Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
4.
5.
6.
Section 1 General
1.1 Scope (3) NOTE
For the application in Belgium, the load models shall also be applied to the design of: - the movable bridges (see Annex M normative - in this National Annex); - the existing bridges to be repaired or upgraded (see informative Annex R); - the retaining walls, tunnels and underground structures (see Annex T).
2.3 Actions for accidental design situations (1) NOTE (4) NOTE.
The appropriate protection are detailed in section 4.7. The values for boat and ship impacts, as for ice and driving materials impacts, are given in EN 1991-1-7, for bridges and tunnels. Additional requirements are specified for the individual project.
Section 4 Road traffic actions and other actions specifically for road bridges
4.1 Field of application (1) NOTE 2 (2) NOTE 1
Load models still apply to bridge length greater than 200 m, unless different prescriptions are defined for the individual project. Specific models for bridges equipped with appropriate means, including road signs, to strictly limit the weight of any vehicle are defined in informative Annex R relative to existing bridges.
4.2 Representation of actions 4.2.1 Models of road traffic loads (1) NOTE 2
No complementary load model is defined for the application in Belgium, except for very heavy traffic in more than 1 lanes (see 4.3.2(3) NOTE 2) and for existing bridges (see informative Annex R). Standard models for special vehicles (exceptional transport) and their application are given in Annex A and in 4.3.4.
(2) NOTE
4.3 Vertical loads - Characteristic values 4.3.1 General and associated design situations (2) NOTE 2
No additional rule for the use of LM2 in Belgium.
(6) NOTE
This alternative rule cannot be considered as a load model, but only as a possible simplification for the calculation.
4.4 Horizontal forces - Characteristic values 4.4.1 Braking and acceleration forces
(2) NOTE 2 The upper limit of 900 kN in (4.6) is replaced by a variable upper limit Qlmax fixed as : 200 kN if L < 30 m and 500 kN if L > 150 m with linear interpolation on L if 30 m < L < 150 m (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101) (3) NOTE For the special vehicle 900 / 150 introduced in 4.3.4 (1), the braking force is supposed to be included in formula (4.6) of 4.4.1(2), when the special vehicle and the tandem systems are acting together on 5
the bridge deck. For other special vehicles, it is supposed that the braking force is equal to 15% of the vertical load on the bridge deck (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101). (6) NOTE The horizontal force transmitted by expansion joints or applied to structural members that can be loaded by only one axle is (normative value for LM1-LM2 and the special vehicle 900 / 150 introduced in 4.3.4 (1)) : Q lk = 0,6 Q1 Q1k (4.6a) For special vehicles, it is supposed that the braking force is equal to 15% of the vertical load on the structural member (ref. former Belgian standard NBN B03 101).
4.5 Groups of traffic loads on road bridges 4.5.1 Characteristic values of the multi-component action (1) Table 4.4a ANB is normative for Belgium, as given hereafter.
Table 4.4a ANB - Assessment of groups of traffic loads [based on the corrected version of EN 1991-2 of 2004] characteristic values of the multi-component action (= group of loads considered as 1 action)
CARRIAGEWAY FOOTWAYS AND CYCLE TRACKS
Load type
Reference Load system gr1a gr1b gr2 Groups of loads gr3 d gr4 gr5 4.3.2 LM1 (TS and UDL systems)
Vertical forces 4.3.3 LM2 (Single axle) 4.3.4 LM3 (Special vehicles) 4.3.5 LM4 (Crowd loading)
Vertical forces only 4.4.2 5.3.2-(1) Centrifugal and Uniformly transverse Distributed forces load
a
Combination value b
Characteristic value Dominant component action (designated as component associated with the group)
a b c
Defined as the frequent values (normative for Belgium). Defined as 2,5 kN / m2 (normative for Belgium)
See 5.3.2.1-(2). One footway only should be considered to be loaded if the effect is more unfavourable than the effect of two loaded footways. This group is irrelevant if gr4 is considered.
4.5.2 Other representative values of the multi-component action (1) The frequent actions can be determined by using Table 4.4b ANB Table 4.4b ANB - Assessment of groups of traffic loads (frequent values of the multicomponent action) CARRIAGEWAY Load type Reference Load system Group of loads
a
One footway only should be considered to be loaded if the effect is more unfavourable than the effect of two loaded footways. b The frequent values of the loads are obtained using the values of 1 of Table A.2.1 ANB of the National Annex (ANB) of Annex A2 of EN 1990. E.g. : 1 = 0,75 for the loads Qik of the tandem system (TS) and 1 = 0,40 for the uniformly distributed loads loads qik and qrk (UDL) (1) NOTE 3 For infrequent loads, if needed, the Table 4.4a is modified as described in EN 1991-2.
(3) NOTE 1 The traffic categories and values are defined in Table 4.5 ANB for a slow lane when using
Fatigue Load Models 3 and 4. On each fast lane (i.e. a traffic lane used predominantly by cars), additionally, 10% of Nobs may be taken into account. Table 4.5 ANB - Number of heavy vehicles expected per year and per slow lane Traffic categories 1 2 3 4 (6) NOTE Roads and motorways with 2 or more lanes per direction with high flow rates of lorries Roads and motorways with medium flow rates of lorries Main roads with low flow rates of lorries Local roads with low flow rates of lorries Expression (4.7) is normative for Belgium. 8 Nobs per year and per slow lane 2,0 106 0,5 106 0,125 106 0,05 106
4.7 Actions for accidental design situations 4.7.2 Collision forces from vehicles under the bridge 4.7.2.1 Collision forces on piers and other supporting members
(1) NOTE The prescriptions of the National Annex (ANB) of EN 1991-1-7 are applicable. As long as this document is not available, the following prescriptions are normative : a) Impact force : 1000 kN in the direction of vehicle travel or 500 kN perpendicular to that direction ; b) Height above the level of adjacent ground surface : 1,25 m.
4.7.3 Actions from vehicles on the bridge 4.7.3.3 Collision forces on vehicle restraint systems
(1) NOTE 1 The following classes of collision forces are normative in Belgium : 9
Table 4.9 ANB Recommended classes for the horizontal force transferred by vehicle restraint systems Recommended class AA (*) A B C D Horizontal force (kN) 50 100 200 400 600
(*) Class AA is provided to be used in conjunction with the prescriptions of EN 1991-1-1 for vehicle barriers and parapets in traffic and parking areas in buildings (category F and G), as long as EN 1991-1-7 ANB is not available, as follows : category F : category G : - for normal barriers and parapets A A - for barriers to access ramps AA B - opposite the ends of straight ramps, intended for downward travel, which exceed 20 m in length B C There is no direct correlation between these values and performances classes of vehicle restraint systems. The proposed values depend on the stiffness connection between the vehicle restraint system and the part of the bridge to which it is connected. The higher classes correspond to Higher containment in the sense of EN 1317-2 (e.g. H2 for class D). The lower classes (e.g. AA) correspond to weak connections (e.g. for restraint barriers with a rigid railing). The horizontal force, acting transversely, are applied 100 mm below the top of the selected vehicle restraint system or 1,0 m above the level of the carriageway or footway, whichever is the lower, and on a line 0,5 m long. (1) NOTE 3 The vertical force acting simultaneously with the horizontal collision force is equal to 0,375 Q1Q1k for classes A and Abis, and to 0,75 Q1Q1k for higher classes; these values are normative for Belgium. (2) NOTE The value of 1,25 times the characteristic resistance of the restraint system is the normative minimum value.
10
4.9 Load models for abutments and walls adjacent to bridges 4.9.1 Vertical loads
(1) NOTE 1 Load Model 1 is applicable to the carriageway behind abutments, wing walls, side walls and generally to all parts of bridges, tunnels and other underground constructions in contact with earth. The tandem system loads are replaced by a uniformly distributed load spread over a rectangular area of 3 m width and 2,20 m length at 0,3 m depth. In the fill, a dispersal angle of 30 from to the vertical for this load should be taken into account. (1) NOTE 2 The calculated equivalent distributed load qeq (kN/m) at the depth Z (m), as described in table 4.10 ANB and fig. 4.11 ANB. Furthermore, attention must be drawn to efforts transmitted to side walls, wing walls or retaining walls during the compacting of embankments, which may have a high magnitude.
Table 4.10 ANB : EQUIVALENT LOAD
Z depth
(m)
dyn
1.7-Z/10
larg 1
(m)
larg 2
(m)
Values including all traffic loads q eq0 q eq 1 q eq2 (see figure 4.12 ANB)
(kN/m) (kN/m) (kN/m)
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
1.67 1.65 1.63 1.62 1.60 1.50 1.40 1.30 1.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10
3.00 3.23 3.46 3.58 3.81 4.96 6.12 7.27 8.43 10.74 14.20 19.97 25.75
6.00 6.23 6.46 6.58 6.81 7.96 9.12 10.27 11.43 13.74 17.20 22.97 28.75
2.20 2.43 2.66 2.78 3.01 4.16 5.32 6.47 7.63 9.94 13.40 19.17 24.95
9.00 8.54 8.13 7.95 7.62 6.43 5.69 5.18 4.81 4.32 3.87 3.48 3.26
98.30 84.51 73.54 68.87 60.81 36.26 24.34 17.63 13.49 9.32 6.80 4.99 4.18
62.04 53.76 47.09 44.23 39.26 23.79 16.09 11.70 8.98 6.29 4.75 3.68 3.22
kN/m
qeq1
qeq2
Z (m)
Figure 4.12 ANB DISPERSAL AREA FOR A GIVEN DEPTH.
qeq0
qeq1
Long
larg2 larg1
11
5.3 Static models for vertical loads characteristic values 5.3.2 Load Models 5.3.2.1 Uniformly distributed load
(1) NOTE The normative characteristic value is qfk = 5 kN/m. This value cover effects of a continuous dense crowd. For cycle tracks, it is assumed that pedestrians may be present, frequently or not. (2) NOTE Load Model 4 (crowd loading) defined in 4.3.5, corresponding to qfk = 5 kN/m, is normative to cover the static effects of a continuous dense crowd where such a risk exists. For an individual project where the application of Load Model 4 is not required, the recommended value for qfk is : qfk = 2,5 kN/m for L > 210 m qfk = 2,0 + 120 / (L + 30) for 10 m < L < 210 m qfk = 5,0 kN/m for L < 10 m where : L is the loaded length in [m].
5.6.1 General
(1) NOTE Other collision actions may be defined for the individual project (see 2.3).
5.6.2 Collision forces from road vehicles under the bridge 5.6.2.1 Collision forces on piers
(1) NOTE For the forces due to the collision of abnormal height or aberrant road vehicles with piers or with the supporting members of a footbridge or ramps or stairs, the prescriptions of 4.7.2.1 are applied as normative.
13
Section 6 Rail traffic actions and other actions specifically for railway bridges
6.1 Field of application (2) NOTE (3) NOTE
This National Annex defines no alternative model.
The loading and characteristic values of actions for special types of railways are specified, if needed, for the individual project, in particular for tramways, metro and railways having not the standard track gauge of 1,435 m.
The loading requirements for the design of temporary railway bridges, which may (7) NOTE generally be based on this document, are specified, if needed, for the individual project. Special requirements may also be given for the individual project for temporary bridges depending upon the conditions in which they are used (e.g. for skew bridges).
6.3 Vertical loads - Characteristic values (static effects) and eccentricity and distribution of loading 6.3.2 Load Model 71
(3) NOTE The classification factor is specified for each railway line by the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1. For a normal exploitation, a value 1,00 is mandatory.
6.3.6 Distribution of axle loads by the rails, sleepers and ballast 6.3.6.3 Transverse distribution of actions by the sleepers and ballast
(5) NOTE For all bridges, the calculation must cover both situations with full-length sleepers (mono-block) or duo-block sleepers, because the situation can vary during the bridges life.
6.4 Dynamic effects (including resonance) 6.4.4 Requirement for a static or dynamic analysis
(1) NOTE (1) NOTE 1 than 63. The use of the flow chart in Figure 6.9 is normative. The influence of the skew may be considered as negligible if the skew angle is greater
(1) NOTE 5 Frame bridges and portal bridges in reinforced or prestressed concrete are considered as continuous bridges (for the case v < 200 km/h)
6.4.5.2 Definition of the dynamic factor (3) NOTE The use of the dynamic factor 2 instead of 3 is submitted to the agreement of the
Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.
6.4.5.3 Determinant length L (1) NOTE The values given in Table 6.2 are recommended. The relevant authority referred to in
Table 6.2 is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.
6.4.6 Requirements for a dynamic analysis 6.4.6.1 Loading and load combinations 6.4.6.1.1 Loading
(6) Table 6.4 NOTE The individual project may specify additional requirements relating to the application of HSLM-A and HSLM-B to continuous and complex structures. (7) NOTE The relevant authority is the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1.
6.5.4 Combined response of structure and track to variable actions 6.5.4.1 General principles
(5) NOTE The requirements for non-ballasted track may be specified for the individual project.
6.5.4.5.1 Track
(2) NOTE For ballasted tracks with additional lateral restraints to the track and for directly fastened tracks the minimum value of track radius may be reduced with the agreement of the Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 (2) NOTE For other track construction standards (in particular those that affect lateral resistance) and other types of rail it is recommended that the maximum additional rail stresses is specified in the individual project.
6.5.4.6 Calculation methods 6.5.4.6.1 Simplified calculation method for a single deck
(1) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify alternative criteria determining when it is not necessary to check the rail stresses (4) NOTE The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify alternative values of k determining the characteristic longitudinal forces FTk per track due to temperature variation (according to 6.5.4.3) acting on the fixed bearings
6.7 Derailment and other actions for railway bridges 6.7.1 Derailment actions from rail traffic on a railway bridge
(2)P NOTE For Design Situation I, the loading situation of figure 6.25 is applicable, where each of the 2 arrows correspond to a force x kacc x model LM71 by rail (as axles of 125 kN and 80 kN/m) For Design Situation II, the loading situation to consider is the following one : - 2 axles of load model LM71 positionned as in figure 6.27, the force on each being equal to x kacc - the remaining load model LM71 is applied to the rails as in the non accidental situations. The coefficient kacc takes into account the eventual dynamic magnification and the statistically influence of the frequent loads, with the value kacc = 1. (4)P In figure 6.27, the legend of (1) is max. 1,5s or less if against wall like in figure 6.26 (6) NOTE For the loads on the other tracks, see 6.8 and EN 1990 Annex A2 ANB. (8)P NOTE 1 The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify the requirements to mitigate the consequences of a derailment for structural elements which are situated above the level of the rails. (8)NOTE 2 The Authority in charge of the railway infrastructure1 may specify requirements to retain a derailed train on the structure.
Table 6.10add ANB - Number of tracks to be loaded for checking structural clearance requirements Limit State and associated acceptance criteria Number of tracks on the bridge 1 SLS Checks 1 2 1
3
6.8.2 Groups of Loads - Characteristic values of the multicomponent action (2) NOTE The values in Table 6.11 are normative, unless other values are specified by the Authority
in charge of the railway infrastructure for an individual project.
1
6.8.3 Groups of Loads - Other representative values of the multicomponent actions 6.8.3.1 Frequent values of the multicomponent actions
(1) NOTE The rules given in this clause are considered as normative.
Annex A
(normative for Belgium)
19
Annex B
(informative)
Fatigue life assessment for road bridges Assessment method based on recorded traffic
The Annex B of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.
20
Annex C
(normative)
Annex D
(normative)
Annex E Limits of validity of Load Model HSLM and the selection of the critical Universal Train from HSLM-A
The Annex E of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.
Annex G Method for determining the combined response of a structure and track to variable actions
The Annex G of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.
Annex H Load models for rail traffic loads in Transient Design Situations
The Annex H of EN 1991-2 has an informative character in Belgium.
22
23
H a rd s h o u ld e r
R e a l s lo w la n e
R e a l fa s t la n e
P o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 1 CLASS 1 (E u ro p e a n ) p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 2
CLASS 2 ( B e lg ia n )
p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 1 p o s s ib le lo c a t io n o f n o t io n a l la n e 2
The factors Qi are taken as 0,8 for existing bridges.( Belgian class 2) Refer to Annexes M and N of the former ENV 1991-3 + NAD for models on bridges of classes 3 and 4.
24
25