Design Of Well Foundation 4r2i4q
This document was ed by and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this report form. Report 3i3n4
Overview 26281t
& View Design Of Well Foundation as PDF for free.
More details 6y5l6z
- Words: 780
- Pages: 18
DESIGN OF WELL FOUNDATION 1.0
HYDRAULIC PARTICULARS Design discharge through the bridge
=
2800
LWW
=
125.00
V
=
3.30
HFL
=
516.95
h
=
0.15
dsm
=
5.647
Maximum depth of scour at Pier
D
=
11.29
Maximum depth of scour at Abutments
D
=
7.17
P1
=
497.755
P2
=
492.416
P3
=
496.114
A1
=
505.063
A2
=
505.063
=
75
Number of Spans. PSC Girder
=
3
Span c/c of Piers
=
34.8
Skew of the Bridge (Right Crossing)
=
Nil
Effective linear water way Maximum mean velocity of flow at HFL High Flood Level Afflux assumed Scour Depths with Silt Factor of 1.25 for Medium Sand Mean depth of scour
Founding Levels of Wells Piers
Abutments
Safe Bearing Capacity for Foundations on Sand
2.0
TECHNICAL DATA
Heighest Flood Level
HFL
=
516.950
Bottom of Deck
BOD
=
518.784
Road Formation Level
RFL
=
520.849
Height of Deck + Gradient + W.C
=
2.065
Height of Pedastal for resting Bearings
=
0.150
Thickness of Elastomeric Bearings
=
0.078
Minimum Thickness of Cross Beam
=
Top of Bed Block
=
518.556
Bearing Level
=
518.706
=
509.916
Low Water Level
LWL
-
Top of Well cap (150 mm above LWL)
=
510.066
Outer Diameter of Pier
=
3.10
Inner Diameter of Pier
=
1.50
Thickness of Pier
=
0.80
Depth of Caping Beam
=
2000
Thickness of Well cap
=
2.25
Bottom of Well cap
=
507.816
Scour Levels with dsm
=
5.647
=
505.656
For Pier 2 dsm For Abutment 1.27 dsm
=
509.77831
=
506.7854
Clause 222.4 of IRC:6-2000. For Seismic 90% For Pier 1.8 dsm 90% For Abutment 1.143 dsm
=
510.495479
Bottom of Foundations as per Scour calculations (Well Foundations) Piers - P2
=
501.891
Provided considering existing soils
=
492.416
Abutments - A2
=
505.063
Linear waterway provided (Right crossing)
=
125.000
Max. mean Velocity of water flow at HFL Tilt
= =
3.30 1 in 80
Shift
=
Allowable Tilts & Shift of well
Diameter of Wells - Pier
0.15
= - Abutment
7.00
= Caisson
Thickness of steining
=
0.900
Slant height of well curb
=
1.665
Maximum Foundation Pressure
=
56.880
Maximum Steining Stress
=
129.27
M.R
=
2079.66
M
=
1192.12
Span length c/c of piers
=
34.8
Total width of decking
=
12
Straight Returns Flywings
Design of Caping Beam
3.0
SUPER STRUCTURE AND LOADINGS & TYPE OF SUBSTRUCTURE
Width of roadway in between Crash Barriers
=
11
Width of Footpaths
=
Width of Crash Barriers
=
Type of Superstructure
= PSC Girder
Camber considered in slab in one direction
=
2.5
Thickness of Uniform Wearing coat in M30
=
0.078
Type of Substructure
= RCC Hollow Circular Piers
Type of Foundation for Piers
= RCC Circular Well &
NA 0.50
RCC Caisson Type of Well caps
4.0
= RCC Circular
DESIGN LOADINGS Unit Weight of Dead Loads as per IRC:6-2000 Unit Weight of PSC
=
2.50
Unit Weight of RCC
=
2.40
Unit Weight of PCC
=
2.30
Weight of Crash Barriers
=
0.80
Weight of Wearing Coat
=
0.18
Type of Live Loads
= One lane of Class - 70 R + One lane of Class A
Seismic Effect:Zone
=
Seismic Coefficient
=
II 0.021
Parts of the structure embedded in soil shall not be considered to produce any Seimic forces.
5.0
Wind force
= As per IRC:6-2000
Type of Bearings
= Elastomeric Bearings
Expansion ts
= 30 mm Strip seal
Drainage Spouts
= As per IRC Standards
DESIGN OF SUBSTRUCTURE Span-1, c/c of Piers
=
34.80
Span-2, c/c of Piers
=
34.80
Thickness of Expansion ts
=
30
Total length of Girder -1
=
34.05
Total length of Girder -2
=
34.05
c/c of bearings with end distance of 40 mm
N
Cumecs m m/sec m m
m m m
m m m m m t/m2
Nos m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m mm m m m m m
m m
m m m m m/sec
m m
m m
t/m2 t/m2 t-m t-m
m m
m
m
% m
CC Hollow Circular Piers
CC Circular Well &
t/m3 t/m3 t/m3 t/m t/m2
ne lane of Class - 70 R +
ne lane of Class A
per IRC:6-2000
astomeric Bearings mm Strip seal per IRC Standards
m m mm
m m
DESIGN OF PIER CAPING BEAM 1.0
DEAD WEIGHT Weight of rectangular portion
=
1100
=
12.00
=
3.10
=
98.21
=
0.00
Area @ top
=
37.20
Area @ bottom
=
15.81
Average area
=
26.51
Beam Weight of Tapered portion
Weight of Taper portion
M
mm m m t t
sqm sqm sqm
HYDRAULIC PARTICULARS Design discharge through the bridge
=
2800
LWW
=
125.00
V
=
3.30
HFL
=
516.95
h
=
0.15
dsm
=
5.647
Maximum depth of scour at Pier
D
=
11.29
Maximum depth of scour at Abutments
D
=
7.17
P1
=
497.755
P2
=
492.416
P3
=
496.114
A1
=
505.063
A2
=
505.063
=
75
Number of Spans. PSC Girder
=
3
Span c/c of Piers
=
34.8
Skew of the Bridge (Right Crossing)
=
Nil
Effective linear water way Maximum mean velocity of flow at HFL High Flood Level Afflux assumed Scour Depths with Silt Factor of 1.25 for Medium Sand Mean depth of scour
Founding Levels of Wells Piers
Abutments
Safe Bearing Capacity for Foundations on Sand
2.0
TECHNICAL DATA
Heighest Flood Level
HFL
=
516.950
Bottom of Deck
BOD
=
518.784
Road Formation Level
RFL
=
520.849
Height of Deck + Gradient + W.C
=
2.065
Height of Pedastal for resting Bearings
=
0.150
Thickness of Elastomeric Bearings
=
0.078
Minimum Thickness of Cross Beam
=
Top of Bed Block
=
518.556
Bearing Level
=
518.706
=
509.916
Low Water Level
LWL
-
Top of Well cap (150 mm above LWL)
=
510.066
Outer Diameter of Pier
=
3.10
Inner Diameter of Pier
=
1.50
Thickness of Pier
=
0.80
Depth of Caping Beam
=
2000
Thickness of Well cap
=
2.25
Bottom of Well cap
=
507.816
Scour Levels with dsm
=
5.647
=
505.656
For Pier 2 dsm For Abutment 1.27 dsm
=
509.77831
=
506.7854
Clause 222.4 of IRC:6-2000. For Seismic 90% For Pier 1.8 dsm 90% For Abutment 1.143 dsm
=
510.495479
Bottom of Foundations as per Scour calculations (Well Foundations) Piers - P2
=
501.891
Provided considering existing soils
=
492.416
Abutments - A2
=
505.063
Linear waterway provided (Right crossing)
=
125.000
Max. mean Velocity of water flow at HFL Tilt
= =
3.30 1 in 80
Shift
=
Allowable Tilts & Shift of well
Diameter of Wells - Pier
0.15
= - Abutment
7.00
= Caisson
Thickness of steining
=
0.900
Slant height of well curb
=
1.665
Maximum Foundation Pressure
=
56.880
Maximum Steining Stress
=
129.27
M.R
=
2079.66
M
=
1192.12
Span length c/c of piers
=
34.8
Total width of decking
=
12
Straight Returns Flywings
Design of Caping Beam
3.0
SUPER STRUCTURE AND LOADINGS & TYPE OF SUBSTRUCTURE
Width of roadway in between Crash Barriers
=
11
Width of Footpaths
=
Width of Crash Barriers
=
Type of Superstructure
= PSC Girder
Camber considered in slab in one direction
=
2.5
Thickness of Uniform Wearing coat in M30
=
0.078
Type of Substructure
= RCC Hollow Circular Piers
Type of Foundation for Piers
= RCC Circular Well &
NA 0.50
RCC Caisson Type of Well caps
4.0
= RCC Circular
DESIGN LOADINGS Unit Weight of Dead Loads as per IRC:6-2000 Unit Weight of PSC
=
2.50
Unit Weight of RCC
=
2.40
Unit Weight of PCC
=
2.30
Weight of Crash Barriers
=
0.80
Weight of Wearing Coat
=
0.18
Type of Live Loads
= One lane of Class - 70 R + One lane of Class A
Seismic Effect:Zone
=
Seismic Coefficient
=
II 0.021
Parts of the structure embedded in soil shall not be considered to produce any Seimic forces.
5.0
Wind force
= As per IRC:6-2000
Type of Bearings
= Elastomeric Bearings
Expansion ts
= 30 mm Strip seal
Drainage Spouts
= As per IRC Standards
DESIGN OF SUBSTRUCTURE Span-1, c/c of Piers
=
34.80
Span-2, c/c of Piers
=
34.80
Thickness of Expansion ts
=
30
Total length of Girder -1
=
34.05
Total length of Girder -2
=
34.05
c/c of bearings with end distance of 40 mm
N
Cumecs m m/sec m m
m m m
m m m m m t/m2
Nos m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m mm m m m m m
m m
m m m m m/sec
m m
m m
t/m2 t/m2 t-m t-m
m m
m
m
% m
CC Hollow Circular Piers
CC Circular Well &
t/m3 t/m3 t/m3 t/m t/m2
ne lane of Class - 70 R +
ne lane of Class A
per IRC:6-2000
astomeric Bearings mm Strip seal per IRC Standards
m m mm
m m
DESIGN OF PIER CAPING BEAM 1.0
DEAD WEIGHT Weight of rectangular portion
=
1100
=
12.00
=
3.10
=
98.21
=
0.00
Area @ top
=
37.20
Area @ bottom
=
15.81
Average area
=
26.51
Beam Weight of Tapered portion
Weight of Taper portion
M
mm m m t t
sqm sqm sqm
Related Documents 3h463d
Design Of Well Foundation 4r2i4q
October 2019 138
Design Of Well Foundation 4r2i4q
August 2021 0
Analysis Of Well Foundation 1b386d
January 2022 0
Well Foundation 673z6b
December 2019 64
Well Foundation 673z6b
October 2019 74