0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

18 просмотров32 страницыJul 28, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

18 просмотров32 страницы© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 32

REFORM CONSTRUCTION

Burak Can GLEN

oruh DURMU

Halil DEMRC

mer Ege ADALIER

Safiye Bircan IIK

INSTRUCTOR:

Alp CANER

Table of Contents

1.

INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 5

a.

b.

2.

DESIGN CRITERIA............................................................................................. 9

a.

b.

Live Load....................................................................................................... 9

c.

Dead Loads:................................................................................................ 10

d.

3.

PIER DESIGN................................................................................................... 14

a.

General....................................................................................................... 14

b.

c.

Design Stage............................................................................................... 17

4.

FOUNDATION DESIGN..................................................................................... 21

1.

General....................................................................................................... 21

2.

3.

4.

5.

5.

COST ESTIMATION.......................................................................................... 27

6.

7.

CONCLUSION.................................................................................................. 31

8.

REFERENCES.................................................................................................. 32

List of Figures

Figure 1 Model of Rail Road Station........................................................................4

2

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

3 Model of Rail Road.................................................................................... 5

4 Cooper E80 Load Distribution...................................................................9

5 Cooper E80 Live Load Arrangement.........................................................9

6 I-Section.................................................................................................. 12

7 A-A and B-B Section................................................................................ 14

8 Live Load Alternative 1...........................................................................14

9 Live Load Alternative 2...........................................................................14

10 Live Load Alternative 3.........................................................................15

11 Live Load Alternative 4.........................................................................15

12 Live Load Alternative 5.........................................................................16

13 B-B Section Live Load Arrangement......................................................17

14 Column Head Dimensions.....................................................................18

15 Column Dimensions.............................................................................. 20

16 Plan View of Foundation........................................................................24

17 Side View of Foundation........................................................................24

List Of Tables

Table 1 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials........................................................12

3

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

3 Excell Sheet for Beam Section Trials........................................................13

4 Calculations to Find Moment....................................................................17

5 Finding Moment at A-A Section.................................................................18

6 Determination of Column Head Cross Section..........................................19

7 Determination of Column Dimensions......................................................20

8 Determination of Column Dimensions......................................................20

9 Soil Characteristic for Sand......................................................................22

10 Soil Characteristic for Clay.....................................................................22

11 Soil Characteristic for Clay.....................................................................22

12 SPT N-Average........................................................................................ 23

13 Determination of Footing Dimensions....................................................23

14 Punching Shear Calculations..................................................................24

15 Pile Capacity Calculations......................................................................24

16 Consolidation Settlement Calculations...................................................25

1. INTRODUCTION

Objective of this project is designing an elevated railroad station bridge. The project is

originally located in Astana, KAZAKHSTAN. The following figures are taken from the

original project.

The identification of the project

Loads and load combinations (for preliminary design stage)

Specifications used

Structural and geotechnical analysis and results

Structural and foundation design calculations

Cost estimations and future works

Railway structures involve wide array of construction intended to support the track itself

or house railway operations. Common examples of track carrying structures are : bridges,

trestles, viaducts, culverts, scales, inspection pits, unloading pits and similar construction.

Common examples of helper structures are : drainage structures, retaining walls, tunnels,

snow sheds, repair shops, loading docks, passenger stations and platforms, fueling facilities,

towers, catenary frames etc.

When designing railway structures, the various sources of their loads must be considered, as

they would be with any other similar, non-railway structure.

live loads from the carried traffic

dynamic components of the traffics (impact, centrifugal, lateral and longitudinal forces

environmental considerations (wind, snow and ice, thermal, seismic and stream flow

loads)

In this very project, dead load consists of footings, columns, deck, ballast, ballast

protection wall, traverse and rails. Seismic load and impact factor are also to be considered. In

preliminary stage, seismic load is not taken into account.

Railway structures must perform under heavier loads. They have longer service lives.

They have different maintenance constraints compered to their highway counterparts.

(Because of these properties, railway structure design is influenced by maintenance issues

more than roadway structures.)

The high deflections in railway structures are not acceptable (in order to prevent

derailment). Hence, stability matters. That is why, maintenance concerns and fatigue

considerations need more attention and must be done in detail compared to the highway

industry. Different standards and specifications must be used. Welded connections and

continuous spans are good options for railway structures.

In general terms, the major components of track carrying structure are very similar to their

non-railway counterparts. Determination of the type of construction and type of material is

important. Generally, these are limited to timber, concrete and steel, or a combination of the

three. Each material has its specific advantages. Timber is economical, but has strength and

life limitations. Using structural timber is getting harder to accomplish for railway structures

in terms of its size and grade. Concrete is also economical, but its has a poor strength to

weight ratio. Steel has a good strength to weight ratio, but is expensive. The material chosen

for the spans will generally determine the designation of the bridge.

i. Bridge deck :

The bridge deck is a major portion of a bridge which can be considered as-sort of- the surface

of the bridge, that carries track rails. In such case, the engineer may not think of the typical

railroad bridge as having a deck, while designing. Railroad bridges are designed as either

open deck or ballast deck structures. Some bridges use direct fixation of the rails to the

supporting structure. Open deck bridges have ties supported directly on load-carrying

elements of the structure (such as girders) The dead loads for open deck structures are

significantly less than for ballast deck structures. However, open decks transfer more of the

dynamic effects of live load into the bridge than ballast decks, as they can transfer the

7

dynamic effecs of impact coming from the bridge to the railway, which is not desired for this

kind of an elevated railway bridge project. Ballast deck bridges have the track rails supported

on ballast, which is carried by the structural elements of the bridge. Ballast deck structures

offer advantages in ride and maintenance requirements. Unlike open decks, the track

alignment on ballast deck spans can be handled using standard track maintenance equipment.

Most railroads currently prefer ballast decks for new structures.

ii. Ballast : Ballast is the component of the structure composed of broken, sharp, strong,

angular stones-such as basalt or granite- which spreads the effects transferred from traverse

(such as vibration) without being exposed to permenant settlement and deflection. In brief,

ballast provides an elastic bed for the railway, thanks to its ability to distribute the incoming

load homogenously by the friction between stones. Ballast also serves as drainage and

protects the deck from mud, freeze, and decay by intercepting rail tracks from soil. The

depth of ballast must be between 30-60 cm. Ballast must be homogenous in terms of particle

size, with particles capable of passing through 6 cm sieve and not pass through 3 cm sieve.

iii. Traverse:

Traverse is the type of structure that transfers the load from specified load model and transfer

it through wider surface (ballast) and provides stability to track rails. It is essential for

eccentricity of the railway. The distance between the centroids of two traverse can be taken as

62-63 cm. For the Ankara-Eskiehir high-speed train railway, this distance is taken as 60 cm.

Traverse has to be made with a concrete stronger than Portland. Traverse also has an

advantage of minimizing noise and impact. Traverse can be preferred as timber, steel, plastic,

concrete monoblocks, or pre-stressed blocks. Timber is preferred due to its elasticity and the

fact that it does not damage ballast. Its maintenance is easy and cheap, however, timber

traverse is effected by moisture easily and is weak against drainage and fire, not to mention its

short life-time. Steel traverse is easier to produce, compared to timber. However, the

possibility of abrasion is significant which may reduce strength, and cause cracking where the

traverse are settled. To prevent this, connections must be done properly. Also, due to the lightweight property of steel traverse, stability can not be maintained as much as it is by timber or

concrete. All types of traverse have advantages and disadvantages due to the type of the

project, however, it must be considered that for the high-speed train railways, concrete

monoblock types are mostly preferred around the world, which is also suitable for this project.

This is because concrete monoblock traverse provides extreme stability due to its heavy

weight, and protection for gauge. For an elevated high-speed railway bridge, stability is the

most important case.

2. DESIGN CRITERIA

In design stage, as code, The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way

Association AREMA is chosen. AREMA is a simple and valid code for this type of design.

While designing an appropriate girder to be used, sections are chosen based on limitations of

AREMA. For the preliminary design stage, dead loads and live loads, and impact effects are

considered. Although seismic actions are to be taken into account, they have not been touched

upon during preliminary stage.

The elevated bridge designed to have a total length of 500m, composed of identical spans

having 25m length, 9m width. Below the station, free space is to be evaluated for parking lot.

Hence, in this report, all of the calculations done and information given are based on a single

25m span. (KOLON BOYUTLARI, NE KADARI TOPRAK NDE, FOOTING/PIER NE

BOKSA ONLARIN BOYUTLARI). The structure is carried by five identical I-beam girders

between each column, made by A588 weathering steel. All of the loads above are carried by

these girders. Ballast type deck is preferred, having a thickness of 0.3m. Deck is made of C55

concrete. Ballast is composed of broken basalt stones, having a thickness of 0.5 m. Traverse is

preferred as monoblock concrete. In preliminary stage, rail tracks have not been identified

properly.

b. Live Load

For live load, two types of train models are considered; that are LM-71 and Cooper E-80

Models. Firstly, LM-71 is taken. However, since Cooper E-80 Model gives a heavier live

load and is appropriate for all AREMA limitations, Cooper E-80 is decided to use, to be on the

safe side.

In the figure below, the portion that creates the maximum moment on mid-span is shown.

According to this loading, for 25 m span, 4210 kN/lane is obtained. Two lanes are to be

designed; total live load is 8420 kN.

Mmax(Mid-span)=11520 kNm (One lane)

Mmax(Mid-span)=23040 kNm (Two lanes)

Mmax(Mid-span)=23040/5=4608 kNm per girder

c. Dead Loads:

Ballast: It must be noted that since the designed bridge is straight for 500m, no anti-drainage

plates are needed.

For ballast, basalt is taken as stone type, having basalt(broken)=1.954 t/m3. Dimensions of volume

of ballast is 25m*9m*0.5m, thus, the ballast volume is;

25*9*0.5=112.5 m3

The void ratio of basalt is 0.37, which indicates that 112.5*(1-0.37)=71 m 3 of crushed basalt

stone is needed.

Total ballast weight (One span): 1.954*71=139 t*9.96=1385 kN

Load per girder: 1385/5=277 kN per girder

Mmax(Ballast)=11*252/8=860 kNm per girder

Mmax(Ballast)=860*5=4300kNm

Traverse: As it is stated above, C55 concrete monoblocks are to be used. Not only

monoblocks are preferred universally for high-speed railways, but also suitable for this kind

of project due to its extreme stability. For this case, derailment is more critical than any other

railway project. Traverse are to be settled as there are going to be 60cm between centroids of

two traverse, and buried 10 cm to the ballast. The space between two traverse is taken as 30

cm. In such case, 42 traverse are to be settled for one lane, making 84 traverse for a 25 m

span.

The sections of traverse are;

10

Bottom width: 320 mm

Height: 20 cm

Mid-height: 17.5 cm

Length: 240 cm

Weight: 242 kg

Life-time: 20-30 years

Total weight (84 traverse): 20.33 tons (202.57 kN)

Mmax(Traverse)= (202.57/25)*252/8=632.8 kNm

Mmax(Traverse)=632.8/5=126.6 kNm per girder

Ballast protection wall: There is to be two platforms between railways, hence, designing

barriers is not necessary but using ballast protection wall. There are to be two walls near two

lanes, each having 30 cmx50 cm dimensions. (2 kN/m)

Mmax(walls)=(2*252/8)*2=312.5 kNm

Mmax(walls)=312.5/5=62.5 kNm per girder

Tracks: Two lanes are to be designed. For preliminary, the distributed load for rails is taken as

0.65*4 rails=2.6 kN/m

Mrail=0.52*252/8=203.1 kNm

Mrail=203.1/5=40.63 kNm per girder

Deck: Dimensions of the deck are to be 25m*9m*0.3m= 67.5 m3 (conc=25 kN/m3)

Total dead load by deck: 67.5*25=1687.5 kN

Dead load per girder: 1687.5/5=337.5 kN

Mmax(Deck)= (1687.5/25)*252/8=5273.4 kNm

Mmax(Deck)= 5273.4/5=1055.7 kNm per girder

LL: 8420 kN

11

Ballast: 1385 kN

Traverse: 202.57 kN

Ballast Protection Wall: 50 kN

Rail: 65 kN

Deck: 1687.5 kN

Girder: 761.2 kN

TOTAL LOAD: 12571.3 kN

In order to determine the ideal section first we calculate the loads that are superimposed dead

load (including ballast, deck, rail and tie), live load and impact. We tried to satisfy the

requirement 0.55 Fy.. We formed an excel sheet, then, grouped the loads. We tried several

sections. First we try sections whose flange thicknesses are 12.14 cm and web thickness is 8

cm. These sections were capable of carrying the stress applied but due to welding problems

we could not choose these ones. Plates having thicknesses more than 5 cm are not suggested.

Top and bottom stresses of girder are calculated as fresh concrete on girder, and as stiff

composite structure. Due to this, neutral axis of the structure, hence, stress values at top and

bottom do change. Instead of calculating the capacity for every section picked, neutral axis of

every section, moment of inertia, and top and bottom stresses for each section is formulated

via Excel.

12

Moreover, as we proportioning our section we took into account some limits which are:

D

* tw

<150

bf

* 2tf

<12

13

Figure 6 I-Section

bf >

D

6

After several trials we have chosen our section. Dimensions of

the section is:

*tf = 5 cm

*tw= 3 cm

*bf = 0.4 m

*D = 1.4 m

Our section also satisfy the limits we have covered above:

D

* tw

<150 ..........................

bf

* 2tf

<12 ...........................

bf >

D

6 ...........................

(46.67)

(4)

(5cm>3.3cm)

3. PIER DESIGN

a. General

Designing the pier is one of the most important subject for the rail road. In preliminary design

stage, exact calculations were not done, however cross-sections are estimated with enough

accuracy. To design the cross-section several types of loads are needed.

14

First of all we decided to use Cooper E80 Train whose loads are determined by the AREMA.

After that, ballast, deck, rail and girder loads are determined. We make 2 analyses with 2

different girder loads. On the other hand, deck, rail and ballast loads are fixed to a value.

Cooper E80 train is the live load of the system. Therefore, we tried to find the appropriate live

load for the system. While designing the girders and the piers, different live load

arrangements have been used. Pier system expressed with two 12,5m girders standing on the

pier. Also these girders are supported by pins in order not to have moment at the supports

which is also the actual case. We analyze 5 different live load arrangements for B-B section as

it shown down:

15

16

As it can be seen from the figures, to compute easily we do not divide the load according to

their affect but we divide it from the mid-point of the span to ease the preliminary

calculations.

Moreover combining these load combinations with each other we tried to find the most

appropriate live load arrangement for A-A section.

c. Design Stage

Column Head

After determining the live load and dead load; concrete column and the head of the column

was designed. To design the column head which is behave like beam we used the formulas

given in TS500. Kl value for materials that have been used (C50 and S420) is 150 mm 2/kN

17

and Km is equal to 119 mm 2/kN. (Uur Ersoy, 1984) We compare the calculated K which is

equal to:

b wd 2

K=

Md

P1-2-3-4-5 values are calculated under the light of dead and live load and maximum moment

has been calculating according to these values.

After calculating the maximum moment we tried to find the best fitting cross-section. As it

seems from the table below, the best section is 2000mmx1300mm. So the column head will be

2000mmx1300mmx9000mm.

18

Column

After preliminary design of the column head finished, column has been designed according to

the loads coming from the column head. Also to determine the column cross-sections we used

0,1*fcd*Ac=P (Karayollar Genel Mdrl, 2015) in order not to add moment interaction.

Moreover, at column section we roughly calculated reinforcing steel in order to estimate the

cost of the structure.

19

At the end of the calculations it has seemed that we need cross-sections with dimensions

1600mmx3600mm. And steel area estimated by assuming all moment carried by the steel

reinforcement and as it seen from the table above 32x32 steel needed. In calculations second

order moment has not calculated. They will be calculated in advanced design.

20

4. FOUNDATION DESIGN

1. General

According to calculation, 6 piles which is 12 m length 0.8 m diameter concrete piles were

designed for carrying nearly 12000 kN load which comes from structure. 2 piles were

designed in longitudinal direction of bridge whereas 3 piles were used in lateral direction of

bridge. Dimension of footing is 6m*6m. Necessary check was done according to TS500 code

for reinforcement calculation. Necessary explanations and soil constants can be found from

Soil Investigation and Soil Properties section.

Site Works

Detailed subsoil observations and investigations were executed in order to determine subsoil

conditions. Geological units at the site are determined by using surface geology, boreholes

and geophysical measurements.

Within the scope of subsoil investigations, 19 boreholes having 451.1 m total length were

completed. Within boreholes systematically at every 1.5m SPT tests were performed.

Soil Profile

The site is mainly covered with a 0.5m thick top soil which is ballast material or vegetable

soil. Below top soil, light brown-brown-dark brown, medium dense, dense, very dense

gravelly clayey sand, sandy clayey gravel, silty gravel composite backfill material is

encountered down to 1,7 m to 3.4 m depth from the ground surface. Under this layer,

quaternary aged alluvial material greyish brown-brown-dark brown, medium stiff, stiff very

stiff gravelly clayey sand, clayey sand, sandy silty gravel, silt and clay encountered down to

21

3.1 m to 6.6 m depth from the ground surface. The grain size of gravel is observed medium

fine and partially coarse. At the bottom layer pinky, yellowish brown, very stiff partially

limestone creation clay and silty clay and at some level sandy gravel which belongs to

Glba Formation is encountered.

Laboratory Tests Results

According the tests results, soils compromising the upper clayey layer are classified mostly as

GC, SC with some GM. The underlying clay layer are mostly classified as CH and some CL

and. The characteristics of the soil are shown below.

Subsoil Units

Gravelly

Clayey Sand

Parameters

Internal Friction Angle

Cohesion

Unit Weight

Elastic Modulus

Symbol

Es

Proposed Value

35.0

0 kPa

19 kN/m3

30000 KPa

Symbol

Cu

Es

Proposed Value

0

15 kPa

19 kN/m3

150 KPa

35000 KPa

Symbol

Cu

Es

Proposed Value

0

25 kPa

19,5 kN/m3

225 KPa

60000 KPa

Subsoil Units

Clay 1

Parameters

Internal Friction Angle

Cohesion

Unit Weight

Undrained shear strength

Elastic Modulus

Subsoil Units

Clay 2

Parameters

Internal Friction Angle

Cohesion

Unit Weight

Undrained shear strength

Elastic Modulus

Calculations are based on location SK106 which is middle of the construction area. The SPT

values, N30 and N60 values which are calculated according to N30 values are below. Peck

and Hanson and Thornburn charts are used by determining of square footing dimension.

no(SK106 depth(m N30(field o'

CN

N1

N60

Nave(B=7m Nave(B=6m)

22

1,5

20

28,5

34

57

4,5

28

85,5

25

109

7,5

12

122,5

9,3

23

138,7

10,5

30

149,5

8

9

12,4

13,5

34

25

166,6

176,5

10

15,4

29

193,6

11

16,5

37

203,5

12

18,5

27

221,5

13

19,5

32

230,5

14

21,5

23

248,5

15

16

22,5

24,3

26

34

257,5

273,7

17

25,5

31

284,5

18

27,1

50

298,9

19

28,5

50

311,5

20

30

45

325

1,83196

2

1,29539

3

1,05768

4

0,93675

4

0,88363

1

0,83042

5

0,79986

8

0,75770

7

0,73615

0,70288

8

0,68557

8

0,65713

1

0,64417

4

0,62040

6

0,60946

7

0,591155

0,57982

6

0,56568

7

0,55412

8

0,54249

7

36

27

44

33

29

21

23

17

10

19

14

23

17

25

18

18

13

20

15

25

18

17

12

20

15

14

10

15

20

11

15

17

12

28

21

27

20

24

18

38

38

Total

Load(KN)

(qn)all(KN/m2 qnet(KN/m2

Gw(m) H(m)

B(m)

depth(m)

Cw

)

)

320,061224

15683

5,5

1

7

3,5 0,7812

326,5416

5

23

qall>qnet

OK

The check was done according to TS500 prevision.

Vpc > Vpd

Vpc = * fctd * Up * d

Up = 2*((3,1+1)+(1,6+1))

d=1m

= 1.0

Vpd = N1-Fa

Fa= qsp (b+d)(h+d)

PUNCHING

Fa(KN)

fcd(Mpa) )

)

)

N(KN)

3411,85265

29662,1 11046,1

3

40 2,213594

6

5 14458

Vpc>Vpd OK

Table 14 Punching Shear Calculations

Accordingly the requirement calculation is carried out below for vertical load capacity of a

single pile.

Qult = Qs + Qp

Qult = Ultimate Bearing Capacity

Qs = Bearing due to friction

Qp = Bearing due to tip

Qs = fs * As (for sand)

fs = v * K * tan ()

Qs = *cu* As (for clay)

Qp = Nc* cu* Ap

24

Pile

Capacity

Qult(KN) Qp(KN)

Qs(KN) Qs2(KN) Qs1(KN)

2795,5599 824,668071 1970,89 1722,37 248,513

7

6

2

8

7

Cu

6 Piles

Qtotal(KN)

16773,3598

Ks

150

Nc

D(m)

0,5

v0'

7

92,25

tan()

0,43

0,49

Depth(m)

1

12

Qtotal>Total

Load

OK

Consolidation settlement due to piles were calculated below by using 2:1(V:H) pressure

distribution.

(Soed=H*mv*)

consolidation

settlement

mv(clay1)

mv(clay2)

5,50E8,00E-05

05

2(Kp 3(Kp

a)

a)

70,878 41,243

169,2885815

61

92

1(Kpa)

Soed (cm)

1,10E-01

Table 16 Consolidation Settlement Calculations

Consolidation settlement is 0,1 cm, therefore structure is safe. The drawings of the structure

are showed on the next page.

25

26

5. COST ESTIMATION

In this step of the project, only the material costs are calculated. At the final design, the

quantity take off calculations will be performed and total cost estimation will be submitted.

Beam Section

Dimensions of the beam:

*tf = 5 cm

*tw= 3 cm

*bf = 0.4 m

*D = 1.4 m

*Hi = 1.3 m

Cross Sectional Area = (0.05*0.4)*2+(1.3*0.03) = 0.079 m2

Length of span = 25 m

Number of sections in span = 5

Volume of steel = 25*5*0.079 = 9.875 m3

Number of span = 20

Total volume of steel = 20*9.875 = 197.5 m3

Weight of steel = 197.5*7850/1000 = 1550.4 tons

Unit price of weathering steel is 2300 TL/ton

Steel price = 2300*1550.4 = 3 565 920 TL

Column Section

Dimensions of the rectangular column:

*a = 3.1 m

*b= 1.6 m

27

*h= 10.5 m

Cross Sectional Area = 3.1*1.6 = 4.96 m2

Volume of column = 4.96* 10.5 = 52.08 m3

Number of columns = 20

Dimensions of the column head:

*a = 9 m

*b= 2 m

*h= 1.3 m

Cross Sectional Area = 2*9 = 18 m2

Volume of column = 18* 1.3 = 23.4 m3

Total volume of concrete for column = 20*(52.08+23.4) = 1509,6 m3

Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3

Concrete price for column = 1509.6 * 120 = 181 152 TL

Steel Reinforcement

For column we used 3230 steel

For column head we used 4530 steel

Unit mass per meter for 30 steel =3.30 kg/m

Length of reinforcement used for column = 11 * 32 =352 m

Length of reinforcement used for column head = 1.5 * 45 = 67.5 m

Total reinforcement used for one pier = 352+67.5 = 419.5 m

For 20 pier = 20* 419.5 = 8390 m

Reinforcement weight = 8390*3.3 = 27 687 kg

Unit price of reinforcement is 1700 TL/ton

Reinforcement price = 27687 /1000*1700 = 47 068 TL

Excavation

Volume of excavation = 3.5*8*8 = 224 m3

Unit Price of excavation = 2,6 TL /m3

28

Number of footing = 20

Excavation Price = 20*224*2,6 = 11 648 TL

Deck

Cross Sectional Area = 0.3*9 = 2.7 m2

Span length = 25

Volume of concrete = 25* 2.7 = 67.5 m3

Number of span = 20

Total volume of concrete for deck = 20*67.5 = 1350 m3

Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3

Concrete price for column = 1350 * 120 = 162 000 TL

Ballast

Cross Sectional Area = 0.5*9 = 4.5 m2

Span length = 25

Volume of ballast to be filled = 25* 4.5 = 112.5 m3

ebasalt(rockfill) = 0.37

Volume of basalt to be used = 112.5*(1-0.37) = 71 m3

Number of span = 20

Total volume of basalt = 20*71 = 1420 m3

Weight of basalt = 1420*1954/1000 = 2774.7 tons

Unit price of basalt is 26 TL/ton

Basalt price = 26*2774.7= 72 142.2 TL

Traverse

Weight of one traverse = 0.242 tons

Number of traverse in one span (Two lanes) = 84

Weight of traverse in one span = 84*0.242 = 20.33 tons

Number of span = 20

29

Unit weight of traverse (C55) is 2.51 tons/m3

Volume of traverse = 406.6 / 2.51 = 162 m3

Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3

Concrete price for traverse = 162 * 120 = 19 440 TL

Ballast Protection Wall

Cross Sectional Area = 0.3*0.5 = 0.15 m2

Number of wall in one span = 2

Span length = 25

Volume of two walls = 2*25* 0.15 = 7.5 m3

Number of span = 20

Total volume of concrete for deck = 20*7.5 = 150 m3

Unit price of concrete is 120 TL /m3

Concrete price for column = 150 * 120 = 18 000 TL

Rail

Estimated rail weight = 20 * 6.53= 130.6 tons ( two lanes- four rail)

Unit price of rail is 1638 TL/ton

Steel price = 1638 * 130.6 = 213 923 TL

Total Cost =3 565 920+181 152+47 068+11 648+162 000+72 142+19 440+18 000+213

923=4 291 293 TL

Considering malfunction Total Cost will be about 5 500 000 TL

30

Bumper design. ( bumper is a device to prevent railway vehicles from going past the end of a

physical section of track. )

Bracing for girders ( in order to prevent buckling)

Detailed buckling checks

Secondary moments effects for columns

Detailed reinforcement calculations for columns

Earthquake effects

Precautions must be taken considering columns being damaged in case of a car accident

Secondary settlement calculation for foundation

Calculation of moment capacity of pile groups.

7. CONCLUSION

Span length is 25 m.

Cooper E80 is used for live load calculations.

For ballast, basalt is taken as stone type

C55 concrete monoblocks are to be used as traverse.

The space between two traverse is taken as 30 cm.

Tracks: Two lanes are to be designed. For preliminary, the distributed load for rails is taken as

Deck: Dimensions of the deck are to be 25m*9m*0.3m= 67.5 m3 (conc=25 kN/m3)

Total Loads for a single span 12571.3 kN

Determined section dimensions of girder are tf = 5 cm, tw= 3 cm, bf = 0.4 m, D = 1.4 m

Determined section dimensions of column head are H= 1.3m B=2m , L=9m.

Determined section dimensions of column are H=10.5m, B=1.6m, L=3.1m.

Dimensions of pile cap are H=1m, B=7m.

Dimensions of pile are H=12m, D=1m

31

8. REFERENCES

Yapma likin Teknolojilerin Gelitirilmesi Teknik Klavuzu. Ankara.

TS500, Betonarme YaplarnTasarm ve Yapm Kurallar, 2000

Birand, A., Ergun, U., Erol, O., CE366 Foundation Engineering 1 Lecture Notes, 2011

http://megep.meb.gov.tr/mte_program_modul/moduller_pdf/Balast%20Ve

%20Travers.pdf adresinden alnd

Yapma likin Teknolojilerin Gelitirilmesi Teknik Klavuzu. Ankara.

https://www.arema.org/publications/pgre/Practical_Guide/PGChapter8.pdf adresinden

alnd

Wai-Fah Chen, L. D. (1999). Brigde Engineering Handbook. Florida: CRC Press LLC.

32

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.