Sample Thesis

Anallysis and Deesign of RCC
C Box Culvvert using WSM

W & LSM
M
A
DISSSERTATION N
SUBMIT
TTED IN TH
HE PARTIAAL FULFILM MENT OF REQUIREM
R ENT
FOR THE
T AWAR RD OF THE DEGREE OF O
M
MASTER O TECHNO
OF OLOGY
IN
TRAANSPORTA ATION ENG GINEERING
G
(Civill Engineering)
BY
An nkit Singh
(Roll No
N – 31407115)
Under the
t guidancee of
Dr. Praaveen Aggarrwal
P
Professor
Civil Enginneering Depaartment
N
National Insstitute of Tecchnology
Kuurukshetra
NATION
NAL INSTIITUTE OF TECHNOL
LGY
KURUKSSHETRA-136119
J
June 2016
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the dissertation entitled “Analysis and Design of RCC Box Culvert using
WSM & LSM” in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of
Master of Technology in Transportation Engineering (Civil Engineering) National Institute of
Technology Kurukshetra is an authentic record of my own work carried out during a period of
July 2015 to June 2016 under the supervision and guidance of Dr. Praveen Aggarwal, Professor
of Civil Engineering Department National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra-136119.
The matter presented in this dissertation has not been submitted by me for the award of
any other degree of this institute or any other institute.
Ankit Singh
Roll No.3140715
This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best of my
knowledge.
Date: Dr. Praveen Aggarwal

Place – Kurukshetra Professor
Civil Engineering Department
National Institute of Technology
Kurukshetra - 136119
(i)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am in debt to a number of people who helped me throughout the course of this dissertation.
First of all I would like to thank Dr. Praveen Aggarwal my thesis supervisor for all of the help,
hard work and patience that they put into this dissertation. I have learned a lot from them over
the last couple of years and I am very lucky to have them as my thesis advisors.
I am highly indebted to Dr. S.K. Madan head of the Department of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra for his administrative help and all kind of support
from department.
My thanks are also due the faculty and staff members of Civil Engineering Department
for their help and encouragement throughout the dissertation work.
Thank you to my parents who have supported me from the beginning. You are truly a
blessing in my life and I would not be here without your constant Love and support and also I
would like to say thank you to my friends and classmates who helped me every time whenever I
needed.
Finally I would like to thank my GOD who has blessed me and remained faithful throughout.
Ankit Singh
Roll No - 3140715
(ii)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE [i]
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT [ii]
TABLE OF CONTENTS [iii]
LIST OF FIGURES [vi]
LIST OF TABLES [viii]
LIST OF SYMBOLS OR ABBREVIATION [ix]
ABSTRACT [xi]
CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL 1
1.2 TOPIC OF RESEARCH AND ITS IMPORTANCE 2
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 2
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 2
1.5 PRESENTATION OF THE STUDY 3
CHAPTER - 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL 4
2.2 BOX CULVERT 4
2.3 COMPONENTS OF BOX CULVERT 5
2.3.1 Top Slab 5
2.3.2 Bottom Slab 5
2.3.3 Side Walls 5
2.3.4 Cushion Load (If present) 5
2.4 LOADS OF BOX CULVERT 5
2.4.1 Concentrated Load 5
2.4.2 Uniform Distributed Load 6
2.4.3 Weight of Side Wall 6
2.4.4 Water Pressure from inside of Box Culvert 6
2.4.5 Earth Pressure on the Vertical Side Wall 6
2.4.6 Uniform Lateral Pressure on the Vertical Side Wall 6
2.5 ADVANTAGEOUS OF BOX CULVERT 7
(iii)
2.6 APPLICATION OF BOX CULVERT 7
2.7 AN OVERVIEW OF VARIOUS PAPERS 9
CHAPTER 3
STANDARDS SPECIFICATIONS
3.1 GENERAL 12
3.2 IRC LOADINGS 12
3.2.1 IRC Class 70R Loading 12
3.2.2 IRC Class AA Loading 14
3.2.3 IRC Class A and IRC Class B Loading 15
3.3 IMPACT EFFECT 16
3.3.1 for IRC Class A or IRC Class B Loading 16
3.3.2 for IRC Class 70R OR IRC Class AA Loading 16
3.4 EFFECTIVE WIDTH OF DISPERSION 16
3.5 EFFECTIVE LEGTH OF LOAD 17
3.6 REDUCTION IN THE LONGITUDINAL EFFECT FOR MORE THAN TWO
LANE TRAFFIC 17
3.7 WORKING STRESS METHOD (WSM) 18
3.8 LIMIT STATE METHOD (LSM) 21
CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
4.1 ANALYSIS & DESIGN CONDITION OF BOX CULVERT 24
4.1.1 Case-1 Box Empty 24
4.1.2 Case-2 Box Full (With Live Load) 24
4.1.3 Case-3 Box Full (Without Live Load) 25
4.2 DESIGN LOAD OF BOX CULVERT 25
4.2.1. Top Slab Dead Load 25
4.2.2 Top Slab Live Load 25
4.2.3 Bottom Slab Dead Load 26
4.2.4 Bottom Slab Live Load 26
4.2.5 Earth Pressure due to Earth-fill on Side Wall [Dead Load] 27
4.2.6 Water Pressure from inside on Side Wall [Dead Load] 27
(iv)
4.2.7 Earth Pressure due to Live Load Surcharge on
Side Wall [Live Load] 28
4.2.8 Critical Load Combination 28
4.3 MANUAL ANALYSIS 30
4.3.1 Design Load Calculation 30
4.3.2 Design Moment Calculation 32
4.3.3 Distribution Factor 34
4.3.4 Design Moment 34
4.4 STAAD PRO ANALYSIS 34
4.5 FORMULAS USED FOR DESIGN BY WSM 35
4.6 FORMULAS USED FOR DESIGN BY LSM 36
4.7 SAMPLE PROBLEM 37
CHAPTER – 5
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
5.1 RESULTS OF ANALYSIS BY MS-EXCEL & STAAD PRO 64
5.2 DESIGN BY MS-EXCEL TOOL 64
5.2.1 Effect on Area of Steel in WSM and LSM Approach 64
5.2.2 Saving in Depth of Section in LSM over WSM with
Constant Steel Area 67
5.3 DISCUSSION 70
CHAPTER – 6
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
ANNEXURE
1. Moment Analysis by STAAD Pro for IRC Class 70R Loading 75
2. Moment Analysis by STAAD Pro for IRC Class A Loading 80
3. Developed MS-Excel tool 85
3.1 Design showing saving in Steel with constant Section 88
3.2 Design showing saving in material with constant Area of Steel 92
(v)
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Figure 2.0 Schematic diagram of a RCC Box Culvert 4
2. Figure 2.1 Multi-Celled Box 7
3. Figure 2.2 Box Culvert at Intersection 8
4. Figure 2.3 Box Culvert below a Railway Track 8
5. Figure 2.4 Box Culvert at Cross Drainage 8
6. Figure 3.0 IRC Class 70R Loading 13
7. Figure 3.1 IRC Class AA Loading 14
8. Figure 3.2 IRC Class A Loading and IRC Class B Loading 15
9. Figure 4.0 Box Empty 24
10. Figure 4.1 Box Full (With Live Load) 24
11. Figure 4.2 Box Full (Without Live load) 25
12. Figure 4.3 Top Slab dead load 25
13. Figure 4.4 Top Slab live load 25
14. Figure 4.5 Bottom Slab dead load 26
15. Figure 4.6 Bottom Slab live load 26
16. Figure 4.7 Side Fill Earth Pressure on Left 27
17. Figure 4.8 Side Fill Earth Pressure on Right 27
18. Figure 4.9 Water Pressure on Left 27
19. Figure 5.0 Water Pressure on Right 27
20. Figure 5.1 Live Load Surcharge on Left 28
21. Figure 5.2 Live Load Surcharge on Right 28
22. Figure 5.3 Critical Load Combination 28
23. Figure 5.4 Load Combination [Box Full With Live] 29
24. Figure 5.5 Load Combination [Box Full Without Live Load] 29
25. Figure 5.6 Soil Base Pressure 31
26. Figure 5.7 Box Culvert notations 37
27. Figure 5.8 Wheel imprint of IRC Class 70R Loading 39
28. Figure 5.9 Wheel imprint of IRC Class A Loading 41
29. Figure 6.0 Saving in Steel using LSM approach over WSM for
Fe415 Steel Grade 65
(vi)
30. Figure 6.1 Saving in Steel using LSM approach over WSM for
28. Figure 6.2 Saving in Material using LSM approach over WSM for
29. Figure 6.3 Saving in Material using LSM approach over WSM for
(vii)
LIST OF TABLES
1. Table 3.0 Reduction in the longitudinal effect for more than
2 lane traffic 17
2. Table 3.1 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as per
Working Stress Method 20
3. Table 3.2 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as per
Limit State Method 23
4. Table 4.0 Side Wall Load Calculation 31
5. Table 4.1 Moment Calculation for Slab 32
6. Table 4.2 Side Wall Moment Calculation 33
7. Table 5.0 Design Moments by MS-Excel tool and STAAD.Pro 64
8. Table 5.1 Saving in Steel using LSM approach over WSM for
9. Table 5.2 Saving in Steel using LSM approach over WSM for
10. Table 5.3 Saving in Material using LSM approach over WSM for
11. Table 5.4 Saving in Material using LSM approach over WSM for
(viii)
LIST OF SYMBOLS OR ABBREVIATION
IRC Indian Road Congress
IS Indian Standards
WSM Working Stress Method
LSM Limit State Method
Kn Kilo Newton
M Meter
MM Mili Meter
K Neutral Axis Factor
J Lever Arm Factor
R Moment of Resistance Factor
ℓ Clear Span
h Clear Height
L Effective Span
H Effective Height
σst Steel Grade
σcbc Concrete Grade
Ke.p. Co-efficient of Earth Pressure at rest
M Modular Ratio
tw.c. Thickness of Wearing Course
tcu. Total Cushion on top (If present)
ttop Top Slab thickness
tbottom Bottom Slab thickness
twall Side Wall thickness
ԃconc Unit Weight of Concrete
ԃsoil Unit Weight of Earth-fill
ԃw Unit Weight of Water
Ф Angle of internal friction
FEM Fixed End Moment
τc Permissible Shear Stress in Concrete
τv Shear Stress in Concrete
(ix)
d Effective Depth
D Total Depth
Ast Reinforcement Area
Mx Moment of x Member
MU Factored Moment of Resistance
V Shear Force
VU Factored Shear Force
p% Percentage of Steel Area
W Design Load for particular member
of Box Culvert
(x)
ABSTRACT
As per standard practice bridges (Short Span less than 6M) were designed by IRC: 6 – 2000 &
IRC: 21 – 2000. Both the codes were based upon Working Stress Method. But IRC has revised
IRC: 6 – 2000 as IRC: 6 – 2014 and published a new code IRC: 112 - 2011 for bridges design.
These are based upon the Limit State Method. In the present study using these codes a RCC Box
Culvert of 4M span & height is analyzed & designed with WSM approach as well as LSM
approach. A MS – Excel sheet is also developed by manual calculation for the same. Results of
manual analysis, MS – Excel sheet & Staad Pro are compared for design the problem The Design
based on both the approaches WSM & LSM are also compared & a parametric study is carried
out by keeping Steel Grade as constant with different Grade of Concrete and finding the %
reduction in Steel Reinforcement as well as % reduction in section dimensions due to LSM
approach over WSM approach. This study will eventually comment on the design philosophy
LSM & WSM regarding the design of RCC Box Culvert and discussed which one will perform
better economically as well as structurally.
The developed MS – Excel tool is user friendly, error free & fast for convenient-application for
the RCC Box Culvert Design.
(xi)
CHAPTER – 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
A culvert is a structure that allows water to flow under a road, railroad, trail, or
similar obstruction from one side to the other side. Typically embedded so as to
be surrounded by soil, a culvert may be made from RCC. Culverts are commonly
used both as cross-drains for ditch relief and to pass water under a road at natural
drainage and stream crossings. A culvert may be a bridge-like structure designed
to allow vehicle or pedestrian traffic to cross over the waterway while allowing
adequate passage for the water. Culverts come in many sizes and shapes including
round, elliptical, flat-bottomed, pear-shaped, and box-like constructions. The
culvert type and shape selection is based on a number of factors which include
requirements for hydraulic performance, limitation on upstream water surface
elevation and roadway embankment height.
Box culvert is one of the type of culvert that provide passage of traffic
movement over an opening without closing of it and consisting a rectangular or
square opening whose span and height of side walls is limited to 4m. It is suitable
where the bearing capacity of soil is poor or discharge in the cross drainage
structure is less. In such situation a box culvert is an ideal structure. The road
level can be at top of box culvert or may be at some height due to earth fill or
cushion above the box culvert.
1

1.2 Topic of Research and its Importance
The topic “Analysis and Design of RCC Box Culvert using WSM & LSM” has
been selected for present study to compare the two design approaches. Box
culvert is quite common cross drainage structure. In the present study a MS Excel
sheet is developed for the analysis and design of RCC box culvert. With the help
of this sheet user shall be better able to understand the design of box culvert by
the two design approaches. An easy comparison of material economy is also
possible with the developed excel sheet along with faster, error free, user friendly
toll for the analysis and design of box culvert using both WSM as well as LSM
approach.
1.3 Objectives of the Study

Present study “Analysis and Design of RCC Box Culvert using WSM & LSM”
aims at collecting information on suitability of LSM approach for design of RCC
Box Culvert. In India till 2014 bridge design was based on the working stress
method. Relevant IRC codes were IRC: 6 - 2000 & IRC: 21 – 2000. Recently
Indian road congress has revised IRC: 6 and published a new code for bridge
design. These new codes i.e. IRC: 6 - 2014 & IRC: 112 - 2011 are based on limit
state method. The objectives of the study include.
1. To analyzed and design RCC Box Culvert with both WSM and LSM approach
2. To develop MS-Excel sheet for analysis and design of RCC Box Culvert using
two approaches
3. To work out material economy by compared the results of two approaches
1.4 Scope of the study

The study has been conducted on a RCC Box Culvert up to 4M span. MS – Excel
tool is designed as per IRC: 6 – 2000 & IRC: 21 – 2000 and IRC: 6 – 2014 &
IRC: 112 – 2011 as applicable for 1-Lane to 8-Lane carriageway. In the
developed tool, provisions are made for IRC Class 70R and IRC Class A loading.
The results of analysis and design obtained through developed excel sheet are
compared and check by manual method and through STAAD Pro.
2

In the present study a box culvert of 4M span on 2-lane road is analyzed
and designed, other combinations may also be used.
1.5 Presentation of the study

The work undertaken for the dissertation has been presented in six chapters.
Chapter – 1 “INTRODUCTION” discusses the introduction of culvert, topic of
research and its importance, objectives of study and scope of the study.
Chapter – 2 “LITERATURE REVIEW” includes the Box Culvert introduction,
Components of Box Culvert, Loads of Box Culvert, advantageous of Box Culvert,
its different applications in transportation and overview of various papers.
Chapter – 3 “STANDARDS SPECIFICATIONS” includes different standard
suggested by IRC Indian Road Congress for analysis & designing of RCC Box
Culvert. Some of standards that are cover in the study are as IRC Ladings, Impact
Factor, Effective width of dispersion, effective length of load and WSM & LSM
design philosophy introduction.
Chapter – 4 “METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY” describes the design load,
design condition, basis of manual analysis & STAAD PRO analysis, WSM
formulas used for design & LSM formulas used for design and sample problem.
Chapter – 5 “RESULT AND DISCUSSION” describes and discusses the results
as obtained using developed MS – Excel tool about the design of RCC Box
Culvert based on WSM & LSM. This will show us that only changing the
required input parameters we will see the whole change in the design philosophy
automatically & can comment which one is better economically & structurally.
Chapter – 6 “CONCLUSSIONS” In this chapter conclusion and scope for further
research is discussed.
3

CHAPTER – 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 General
Bridges are provided at location of cross drainage structure. Depending upon the
span, bridges are classified into three categories (I) Major Bridge (Span > 60M)
(II) Minor Bridge (Span 6M to 60M) and (III) Culvert (Span < 6M). Depending
upon the shape culverts can further be classified into (I) Slab Culvert (II) Box
Culvert and (III) Pipe culvert. Normally Box culverts are provided for span up to
4.0M.
2.2 Box Culvert

Box culvert is one of the type of culvert that provide passage of traffic movement
over an opening without closing of it and consisting a rectangular or square
opening whose span and height of side walls is limited to 4m. It is suitable where
the bearing capacity of soil is low and discharge in the cross drainage structure is
moderate. In such situation a box culvert is an ideal structure. The road level can
be at top of box culvert or may be at some height due to earth fill or cushion
above the box culvert (Figure 2.0).
Box culverts are economical due to their rigidity and monolithic action
and separate foundation are not required since the bottom slab resting directly on
the soil, serves as raft slab. For small discharges, single celled box culvert is used
and for large discharges, multi celled box culverts can be employed.
4

Figure 2.0 Schematic diagram of a RCC Box Culvert

2.3 Components of Box Culvert
Box Culvert is comprised of top slab, bottom slab and side walls. All three
components are rigidly connected to each other so that they can form a monolithic
RCC structure. The various parts of Box Culvert are discussed below.
2.3.1 Top Slab
Top slab of Box Culvert forms the deck slab which will be in direct contact of
moving traffic. Live Load makes the use of this top slab.
2.3.2 Bottom Slab

Bottom slab of Box Culvert is in direct contact of soil and resting over it. It is act
as a raft foundation over the soil and transmits the load to the earth surface.
2.3.3 Side Walls

These are the wall held vertically and are in contact with earth-fill laterally to
resist the earth pressure coming from the side fills. This is also resisting the water
pressure from inside of Box Culvert if Box is full of water.
2.3.4 Cushion (If Present)

If top of box culvert is subjected to some embankment. In this case the top of the
top slab are not in direct contact of traffic.
The load of this earth fill surcharge or embankment over the top of the top slab is
called as cushion load. The cushion height is generally vary 1M to 3M.
2.4 Loads of Box Culvert

All the parts of Box Culvert are subjected to the various loads. Their type and
nature of action are as under.
2.4.1 Concentrated Load
Top slab of box culvert forms the deck slab. We converted the concentrated wheel
load into uniformly distributed load calculated by using expression.
I
W=P
.
Where W = uniformly distributed load on the slab
5

P = wheel load as per IRC recommendations
beff. = effective width of dispersion
ℓeff. = effective length of load
I = impact factor as per IRC recommendations
2.4.2 Uniform distributed load

The dead load of top slab or deck slab, wearing coat & weight of embankment or
cushion (if present) is also considered to be uniformly distributed over the top
slab and a uniform soil reaction will developed on the bottom slab.
2.4.3 Weight of Side Wall

The weight of two side walls will be acting as a concentrated load and is also
assumed to be produced a uniform soil reaction on the bottom slab.
2.4.4 Water pressure from inside of Box Culvert

When box culvert is full with water, a water pressure from inside of wall is acting.
The pressure distribution on the walls is assumed to be triangular with a
maximum pressure intensity given by the expression.
p = w h at the base
Where w = density of water
h = depth of flow
2.4.5 Earth pressure on the vertical Side Wall

There is also pressure of side earth fill on the vertical side walls For computing
the earth pressure on the side walls of box culvert we make the use of Rankine
and Coulomb Theory.
2.4.6 Uniform lateral pressure on the vertical Side Wall

The live load acting on the top slab of box culvert also produces a uniform lateral
pressure on the side walls to some extent up to a particular height of side walls.
6

2.5 Advantageous of Box Culvert
2.5.1 The horizontal & vertical member of box culvert are made up of RCC slab that’s
why we can say the box culvert is a monolithic & rigid frame structure and its
operation of construction is very simple.
2.5.2 The conventional slab culvert will require the abutment while box culvert has no
abutment. In such situation box culvert is an economical & ideal structure.
2.5.3 The superimposed load as well as the dead load of box culvert is distributed
uniformly over a wider area because bottom slab works as a raft foundation.
2.5.4 Box culvert makes the use of portion both below and above of top slab. Like
above of top slab always use for movement of traffic and below of top slab may
be used for traffic & cross drainage structure.
2.5.5 The problem of erosion & scouring of earth fill below a conventional slab culvert
is almost completely reduced by the construction of box culvert.
2.6 Application of Box Culvert

2.6.1 If discharge in the drain is considerable then multi celled box culvert can be
employed together monolithically (Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1 Multi-Celled Box Culvert
7

2.6.2 When a more important road cross to a less important road and results in an
intersection. It is also used now days at location of intersection for facilitating the
cross movement below another road (Figure 2.2).
Figure 2.2 Box Culvert at Intersection

Location
2.6.3 In railway engineering also, where a railway line and a cross drainage structure
intersect in such situation box culvert is now widely used RCC structure (Figure
2.3).
Figure 2.3 Box Culvert below a Railway Track
2.6.5 In case of cross drainage structure, if discharge is less a box culvert is the single
RCC structure that can serve the required purpose if cross movement is to be
provided (Figure 2.4).
8

Figure 2.4 Box Culvert at Cross Drainage Structure

2.6.4 Most of the designers now prefer the box culvert over conventional slab culvert.
2.7 An Overview of various Papers

A number of journals and research papers have been published in Indian &
International journals as well as conferences on the similar study. These journals
and papers are given various results, conclusion, formulas regarding the RCC Box
Culvert. In the present study several of concept has been reviewed and used from
them. The Literature Review of some of few of Indian & international journal and
papers are discussed below:
Sinha and Sharma (2009) [1] have done a study in which they analyzed &
designed a RCC Box Culvert by manual and computer application. The study told
that effective width method mainly applicable for the top slab (particularly for the
box without cushion) and the design of box is covered by three load cases. The
fourth situation when whole box is submerged under water, provide design
moments are less than given by the three load cases hence need not to be
considered. This study also told amount of required Steel Reinforcement is
confirmed by the required depth of section.
Kulkarni and Jirage (2011) [2] have done Comparative Study on Steel Angles
as Tension Members Designed by Working Stress Method and Limit State
Method. The design of tension member using Angles by Limit state method is
economical over the working stress method which values for 12% to 54%.
Zhu et al. (2012) [3] have study on optimal design of a Box Culvert under road
and find with the reduction in the size of proposed box culvert structure, the self
weight of the concrete structure is obviously reduced. Therefore, the requirement
for the soil bearing capacity is decreased. As a result, the use of concrete is
significantly reduced. As such, the optimal design is much more cost efficient.
Solanki and Vakil (2013) [4] have done study on Comparative study for flexure
design using IRC 112:2011 & IRC 21:2000. The study guides for flexure design
for different combination of grade of concrete & steel.
Shreedhar and Shreedhar (2013) [5] have conducted study on Design
coefficients for single and two cell box culverts. The study aims on the loads
9

considered for the analysis of box culverts are Dead load, Live load, Soil pressure
on side walls, Surcharge due to live load, and Water pressure from inside. These
includes Uniform distributed load, Weight of side walls, Water pressure from
inside of culvert, Earth pressure on vertical side walls & Uniform lateral load on
side walls.
Varma (2014) [6] has done study on the working stress method and limit state
method & in RCC chimney design and finds on comparison of working stress
method and limit state method limit of collapse for chimney of height 70m. Result
shows that Limit State method is much more economical than working stress
method.
Meshram and Pajgade (2014) [7] have done Comparative Study of Water Tank
Using Limit State Method and Working Stress Method and obtained result shows
that the steel quantity found more for a circular service reservoir design by WSM
than that of LSM. The steel quantity found more for a square service reservoir
design by WSM than that of LSM.
Kolate et al. (2014) [8] have analyzed and design a RCC Box Culvert. The study
said that box is designed for maximum moment for its concrete section and
reinforcements. It is checked for shear at the critical section and if it exceeds
permissible shear stress for the size of section; mix of concrete and percentage of
reinforcements, the section has to be increased to bring shear stress within the
permissible limit.
Tom (2015) [9] has conducted their study on analysis and design of bridge and
culvert. The study says that major classifications of vehicles considered as live
load for design are Class 70R Wheeled adopted on all roads on which permanent
bridges and culverts are constructed and they should also be checked for Class A
Loading.
Shreedhar (2015) [10] have done Comparative Study of Slab Culvert Design
using IRC 112:2011 and IRC 21:2000 and finds in limit state method of design
the utilization capacity of limiting moment will increase with increasing span
which is up to 65%.
10

Kumar and Srinivas (2015) [11] have conducted study on analysis and design of
box culvert by using computational methods. This study tells that earth can exert
pressure as active and passive. Minimum is active and maximum is passive earth
pressure and the median is rest. The coefficient of earth pressure is calculated as
shown below and the angle of repose is taken as 30⁰. Earth Pressure due to Side
earth from lateral direction is calculated as under.
. .
Where = Unit Weight of Soil

Ke.p. = Earth Pressure Coefficient
Height of wall Surcharge is calculated as 1.2m height of soil rest on both sides of
the box culvert. Earth Pressure due to Surcharge from top and live load effect on
side walls is calculated as under.
. . 1.2
Where = Unit Weight of Soil
Ke.p. = Earth Pressure Coefficient
As per LFRD (Load and Resistance Factor Design) 2013 clause 3.11.5.2-1 earth
pressure coefficient is equal to Ke.p. = 1-Sin (Ф).
Where Ф = internal friction angle of soil
Jha et al. (2015) [12] have done Comparative Study of RCC Slab Bridge by
Working Stress (IRC: 21-2000) and Limit State (IRC: 112-2011) and finds the
thickness of slab was 500mm for WSM which was reduced to 400mm for both
carriageways still there is about 20% saving in amount of concrete and 5-10%
saving in amount of reinforcement for LSM i.e. LSM is considerably economical
design compared to WSM.
11

CHAPTER – 3
STATNDARDS SPECIFICATIONS
3.1 General
Indian Road Congress has defined various standards for the analysis and design of
bridges. Indian Road Congress published various codes of design and revised
them with the passage of time. Recently Indian Road Congress revised IRC: 6 -
2000 as IRC: 6 - 2014 & published a new code for bridge design IRC: 112 –
2011. Both are based on the Limit State method. These two newly published
codes replaced the IRC: 6 – 2000 & IRC: 21 – 2000. They were used for bridge
design based on the Working Stress Method.
3.2 IRC Loadings

There are currently 4 types of IRC loading as per IRC: 6 - 2014 which are
considered as Live Load for Bridge design.
3.2.1 IRC Class 70R Loading
This loading is recently introduced in IRC: 6 - 2014. It consist the tracked loading
as well as wheeled loading. We can say it is the advanced version of IRC Class
AA loading (IRC: 6 – 2000). This loading has the highest magnitude in respect of
all other IRC loadings. This loading is generally used for construction of bridges
in industrial area and military area. The maximum load of a single wheel in case
of IRC Class 70R loading is 350Kn. It is different from IRC class AA loading in
longitudinal length of load which is 4.57M (Figure 3.0).
12

Figure 3.0 IR
RC Class 700R Loadingg
13

3..2.2 IRC Class
C AA Looading
This loading
l described by thhe IRC: 6 - 2000 for bridge design based onn the
Working Stress Method.
M Beffore introduccing of IRC
C Class 70R loading thiss had
the hiighest magnnitude. Beforre introducinng IRC Classs 70R Loadding this loaading
was considered
c f design of
for o bridges inn Military area,
a Industrrial area and for
highw
ways. In the same mannner of IRC Class 70R loading thee IRC Classs AA
loadin
ng also had the maximuum load forr single wheeel as 350Knn & longituudinal
length
h of load as 3.6M
3 (Figurre 3.1).
14
Figgure 3.1 IRC
C Class AA Loading
3..2.3 IRC Class
C A and IRC Class B loading
Thesee two loadingg is considerred as lighterr loading in comparison to the IRC Class
C
70R & IRC Class AA loadingg. These loadding are connsidered for the
t bridge design
d
of rural area or wee can say forr timber briddges. The maximum load of single wheel
w
for IR
RC Class A loading
l is 114Kn and foor IRC Class B loading is 68Kn (Fiigure
3.2).
15
Figure
F 3.2 IR
RC Class A Loading an
nd IRC Class B Loadin
ng
3.3 Impact Effect
In order to considered the effect of increase in stresses due to the dynamic action.
Impact allowance is made as per the IRC codal provision. It is equivalent to the
part of live load. It is taken into account to counter act the impact effect due to
live load. Impact factor suggested by IRC: 6 - 2014 are follows.
3.3.1 for IRC Class A or IRC Class B Loading
I=
Where I = impact factor

A = constant 4.5 for RCC bridges & 9.0 for steel bridges
B = constant 6 for RCC bridges & 13.5 for steel bridges
L = effective span of bridge.
3.3.2 for IRC Class 70R or IRC Class AA Loading

For RCC bridges designed for tracked vehicle 25% for span up to 5M and linearly
reducing to 10% for span of 9M and for spans greater than 9M it is 10% up to a
length of 40m.
For RCC bridges designed for wheeled vehicle 25% for spans up to 12M and in
accordance with the curve for spans exceeds to 12M.
3.4 Effective width of dispersion

The concentrated load on the bridge is not directly taken by the area exactly
below the load. It is taken by the some effective area whose dispersion
perpendicular to the span direction is known as the effective width of dispersion.
Effective width of dispersion is calculated as per IRC clause B3.2 of IRC: 112 -
2011 only when span is supported on two apposite edges or along four edges
when the span length is too more.
Effective width of dispersion for one wheel is given by the following expression
in the perpendicular direction of traffic movement.
beff. = α x (1- [ ]) + bw
L
Where beff. = effective width of dispersion
16

B
α = a constant depends upon [ ] ratio
L
B = lane width
L = effective span
x = distance of center of gravity of load from the nearest support.
bw = width of concentrated area of load
bw = width of tyre + 2(thickness of wearing course)
3.5 Effective length of load

In the same manner of effective width of dispersion the effective length of load
for one wheel is given by the following expression along the direction of traffic
movement as per IRC clause B3.3 of IRC: 112 – 2011.
ℓeff. = length of load + 2(thickness of top slab + thickness of wearing course)
ℓeff. = length of load + 2 (ttop + tw.c.)
Where ℓeff = effective length of load
ttop = top slab thickness
tw.c = wearing coat thickness
3.6 Reduction in the longitudinal effect for more than two lane traffic
Reduction in longitudinal effect on bridges having more than two traffic lanes due
to the low probability that all lanes will be subjected to the characteristic load
simultaneously shall be in accordance as per IRC clause 205 of IRC: 6 – 2014
(Table 3.0).
Table 3.0 Reduction in the longitudinal effect for more than two lane traffic
Number of lanes Reduction in Longitudinal Effect
Two lanes No reduction

Three lanes 10% reduction
Four lanes and more than four lanes 20% reduction
17

3.7 Working Stress Method (WSM)
This method is also called as the Modular Ratio Method or Centroidal Axis
Method. As we know bridge structure is one of the massive structures and it is
subjected to the number of lives that will use in its service period so designing of
bridge will be very important for safety purpose. Working Stress Method is also
the one of the very first design philosophy for every RCC structure design.
The IRC codes for above philosophy were IRC: 6 - 2000 and IRC: 21-
2000. Both based on WSM and for shear criterion IS: 456 – 2000 “Plain and
Reinforced Concrete- code of practice (fourth revision)” is also used.
Basis of WSM
9 A section prior to loading will be remains same as that of without loading. It
means the neutral axis remain straight before bending and after bending.
9 All tensile stresses are taken by only steel and concrete will not take any tensile
stresses.
9 In tension area concrete is completely neglected and all tensile stresses are
considered to be taken by only steel.
9 This analysis is called as Cracked Section Analysis. A concrete section is
considered cracked section if maximum tensile stress developed in concrete is
more than the fcr (flexure tensile strength of concrete) and which is very less in
comparison to σst value of steel that’s why we neglect the concrete area in tension.
9 The stress strain relation for steel and concrete are straight line within working
load.
9 Modular ratio is the ratio of young’s modulus of steel to young’s modulus of
concrete or also the ratio of stress in steel to stress in concrete.
9 Un-cracked section- when cracking moment is less than moment that will
consider for design of section. i.e. ft< fcr then consider entire area of concrete area
M
and stress at any section f = Y
I
9 Cracked section- when cracking moment is more than the moment that will
consider for design of section. i.e. ft > fcr then neglect concrete area on tension
side and all tensile stresses are taken by steel only.
18

Formulas used for design by WSM
• Effective Depth required d
M
9 d=√
9 Where M = design moment

9 R = moment of resistance factor
9 b = width of section
9 R= σcbc j k
9 k = neutral axis factor

σ
9 k=
σ σ
9 σst = permissible stress in steel

9 j = lever arm factor
9 j = 1-
• Area of Steel Reinforcement Ast

M
9 Ast =
σ
• Check for Shear will be done same as for all parts top slab, bottom slab & side
walls
• Shear Force at effective depth from face of wall V

9 V =
• Shear Stress τv

9 τv =

• Steel percentage p
A
9 p=

19

3.7.1 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as Per Working Stress Method
(Table 3.1).
The permissible shear stress in concrete by Working Stress Method is given by
clause table 23 of IS: 456 – 2000 are as follows.
Table 3.1 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as per Working Stress Method
Concrete Grade
A
P
M2 M2 M3 M4Oandabov
M 15 M35
0 5 0 e
≤0.15 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20
0.25 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23
0.50 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32
0.75 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38
1.00 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.42
1.25 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46
1.50 0.42 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.49
1.75 0.44 0.47. 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.52
2.00 0.44 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.54 0.55
2.25 0.44 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.57
2.50 0.44 0.51 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.60
2.75 0.44 0.51 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62
3.00 0.44 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.63
>3.00 0.44 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.63
20

3.8 Limit State Method (LSM)
The earlier design method includes the Working Stress Method (WSM). WSM is
based on the SERVICE LOADS. However LSM takes into account the safety at
ultimate load and serviceability at service loads. LSM employs different safety
factors at ultimate loads and service loads. These multiple safety factors are based
on probabilistic approach with separate approaches for each type of failure, type
of materials and types of load.
Limit State-limit state is the state of “about to collapse” or “impending failure”
beyond which, the structure is not of any practical use i.e. either the structure
collapses or becomes unserviceable. In LSM two types of limit states are defined
which are.
9 Limit State of Collapse- This limit state deals with the strength of the structure in
terms of collapse, overturning, sliding, buckling etc.
9 Limit State of Serviceability-This limit state deal with the deformation of the
structure to such an extent that the structure becomes unserviceable due to
excessive deflection, cracks, vibration, leakage etc.
Various limit states of serviceability are:
[1] Deflection [2] Excessive vibrations [3] Corrosion [4] Cracking (Do not
consider the tensile strength of concrete).
This is the currently using design philosophy of Bridge design that has been
recently came into existence particularly for RCC bridge design. The IRC codes
for above philosophy are IRC: 6 - 2014 and IRC: 112- 2011. Both based on LSM
and for shear criterion IS: 456 – 2000 “Plain and Reinforced Concrete- code of
practice (fourth revision)” is also used.
Basis of LSM
9 Prior to loading a section will always be remain same as without loading. That is
neutral axis have no changes itself.
9 The highest strain at last compressed fiber in case of compression bending is
0.0035.
9 Strength of concrete is considered to be 0.67fck and a partial safety factor mc =
1.5 also applied to the above value that is 0.45fck is used for design.
21

9 Strength in tension of concrete is neglected because of all stresses in tension are
taking by the steel i.e. cracked section analysis.
9 Partial safety factor of ms = 1.15 is applied for the steel i.e. design strength value
is 0.87fy of steel.
9 Strain that is maximum in tension at the time of collapse should not be lesser of
.
0.002 .
E
Formulas used for design by LSM

M
9 d=√
9 Where Mu = factored design moment

9 R = 0.36 fck j k
9 k = Neutral axis factor
9 k=
.
9 fck = characteristics strength of concrete

9 fy = yield strength or characteristics strength of steel
9 j = 1- 0.42k
M
9 Ast=
.
walls
• Shear force at effective depth from face of wall Vu
.
9 Vu = 1.5V =
• Shear Stress τvu

9 τvu =

22

• Steel Percentage p
A
9 p=

3.8.1 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as Per Limit State Method (Table
3.2)
The permissible shear stress in concrete by Working Stress Method is given by
clause table 19 of IS: 456 – 2000 are as follows.
Table 3.2 Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc as per Limit State Method
A Concrete Grade
p=

M 15 M20 M25 M30 M35 M40 and above
≤0.15 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30

0.25 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38
0.50 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.51
0.75 0.54 0.56 0.57 0.59 0.59 0.60
1.00 0.6 0.62 0.64 0.66 0.67 0.68
1.25 0.64 0.67 0.70 0.71 0.73 0.74
1.50 0.68 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.79
1.75 0.71 0.75 0.78 0.8 0.82 0.84
2.00 0.71 0.79 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88
2.25 0.71 0.81 0.85 0.88 0.90 0.92
2.50 0.71 0.82 0.88 0.91 0.93 0.95
2.75 0.7 1 0.82 0.90 0.94 O.96 0.98
3.00 0.71 0.82 0.92 0.96 0.99 1.01
>3.00 0.71 0.82 0.92 0.96 0.99 1.01
23

CHAPTER – 4
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
4.1 Analysis & Design Condition of box culvert

Box culvert is treated as a Rigid Frame that’s why The Moment Distribution
Method is generally adopted for distribution & determination of final moments at
the joints of frames or slabs.
The box culvert is analysis & designed for following critical loading conditions.
4.1.1 Case-1 Box Empty

In such situation box culvert is subjected to the
Live Load, Dead Load, Earth Pressure from
outside, lateral pressure due to Live Load and No
Water Pressure from inside of Box (Figure 4.0).
Figure 4.0 Box Empty
4.1.2 Case-2 Box Full (With Live Load)

In such situation box culvert is subjected to the
Live Load, Dead Load, earth pressure from
outside, lateral pressure due to Live Load and
water Pressure from inside of Box (Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1 Box Full (With Live Load)
24

4.1.3 Case-3 Box Full (Without Live Load)
It is the advanced case of Box Full. Where
there is no live load on the top slab it will
also come in the category of Box Full. In this
case we don’t provide such strength to the
top slab because it is not subjected to any
Live Load (Figure 4.2).
Figure 4.2 Box Full (Without Live load)
4.2 Design Load of Box Culvert

For Top Slab Load
Top slab load consists of top slab dead load, top slab live load and their nature &
direction of action. The nature & direction of action are as follows.
4.2.1 Top Slab dead load

This load is coming from up word direction due to
dead load of top slab and dead load of wearing coat. It
is acting as uniformly distributed load (Figure 4.3).
Figure 4.3 Top Slab dead load
4.2.2 Top Slab live load

This load is also coming from up word direction
due to live load. In actual Live load is the wheel
load. This is a concentrated load but with the help
effective width of dispersion & effective length of
load this concentrated load is converted into the
uniformly distributed load as top slab dead load
(Figure 4.4).
Figure 4.4 Top Slab live load
25

For Bottom Slab Load
In the same manner of top slab the bottom slab load also subjected to bottom slab
dead load and bottom slab live load and their nature & direction of action. The
nature & direction of bottom slab load are as follows.
4.2.3 Bottom Slab dead load
This load is coming on the bottom slab due to
dead load of top slab and dead load of side
wall. It is acting as the uniformly distributed
load as shown (Figure 4.5).
Figure 4.5 Bottom Slab dead load
4.2.4 Bottom Slab live load

This load is coming on bottom slab due to the
live load of top slab. In actual it is fraction of
live load of top slab that will have to be bear by
the bottom slab (Figure 4.6).
Figure 4.6 Bottom Slab live load
For Side Wall Load

There are two side wall in a box culvert which are left side wall and right side
wall & both walls is always be in direct contact of earth fill from the outer side
and earth fill exert the soil pressure on the side walls varying in triangular pattern.
If the box culvert is in full condition of water in such situation water also exerts
the pressure on the side walls from inside. The water pressure also varies in the
triangular pattern. Along with the earth fill pressure from outside & water
26

pressure from inside of box culvert, the soil base pressure is also associated with
box culvert. It is acting from the bottom of bottom slab in the up word vertical
direction. It also assumes that the live load on the top slab is too exerting the
pressure on the side wall equivalent to a particular height of side wall and it is
varying in uniform pattern along the height of side wall. These all pressure may
be simultaneously acting on the box culvert or may be individually depending
upon the design condition of box culvert. The pressure distribution pattern and
pressure acting direction of possible condition of box culvert are as follows.
4.2.5 [Dead Load] Earth pressure due to earth fill on Side Wall
The pressure distribution due to earth fill on side walls of Box Culvert is shown as
below: (Figure 4.7 and 4.8)
Figure 4.7 Side Fill Earth Pressure on Left Figure 4.8 Side Fill Earth Pressure on Right
4.2.6 [Dead Load] Water Pressure from inside on Side Wall

The pressure distribution due to Water Pressure from inside of Box Culvert is
shown as below: (Figure 4.9 and 5.0)
27

Figure 4.9 Water Pressure on Left Figure 5.0 Water Pressure on Right
4.2.7 [Live Load] Earth Pressure due to Live Load Surcharge on Side Wall
The pressure distribution due to Live Load Surcharge on side walls of Box
Culvert is shown as below: (Figure 5.1 and 5.2)
Figure 5.1 Live Load Surcharge on Left Figure 5.2 Live Load Surcharge on Right
4.2.8 Load Combination

Mainly there are three possible load combination (I) Box Empty (II) Box Full
(With Live load) and (III) Box Full (Without Live load). Out of these three load
combination the (I) Box Empty is most critical because in Box Empty there will
no counter acting bending moment from inside of box and results in the highest
design bending moment and worst condition for analysis and design of Box
Culvert. The box empty is also one of the widely used conditions of Box Culvert
like below a railway line and intersection also. The schematic diagrams of all
critical load combination of Box Culvert are as below.
4.2.8.1 Critical Load Combination
Box Empty case forms the critical load combination for Box Culvert Analysis &
Designing is shown as below: (Figure 5.3)
28

Figure 5.3 Critical Load Combination

4.2.8.2 Load Combination [Box Full With Live Load]
The Load Combination belonging to Box Full with Live Load is shown as below:
(Figure 5.4)
Figure 5.4 Load Combination [Box Full With Live Load]
4.2.8.3 Load Combination [Box Full Without Live Load]

The Load Combination belonging to Box Full without Live Load is shown as
below: (Figure 5.5)
Figure 5.5 Load Combination [Box Full Without Live Load]
29

4.3 Manual Analysis
For calculating the moment we have to calculate the various design loads due to
which the moments are developing. In order to calculating the moment for all
design conditions of box culvert we have to first calculate the design Loads. The
different design loads for analysis & designing of a RCC box culvert are as
follows.
4.3.1 Design Load Calculation

4.3.1.1 Top Slab dead load calculation
Top Slab dead load = dead load of top slab + dead load of wearing coat
Dead load of top slab = thickness of top slab concrete density for top slab (24
Kn/M3)
Dead load of wearing coat = thickness of wearing coat concrete density for
wearing coat (22 Kn/M3)
4.3.1.2 Top Slab live load calculation

Top Slab live load = live load defined by IRC: 6 – 2014 as per effective width of
dispersion (IRC: 112 – 2011) and effective length of load (IRC: 112 – 2011)
including impact factor (IRC: 6 – 2014)
Total load of top slab = top slab dead load + top slab live load
4.3.1.3 Bottom Slab dead load calculation

Bottom slab dead load= dead load of top slab on bottom slab + dead load on
bottom slab from side walls
Dead load on bottom slab from side walls = 2 dead load of one side wall on
bottom slab
H
DLS.W. = [ ]

Where DLS.W. = Dead load of one side wall on bottom slab
30

4.3.1.4 Bottom Slab live load calculation
f IRC:
BSLL= [ ]

Where BSLL = Bottom Slab live load

Total load of bottom slab= bottom slab dead load + bottom slab live load
4.3.1.5 Side wall load calculation

The expressions used for calculation of Side Walls are tabulated below: (Table
4.0)
Table 4.0 Side Wall Load Calculation
Load Load Case-3 Box Full
Case-2 Box Full
Case-1 Box Empty (Without Live
Type Cases (With Live Load)
Load)
[Live Load] Earth

Pressure at base due
1.2× soil×Ke.p. 1.2× soil×Ke.p. X
to Live Load
Surcharge
[Dead Load] Earth

Pressure at base due H× soil × Ke.p. H× soil × Ke.p. H× soil × Ke.p.
to Earth fill
[Dead Load] Water

Pressure at base X water×h water×h
from inside
Where soil = unit weight of soil

Ke.p = earth pressure coefficient
h = height of water level H = Total height of Side Wall
4.3.1.6 Bottom Slab base reaction

It is base reaction from bottom slab due to all up word
superimposed and dead load of box culvert. Its role is
important for checking the bearing capacity of soil and
in ensuring that Our RCC structure will be held on
Figure 5.6 Soil Base Pressure
31

earth will serve the required purpose safely or not. Bottom slab reaction is comes
out by the help following load calculation (Figure 5.6).
Bottom slab base reaction = dead load base reaction + live load base reaction
Dead load base reaction = dead load of top slab, bottom slab and side wall
Live load base reaction = live load of bottom slab without impact effect
4.3.2 Design Moment Calculation

After calculating the design loads we will calculate the fixed end moments. These
fixed end moments will be distributed at all junctions of Box Culvert.
For this we calculate the fixed end moment at all corner of box culvert manually
and these Moments are distributed by the Moment Distribution Method because
box culvert is a Rigid Frame structure. The expressions that are used for
calculating the fixed end moments for box Culvert are as follows.
4.3.2.1 Moment Calculation for Slab
The expressions used for Moment calculation of Slab are tabulated below: (Table
4.1)
Table 4.1 Moment Calculation for Slab
Load Slab Top Slab Moment Bottom Slab Moment

Type Type Calculation Calculation
Dead Load Moment

12 12
Live Load Moment

12 12
Where W = Dead Load or Live Load as the case may be

L = Effective Span
32

4.3.2.2 Side Wall Moment Calculation
The expressions used for Moment calculation of Side Walls are tabulated below:
(Table 4.2)
Table 4.2 Side Wall Moment Calculation

Case-2 Box Full
Case-1 Box Empty (Without Live
Type Cases (With Live Load)
Load)
Live Load Moment

WL WL
at top corner of Side X
Wall 12 12
Dead Load Moment

WL WL WL
at top corner of Side
Wall Earth 30 30 30
Dead Load Moment

WL WL
at top corner of Side X
Wall Water 30 30
Live Load Moment

WL WL
at base corner of X
Side Wall 12 12
Dead Load Moment

WL WL WL
at base corner of
Side Wall Earth 20 20 20
Dead Load Moment

WL WL
at base corner of X
Side Wall Water 20 20
Where W = Dead Load or Live Load as the case may be.

L = Effective Span
33

4.3.2.4 Braking Force Moment Calculation
The concern of braking force or braking force moment depends upon the
designer. If the designer wants to take this then he can take for safer side of
design otherwise if does not want to take then he can’t. Because impact allowance
has already made in the design that’s why we can leave the braking force
moment. It is taken under consideration for dealing with more safer and practical
situation as in field. It is calculated as per IRC clause 211.2 of IRC: 6 – 2014.
Braking force = 20% for first load train + 10% for second load train

Effective braking force =

WL
Braking force moment =
4.3.3 Distribution Factor

For manual analysis we consider the distribution factor on an average as 0.5 for
distribution of moment by moment distribution method.
4.3.4 Design Moment

Design Moment = Final Moment after distribution
OR Design Moment = Final Moment after distribution + Braking Force Moment
4.4 STAAD.Pro Analysis

STAAD.Pro is a structural analysis and design computer program originally
developed by Research Engineers International at Yorba Linda, CA in year 1997.
In late 2005, Research Engineers International was bought by Bentley Systems.
An older version called Staad-III for windows is used by Iowa State University
for educational purposes for civil and structural engineers. Initially it was used
for DOS-Window system. The commercial version STAAD.Pro is one of the
most widely used structural analysis and design software. It supports several
steel, concrete and timber design codes.
It can make use of various forms of analysis from the traditional 1st order static
analysis, 2nd order p-delta analysis, geometric non linear analysis or
34

a buckling analysis. It can also make use of various forms of dynamic analysis
from modal extraction to time history and response spectrum analysis.
In recent years it has become part of integrated structural analysis and design
solutions mainly using an exposed API called Open STAAD to access and drive
the program using a VB macro system included in the application or other by
including Open STAAD functionality in applications that themselves include
suitable programmable macro systems.
4.5 Formulas used for design by WSM

M
9 d=√
9 Where M = design moment

9 R= σcbc j k
9 k = neutral axis factor

σ
9 k=
σ σ
9 σst = permissible stress in steel

9 j = 1-

M
9 Ast =
σ
walls
• Shear Force at effective depth from face of wall V

9 V =
• Shear Stress τv

9 τv =

35

• Steel percentage p
A
9 p=

4.6 Formulas used for design by LSM

M
9 d=√
9 Where Mu = factored design moment

9 R = 0.36 fck j k
9 k = Neutral axis factor
9 k=
.
9 fck = characteristics strength of concrete

9 fy = yield strength or characteristics strength of steel
9 j = 1- 0.42k
M
9 Ast=
.
walls
• Shear force at effective depth from face of wall Vu
.
9 Vu = 1.5V =
• Shear Stress τvu

9 τvu =

• Steel Percentage p
A
9 p=

36

4.7 Sample Problem
‐ve Clear Span +ve
A B

ttop
‐ve
+ve

Clear height

twall twall
+ve
‐ve
tbottom
D C
+ve ‐ve

Figure 5.7 Box Culvert notations
Input parameters
Clear span ℓ = 4M
Clear height h = 4M
Top slab thickness ttop = 0.5M
Bottom slab thickness tbottom = 0.5M
Side wall thickness twall = 0.5M
Unit weight of concrete conc. = 24 Kn/M3
Unit weight of soil soil = 18 Kn/M3
Unit weight of water water = 10 Kn/M3
Co efficient of earth pressure Ke.p. = 0.5
Total cushion on top (If present) tcu. = 0M
Thickness of wearing course tw.c. = 0.08M
Carriage way width B = 2 Lane 7.5M
Concrete grade = M35
Steel grade = Fe415
Modular ration for bridge as per IRC: 6 – 2000 m = 10
Live load
IRC Class 70R Loading
IRC Class A Loading
All dimensions in M and force in Kn.
37

WSM design parameters
Permissible flexural compressive stress in concrete for M35 concrete as per IRC: 21 –
2000
σcbc = 11.67 N/MM2
Permissible stress in steel in tension for Fe415 grade as per IRC: 21 – 2000
σst = 200 N/MM2
Neutral axis factor
σ .
k= = = 0.37
σ σ .
Lever arm factor

.
j = 1- = 1- = 0.88
Moment of resistance factor

q= σcbc j k = *11.67*0.88*0.37 = 1.89
LSM design parameters

Characteristics strength of concrete for M35
fck = 35 N/MM2
Yield strength of steel for Fe415
fy = 415 N/MM2
Neutral axis factor
k= = = 0.48
. .
Lever arm factor

j = 1 – 0.42 k = 1 – 0.42*0.48 = 0.80
Moment of resistance factor
q = 0.36 fck j k = 0.36*35*0.80*0.48 = 4.82
38

Analysis
Load calculation for all members
1. Top slab load calculation
Self weight of Top Slab = ttop Concrete density for ttop (24 Kn/M3)
= 0.5*24 = 12 Kn/M2
Self weight of wearing course = tw.c. Concrete density for t w.c. (22 Kn/M3)
= 0.08*22 = 1.76 Kn/M2
Adopt minimum of 2 Kn/M2 weight of wearing course as per MOST specifications
= 2 Kn/M2
Total dead load of top slab = self weight of top slab + self weight of wearing course
= 12 + 2 = 14 Kn/M2
Live load of top slab

350Kn 350Kn

L = 4.5M
1.22M
Leff. = 5.73M

0.85M 0.85M
7.5M
C=1.2M

beff. = beff. = 4.27M
2.9M
Figure 5.8 Wheel imprint of IRC Class 70R Loading
39

Effective span L = clear span + thickness of side wall = 4+0.5 = 4.5M
Dispersal of load in span direction as per IRC: 112 - 2011
ℓeff. = length of load + 2 (ttop + tw.c.) = 4.57 + 2*(0.5+0.08) = 5.73M
Also in case of IRC Class 70R Loading dispersal of train of load Leff. = 4.5M
It should not more than the effective span L so Leff = 4.5M
Dispersal of load traverse to span direction as per IRC: 112 - 2011
X
beff. = α x (1- [ ] ) + bw
L
Where beff. = effective width of dispersion

B
Α = A constant depends upon [ ] ratio
L
B = Lane width
L = Effective Span
X = Distance of center of gravity of load from the nearest support.
bw = Width of concentrated area of load
bw = Width of tyre + 2(tcu.)
B .
= = 1.67 so α = 2.91 from IRC: 112 - 2011
L .
.
X = = 2.25
bw = 0.84 + 2(0.08) = 1M
.
beff. = 2.91*2.25 (1 – ) + 1 = 4.27M
.
Also dispersal of train of load Beff. = 2.135 + 0.42 + 1.22 + 0.42 + 2.135 = 6.33M
It should not more than the effective span B so Beff. = 6.33M
. .
Live load of top slab = Kn/M2 = * = 15.16 Kn/M2
. . . . . .
Impact for IRC Class 70R Loading as per IRC: 112 – 2011 25% for Span up to 5M
So Live Load with Impact effect = 1.25*15.16 = 18.95 Kn/M2
Total load of top slab = Dead load of top slab + Live load of top slab
Total load of top slab for IRC Class 70R Loading = 14 + 18.95 = 32.95 Kn/M2
Live load of top slab
IRC Class A Loading

40

7.5M
57Kn 57Kn 57Kn 57Kn

L = 4.5M
57Kn 57Kn
57Kn 57Kn

57Kn 57Kn
57Kn 57Kn

C=0.1
5m
0.5 1.3 0.5 1.2 0.5 1.3 0.5
M M M M M M M
Figure 5.9 Wheel imprint of IRC Class A Loading
Effective Span L = Clear span + Thickness of side wall = 4+0.5 = 4.5M
Dispersal of load in span direction as per IRC: 112 - 2011
ℓeff. = Length of Load + 2 (ttop + tw.c.) = 0.25 + 2*(0.5+0.08) = 1.41M
Also dispersal of train of load Leff. = 0.705 + 1.2 + 3.2 + 0.705 = 5.81M
It should not more than the effective span L so Leff = 4.5M
Dispersal of load traverse to span direction as per IRC: 112 - 2011
X
beff. = α x (1- [ ]) + bw
L
Where beff. = Effective width of dispersion

B
Α = A constant depends upon [ ] ratio
L
B = Lane width
L = Effective Span
X = Distance of center of gravity of load from the nearest support.
bw = Width of concentrated area of load
bw = Width of tyre + 2(tcu.)
B .
= = 1.67 so α = 2.91 from IRC: 112 - 2011
L .
X = 0.05
bw = 0.5 + 2*0.08 = 0.66M
.
beff. = 2.91*0.05 (1 – ) + 0.66 = 0.80M
.
Also dispersal of train of load Beff. = 0.40 + 0.25 + 1.3 + 0.5 + 1.2 + 0.5 + 1.3 + 0.25 +
0.40 = 6.10M
It should not more than the effective span B so Beff. = 6.10M
. .
Live load of top slab = Kn/M2 = * = 14.95 Kn/M2
. . . . . .
41

Impact for IRC Class A Loading as per IRC: 112 – 2011
I=
Where I = impact factor

A = constant 4.5 for RCC bridges & 9.0 for steel bridges
B = constant 6 for RCC bridges & 13.5 for steel bridges
L = effective span of bridge.
.
I= = 0.43
.
So live load with impact effect = 1.43*14.95 = 21.38 Kn/M2

Total load of top slab = dead load of top slab + live load of top slab
Total load of top slab for IRC Class A Loading = 14 + 21.38 = 35.38 Kn/M2
2. Bottom slab load calculation
Dead Load on bottom slab = Dead load of top slab + 2 Dead load of one side wall on
bottom slab
Dead load of top slab = 14 Kn/M2
Dead load of one side wall on bottom slab DLS.W.
H W T W W C
=
L W B
Load dispersion of side wall = Effective span + Thickness of bottom slab

= 4.5 + 0.5 = 5M
.
DLS.W. = = 19.2 Kn/M2
Dead load on bottom slab = 14 + 19.2 = 33.2 Kn/M2

Live load of bottom slab BSLL = Live load of top slab without Impact effect
L L f IRC I
=
E C T W
. .
= . .
= 9.56 Kn/M2
. . .
IRC Class A Loading

L L f IRC I
=
E C T W
. .
= . .
= 9.07 Kn/M2
. . .
42

Adopt live load of bottom slab = 9.56 Kn/M2
So total load on bottom slab = 9.56 + 33.2 = 42.76 Kn/M2
3. Side wall load calculation
Earth pressure due to Live Load Surcharge equivalent to 1.2M height is
considered. (Kn/M2)

Case-2 Box Full
Type Cases Case-1 Box Empty (Without Live
(With Live Load)
Load)
[Live Load] Earth
1.2× soil×Ke.p.= 1.2× soil×Ke.p. =
pressure at base due
1.2*18*0.5 = 10.8 1.2*18*0.5 = 10.8 X
to Live Load
Surcharge
[Dead Load] Earth
H× soil × Ke.p. = H× soil × Ke.p. = H× soil × Ke.p. =
pressure at base due
5*18*0.5 = 45 5*18*0.5 = 45 5*18*0.5 = 45
to Earth fill
[Dead Load] Water water×h = 10*4 = water×h = 10*4 =
pressure at base X 40 40
from inside
Check for Base pressure

Dead load base pressure = Dead load from top slab + Dead load of side walls on bottom
slab + Dead load of bottom slab
= 14 + 19.2 + 0.5*24 = 45.2 Kn/M2
Live load base pressure = Live load of bottom slab = 9.56 Kn/M2
Base pressure = 45.2 + 9.56 = 54.76 Kn/M2
In both case base pressure is less than the 150 Kn/M2 so our RCC structure is Safe.

43

Moment calculation for all members
1. Top slab and bottom slab moment calculation (Kn-M)

Slab
Top Slab Moment Bottom Slab Moment
Type Calculation Calculation
IRC Class
Load IRC Class A IRC Class 70R IRC Class A
70R

Type Loading Loading Loading
Loading

Dead Load . . . . . .
Moment = = = =
23.63 23.63 56.03 56.03

Live load . . . . . . . .
Moment = = = =

31.98 36.08 16.13 16.13

Total Load
55.61 59.71 72.16 72.16
Moment

44

2. Side wall moment calculation (Kn-M)
Case-2 Case-3
Case-1 Box Full Box Full
Load Load
Box (With (Without
Type Cases
Empty Live Live
Load) Load)
. . . .
WL
Live Load Moment at top corner of Side Wall X
= 18.23 = 18.23
Dead Load Moment at top corner of Side Wall .

=
.
=
.
=
WL
Earth 30.38 30.38 30.38
Dead Load Moment at top corner of Side Wall .
=
.
=
WL X
Water 27 27
Total Load Moment at top corner of Side Wall 48.61 21.61 3.38
Live Load Moment at base corner of Side Wall . . . .
WL X
= 18.23 = 18.23
Dead Load Moment at base corner of Side Wall .

=
.
=
.
=
WL
Earth 45.56 45.56 45.56
Dead Load Moment at base corner of Side Wall .

=
.
=
WL X
Water 40.5 40.5
Total Load Moment at base corner of Side Wall 63.79 23.29 5.06
45

Among all above cases of side walls the Case – 1 Box Empty is the critical case because
of non availability of any counteracting moment due to absent of water.
Moments for distribution may be drawn:
for IRC Class 70R Loading for IRC Class A Loading
MAB = MBA = 55.61 MAB = MBA = 59.71
MDC = MCD = 72.16 MDC = MCD = 72.16
MAD = MBC = 48.61 MAD = MBC = 48.61
MDA = MCB = 63.79 MDA = MCB = 63.79

A D B C
AB AD DA DC BA BC CB CD
-55.60 48.61 -63.79 72.16 55.60 -48.60 63.79 -72.16
3.50 3.50 -4.19 -4.19 -3.50 -3.50 4.19 4.19

-1.75 -2.09 1.75 2.09 1.75 2.09 -1.75 -2.09
1.92 1.92 -1.92 -1.92 -1.92 -1.92 1.92 1.92

-51.93 51.93 -68.15 68.15 51.93 -51.93 68.15 -68.15

IRC Class A Loading

A D B C

AB AD DA DC BA BC CB CD

-59.71 48.60 -63.79 72.16 59.71 -48.60 63.79 -72.16

5.52 5.52 -4.18 -4.18 -5.52 -5.52 4.18 4.18
-2.76 -2.09 2.76 2.09 2.76 2.09 -2.76 -2.09
2.43 2.43 ‐2.43 ‐2.43 ‐2.43 ‐2.43 2.43 2.43

‐54.45 54.45 ‐67.64 67.64 54.45 ‐54.45 67.64 ‐67.64

46

3. Braking force moment calculation as per IRC: 112 - 2011
Braking force = 20% for first load train + 10% for second load train
For IRC Class 70R Loading
. .
= 0.2*[ ] + 0.1*[ ] = 82.46 Kn
. .
Effective braking force

. .
= = = 58.62 Kn/M2
.
WL . .
Moment due to braking force = = = 131.90 Kn-M
Moment due to braking force will quarterly distributed at all corner of box culvert. =
32.97 Kn-M
For IRC Class 70R Loading
. . .
= 0.2*[ ] + 0.1*[ ] + 2*0.05*[ ] = 44.15 Kn
. . .
Effective braking force

. .
= = = 82.56 Kn/M2
.
WL . .
Moment due to braking force = = = 73.26 Kn-M
Moment due to braking force will quarterly distributed at all corner of box culvert. =
18.31 Kn-M
Design moment = distributed moment + moment due to braking force
for IRC Class 70R Loading for IRC Class A Loading
MAB = MBA = 84.90 MAB = MBA = 72.76
MDC = MCD = 101.12 MDC = MCD = 85.95
MAD = MBC = 84.90 MAD = MBC = 72.76
MDA = MCB = 101.12 MDA = MCB = 85.95
47

Design
WSM design approach with constant depth of section
1. Top slab
M
Effective depth required d = √
.
d=√ = 212.17MM
.
Let us provide 20MM Ф bars @ 40MM clear cover so effective depth provided
d=450MM
M .
Area of steel = = = 1071.96MM2
σ .
Shear force at effective depth from face of wall

T
V=

. . .
V= = 59.30Kn

.
Shear Stress τv = = = 0.13 N/MM2

A .
Steel percentage p = = = 0.24

Permissible Shear Strength of Concrete τc corresponding to p = 0.23 N/MM2

Since τv < τc hence design is safe.
2. Bottom slab
M
.
d=√ = 231.30MM
.
d = 450MM
M .
σ .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 76.97Kn

.

A .

48

Since moments at junctions of side wall are same as that of top slab and bottom slab.
Hence same reinforcement is to be continued for side wall.
Check for shear for side walls
RA = reaction at point A

= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn
RD = reaction at point D

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn
Pressure at ttop from face A = *0.25 = 2.5 Kn/M2

.

.
Effective height of side wall = clear height of side wall +

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

Effective depth for side wall = effective depth for bottom slab = 450MM
Shear force at effective depth from face A
. .
VA = RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.450 – 10.8*0450 = 52.63Kn
Shear force at effective depth from face D

. .
VD = RD – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 91.8- * 0.450 – 10.8* 0.450 = 67.25Kn
.
Maximum shear stress τv = = 0.15

N/MM2
49

LSM design approach with constant depth of section
3. Top slab
M
. .
d=√ = 162.54MM
.
d = 450MM
M . .
. . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 88.95Kn

.
Shear Stress τvu = = = 0.20 N/MM2

A .


Since τvu < τc hence design is safe.
4. Bottom slab
M
. .
d=√ = 177.39MM
.
d = 450MM
M . .
. . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 115.46Kn

.

A .


50


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VuA = [RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.450 – 10.8*0450]*1.5 = 78.95Kn

. .
VuD = [RD – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 91.8- * 0.450 – 10.8* 0.450]*1.5 =
100.88Kn
.
Maximum shear stress τvu = = 0.22

N/MM2
51

IRC Class A Loading
WSM design approach with constant depth of section
5. Top slab
M
.
d=√ = 196.20MM
.
d = 450MM
M .
σ .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 63.61Kn

.

A .


6. Bottom slab
M
.
d=√ = 213.47MM
.
d = 450MM
M .
σ .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 76.97Kn

.

A .


52


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VA = RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.450 – 10.8*0450 = 52.63Kn

. .
.

N/MM2
53

IRC Class A Loading
LSM design approach with constant depth of section
7. Top slab
M
. .
d=√ = 150.45MM
.
d = 450MM
M . .
. . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 95.42Kn

.

A .


8. Bottom slab
M
. .
d=√ = 163.51MM
.
d = 450MM
M . .
. . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 115.46Kn

.

A .


54


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VuA = [RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.450 – 10.8*0450]*1.5 = 78.95Kn

. .
VuD = [RD – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 91.8- * 0.450 – 10.8* 0.450]*1.5 =
100.88Kn
.
Maximum shear stress τvu = = 0.22

N/MM2
55

WSM design approach with constant steel area
9. Top slab
Let us provide area of steel = 1000MM2
M
.
d=√ = 212.17MM
.
Effective depth provided as per area of steel

M .
= = = 482.39MM > 212.17MM OK
σ A .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 58.26Kn

.

A

10. Bottom slab
M
.
d=√ = 231.30MM
.

M .
= = = 478.78MM > 231.30MM OK
σ A .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 75.77Kn

.

A

56


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VA = RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.478 – 10.8*0.478 = 52.29Kn

. .
.
.
N/MM2
57

LSM design approach with constant steel area
11. Top slab
M
R
. .
d=√ = 162.55MM
.

M . .
= = = 440.90MM > 162.55MM OK
. A . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 89.46Kn

.

A


12. Bottom slab
M
R
. .
d=√ = 177.39MM
.

M . .
= = = 437.61MM > 177.39MM OK
. A . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 116.29Kn

.
Shear Stress τv = = = 0.27N/MM2
.
A
.
58


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VAu = [RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.437 – 10.8*0.437]*1.5 = 79.17Kn

. .
VDu = [RD – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 91.8- * 0.437 – 10.8* 0.437] = 101.69Kn
.
.
N/MM2
59

IRC Class A Loading
WSM design approach with constant steel area
13. Top slab
M
.
d=√ = 196.20MM
.

M .
= = = 413.40MM > 196.20MM OK
σ A .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 64.91Kn

.

A
.
14. Bottom slab
M
.
d=√ = 213.25MM
.

M .
= = = 406.96MM > 213.25MM OK
σ A .

T
V=

. . .
V= = 78.85Kn

.

A
.
60


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VA = RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - * 0.406 – 10.8*0.406 = 53.16Kn

. .
.
.
N/MM2
61

LSM design approach with constant steel area
15. Top slab
M
R
. .
d=√ = 150.47MM
.

M . .
= = = 377.86MM > 150.47MM OK
. A . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 99.28Kn

.

A

16. Bottom slab
M
R
. .
d=√ = 163.55MM
.

M . .
= = = 371.96MM > 163.55MM OK
. A . .

T
Vu =

. . . .
Vu = = 120.51Kn

.
Shear Stress τv = = = 0.32N/MM2
.
A
.
62


= +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 58.05Kn

RD = +

M f
*

. . .
= + * = 91.8Kn

.

.

dwall = 4 + 0.5 = 4.5M

. .
VAu = [RA – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 58.08 - *0.371 – 10.8*0.371]*1.5 =80.367Kn

. .
VDu = [RD – * dwall – 10.8* dwall = 91.8 - *0.371–10.8*0.371] = 107.34Kn
.
.
N/MM2
63

CHAPTER – 5
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Results of Analysis by MS-Excel & STAAD Pro

The result of moment analysis by manual calculation, by developed MS-Excel
Sheet and STAAD Pro are shown in Table 5.0.
Table 5.0 Design Moments by MS-Excel tool and STAAD.Pro
Bending Moments (Kn-M)
Loading IRC CLASS 70R LOADING IRC CLASS A LOADING
Member By MS-Excel By STAAD. By MS-Excel By STADD.

Pro Analysis Pro Analysis
Analysis Analysis
Bottom Slab 68.15 72.2 67.64 72.2
Top Slab 51.93 53.00 54.45 55.6
Side Wall 68.15 72.2 67.64 72.2
5.2 Design by MS-Excel tool

5.2.1 Effect on Area of Steel in WSM and LSM Approach
A design of a RCC Box Culvert with Span & Height 4M is prepared with the help
of developed MS-Excel tool. This design is based on the WSM as well as LSM
approaches. From the developed MS-Excel tool the saving in the amount of steel
area required with keeping a constant depth of section from WSM to LSM
approaches is noted and from these noted data following figures and tables are
developed (Table 5.1 and 5.2 & Figure 6.0 and 6.1 ).
64

Table 5.1 Saving
S in Stteel using LS
SM approacch over WS
SM for Fe4115 Steel Graade

Fe 41
15 IRC CLLASS 70R LOA
ADING IRC CLLASS A LOADIING
CONCRETE GRADE % D
DECREAMENTT IN % DEECREAMENT IN
REINFORCEMENNT REINNFORCEMENT
M30
0 7.54% 7.54%
M35
5 8.75% 8.75%
M40
0 9.84% 9.84%
M45
5 10.84% 10.84%
%Sav
ving in Area of
o Steel
Span=4MM
12.00%
% Height=4M M
2 Lane Rooad
10..76%
10.76%
9.82%
9 Steel Gradde Fe415
10.00%
% 9.82%
8.80%
8.80%
%Decreament due to LSM
7.67%
7.67%
%
8.00%
%
IRC CLASS 70R LOADING%
DECREAMENT IN
6.00%
% REINFORCEMENT
IRC CLASS A LOADING%
4.00%
%
DECREAMENT IN
REINFORCEMENT
2.00%
%
0.00
0%
M30
M35
M40
M
M45
Concrete Grade
Figure 6..0 Saving in

n Steel usingg LSM apprroach over WSM
W for Fee415 Steel Grade
G
65

Table 5.2 Saving
S in Stteel using LSM approaach over WS
SM for Fe5000 Steel Graade

Fe 50
00 IRC CLA
ASS 70R LOAD
DING IRC CLASSS A LOADING
G
CONCRETE GRADE % DEECREAMENT IIN % DECREAMENT IN

REINNFORCEMENTT REINFFORCEMENT
M30
0 7.67% 7.67%
M35
5 8.80% 8.80%
M40
0 9.82% 9.82%
M45
5 10.76% 1
10.76%
%Saaving in Areaa of Steel

Span=4M
12.00% Height=4M
2 Lane Roadd
4%
10.84
0.84%
10 Steel Gradee Fe500
10.00% 9.8
84%
9.84%
8.75%
8 8.75%
t LSM
7.54%
7.54%
8.00%
IRC CLASS 70
0R LOADING%
d to
t due
6.00% DECREAMEN NT IN

REINFORCEM MENT
%Decreament
4.00%
IRC CLASS A LOADING%
DECREAMEN NT IN
%D
2.00% REINFORCEM MENT
0.00%
M30
M35
M
M40
45
M4
Concrete Grrade
F
Figure 6.1 Saving
S in Steeel using LS
SM approacch over WSM
M for Fe5000 Steel Grad
de
66

5.2.2 Saving in Depth of Section in LSM over WSM with constant Steel Area
A design of a RCC Box Culvert with Span & Height 4M is prepared with the help
of developed MS-Excel tool. This design is based on the WSM as well as LSM
approaches. From the developed MS-Excel tool the variation in the amount of
depth of section with keeping a constant steel area required from WSM to LSM
approaches is noted and from these noted data following figures and tables are
developed (Table 5.3 and 5.4 & Figure 6.2 and 6.3 ).
67

T
Table 5.3 Sav
ving in Matterial using LSM approoach over WSM
W for Fe4415 Steel Grade

Fe 415 IRC CLA
ASS 70R LOAD
G
Fe415
5 % DECREAMENT IN DEPTH
H OF THE % DECREAMENT IN DEPTH
H OF
SECTION THE SECTION
M30
0 6.86% 6
6.85%
M35
5 7.91% 7
7.85%
M40
0 8..94% 8
8.93%
M45
5 9.90% 9
9.71%
%
%Saving in Material
Spaan=4m
Heiight=4m
10.00%
% 9.9
90%
9.71%
2 laane road
8.94%
8 8.93% Steeel Grade
9.00%
%
7.91%
7.85% Fe4415
8.00%
%
6.86% %
6.85%
7.00%
% IRC CLASSS 70R LOADIN
NG%
%Improvement due to LSM
6.00%
% DECREAAMENT IN DEPTTH OF
THE SEC
CTION
5.00%% IRC CLASSS A LOADING%
4.00%% DECREAAMENT IN DEPTTH OF
3.00% THE SEC
CTION
2.000%
1.000%
0.00
0%
M30
M35
M40
M
M45
Concretee Grade
Figure 6.2 Saving

S in Material
M usin
ng LSM app
proach overr WSM for Fe415
F Steell Grade
68

T
Table 5.4 Sav
ving in Matterial using LSM approoach over WSM
W for Fe500 Steel Grade
G

Fe500
0 IRC CLA
ASS 70R LOAD
G
CONCRETE GRADE % DECREAMENT IN DEPTH
H OF THE % DECREAMENT IN DEPTH
H OF
SECTION THE SECTION
M30
0 6.82% 6
6.74%
M35
5 7.87% 7
7.65%
M40
0 8.89% 8
8.55%
M45
5 9.70% 9
9.42%
%Saving in
i Material
Spaan=4m
Height=4m
10.0
00%
2 laane road
9.70%
9.42% Steeel Grade
9.0
00% 8.89%
8.55% Fe5500
7.87%
8.0
00% 7.65%
%
6.82%
%74%
6.7
7.0
00%
%Improvement due to LSM
IRC CLA
ASS 70R LOADIN
NG%
6.0
00% DECREAAMENT IN DEPPTH OF
5.0
00% THE SEC
CTION
00%
4.0 IRC CLA
ASS A LOADING
G%
3.00% DECREAAMENT IN DEPPTH OF
THE SEC
CTION
2.00%
1..00%
0..00%
M30
0
M35
M40
M45
Concrrete Grade
Figure 6.3 Sa
aving in Maaterial usingg LSM apprroach over WSM
W for Fee500 Steel Grade
G
69

5.3 Discussion
5.3.1 There will be three conditions for analysis and designing of Box Culvert (I) Box
Empty (II) Box Full with Live Load and (III) Box Full without Live Load.
5.3.2 The water pressure is the only load that produces the moment in the opposite
directions on the side walls i.e. counteracting moments.
5.3.3 Box empty condition is the critical load combination because all loads produces
the moment in the same directions with no counter balancing from water pressure.
This shall make worst condition of analysis and design of box culvert.
5.3.4 Keeping the section constant 6-10% saving in steel can be obtained by shifting
from WSM to LSM design approach.
5.3.5 For constant steel area, section of top, wall and bottom can be reduced by 7-12%
if design is done by LSM approach instead of WSM approach.
5.3.6 At higher grade of concrete more saving in steel is observed.
5.3.7 Formulas that are used in LSM design are simple to apply and there is separate
partial safety factor for both concrete and steel reinforcement.
5.3.8 There are two limits in LSM approach (I) Limit State of Collapse & (II) Limit
State of Serviceability. Limit State of Collapse corresponds to the Flexure,
Compression, Shear, and Torsion while Limit State of Serviceability corresponds
to Deflection, Cracking, Corrosion and Excessive Vibration. These limits are
based on the various probabilities and because of this LSM approach is also called
as Probabilistic Approach. These make LSM approach is farther better than the
WSM approach.
70

CHAPTER – 6
CONCLUSIONS
In the present study on “Analysis & Design of RCC Box Culvert using WSM & LSM”
the analysis & design of box culvert under different loading conditions has been carried
out. A sample problem of 4M span with Empty Box Condition is analysed by manual and
STAAD Pro software. The design for the same is carried out with conventional WSM
approach & as per latest guidelines of IRC: 6 – 2014 using LSM approach.
A MS – Excel tool is developed for analysis and design of box culvert. The tool is
capable of analyzing box culvert for all three possible situations i.e. (I) Case-1 Box
Empty (II) Case-2 Box Full (With Live load) & (III) Case-3 Box Full (Without Live
Load) and box culvert subjected to 2 types of loading i.e. (I) IRC Class 70R Loading &
(II) IRC Class A Loading. With the develop tool design can be carried out using WSM as
well as LSM approaches.
The results from the develop tool analysis & design are compared with manual &
STAAD Pro analysis/calculation. From the study following conclusions may be drawn:
1. The develop MS – Excel tool for analysis & design of box culvert is accurate, fast,
easy to use & user friendly application.
2. No software and additional knowledge to run software is required for the analysis and
design of box culvert.
3. Empty box culvert condition is found to be most critical loading combination as in
this case no counterbalancing moments are available because of non availability of
water head.
4. Although IRC Class 70R Loading are higher as compared to IRC Class A Loading
but due to higher impact factor in case of IRC Class A Loading sometimes shear
check becomes critical.
5. From the parametric study it is observed that for a constant section, a saving of tune
of 6-10% may be achieved by using LSM approach, amount of saving is higher for
higher grades of concrete.
71

6. From the parametric study, it is also observed that for a constant Steel Area a saving
of the tune of 7-12% may be attained in concrete by using LSM approach over WSM
design approach. For higher grades of concrete saving is higher.
Scope for Future Study

Based on the experience of present study, work can also be extended for the other
type of bridges such as (i) Slab Culvert Bridge (ii) T–Beam Bridge and (iii) Plate
Girder Bridge. The study may be carried out for the bridge abutment, bridge pier &
bridge foundation also.
72

References
[1] B.N. Sinha and R.P. Sharma ‘RCC Box Culvert – Methodology and Designs
including Computer Method’ Paper no. 555 Journal of Indian Road Congress,
2009
[2] Ravindra Bhimarao Kulkarni and Rohan Shrikant Jirage ‘Comparative Study of
Steel Angles as Tension Members Designed by Working Stress Method and Limit
State Method’ International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research,
Volume 2, Issue 11, 2011
[3] Ping Zhu, Run Liu, Wenbin Liu and Xinil Wu ‘Study on Optimal Design of a Box
Culvert under Road’ Civil Engineering and Urban Planning 2012 (CEUP 2012)
[4] B.H. Solanki and M.D. Vakil ‘Comparative Study for Flexure Design using IRC
112:2011 & IRC 21:2000’ International Journal of Scientific & Engineering
Research, Volume 4, Issue 6, 2013
[5] Sujata Shreedhar and R. Shreedhar ‘Design Coefficients for Single and Two cells
Box Culverts’ International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, Volume
3, Issue 3, 2013
[6] RajaVarma ‘Study the Working Stress Method and Limit State Method and in
RCC Chimney Design’ International Journal of Technical Research and
Applications, Volume 2, Issue 1, 2014
[7] Neeta K. Meshram and P.S.Pajgade ‘Comparative Study of Water Tank Using
Limit State Method and Working Stress Method’ International Journal of
Research in Advent Technology, Volume 2, Issue 8, 2014
[8] Neha Kolate, Molly Mathew and Snehal Mali ‘Analysis and Design of RCC Box
Culvert’ International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5,
Issue 12, 2014
[9] Paul Tom P. ‘Analysis and Design of RCC Bridges and Box Culvert’ Research
Report, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275272796, 2015
[10] Shivanand Tenagi and R. Shreedhar ‘Comparative Study of Slab Culvert Design
using IRC 112:2011 and IRC21:2000’ International Journal for Scientific
Research & Development, Volume 3, Issue 05, 2015
73

[11] Y. Vinod Kumar and Chava Srinivas ‘Analysis and Design of Box Culvert by
using Computational Methods’ International Journal of Engineering & Science
Research IJESR, Volume 5, Issue 7, 2015
[12] Sudip Jha, Cherukupally Rajesh and P.Srilakshmi ‘Comparative Study of RCC
Slab Bridge by Working Stress (IRC: 21-2000) and Limit State (IRC: 112-2011)’
International Journal & Magazine of Engineering, Technology, Management and
Research, Volume 2, Issue 8, 2015
[13] IRC: 6 - 2000 Standard Specifications and Code for practice for Road Bridges
Section-II Loads and Stresses (Fourth revision)
[14] IRC: 21 - 2000 Standard Specifications and Code of practice for Road Bridges
Section-III Cement Concrete (Plain and Reinforced)
[15] IRC: 6 - 2014 Standard Specifications and Code of practice for Road Bridges
Section-II Loads and Stresses (Revised edition)
[16] IRC: 112 – 2011 Code of practice for Concrete Road Bridges
[17] IS: 456 - 2000 Plain and Reinforced Concrete- Code of practice (Fourth revision)
[18] D J Victor ‘Essentials of Bridge Engineering’ Oxford & IBH. 1980
[19] M. A. Jayaram ‘Design of Bridge Structures’ Prentice-Hall of India Pvt. Limited,
2004
[20] N Krishna Raju, ‘Design of Bridges, Oxford and LBH publishing co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, Fourth edition.
74

Sample Thesis

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Sample Thesis

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Anallysis and Deesign of RCC

C Box Culvvert using WSM

Date: Dr. Praveen Aggarwal

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.4 Scope of the study

1.5 Presentation of the study

2.2 Box Culvert

Figure 2.0 Schematic diagram of a RCC Box Culvert

2.3.2 Bottom Slab

2.3.3 Side Walls

2.3.4 Cushion (If Present)

2.4 Loads of Box Culvert

Where W = uniformly distributed load on the slab

2.4.2 Uniform distributed load

2.4.3 Weight of Side Wall

2.4.4 Water pressure from inside of Box Culvert

2.4.5 Earth pressure on the vertical Side Wall

2.4.6 Uniform lateral pressure on the vertical Side Wall

2.6 Application of Box Culvert

Figure 2.1 Multi-Celled Box Culvert

Figure 2.2 Box Culvert at Intersection

Figure 2.3 Box Culvert below a Railway Track

Figure 2.4 Box Culvert at Cross Drainage Structure

2.7 An Overview of various Papers

Where = Unit Weight of Soil

3.2 IRC Loadings

Where I = impact factor

3.3.2 for IRC Class 70R or IRC Class AA Loading

3.4 Effective width of dispersion

Where beff. = effective width of dispersion

3.5 Effective length of load

Number of lanes Reduction in Longitudinal Effect

Two lanes No reduction

Four lanes and more than four lanes 20% reduction

9 Where M = design moment

9 k = neutral axis factor

9 σst = permissible stress in steel

• Area of Steel Reinforcement Ast

≤0.15 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20

0.25 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23

0.50 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32

0.75 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38

1.00 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.42

1.25 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46

1.50 0.42 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.49

1.75 0.44 0.47. 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.52

2.00 0.44 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.54 0.55

2.25 0.44 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.57

2.50 0.44 0.51 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.60

2.75 0.44 0.51 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62

3.00 0.44 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.63

>3.00 0.44 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.63

Formulas used for design by LSM

9 Where Mu = factored design moment

9 fck = characteristics strength of concrete

• Shear Stress τvu

M 15 M20 M25 M30 M35 M40 and above

≤0.15 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30

4.1 Analysis & Design Condition of box culvert

4.1.1 Case-1 Box Empty

Figure 4.0 Box Empty

4.1.2 Case-2 Box Full (With Live Load)

Figure 4.1 Box Full (With Live Load)

Figure 4.2 Box Full (Without Live load)