive action. 3or full
effectiveness 5i.e., more uniform distribution of live loads transversely6 under highway
loadings or railway loadings, several closely spaced diaphragms should be provided this will cause
the dec$ to act as a two8way slab.
4.4 BASIC CONCEPTS OF LOAD DISTRIBUTION
To understand the meaning of and the concern for load distribution in highway bridges, it is
instructive to e"amine the load path 5or the load8transfer mechanism6 in buildings with floors
supported on longitudinal beams. The dead load of the floor is assumed to be transferred to the
supporting beams on the tributary area basis. The live load, such as building occupants, furniture,
machines, and fi"tures, although not uniform in reality, is assumed to be uniformly distributed
over the floor area and is also assumed to be transferred to the supporting beams on the
tributary area basis. '=ually spaced interior beams, under this assumption, are assumed to share
floor loads e=ually. The same analogy can be used for bridge dec$s supporting bridge live loads
5!
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
5vehicles6, with one notable e"ception) the live loads 5machines, fi"tures, e=uipment, etc.6 in
buildings occupy relatively fi"ed positions 5they are pseudo static6, whereas bridge live loads
occupy only a partial area of the dec$s.
Figure 4.2 5a6 A slab8on8beam dec$ 5b6 0ending of the directly loaded beam in the
plane of the loads without twisting 5c6 Transverse bending of the slab accompanied by
twisting of beams remote from the directly loaded beam
.n fact, the live load on bridge dec$s, consisting of concentrated wheel loads, may occupy
random positions, both longitudinally and transversely, and thus will affect the live load shared
by various beams supporting the dec$. This aspect of live8load distribution is one of the primary
concerns in the analysis of bridge dec$s.
&hysical reasoning can be used to get a feel for the comple"ity involved in analysis of bridge
dec$s. 3or simplicity, a slab8on8beam type dec$, shown in 53ig a6, may be used to illustrate the
general nature of the problem. Again, for simplicity, it may be assumed that the dec$ is loaded
longitudinally by one line of wheel loads. .f these concentrated loads are placed on the dec$
directly over one of the beams, that particular beam will bear a greater share of the total load than
the other parallel beams remote from it. The slab and all of the beams will bend longitudinally in
5"
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
the plane containing the line of the loads 53ig b6. The slab, however, bends transversely also,
causing the remote beams 5but not the directly loaded beam6 to twist along with it, to maintain the
overall compatibility of displacements at the slab8beam interfaces 53ig c6.The participatory action
of these remote beams will depend on the stiffness of the slab, and the span, spacing, and stiffness
of beams. The determination of this participatory action of the various superstructure components
is referred to as load distribution.
4.5 STRUCTURAL FORMS AND BEHA#IORAL CHARACTERISTICS
A bridge dec$ is the medium through which all bridge loads are transferred to other components.
3igure shows a typical cross section of a bridge over a waterway, in which various components are
identified. The general load path 5or load transfer mechanism6 for most common types of bridge
dec$s is shown in 3ig.
,epending on the purpose, bridge superstructures can be classified in several ways, as
e"plained in %hapter 9. The applicability of an analytical method for a particular type of dec$
depends on the comple"ity of its structural form and behavioral characteristics from this
standpoint, the most commonly used bridge dec$s can be classified as follows.
4. /lab dec$s
9. 0eam8and8slab dec$s
<. 0eam dec$s
Figure 4. The *oad &ath in 0ridge superstructure
$%
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Figure 4.4 Typical cross section of a bridge over a waterway
4.5.1 SLAB DEC&S
The slab dec$ is the most commonly used type of dec$ for short8span bridges. The load8carrying
mechanism of a slab is analogous to that of a plate, which is characterized by its ability to
transfer bending and twisting in its own plane owing to continuity in all directions. .ts physical
behavior is e"plained in 3ig, which shows the slab divided into several rectangular elements.
Application of a load on a portion of a slab causes it to deflect locally in a !dish,!
causing a two8dimensional system of bending and twisting moments through this mechanism
the load is transferred to the ad>acent parts of the dec$, which are less severely loaded. 1sually,
slabs are poured in place. 3or analytical purposes, they are said to be isotropic if they have
similar stiffness in both the longitudinal and transverse directions, and orthotropic otherwise
/lab dec$s are not economical for spans e"ceeding @: ft or so, owing to the e"cessive
deadweight resulting from large depth re=uirements. #ollow concrete slabs 5voided slabs6
were developed to overcome this problem, by incorporating voids of circular or rectangular cross
section placed symmetrically about the neutral a"is.
$1
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Figure 4.5 &late action in slab ,istribution of forces by bending and twisting in two
directions
4.5.2 BEAM AND SLAB DEC&S
3igure 4.A shows cross sections of commonly used beam8and8slab bridge dec$s, schemes (a),
(b), and 5c6 being the most commonly used for highway bridges in the short8span range.
0eam8and8slab dec$s comprise a number of usually e=ually spaced 5generally A849 ft apart6
beams spanning longitudinally between supports 5hence the design is also referred to as spaced
beam8and8slab dec$s, or parallel girder systems with a thin, structurally continuous slab spanning
transversely across the top. The slab serves the dual purpose of supporting the live load on the bridge
and acting as the top flange of the longitudinal beams The slab can be non composite or composite,
the latter being the obvious choice for economy and structural efficiency, in which case the slab
structurally acts as the top flange of the beams.
$2
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Figure 4.$ %ross sections of bridge8and8slab dec$s) 5a6 T8beam bridges, 5b6 /lab8on8steel
beams, 5c6 /lab on prestressed concrete beams
.n this scheme, under the load, the slab deflects in a single smooth wave so that the
resulting structural behavior is a$in to that of an orthotropic slab with longitudinal stiffening. .n
con>unction with steel beams, the concrete slab may be replaced by stiffened steel !battle dec$!
fabricated from stiffened thin plate.
A structural characteristic of the spaced beam8and8slab dec$ schemes of 3ig. 4.A is their use
of beams of open cross section, which are inherently torsionally wea$. A more efficient type of
dec$ is the multi span dec$ shown in 3ig. 4.B which comprises girders of closed cross section
5concrete or steel6 and a continuous structural concrete dec$ at the top. .n its e"treme form, this
type of configuration can have as few as two spine beams, concrete or steel. +f necessity, concrete
spine beams are more closely spaced than steel spine beams. .n a two8spine steel beam dec$, the
spacing of beams can be more than 4: ft, whereas the spacing of solid concrete spines is
generally in the 948ft range.
0eam8and8slab dec$s of various configurations can be idealized as comprising a series of
longitudinally spanning parallel T8beams connected along their edges with full continuity 53ig.
4.C6. 1nder load, the response of a slab is characterized by longitudinal bending as flanges of T8
beams, accompanied by transverse bending as a continuous beam.
Figure 4.7 (esponse of a beam8and8slab dec$ 5a6 *ongitudinal 0ending as flanges of T8
beams, 5b6 Transverse bending as a continuous beam
$
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
4.5. BEAM DEC&S
A bridge dec$ can be assumed to behave as a beam when its length8to8width ratio is such that,
under loads, its cross sections displace bodily but without any distortion. 0ecause the dominant load
in such dec$s is concentric, distortion of the cross section under eccentric loading has relatively little
influence on the principal bending stresses. These dec$s can be analyzed by classical methods of
structural analysis, with stresses determined from simple bending theory and torsion of
noncircular cross sections.
4.$ AASHTO METHOD OF LI#E LOAD DISTRIBUTION'SLABS
AND BEAMS
?ith reference to the various superstructure types 53ig. 4.A6 and the load path 53ig. 4.<6, we
now discuss application of the AA/#T+ method to determine design forces in various
components, such as slab, stringers, floor beams, etc.
4.$.1 CONCRETE SLABS
4.$.1.1 SUPPORT CONDITIONS FOR SLAB
Two cases are considered, based on the direction of the span of the slab)
The dec$ consists only of a reinforced concrete slab supported on abutments and7or
piers) The main reinforcement in this case runs parallel to traffic 53ig. 4.B5a66.
The dec$ slab is supported over a number of parallel steel, concrete, or timber
beams. The main reinforcement in this case is oriented perpendicular to traffic 5and
beams6 53ig. 4.B5b6, 5c6, and 5d66.
.n both cases, for analytical purposes, the loads are placed on the slab in a specified
manner. The two $ey design forces to be determined are moment and shear in the slab.
The empirical formulas used for calculating slab moments are based on the assumed
position of the wheel load) one ft from the curb, or one ft from the rail if a sidewal$ or
curb is not provided.
4.$.1.2 DETERMINATION OF MOMENTS AND SHEAR IN SLABS

C()e 1* SLAB SUPPORTED ON AN ABUTMENT AND+%R PIERS
This case is covered by AA/#T+ <.94.<.9 under !%ase 08 Dai n (einforcement &arallel to
Traffic.! 3or moment computations, the span 5/6 is defined as the distance between the
centers of the supports, but / need not e"ceed the length of the clear span plus the thic$ness
of the slab 5AA/#T+ <.94.4.46.
$4
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Figure 4.! /upport conditions for a concrete slab) (a) (einforced concrete slab bridge
(b) Reinforced concrete T8beam bridge 5c6 (einforced concrete slab supported on steel
stringers 5d6 (einforced concrete slab supported on prestressed concrete girders
De)ig, -.-e,/ 3or simple spans,
,ead8load moment E wl
9
7B
?here w E dead load7ft
z
of slab and * E span
$5
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Li0e'1.(2 -.-e,/ 5**D6 Two methods are prescribed in AA/#T+ <.94.<.9 for
determining slab moments.
Me/3.2 1 Doment is calculated as if it were caused by concentrated load acting on a
simple span. .n reality, however, the wheel loads are not true concentrated 5or point6 loads,
but are distributed over the tire contact area. 0ecause of the lateral stiffness of the slab, it is
assumed that the distribution area for the wheel load is larger than the actual contact area
between the tire and the slab. Thus, a truc$ wheel load is distributed over a width of ' 54 F
:.:A/6 ft, to a ma"imum of C.: ft. The value of the concentrated load is obtained by
dividing the rear wheel load 54A $ips for #9+ or #/9: loading6 by this distribution width.
3or lane loading, the concentrated load is distributed over twice the distribution width 5i.e.,
9' ft6. Da"imum moment is obtained by placing the concentrated load so obtained at the
midspan, which gives
D E &G/74
where
/ E span 5ft6
and
P' E P/E for truc$ loading E P/2E for lane loading
where
' E 4 F :.:A/ 5ft6
and
& E &4@ E 49,::: lb for #4@ truc$ loading
E &9: E 4A,::: lb for #9+ truc$ loading
E 4<,@:: lb for #4@ lane loading
E 4B,::: lb for #9: lane loading
-ote that in the case of lane loading, the uniform lane loading should also be distributed over
the width of 9' and moment 5w/
9
7B6, calculated accordingly.
Me/3.2 2 Alternatively, for #/9: loading, the ma"imum live8load moment (LLM) per
foot width of slab can be closely appro"imated by the following empirical formulas)
3or spans up to @: ft, LLM = H::/ ft8lb
3or spans I @: to 4:: ft, LLM = 4:::54.</ 8 9:.:6 ft8lb
The obvious appro"imate nature of these values of moments should be recognized. 3or #/
4@ loading, LLM can be ta$en as three8fourths of the preceding values.
The edges of the dec$ slab should be stiffened. This can be accomplished by either
providing an additionally reinforced slab section, a beam integral with and deeper than the
slab, or an integrally reinforced section composed of slab and curb. This portion of the slab,
$nown as the longitudinal edge beam, is designed for a live8load moment e=ual to :.4&/,
where & E &4@ or &9:, respectively, for slabs designed for #4@ or #/4@, or #9+ and #/9:
loadings. According to AA/#T+, the value of moment for the edge beam is not to be
increased for impact considerations.
The re=uirement that a wheel load should not be placed closer than 4 ft from the curb or the
parapet was noted earlier. These distances are sometimes called the edge distances and
$$
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
have an important bearing on the analytical aspects of the slab. The stiffened section at the
edges of the slab essentially acts as an *8beam whose neutral a"is is higher than that of the
slab. 3or continuous spans, the simple8span moment can be reduced by 9: percent, both
for positive and negative moments.
S3e(r (,2 4.,2 ,ec$ slabs designed according to the preceding methods are
considered safe in shear and bond accordingly, no chec$ is re=uired for this design
consideration 5AA/#T+ 3.24.4).
4.$.1.2 DETERMINATION OF MOMENTS AND SHEAR IN SLABS

C()e 2* SLAB SUPPORTED ON BEAMS AND STRINGERS
This case is covered by AA/#T+ <.94.<.4, !%ase A8Dain (einforcement &erpendicular to
Traffic.!
S5(, .n this case, the slab is usually continuous over several parallel stringers or beams,
which can be reinforced concrete 5T beams6, prestressed concrete, steel, or timber. The
effective span, /, is different in each case, as follows 5AA/#T+ <.94.4.96)
?hen the supporting beams are made from reinforced concrete, the slab is usually cast
monolithic with them, resulting in a T 8beam section. .n such cases, / e=uals the clear span
53ig. 4.H5a66. This specification also applies in the case of slabs supported on rigid top
flange prestressed concrete beams, where the ratio of top flange width to minimum
thic$ness is less than 4.0.
?hen the slab is supported on steel stringers, / e=uals the clear span plus half the width
of the stringer flange 53ig. 4.H5b66. .n a case where the widths of the top and the bottom
flanges are different 5e.g., in a composite plate girder6, the top flange width should be
considered in computing /. This specification also applies in the case of slabs supported on
thin top flange prestressed concrete beams, where the ratio of top flange width to minimum
thic$ness is 4.0 or larger.
Figure 4." 'ffective spans for stringer8supported slabs
$7
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
De)ig, -.-e,/
,ead load moment E M
D
E w*
9
7B or w/
9
7B
?here w E dead load7ft
2
of slab and L E effective span
Li0e'1.(2 -.-e,/ 6LLM7 LLM is determined from following e=uation
**D E &5/F967<9 ft8lb
?here &i E P20 E 4A,::: lb 5load on one rear wheel of an #/9: truc$6
= &4@ E 49,::: lb 5load on one rear wheel of an #/4@ truc$6
-ote that above e=uation gives design moment per foot width of a simple slab, and the
span, /, is in foot units. These moments are to be reduced by 9: percent when the slab is
continuous over three or more stringers, which is generally the case for concrete dec$s.
This reduction of moments is specified in AA/#T+ <.94.<.4, which permits a continuity
factor of 0.8 to be applied to '=uation. .n a general sense, this is analogous to using, for
uniform load, M = wL
2
74: for a continuous span instead of M = wL
2
/8 for a simple span
(0.8wL
2
/8 = wL
2
/ 10).
4.$.2 FORCES IN STRINGERS
/tringers are the longitudinal beams supported on abutments and piers. They receive their
loads directly from the slab which they support. The two outside stringers on each side of
the bridge dec$ are called the e"terior stringers the remaining stringers are the interior
stringers.
4.$.2.1 DEAD LOAD FORCES
,ead load is distributed to various stringers in proportion to their tributary widths. .n most
cases, the stringers are spaced e=ually, resulting in e=ual tributary widths for all interior
stringers. %onse=uently, all interior stringers are assumed to carry e=ual amounts of dead
load. 'ssentially, the dead load consists of the dec$ slab, the wearing surface, sidewal$s,
curbs, parapets, and railings. 1sually, the slab is poured first, and after the slab has
hardened, the pouring of the curb, sidewal$, and parapet follows. The dead load due to
these components, also referred to as superimposed dead load 5usually denoted as DL
9
in
computations6, is assumed to be shared e=ually by all stringers, although, in reality, they
are positioned in closer pro"imity to the e"terior stringers 5AA/#T+ <.9<.9.<.4.46.
(ecent studies suggested that
4. 3or the right bridges, 80 percent of the sidewal$ and parapet loads are ta$en by the
e"terior beams, and 9: percent by the interior beams
9. The asphalt wearing surface load is distributed to each beam in the ratio of its mo8
ment of inertia to the total moment of inertia of all the beams.
$!
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
Figure 4.1% A typical parapet section
The tributary area of the e"terior stringers is usually smaller than that of the interior
stringers. Also, as shown in 3ig. 4.:H, the dec$ slab, with edges stiffened by an inte grally
cast curb, parapet, or sidewal$, generally overhangs from the e"terior stringers in the
transverse direction. .n such cases, the load on the e"terior stringer can be calculated as a
reaction by considering the slab 5with an overhang6 as simply supported on both the e"terior
and the first interior stringer 5i.e, by the lever rule method6. 3igure 4.4: shows one of the
commonly used concrete parapet curbs 5the mounted aluminum railing not shown6,
weighing about @:@ lb7ft. +ther variations are also used.
4.$.2.2 LI#E LOAD FORCES
The problem of determining shears and moments in stringers due to live loads received from
the slab is highly indeterminate owing to the fact that moving loads, generally spea$ing, can
literally occupy any position on the dec$ the only e"ception to this is the portion of the slab
covered by the sidewal$, curb, and parapet. Although live loading is assumed to occupy and
move in the designated lanes, such specification is hardly enforceable. This comple"ity and
uncertainty in application of the live load on the slab has led to simplifying assumptions
regarding the transverse position of the moving load on the dec$. The conclusion is that the
live load shared by the e"terior stringer would be different from that shared by the interior
stringer. This is evident because the e"terior stringers support the portion of the slab covered
by the sidewal$, curb, and railing, thereby precluding the possibility of the live load
occupying this portion of the slab.
+wing to the presence of the slab, the loads are not applied directly to the stringers
rather, the stiffness of the slab causes lateral distribution of the moving loads to the ad>acent
stringers. The lateral distribution, however, is a highly indeterminate coupled phenomenon
that depends on the stiffness and the type of the dec$, the type and spacing of supporting
stringers, and the stiffness of diaphragms. .n view of the theoretical comple"ity involved in
load distribution to stringers, AA/#T+ <.9< provides a simplified, but empirical, method to
determine the lateral distribution of moving loads to both e"terior and interior stringers. This
method is referred to as d!trb"to# o$ %oad!, and, although simple, it does have some
$"
%#A&T'( 4) T#' *+A, &AT# A-, *+A, ,./T(.01T.+- .- 0(.,2' /1&'(/T(1%T1('/
limitations 5discussed in a later section6. According to this method of analysis, shear and
moments in stringers are obtained first as if they are directly loaded by the a"le 5or wheel6
loads. These values are then multiplied by the appropriate %&e'%oad d!trb"to# $a(tor!,
,3, 5listed in AA/#T+ Table <.9<.46 and by the impact factors 54 F .6, to obtain design
shear and moments in stringers.
.n the case of lane loading, the uniform load is assumed to be distributed over a lane
width of 4: ft. This stipulation also applies to the concentrated loads associated with the lane
loading. 3or e"ample, in the case of #/9: lane loading, the :.A48$7ft lane load is assumed to
be distributed over a width of 4: ft on a line normal to the center8 line of the lane, resulting
in a uniform load intensity of :.:A4 $7ft
9
on the loaded lane. The concentrated loads
associated with #/9: lane loading are 4B $ips for moment and 9A $ips for shear 5AA/#T+
<.C.4.<6. These concentrated loads are also assumed to be distributed over a width of 4: ft,
giving a line load of 4.B $7ft for moment and 9.A $7ft for shear 5AA/#T+ <.C.4.96. -ote that,
as far as the live8load distribution factors are concerned, no distinction is made in the
AA/#T+ specifications between noncomposite and composite construction.
/hear and moment in a stringer due to moving loads can be easily determined from
influence lines. .t is incumbent on a designer to apply bridge live loads on the dec$ in
specific manners outlined in the AA/#T+ specifications. The following points must be
noted in this conte"t)
4. .n the case of single8span bridges, regardless of the span length of the bridge, only
one # or #/ truc$ is assumed to occupy the bridge. The distance between the two
rear a"les is $ept as a variable between 44 and <: ft, as shown in 3ig. 4.4@ this dis8
tance should be chosen so as to cause ma"imum stresses in the supporting members.
9. .n the case of lane load, the entire span is assumed to be occupied by uniform lane
loading in the designated lane. The line load due to concentrated loads is to be posi8
tioned, along with the uniform live load, to cause the most critical stress conditions in
the member under consideration.
<. .n the case of continuous spans, they should be loaded so as to cause ma"imum
effects 5stresses and deflections6 in the member under consideration.
-ote that shears and moments tabulated in the AA/#T+ specifications have been com8
puted for the governing truc$ or the lane loading. .n the case of truc$ loading, only one truc$
is assumed to be present on the span, and the tabulated values of moments and shears are
computed for the corresponding a"le loads 5B $ips and <9 $ips for #9: andB $ips, <9 $ips,
and <9 $ips for #/9: loading all spaced 44 ft apart6. The effect of multipresence of
vehicles 5i.e., two or more lanes loaded simultaneously6 is not included in these values.
The effect of multilane loading is considered by multiplying the single8lane loading by the
multipresence reduction factor, as given in AA/#T+ <.49. #owever, it is reiterated that
the multipresence reduction factors are not to be used in con>unction with the distribution
factors, e"cept where the lever rule is used or where special re=uirements for the e"terior
beams in beam8slab bridges as specified in AA/#T+8*(3, 4.A.9.9.9d are used.
7%