Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)

SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
'~ Table 3.6.2.1-1 - Dynamic Load Allowance, 1M . Hammering effect is the dynamic response of the
wheel assembly to riding surface discontinuities,
I I I such as deck joints, cracks, potholes, and
I Component I 1M I delaminations, and
Deck Joints - AII Limit States 75% . Dynamic response of the bridge as a whole to
AII Other Components passing. ve~icles, which may be due to long
. Fatigue and Fracture 15% undulatlons In the roadway pavement, such as.th~se
L. .t State caused by settlement of fill, or to resonant excltatlon
Iml as a result of similar frequencies of vibration
. Al! Other Limit States 33% between bridge and vehicle.
. .. . Field tests indicate that in the majority of highway
The appllcatlon of .dynam!c load allowance for bu!led bridges, the dynamic component of the response does
?omp.onents, covered In Sectlon 12, shall be as speclfied not exceed 25 percent of the static response to vehicles.
In Artlcle 3.?2.2. . This is the basis for dynamic load allowance with the
Dynamlc load allowance need not be applled lo: exception of deck joints. However, the specified live load
. . ... combination of the design truck and lane load,
. Retalnlng walls not subJect to vertical reactlons from represents a group of exclusion vehicles that are at least
the superstructure, and 4/3 of those caused by the design truck alone on short-
. . and medium-span bridges. The specified value of 33
. Foundatlon components that are entlrely below percent in Table 1 is the product of 4/3 and the basic 25
ground level. percent.
. This article recognizes the damping effect of soil
The dynamlc load al!o:wanc.e .ma~ be reduced. for when in contact with some buried structural components,
co~ponent.s, other than JOI~tS, If Justlfi.e~ by sufficl.ent such as footings. To qualify for relief from impact, the
evldence, In accordance wlth the provlslons of Artlcle entire component must be buried. For the purpose of
r 4.7.2.1. this article, a retaining type component is considered to
be buried to the top of the fill.
3.6.2.2 BURIED COMPONENTS
The dynamic load allowance for culverts and other j.,.
buried structures covered by Section 12, in percent, shall ;~~. . ~
be taken as: ,;" ,
IM=33(1.0-4.1x10-4OE) ~O% (3.6.2.2-1)
where:
DE = the minimum depth of earth cover above the
structure (mm)
3.6.2.3 WOOD COMPONENTS C3.6.2.3
For wood bridges and wood components of bridges, Wood structures are known to experience reduced
the dynamic load allowance specified in Article 3.6.2.1 dynamic wheel load effects due to internal friction
may be reduced to 50 percent of the values specified for between the components and the damping
1M in Table 3.6.2.1-1. characteristics ofwood.
3.6.3 Centrifugal Forces: CE C3.6.3
1'"'"'\ Centrifugal forces shall be taken as the product of Lane load is neglected in computing the centrifugal
~J the axle weights of the design truck or tandem and the force, as the spacing of vehicles at high speed is
! factor C, taken as:
!
3-27
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
4 2 assumed to be large, resulting in a low density of ~ ,
C = -~ (3.6.3-1) vehicles following and/or preceding the design truck. -",,/
3 g R The specified live load combination of the design
truck and lane load, however, represents a group of
where. exclusion vehicles that produce force effects of at least
. 4/3 of those caused by the design truck alone on short-
v = highway design speed (mIs) and ~edium-span bridge~.. T~is ratio is. indicated in
Equatlon 1. Thus, the provlslon IS not technlcally perfect,
9 = gravitational acceleration: 9.807 (m/s2) yet .it reason.ably mod.els the rep~esentative exclusion
vehlcle travellng at deslgn speed wlth large headways to
R = radius of curvature of traffic lane (m) other ~ehicles. The . ap~roximation a.ttributed to this
convenlent representatlon IS acceptable In the framework
Highway design speed shall not be taken to be less of the uncertainty of centrifugal force from random traffic
than the va~ue sp~cified i~ MSHTO publication A Polic~ patt~r~s~1 = 360 k Ih
of Geometrlc Deslqn of Hlqhwavs and Streets (1990). . s . m
The multiple presence factors specified in Article
3.6.1.1.2 shall apply.
Centrifugal forces shall be applied horizontally at a
distance 1800 mm above the roadway surface.
3.6.4 Braking Force: BR C3.6.4
Braking forces shall be taken as 25 percent of the Based on energy principies, and assuming uniform
axle weights of the design truck or tandem per lane deceleration, the braking force determined as a fraction
placed in all design lanes which are considered to be of vehicle weight is:
loaded in accordance with Article 3.6.1.1.1 and which are 2
carrying traffic headed in the same direction. These b = ~ (C3.6.4-1) ~
forces shall be assumed to act horizontally at a distance 2ga
of 1800 mm above the roadway surface in either
longitudinal direction to cause extreme force effects. AII h "". th I th f .f d I . d "b" .
design lanes shall be simultaneously loaded for bridges w ere a. IS e eng ? un, or.m ece era~lon an IS
likely to become one-directional in the future. the fraGuan. Calculauons uslng a br~klng ~ength of
The multiple presence factors specified in Article 122 ~ and a speed of 90 .km/h (25 mIs) y!eld b - 0.26 for
3 6 1 1 2 shall apply a horizontal force that wlll act for a perlod of about 10
. . . .. seconds. The factor "b" applies to all lanes in one
direction because all vehicles may have reacted within
this time trame. Only the design truck or tandem are to
be considered because other vehicles, represented by
the design lane load, are expected to brake out of phase.
3.6.5 Vehicular Collision Force: CT
3.6.5.1 PROTECTION OF STRUCTURES C3.6.5.1
The provisions of Article 3.6.5.2 need not be For the purpose of this article, a barrier may be
considered for structures which are protected by: considered structurally independent if it does not transmit
loads to the bridge.
. An embankment; Full-scale crash tests have shown that some vehicles
have a greater tendency to lean ayer or partially cross
. A structurally independent, crashworthy ground- ayer a 1070 mm high barrier than a 1370 mm high
mounted 1370 mm high barrier, located within barrier. This behavior would allow a significant collision
3000 mm from the component being protected; or of the vehicle with the component being protected if the
component is located within a meter or so of the barrier.
. A 1070 mm high barrier located at more than If the component is more than about 3000 mm behind ~
3000 mm from the component being protected.
3-28
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
~ In arder to qualify for this exemption, such barrier shall the barrier, the difference between the two barrier
be structurally and geometrically capable of surviving the heights is no longer important.
crash test for Performance Level 3, as specified in
Section 13.
3.6.5.2 VEHICLE ANO RAILWAY COLLISION WITH C3.6.5.2
STRUCTURES
Unless protected as specified in Article 3.6.5.1, It is not the intent of this provision to encourage
abutments and piers located within a distance of unprotected piers and abutments within the setbacks
9000 mm to the edge of roadway, or within a distance of indicated, but rather to supply some guidance for
15 000 mm to the centerline of a railway track, shall be structural design when it is deemed totally impractical to
designed for an equivalent static force of 1 800 000 N, meet the requirements of Article 3.6.5.1.
which is assumed to act in any direction in a horizontal The equivalent static force of 1 800 000 N is based
plane, at a distance of 1200 mm above ground. on the information from full-scale crash tests of barriers
The provisions ofArticle 2.3.2.2.1 shall apply. for redirecting 360 000 N tractor trailers and from
analysis of other truck collisions. The 1 800 000 N train
collision load is based on recent, physically unverified,
analytical work (Hirsch 1989). For individual column
shafts, the 1 800 000 N load should be considered a
point loado For wall piers, the load may be considered to
be a point load or may be distributed ayer an area
deemed suitable for the size of the structure and the
anticipated impacting vehicle, but not greater than 1500
mm wide by 600 mm high. These dimensions were
determined by considering the size of a truck trame.
r---, 3.6.5.3 VEHICLE COLLlSION WITH BARRIERS
."""
,
i ";' The provisions of Section 13 shall apply.
I 'C ~
3.7 WATER LOADS: WA
_il:t;,,;}.qi
. ,," ~.;
3.7.1 Static Pressure .J~"(;,;,,.'
':Cc,;J(X:r:CJ ~.'~:1
Static pressure of water shall be assumed to act
perpendicular to the surface that is retaining the water.
Pressure shall be calculated as the product of height of
water above the point of consideration, the density of
water, and 9 (the acceleration of gravity).
Oesign water levels for various limit states shall be
as specified and/or approved by the Owner.
3.7.2 Buoyancy C3.7.2
Buoyancy shall be considered to be an uplift force, For substructures with cavities in which the presence
taken as the sum of the vertical components of static or absence of water cannot be ascertained, the condition
pressures, as specified in Article 3.7.1, acting on all producing the least favorable force effect should be
components below design water level. chosen.

" v
~:;- ; ..~
3-29
i
.
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
3.7.3 Stream Pressure ~
3.7.3.1 LONGITUDINAL C3. 7 .3.1
The pressure of flowing water acting in the For the purpose of this article, the longitudinal
longitudinal direction of substructures shall be taken as: direction refers to the majar axis of a substructure unit.
- -4 C V 2 The theoretically correct expression for Equation 1
p - 5.14x10 D (3.7.3.1-1) is:
where: y V2 -6
P = CD-x10 (C3.7.3.1-1)
2
P = pressure of flowing water (MPa)
CD = drag coefficient for piers as specified in Table 1 where:
V = design velocity of water for the design flood in y = density (unit mass) of water (kg/m3)
strength and service limit states and for the
check flood in the extreme event limit state (mIs) V = velocity of water (mIs)
Table 3.7.3.1-1 - Drag Coefficient
I Type I CD I
semicircular-nosed ier 0.7
s uare-ended ier 1.4 ---,
debris lod . ier 1.4 . /
wedged-nosed pier with nose 0.8
an le 90 or less
The longitudinal drag force shall be taken as the The drag coefficient, CD, and the lateral drag
product of longitudinal stream pressure and the coefficient, CL, given in Tables 1 and 3.7.3.2-1, were
projected surface exposed thereto. adopted from the Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code
(1991). The more favorable drag coefficients measured
by some researchers for wedge-type pier nose angles of
less than 90 are not given here beca use such pier
noses are more prone to catching debris.
I Floating logs, roots, and other debris may
! accumulate at piers and, by blocking parts of the
, waterway, increase stream pressure load on the pier.
Such accumulation is a function of the availability of such
debris and level of maintenance efforts by which it is
\, removed. It may be accounted for by the judicious
,-"iA ,{" increase in both the exposed surface and the velocity of
~ j, ?',
.',r;.i" ,,;,t ;";1'; water. .
E\:: ; ",?18 ",:'1 The draft New Zealand ~ighway. ~ridge . Deslgn
Specification contains the followlng provlslon, whlch may
be used as guidance in the absence of site-specific
criteria:
Where a significant amount of driftwood is
carried, water pressure shall al so be allowed for ~
on a driftwood raft lodged against the pier. The ~, ...1'
size of the raft is a matter of judgment, but as a
. 3-30
i
!
i
[.
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
guide, Dimension A in Figure 1 should be half
the water depth, but not greater than 3000 mm.
Dimension B should be half the sum of adjacent
span lengths, but no greater than 14 000 mm.
Pressure shall be calculated using Formula 1,
with Co = 0.5.
L I B ~:=;= 1 Water Surface
A
Debris Raft
BedLevel
Figure C3.7.3.1-1 - Debris Raft for Pier Design
3.7.3.2 LATERAL C3.7.3.2
The lateral, uniformly distributed pressure on a The discussion of Equation 3.7.3.1-1 also applies to
substructure due to water flowing at an angle, e, to the Equation 1.
longitudinal axis of the pier shall be taken as:
r. p=5.14x10-4CLy2 (3.7.3.2-1)
where:
p = lateral pressure (MPa)
CL = lateral drag coefficient specified in Table 1
p
r , \~\~
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~~:.:::..-~ ~,,~.:3:;r e
Figure 3.7.3.2-1 - Plan View of Pier Showing Stream
Flow Pressure
\
\
r..
3 - 31
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
Table 3.7.3.2-1 - Lateral Drag Coefficient ~
Angle, S, between direction of flow CL
and longitudinal axis of the pier
0 0.0
5 0.5
10 0.7
20 0.9
:?c30 1.0
The lateral drag force shall be taken as the product
of the lateral stream pressure and the surface exposed
thereto.
3.7.4 Wave Load C3.7.4
Wave action on bridge structures shall be considered Loads due to wave action on bridge structures shall
for exposed structures where the development of be determined using accepted engineering practice
significant wave forces may occur. methods. Site-specific conditions should be considered.
The latest edition of the Shore Protection Manual,
published by the Coastal Engineering Research Center,
Department of the Army, is recommended for the
computation of wave forces. ~
3.7.5 Change in Foundations Due to Limit State for C3.7.5
Scour
Statistically speaking, scour is the most common
The provisions of Article 2.6.4.4 shall apply. reason for the failure of highway bridges in the United
The consequences of changes in foundation States.
conditions resulting from the design flood for scour shall Provisions concerning the effects of scour are given
be considered at strength and service limit states. The in Section 2. Scour per se is not a force effect, but by
consequences of changes in foundation conditions due changing the conditions of the substructure it may
to scour resulting from the check flood for bridge scour significantly alter the consequences of force effects
and from hurricanes shall be considered at the extreme acting on structures.
event limit states.
3.8 WIND LOAD: WL AND WS
3.8.1 Horizontal Wind Pressure
3.8.1.1 GENERAL C3.8.1.1
Pressures specified herein shall be assumed to be Base design wind velocity varies significantly due to
caused by a base design wind velocity, Ve, of 160 km/h. local conditions. For small and/or low structures, wind
Wind load shall be assumed to be uniformly usually does not govern. For large and/or tall bridges,
distributed on the area exposed to the wind. The however, the local conditions should be investigated.
exposed area shall be the sum of areas of all Pressures on windward and leeward sides are to be
components, including floor system and railing, as seen taken simultaneously in the assumed direction of wind. f'
in elevation taken perpendicular to the assumed wind y
3 - 32
I
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
~ direction. This direction shall be varied to determine the Typically, a bridge structure should be examined
extreme force effect in the structure or in its components. separately under wind pressures from two or more
Areas that do not contribute to the extreme force effect different directions in arder to ascertain those windward,
under consideration may be neglected in the analysis. leeward, and side pressures producing the most critical
For bridges or parts of bridges more than 10 000 mm loads on the structure.
11 above low ground or water level, the design wind Equation 1 is based on boundary layer theory
velocity, VDz, should be adjusted according lo: combined with empirical observations and represents the
most recent approach to defining wind speeds for
various conditions as used in meteorology. In the past,
V = 2 5 V ( ~
) In ( ~ ) an exponential equation was sometimes used to rela~e
DZ . o V Z wind speed to heights above 10 000 mm. Thls
B o (3.8.1.1-1) formulation was based sol el y on empirical observations
where: and had no theoretical basis.
VDz = design wind velocity at design elevation, z (km/h) -
( Z ) a
VDZ - CV1o 10000 (C3.8.1.1-1)
V1o = wind velocity at 10000 mm above low ground or
above design water level (km/h)
The purpose of the term C and exponent "a" was to
VB = base wind velocity of 160 km/h at 10 000 mm adjust the equation for various upstream surface
height, yielding design pressures specified in conditions, similar to the use of Table 1. Further
Articles 3.8.1.2 and 3.8.2 information can be found in Liu (1991) and Simiu (1973,
1976).
Z = height of structure at which wind loads are being The following descriptions for the terms "open
calculated as measured from low ground, or country", "suburban", and "city" in Table 1 are
from water level, > 10000 mm paraphrased from ASCE-7-93:
~
Vo = friction velocity, a meteorological wind . Open Country - Open terrain with scattered
characteristic taken, as specified in Table 1, for obstructions having heights generally less than
" various upwind surface characteristics (km/h) 10 000 mm. This category includes tlat open country
i ' and grasslands.
I lo = friction length of upstream fetch, a
~ meteorological wind characteristic taken as . Suburban - Urban and suburban areas, wooded
specified in Table 1 (mm) areas, or other terrain with numerous closely spaced
obstructions having the size of single-family or larger
dwellings. Use of this category shall be limited to
those areas for which representative terrain prevails
in the upwind direction at least 500 000 mm.
I . City - Large city centers with at least 50 percent of
I the buildings having a height in excess of 2100 mm.
Use of this category shall be limited to those areas
for which representative terrain prevails in the
upwind direction at least 800 000 mm. Possible
I channeling effects of increased vel?ci~ pressures
I ' due to the bridge or structure's locatlon In the wake
of adjacent structures shall be taken into account.
(\
I
I -
3-33
,
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
Table 3.8.1.1-1 - Values of Va and Zo for Various "'"'"'
Upstream Surface Conditions
I I OrEN I I I
I CONDITION I COUNTRY I SUBURBAN I CITv I ~
I Va (km/h) I 13.2 I 17.6 I 19.3 I ~
I lo (mm) I 70 I 1000 I 2500 I
, J'V~~"'~"
V 10 may be established from: ,;,;
';,:'... :~
. Basic Wind Speed charts available in ASCE 7-88 for "
various recurrence intervals,
. Site-specific wind surveys, and
. In the absence of betler criterion, the assumption
that V10 = Va = 160 km/h.
3.8.1.2 WIND PRESSURE ON STRUCTURES: WS
3.8.1.2.1 General C3.8. 1.2. 1
If justified by local conditions, a different base design The stagnation pressure associated with a wind
wind velocity may be selected for load combinations not velocity of 160 km/h is 1.23x10-3 MPa, which is ~
involving wind on live loado The direction of the design significantly less than the values specified in Table 1.
wind shall be assumed to be horizontal, unless otherwise The difference reflects the effect of gusting combined
specified in Article 3.8.3. In the absence of more precise with some tradition of long-time usage.
data, design wind pressure, in MPa, may be determined The pressures specified in N/mm or MPa (= N/mm2)
as. should be chosen to produce the greater net wind load
2 2 on the structure.
p = p
( ~ ) = p -~ - Wind tunnel tests may be used to provide more
D B V B 25 600 (3.8.1.2.1 1) precise estimates of wind pressures. Such testing
B should be considered where wind is a majar design loado
Pa = base wind pressure specified in Table 1 (MPa)
Table 3.8.1.2.1-1 - Base Pressures, Pa
Corresponding to Va = 160 km/h
STRUCTURAL WINDWARD LEEWARD
COMPONENT LOAD, MPa LOAD, MPa
Trusses, 0.0024 0.0012
Columns, and
fArches
Beams 0.0024 NA
Large Flat 0.0019 NA
Surfaces
The wind loading shall not be taken less than ~
4.4 N/mm in the plane of a windward chord and ~
3 - 34
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
~ 2.2 N/mm in the plane of a leeward chord on truss and
arch components, and not less than 4.4 N/mm on beam
or girder components.
3.8.1.2.2 Loads from Superstructures C3.8.1.2.2
Where the wind is not taken as normal to the For trusses, columns, and arches, the base wind
structure, the base wind pressures, PB, for various pressures specified in Table 1 are the sum of the
angles of wind direction may be taken as specified in pressures applied to both the windward and leeward
Table 1 and shall be applied to a single place of exposed areas.
area. The skew angle shall be taken as measured from
a perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. The wind
direction for design shall be that which produces the
extreme force effect on the component under
investigation. The transverse and longitudinal pressures
shall be applied simultaneously.
Table 3.8.1.2.2-1 - Base Wind Pressures, PB, for Various
Angles of Attack and V B = 160 km/hr
Columns and Arches Girders
Skew Angle Lateral Longitudinal Lateral Longitudinal
of~nd Load Load Load Load
Degrees MPa MPa MPa MPa
/"--'
O 0.0036 O 0.0024 O
["'"C;: 15 O0034 O0006 O0021 O0003 ;f~~~f' "~j,~,;i' 30 0.0031 0.0013 0.0020 0.0006
riJo
45 0.0023 0.0020 0.0016 0.0008
60 0.0011 0.0024 0.0008 0.0009
3.8.1.2.3 Forces Applied Directly to the Substructure
The transverse and longitudinal forces to be applied
directly to the substructure shall be calculated from an
assumed base wind pressure of 0.0019 MPa. For wind
I directions taken skewed to the substructure, this force
shall be resolved into components perpendicular to the
end and front elevations of the substructure. The
'. \ component perpendicular to the end elevation shall act
on the exposed substructure area as seen in end
elevation, and the component perpendicular to the front
elevation shall act on the exposed areas and shall be
applied simultaneously with the wind loads from the
superstructure.
1"'"-'"
3-35
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
3.8.1.3 WIND PRESSURE ON VEHICLES: WL C3.8.1.3 ~
When vehicles are present, the design wind pressure Based on practical experience, maximum live loads
shall be applied to both structure and vehicles. Wind are not expected to be present on the bridge when the
pressure on vehicles shall be represented by an wind velocity exceeds 90 km/h. The load factor
interruptable, moving force of 1.46 N/mm acting normal corresponding to the treatment of wind on structure only
to, and 1800 mm above, the roadway and shall be in Load Combination Strength III would be (90/160)2
transmitted to the structure. (1.4) = 0.44, which has been rounded to 0.40 in the
When wind on vehicles is not taken as normal to the Strength IV Load Combination. This load factor
structure, the components of normal and parallel force corresponds to 0.3 in Service l.
applied to the live load may be taken as specified in The 1.46 N/mm wind load is based on a long row of
Table 1 with the skew angle taken as referenced normal randomly sequenced passenger cars, commercial vans,
to the surface. and trucks exposed to the 90 km/h design wind. This
horizontal live load, similar to the design lane load,
should be applied only to the tributary areas producing
a force effect of the same kind.
Table 3.8.1.3-1 - Wind Components on Live Load
Normal Parallel
Skew Angle Component Component
Degrees N/mm N/mm
O 1.46 O
~
15 1.28 0.18
30 1.20 0.35
45 0.96 0.47 ~
60 0.50 0.55 i
3.8.2 Vertical Wind Pressure C3.8.2
Unless otherwise determined in Article 3.8.3., a The intent of this article is to account for the effect
vertical upward wind force of 9.6x10-4 MPa times the resulting from interruption of the horizontal flow of air by -
width of the deck, including parapets and sidewalks, the superstructure. This load is to be applied even to
shall be considered to be a longitudinal line loado This discontinuous bridge decks, such as grid decks. This
force shall be applied only for limit states that do not load may govern where overturning of the bridge is
invol'le wind on live load, and only when the direction of investigated.
wind is taken to be perpendicular to the longitudinal axis
of the bridge. This lineal force shall be applied at the
windward quarter-point of the deck width in conjunction
with the horizontal wind loads specified in Article 3.8.1.
3.8.3 Aeroelastic Instability
3.8.3.1 GENERAL C3.8.3.1
Aeroelastic force effects shall be taken into account Because of the complexity of analyses often ~
in the design of bridges and structural components apt necessary for an in-depth evaluation of structural y
to be wind-sensitive. For the purpose of this article, all aeroelasticity, this article is intentionally kept to a simple
3 - 36
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
~ bridges, and structural components thereof with a span statement. Many bridges, decks, or individual structural
length to width or depth ratio exceeding 30.0 shall be components have been shown to be aeroelastically
deemed to be wind-sensitive. insensitive if their length-to-width or length-to-depth
The vibration of cables due to the interaction of wind ratios are under about 30.0, a somewhat arbitrary value
and rain shall algo be considered. helpful only in identifying likely wind-sensitive cases.
Flexible bridges, such as cable-supported or very
long spans of any type, may require special studies
based on wind tunnel information. In general,
appropriate wind tunnel tests involve simulation of the
wind environment local to the bridge site. Details of this
are part of the existing wind tunnel state of the art and
are beyond the scope of this commentary.
3.8.3.2 AEROELASTIC PHENOMENA C3.8.3.2
The aeroelastic phenomena of vortex excitation, Excitation due to vortex shedding is the escape of
galloping, flutter, and divergence shall be considered wind-induced vortices behind the member, which tend to
where applicable. excite the component at its fundamental natural
frequency in harmonic motion. It is important to keep
stresses due to vortex-induced oscillations below the
"infinite life" fatigue stress. Methods exist for estimating
such stress amplitudes, but they are outside the scope
of this commentary.
" - - . Tubular components can be protected against
'c.I:", ::..:' i;;~ vortex-induced oscillation by adding bracing, strakes, or
:(t,;:;;' !"j 1e tuned mass dampers or by attaching horizontal flat
/~ plates parallel to the tube axis above and/or below the
"f.,:;'~,, f;\~4 s:;, ,)1~.,''-" central third of their span. Such aerodynamic damper
';$'...:"':' ':1"1'; f\:;' '" ';, ,ijb.; plates should lie about one-third tube diameter above or
': '-,;i..;!':!,; J,,'1';.;; (-; ')":"f tc.:J"',,'J':: below the tube to allow free passage of wind. The width
",'.::;'1 of the plates may be the diameter of the tube or wider.
Galloping is a high-amplitude oscillation associated
:-.i ;-,';if:),:~,' ~;,";.:;" ,:\ with ice-laden cables or long, flexible members having
,," t,."i ~~,q:; ;':) g::,):?;"j'~iYjJ " aerodynamically unsymmetrical cross-sections. Cable-
c.;.;;i, (c' ti:)1i t;~t' ;::3?'! '0;\.1".,,-, stays, having circular sections, will not gallop unless their
1;;{; ,::~-;;; ,~;-,t;, circumferences are deformed by ice, dropping water, or
accumulated debris.
Flexible bridge decks, as in very long spans and
some pedestrian bridges, may be prone to wind-induced
flutter, a wind-excited oscillation of destructive
amplitudes, or, on so me occasions, divergence, an
irreversible twist under high wind. Analysis methods,
including wind tunnel studies leading to adjustments of
f the deck form, are available for prevention of both flutter
and divergence.
\
3.8.3.3 CONTROL OF DYNAMIC RESPONSES C3.8.3.3
Bridges and structural components thereof, including Cables in stayed-girder bridges have been
cables, shall be designed to be free of fatigue damage successfully stabilized against excessive dynamic
due to vortex-induced or galloping oscillations. Bridges responses by attaching automotive dampers to the
shall be designed to be free of divergence and bridge at deck level or by cross-tying multiple cable-
1"""'\ catastrophic flutter up to 1.2 times the design wind stays.
velocity applicable at bridge deck height.
3-37
Section 3 - Loads and Load Factors (SI)
SPECIFICATIONS COMMENTARY
3.8.3.4 WIND TUNNEL TESTS C3.8.3.4 ,, Representative wind tunnel tests may be used to Wind tunnel testing of bridges and other civil
satisfy the requirements of Articles 3.8.3.2 and 3.8.3.3. engineering structures is a highly developed technology,
which may be used to study the wind response
characteristics of a structural model or to verify the
results of analysis (Simiu 1976).
3.9 ICE LOADS: IC
3.9.1 General C3.9.1
Ice forces on piers shall be determined with regard Most of the information for ice loads was taken from
to site conditions and expected modes of ice action as Montgomery et al. (1984), which provided background
follows: for the clauses on ice loads for Canadian Standards
Association (1988). A useful additional source has been
. Dynamic pressure due to moving sheets or tIces of Neill (1981).
ice being carried by stream flow, wind, or currents; It is convenient to classify ice forces on piers as
dynamic forces and static forces.
. Static pressure due to thermal movements of ice Dynamic forces occur when a moving ice floe strikes
sheets; a bridge pier. The forces imposed by the ice floe on a
pier are dependent on the size of the floe, the strength
. Pressure resulting from hanging dams or jams of ice; and thickness of the ice, and the geometry of the pier.
and The following types of ice failure have been
observed (Montgomery et al. 1984):
. Static uplift or vertical load resulting from adhering ~
ice in waters of fluctuating leve!. . Crushing, where the ice fails by local crushing ""
across the width of a pier. The crushed ice is ~;;
The expected thickness of ice, the direction of its continually cleared from a zone around the pier as
movement, and the height of its action shall be the floe moves pasto
determined by field investigations, review of public
records, aerial surveys, or other suitable means. . Bending, where a vertical reaction component acts
on the ice floe impinging on a pier with an inclined
nose. This reaction causes the floe to rise up the
pier nose, as flexural cracks formo
. Splitting, where a comparatively small floe strikes a
pier and is split into smaller parts by stress cracks
propagating from the pier.
. Impact, where a small floe is brought to a hall by
impinging on the nose of the pier before it has
"'" crushed over the full-width of the pier, bent or split.
\ '
\ . Buckling, where compressive forces cause a large
floe to fail by buckling in front of the nose of a very
wide pier.
" c
For bridge piers of usual proportions on larger bodies
of water, crushing and bending failures usually control
the magnitude of the design dynamic ice force. On
smaller streams, which cannot carry large ice tices, ;-'\-
impact failure can be the controlling mode.
' !
3-38