Lateral Stability of Girders

WSDOT Design for Lifting and Hauling

Anthony Mizumori & Rick Brice

Washington State Department of Transportation

Georgia/Carolinas PCEF Committee Meeting

August 17, 2017
 Background

• WSDOT has designed for initial lifting and hauling for over 25 years

• Design was limited to simple stress checks during lifting and hauling

• Lateral stability was less of a concern for the previous generation of

W-series girders

2
Background
• Span capability of have been steadily increasing (200’+)
• When girders are optimized for fabrication, girder stability
is a primary design element
 WF-series girders 4'-1"
2'-1"

• HPC created a need for new girders

• Wider flanges allow:
WF-series
– More straight pre-stressing W-series

– Improved lateral stiffness

– 8 top strands 2'-1"
3'-23/8"

8'-4"

3'-0"

WF36G WF42G WF50G WF58G WF66G WF74G WF84G WF95G WF100G

WF-series girders
4
Temporary Top Strands (TTS)
• Control tension stress in top of girder
• Place a significant force at a high eccentricity above the
stressing bed floor Temporary Strands
Pjack
Harped Strands

e
Straight Strands

Mr ≥ Moverturning

• (6) 0.6”ø strands are common

5
Courtesy of Concrete Technology Corporation, Tacoma, WA
6
Stability Basics

PCI Journal
• Mueller, “Lateral Stability of
Precast Members During
Handling and Placing” (1962)

• Anderson, “Lateral Stability

of Long Prestressed
Concrete Beams” (1971)

• Laszlo and Imper, “Handling

and Shipping of Long Span
Bridge Beams” (1987)
7
Stability Basics

Bob Mast’s Special Reports in

PCI Journal

• Lateral Stability of Long

Prestressed Concrete Beams
– Part 1 (1989)

• Lateral Stability of Long

Prestressed Concrete Beams
– Part 2 (1993)

8
Stability Basics – Hanging Beam

9
Stability Basics – Hanging Beam

10
Stability Basics – Seated Beam

11
Designing for Lifting

• Parameters: Stiffness, Pickpoints, Pick Eccentricity,

Camber, Sweep
• Design: Initial Strength, Temp Strands
12
Designing for Lifting - Criteria
• FS against cracking > 1.0

• FS against failure > 1.5

• Tension stress:
• 𝑓𝑡 ≤ 0.0948 𝜆 𝑓𝑐𝑐 ′ ≤ 0.2𝑘𝑘𝑘
• 𝑓𝑡 ≤ 0.24 𝜆 𝑓𝑐𝑖 ′ (with bonded reinf.)

• Compression stress:
• 𝑓𝑐 ≤ 0.65𝑓𝑐𝑐 ′

13
Designing for Lifting - Assumptions

• Lifting loop tolerance:

– 3” longitudinally
– ¼” transversely
– Vertical lift

• Camber: Calculated

• Sweep: ⅛” per 10’ of girder length

14
Designing for Hauling

• Parameters: Stiffness, Bunkpoints, Bunk Tolerance,

Roadway Superelevation, Vehicle height and roll
stiffness, Axle width, Impact, Camber, Sweep
• Design: Final Strength, Temp Strand, Vehicles, Route?

15
Designing for Hauling - Routes

• Hauling Analysis using AUTOTURN to

determine “haul-ability”

• Consult with hauling subcontractors to

investigate and provide guidance

16
Designing for Hauling - Cases
• Load Case 1:
– 2% roadway cross-slope
– +/- 20% vertical impact
– No wind or centrifugal effects

• Load Case 2:
– 6% roadway cross-slope
– 0% impact
– No wind or centrifugal effects

17
Designing for Hauling - Criteria
• FS against cracking > 1.0

• FS against failure and rollover > 1.5

• Tension stress:
• 𝑓𝑡 ≤ 0.0948 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ≤ 0.2𝑘𝑘𝑘
• 𝑓𝑡 ≤ 0.19 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 (with bonded reinf.)

• 𝑓𝑡 ≤ 0.24 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 (with bonded reinf. @ 6% slope)

• Compression stress:
• 𝑓𝑐 ≤ 0.65𝑓𝑐 ′
18
Designing for Hauling – Assumptions

• Support tolerance:
– 6” longitudinally
– 1” transversely

• Camber: Assumed 2%

• Sweep: ⅛” per 10’ of

girder length

• Vehicle parameters,
from hauling subcontractors

19
Haul Truck Parameters
• Geometry and roll stiffness of truck are critical
parameters
Haul Truck Roll Stiffness
• Roll stiffness, Kθ, is not well defined – must be measured

21
Designing for Constructability
• Haul-ability must be confirmed
• Design modifications after bidding are undesirable:
– Delays production
– TTS and/or concrete strength effects camber
• Camber changes imply changes to roadway profile and
concrete quantity for deck haunches

• Can the girders carry the extra dead load?

• Who pays for the extra material?
22
Design procedure
1) Design for final service conditions
Number of permanent strands

2) Design for lifting w/o Temp Strands

Arrangement of permanent strands
Lifting embedment locations
Initial strength (f’ci)

3) Design for hauling

Temporary strand requirements
Truck support locations
Final Strength (f’c)

Yes Temp
Strands
Required?
4) Design for lifting w/ Temp Strands
Initial Strength (f’ci)
Lifting embedment locations No

5) Check design for final strength and

service conditions
23
Design procedure

• AASHTO refined estimate of time-dependent losses

using intermediate time-steps

• Assumed schedule:
– Lifting day 1
– Hauling day 10 (day 3-7 min.)
– Deck placement between day 40 and day 120

• Keep girder below ~270 kips for hauling

– Below 252 kips is better

24
Designing for Stability
• Designing for stability and optimized fabrication utilizes
complex iterative analytical procedures

• WSDOT design suite:

PGSuper : precast/prestressed girder design with integrated stability analysis

PGSplice : precast spliced girder design with integrated stability analysis
PGStable : stand-alone girder stability analysis
Free download – http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/eesc/bridge/software

25
 Designing for Stability
Lift Point Stability Analysis
Factor of Safety

Lift Point Location from Girder End (ft)

26
 Designing for Stability
Haul Support Stability Analysis
Factor of Safety

Haul Support Location from Girder End (ft)

27
Project Experience
• Two recent WSDOT projects with WF100G girders
– 2012 Alaskan Way Viaduct – 205 ft
– 2015 Puyallup River Bridge – 201 ft

28
Project Experience
• New hauling equipment with twice
the roll stiffness (80,000 kip-in/rad)
and wider axles

• Only one set of hauling equipment

was available at the time the first
girders were designed

29
First 205’ WF100G girders
Second WF100G girder bridge

31
Hauling Equipment

• Puyallup River Bridge girders were designed assuming

the equipment used to haul the Alaskan Way Viaduct
girders

• New hauling equipment became available when it was

time to transport the girders
– Hauling with less stiff equipment was desired to
speed construction
– Minimum roll stiffness information was not provided in
the contract
– Additional temporary top strand were needed

32
 Hauling equipment
Gen. Equipment Roll Stiffness C-C Wheel

𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑖𝑖
1st 𝐾𝜃 = 40,000 − 50,000 72"
𝑟𝑟𝑟

𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑖𝑖
2nd 𝐾𝜃 = 80,000 96"
𝑟𝑟𝑟

𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑖𝑖
3rd 𝐾𝜃 = 60,000 − 70,000 72“
𝑟𝑟𝑟
Responsibility and Liability

• PCI-PNW and local haulers approached WSDOT to

refine hauling design procedures

• Goals:
– Design for least stiff hauling vehicle possible
– Contractor to maintain responsibility for handling
– Communicate all design assumptions regarding lifting
and hauling

34
Hauling Equipment
• Design using least value of Kθ from the table below
along with the corresponding Wcc that provides adequate
stability
Kθ (k-in/rad) Wcc (in)

40,000 72

50,000 72

60,000 72

60,000 96

70,000 96

80,000 96

35
Communicating assumptions

• WSDOT Standard Specifications include

– Allowable stress and stability requirements
– Assumed parameters
– Tolerances
– Calculation method per PCI

• Contract plan girder schedule lists job specific information

• Contractors must submit PE stamped handling plans when

deviating from the contract

36
Contract Plan Information
Modern Stability Design

PCI Publication

• Recommended Practice for

Lateral Stability of Precast,
Prestressed Concrete Bridge
Girders

• Considers wind, centrifugal

forces, inclined lifting lines.

38
Future Work
• Establish allowable stresses during hauling
• Torsion and U-girders
• Pre-cambered girders

39
 Questions?

Anthony Mizumori, P.E., S.E.

Bridge & Structures Office
Washington State Department of Transportation
mizumoa@wsdot.wa.gov
360-705-7228