Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Current practice is to make decks integral with the abutments. The objective is to avoid the use of
joints over abutments and piers. Expansion joints are prone to leak and allow the ingress of de-
icing salts into the bridge deck and substructure. In general all bridges are made continuous over
intermediate supports, and decks under 60 metres long with skews not exceeding 30 are made
Full height integral abutments (DfT BA 42/96 call Frame Abutments) are generally used for the
Integral abutments with piled foundations (DfT BA 42/96 call Embedded Abutments) usually
incorporate steel H piles in a single row; the H piles are orientated so that bending occurs about
their weaker axis. These abutments are suitable for the larger span decks.
Integral abutments with spread footings (DfT BA 42/96 call Bank Pad Abutments) should only be
Where decks exceed 60 metres long or have skews exceeding 30 then movement joints and
Geometric Considerations
the solid abutment form. The exact transition point between the two types depends very much on
the geometry and the site of the particular bridge. In most cases the open abutment solution has a
better appearance and is less intrusive on the general flow of the ground contours and for these
reasons is to be preferred. It is the cost of the wing walls when related to the deck costs which
swings the balance of cost in favour of the solid abutment solution for wider bridges. However the
wider bridges with solid abutments produce a tunnelling effect and costs have to be considered in
conjunction with the proper functioning of the structure where fast traffic is passing beneath. Solid
abutments for narrow bridges should only be adopted where the open abutment solution is not
possible. In the case of wide bridges the open abutment solution is to be preferred, but there are
Design Considerations
iii. Horizontal loads from temperature, creep movements etc and wind.
These loads are carried by the bearings which are seated on the abutment bearing platform. The
horizontal loads may be reduced by depending on the coefficient of friction of the bearings at the
However, the full braking effect is to be taken, in either direction, on top of the abutment at
carriageway level.
In addition to the structure loads, horizontal pressures exerted by the fill material against the
abutment walls is to be considered. Also a vertical loading from the weight of the fill acts on the
footing.
Vehicle loads at the rear of the abutments are considered by applying a surcharge load on the rear
of the wall.
For certain short single span structures it is possible to use the bridge deck to prop the two
abutments apart. This entails the abutment wall being designed as a propped cantilever.
Abutment Design to BD 30 and EN 1997-1
Index
1.Earth pressures
2.Abutment Construction
3.Loading
4.Stability
1.Earth Pressures
Active earth pressures (Ka h) are considered to ensure that the abutment is stable.
At rest earth pressures (Ko h) are considered to ensure that the structural elements are
adequate.
Passive earth pressures (Kp h) are only considered for integral abutments or where shear
At rest pressures are initially developed on the back of the abutment wall during construction and
whilst the backfill is compacting. Consequently the structural elements have to be designed to
Any movements in the structure caused by the at rest pressure, either through rotation or
deflection will reduce the pressure on the back of the wall; a state of equilibrium is reached when
the pressure reduces to the active earth pressure value. Consequently the stability of the structure
Passive pressures are developed when the structure pushes against the soil. Since movements
required to develop passive pressures are considerably greater than that for active pressures, and
the structure is designed to ensure that the foundations do not slide under active pressures, then
it is unlikely that passive pressures will be developed in front of the abutment. The magnitude of
movement required to mobilise passive pressure can be determined from EN 1997-1:2004 Clause
C.3(2) and PD 6694-1:2011 Clause 7.5. There is also the chance that, at some time in the future,
the soil in front of the abutment may be removed temporarily. This could happen if services, such
as drainage pipes, water or gas mains, are installed or repaired in front of the abutment.
Consequently the structure needs to be designed to be stable with no soil in front of the concrete
footings.
If shear keys are required to prevent sliding then the key should be located under the rear half of
the base and a factored value of passive pressure is used.
Integral bridges experience passive pressures on the back of the abutment wall when the deck
expands. The design of integral abutments is covered in BA 42, PD 6694-1 and a number of
and Composite Highway Bridge Design by D C Iles give guidance and examples.
2.Abutment Construction
The layout of the abutment will have implications on the design which need to be considered.
The provision of a drainage layer will allow porewater pressures to be ignored (unless there is a
possibility of a large water main bursting). However the drainge layer separates the backfill soil
from the wall so back of wall friction should not be included. Traffic vibration will also affect any
Foundation level is usually set at least one metre below ground level to avoid deterioration of the
foundation material through frost action. If services, such as gas pipes, water mains, electricity
cables etc., may be installed in front of the abutment wall then the depth to foundation level may
need to be increased to allow the services to be installed above the concrete footing.
It is usual to provide granular backfill to the back of the wall which limits the material to Class 6N
or 6P as defined in the Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works Volume 1 Specification
Series 600 Clause 610 and Table 6/1. A typical value for the effective angle of internal friction (')
for Class 6N or 6P material is 35o. This equates to serviceability limit state values of:
Ko = (1-Sin') = 0.43
3.Loading
Loading from the deck is applied to the abutment through the bearings. Maximum vertical bearing
loads are obtained from the deck analysis; these loads, together with the type of restraint required
Horizontal loads from the deck are produced by wind loading, temperature effects, creep
movements, traction, braking and skidding loads, collision loads when high level of containment
parapets are used, and centrifugal loads if the horizontal radius of curvature of the carriageway is
less than 1000 metres when using BS 5400-2, or 1500 metres when using EN 1991-2.
Longitudinal loads from temperature effects in the deck will be determined according to the type of
bearing used. Elastomeric bearings are effectively 'glued' in place between the deck soffit and the
abutment bearing plinth so that the bearing has to distort when the deck expands and contracts.
The longitudinal force produced by this distortion is proportional to the shear stiffness of the
Sliding bearings, on the other hand, produce a longitudinal load which is proportional to the
dead(permanent) load reaction and the coefficient of friction between the sliding surfaces. The
cofficient of friction () varies between 0.01 and 0.08 depending on the type of bearing and
The longitudinal load from the temperature effect will act equally on both abutments. If sliding
bearings are used then the load transmitted is equal to the friction at the bearing under dead and
superimposed dead loads (permanent actions). If elastomeric bearings are used then the load
transmitted is equal to the force required to distort the bearing by the distance the deck expands
or contracts.
The deck is very stiff in the axial direction so horizontal loads will have negligible effect on the
length of the deck. Hence longitudinal loads due to traction, braking and skidding are assumed to
be transmitted to the fixed abutment only. If only elastomeric bearings are used, i.e. there is no
fixed abutment, then the loads due to traction, braking and skidding are shared between the two
abutments.
Transverse loads on the deck will be transmitted to the abutment through the fixed and sliding-
guided bearings only. These loads are unlikely to have an effect on the stability of a full height
abutment, but the bearing plinths need to be designed to resist the loads. The stability of small
abutments, such as bank seats, may need to be checked for these loads.
Live loading at the rear of the abutment is represented by a surcharge loading (see BS 5400 Part
2:2006 clause 5.8.2 or PD 6694-1:2011 clause 7.6). Traction, braking and skidding loads at the
rear of the abutment are not required to be consider when using EN 1991-2:2003 (see clause
4.9.2). The curtain wall (also called upstand wall or ballast wall) does however need to be
Vehicle collision on abutments need not normally be considered as they are assumed to have
sufficient mass to withstand the collision loads for global purposes (See BD 60/04 clause 2.2, or
4.Stability
Sliding
Overturning
Boreholes need to provide information about the nature of the ground below the foundations.
Adequate sampling and testing also need to be carrried out to obtain design parameters for
allowable bearing pressures, together with friction and cohesion values of the soil at foundation
level.
When using BD 30 sliding and overturning effects are calculated using nominal loads and active
earth pressures. A factor of safety of 2.0 is used to ensure that the abutment is stable against
When using EN 1997-1:2004 stability needs to be considered at serviceability and ultimate limit
states.
Several load cases need to be considered to ensure all loading conditions are catered for.
Construction sequences also need to be considered. The abutment wall will often be constructed
and backfilled up to bearing shelf level; this provides good access for the deck construction. A
surcharge load can be applied to the wall by the construction plant used to compact the backfill.
This surcharge load, together with the active backfill earth pressures, will be acting on the back of
the wall without the stabilising effects of the dead load from the deck and can result in a critical
loading case.
Allowable bearing pressures are obtained from the Ground Investigation Survey. An allowable
in EN 1997-1:2004 to limit the maximum SLS pressure under the foundation to a fraction of the
ground strength; PD 6694-1:2011 clause 5.2.2 clarifies this fraction to be one third. As the
allowable pressure will be dependent on the size of foundation and loads applied then there will
need to be an initial assessment of the loads and foundation sizes before an allowable pressure
can be given. This results in some redesigning until the correct base size, applied loads and
BS 8002 says that instability of the earth mass involving a slip failure may occur where:
the wall is built on sloping ground which itself is close to limiting equilibrium; or
the structure is underlain by a significant depth of clay whose undrained strength increases
the structure is underlain by strata within which high pore water pressures may develop
If none of these conditions are present then a slip failure analysis will not be necessary.
Design the fixed and free end cantilever abutments to the 20m span deck shown to carry HA and
45 units of HB loading. Analyse the abutments using a unit strip method. The bridge site is located
south east of Oxford (to establish the range of shade air temperatures).
Vehicle collision on the abutments need not be considered as they are assumed to have sufficient
mass to withstand the collision loads for global purposes (See BD 60/04 Clause 2.2).
The ground investigation report shows suitable founding strata about 9.5m below the proposed
road level. Test results show the founding strata to be a cohesionless soil having an angle of
Backfill material will be Class 6N with an effective angle of internal friction (') = 35o and density
() = 19kN/m3.
The proposed deck consists of 11No. Y4 prestressed concrete beams and concrete deck slab as
shown.
A grillage analysis gave the following reactions for the various load cases:
From BS 5400 Part 2 Figures 7 and 8 the minimum and maximum shade air temperatures are -19
For a Group 4 type strucutre (see fig. 9) the corresponding minimum and maximum effective
bridge temperatures are -11 and +36oC from tables 10 and 11.
From Clause 5.4.6 the range of movement at the free end of the 20m span deck = 47 12 10-
6 20 103 = 11.3mm.
The ultimate thermal movement in the deck will be [(11.3 / 2) f3 fL] = [11.3 1.1 1.3 /2]
= 8mm.
With a maximum ultimate reaction = 230 + 60 + 500 = 790kN then a suitable elastomeric bearing
Note: the required shear deflection (8mm) should be limited to between 30% to 50% of the
thickness of the bearing. The figure quoted in the catalogue for the maximum shear deflection is
A tolerance is also required for setting the bearing if the ambient temperature is not at the mid
range temperature. The design shade air temperature range will be -19 to +37oC which would
require the bearings to be installed at a shade air temperature of [(37+19)/2 -19] = 9oC to
If the bearings are set at a maximum shade air temperature of 16oC then, by proportion the deck
Let us assume that this maximum shade air temperature of 16oC for fixing the bearings is specified
This is an ultimate load hence the nominal horizontal load = 121 / 1.1 / 1.3 = 85kN at each
bearing.
H = AGr/tq
This correllates with the value obtained above using the shear stiffness from the manufacturer's
data sheet.
With a maximum ultimate reaction of 790kN and longitudinal movement of 8mm then a suitable
Movement X = 12.5mm
As the mating surface between the stainless steel and PTFE is smaller than the base plate then the
From Table3 of BS 5400 Part 9.1 the Coefficient of friction = 0.08 for a bearing stress of 5N/mm2
Hence total horizontal load on each abutment when the deck expands or contracts = 2220 0.08
When this load is applied on the deck it will act on the fixed abutment only.
300 < 450kN hence braking load is critical in the longitudinal direction.
When this load is applied on the deck it will act at bearing shelf level, and will not affect the free
Backfill
Fs = Ka w h = 0.27wh kN/m
1) Stability Check
There are a number of publications that will give guidance on base sizes for free standing
cantilever walls, Reynolds's Reinforced Concrete Designer's Handbookbeing one such book.
Alternatively a simple spreadsheet will achieve a result by trial and error.
Load Combinations
Factor of Safety Against Overturning = 3251 / 452 = 7.2 > 2.0 OK.
523kN/m
Factor of Safety Against Sliding = 523 / 168 = 3.1 > 2.0 OK.
Bearing Pressure:
Check bearing pressure at toe and heel of base slab = (P / A) (P e / Z) where P e is the
P = 906kN/m
A = 6.4m2/m
Z = 6.42 / 6 = 6.827m3/m
It can be seen that the use of elastomeric bearings (Case 2) will govern the critical design load
cases on the abutments. We shall assume that there are no specific requirements for using
elastomeric bearings and design the abutments for the lesser load effects by using sliding
bearings.
Loads on the back of the wall are calculated using 'at rest' earth pressures. Serviceability and
Ultimate load effects need to be calculated for the load cases 1 to 6 shown above. Again, these are
Using the Fixed Abutment Load Case 1 again as an example of the calculations:
Wall Design
fL for horizontal loads due to surcharge and backfill from BS 5400 Part 2 Clause 5.8.1.2:
Serviceability = 1.0
Ultimate = 1.5
f3 = 1.0 for serviceability and 1.1 for ultimate (from BS 5400 Part 4 Clauses 4.2.2 and 4.2.3)
Analysing the fixed abutment with Load Cases 1 to 6 and the free abutment with Load Cases 1 to
5 using a simple spreadsheet the following results were obtained for the design moments and
599
Concrete to BS 8500:2006
Use strength class C32/40 with water-cement ratio 0.5 and minimum cement content of
Nominal cover to reinforcement = 60mm (45mm minimum cover plus a tolerance c of 15mm).
Ultimate axial load in wall from deck reactions = 2400 + 600 + 2770 = 5770 kN
0.1fcuAc = 0.1 40 103 11.6 1 = 46400 kN > 5770 design as a slab in accordance with
clause 5.4
Bending
BS 5400 Part 4 Clause 5.4.2 for reisitance moments in slabs design to clause 5.3.2.3:
z = {1 - [ 1.1fyAs) / (fcubd) ]} d
Mu = (0.87fy)Asz = 0.87 500 8378 0.875 920 10-6 = 2934kNm/m > 2175kNn/m OK
Carrying out the crack control calculation to Clause 5.8.8.2 gives a crack width of 0.2mm <
0.25mm.
Also the steel reinforcement and concrete stresses meet the limitations required in clause 4.1.1.3
serviceability requirements are satisfied.
Shear
(40)1/3 = 0.72
svc = 0.86 0.72 = 0.62 N/mm2 < 0.673 hence shear reinforcement should be provided,
Hence height requiring strengthening = 1.073 (0.673 - 0.62) / (0.673 - 0.53) = 0.4m < d.
Provide a 500 500 splay at the base of the wall with B32 @ 150c/c bars in sloping face.
Considering the effects of casting the wall stem onto the base slab by complying with the early
thermal cracking of concrete to BD 28 then B16 horizontal lacer bars @ 150 c/c will be
Minimum area of secondary reinforcement to Clause 5.8.4.2 = 0.12% of bad = 0.0012 1000
Base Design
Maximum bending and shear effects in the base slab will occur at sections near the front and back
of the wall. Different load factors are used for serviceability and ultimate limit states so the
calculations need to be carried out for each limit state using 'at rest pressures'
Using the Fixed Abutment Load Case 1 again as an example of the calculations:
P = 906kN/m
A = 6.4m2/m
Z = 6.42 / 6 = 6.827m3/m
SLS Moment at a-a = (177 1.12 / 2) + ([195 - 177] 1.12 / 3) - (25 1.0 1.12 / 2) =
SLS Moment at b-b = (89 4.32 / 2) + ([160 - 89] 4.32 / 6) - (25 1.0 4.32 / 2) - (531
P = 1070kN/m
A = 6.4m2/m
Z = 6.42 / 6 = 6.827m3/m
f3 = 1.1
ULS Shear at a-a = 1.1 {[(260 + 228) 1.1 / 2] - (1.15 1.1 25)} = 260kN/m
ULS Shear at b-b = 1.1 {[(199 + 74) 4.3 / 2] - (1.15 4.3 25) - 637 - 62} = 259kN/m
ULS Moment at a-a = 1.1 {(228 1.12 / 2) + ([260 - 228] 1.12 / 3) - (1.15 25 1.0
ULS Moment at b-b = 1.1 {(74 4.32 / 2) + ([199 - 74] 4.32 / 6) - (1.15 25 1.0 4.32 /
Analysing the fixed abutment with Load Cases 1 to 6 and the free abutment with Load Cases 1 to
Bending
BS 5400 Part 4 Clause 5.7.3 design as a slab for reisitance moments to clause 5.3.2.3:
z = {1 - [ 1.1fyAs) / (fcubd) ]} d
Mu = (0.87fy)Asz = 0.87 500 5362 0.92 924 10-6 = 1983kNm/m > 1922kNm/m OK
(1983kNm/m also > 1834kNm/m B32 @ 150 c/c suitable for fixed abutment.
For the Serviceability check for Case 3 an approximation of the dead load moment can be obtained
by removing the surcharge and braking loads. The spreadsheet result gives the dead load SLS
moment for Case 3 as 723kNm, thus the live load moment = 1233 - 723 = 510kNm.
Carrying out the crack control calculation to Clause 5.8.8.2 gives a crack width of 0.27mm >
0.25mm Fail.
This could be corrected by reducing the bar spacing, but increase the bar size to B40@150 c/c as
this is required to avoid the use of links (see below).
Using B40@150c/c the crack control calculation gives a crack width of 0.17mm < 0.25mm OK.
Also the steel reinforcement and concrete stresses meet the limitations required in clause 4.1.1.3
Shear
By inspection B32@150c/c will be adequate for the bending effects in the toe (Muls = 365kNm <
1983kNm)
Shear requirements are designed to BS 5400 clause 5.7.3.2(a) checking shear at d away from the
ULS Shear on toe = 1.1 {(620 + 599) 0.5 0.176 - 1.15 1 0.176 25} = 112kN
(40)1/3 = 0.62
Shear requirements are designed at the back face of the wall to clause 5.4.4.1:
Length of heel = (6.5 - 1.1 - 1.0) = 4.4m
ULS Shear on heel = 1.1 {348 0.5 (5.185 - 2.1) - 1.15 1 4.4 25 - 1.2 4.4 (8.63
19 + 10)} = 559kN
(40)1/3 = 0.62
Rather than provide shear reinforcement try increasing bars to B40 @ 150 c/c (also required for
(40)1/3 = 0.716
Considering the effects of casting the base slab onto the blinding concrete by complying with
the early thermal cracking of concrete to BD 28 then B16 distribution bars @ 250 c/c will be
required.
Minimum area of main reinforcement to Clause 5.8.4.1 = 0.15% of bad = 0.0015 1000 924 =
Curtain Wall
This wall is designed to be cast onto the top of the abutment after the deck has been built.
Loading will be applied from the backfill, surcharge and braking loads on top of the wall.
HB braking load to BS 5400 clause 6.10 = 25% 45units 4 10kN on 2 axles = 225kN per
axle.
To allow for load distribution effects assume a 45o dispersal to the curtain wall and a 45o dispersal
down the wall, with maximum dispersal of the width of the abutment (11.6m).
This crude analysis will slightly underestimate the peak values in the wall below the load, but
allowance can be made when designing the reinforcement to ensure there is spare capacity. Then:
Dispersed to the base of the curtain wall = 225 / 11.6 = 19.4 kN/m
SLS Moment = (44.4 3.0) + (25.6 1.5) + (36.4 1.0) = 208 kNm/m (36 dead + 172 live)
ULS Moment = 1.1 {(1.1 44.4 3.0) + (1.5 25.6 1.5) + (1.5 36.4 1.0)} = 285
kNm/m
ULS Shear = 1.1 {(1.1 44.4) + (1.5 25.6) + (1.5 36.4)} = 156kN/m