Applied Loads and Stability of Steel and Steel-Concrete Composite Bridges - Finite Element Analysis and Design of Steel and Steel-Concrete Composite Bridges - page 121

where indicated) represent that of the actual traffic in the year 2000 in
European countries. Where vehicles that do not comply with the regulations
concerning the limits of weights and, possibly, dimensions of vehicles not
requiring special permits, or military loads, have to be taken into account
for the design of a bridge, they should be defined.
The carriageway width ( w ) (see Figure 3.5 specified in EC1 (3.1)) should
be measured between curbs or between the inner limits of vehicle restraint
systems and should not include the distance between fixed vehicle restraint
systems or curbs of a central reservation nor the widths of these vehicle
restraint systems. The recommended minimum value of the height of the
curbs is 100 mm. The width w 1 of notional lanes on a carriageway and
the greatest possible whole (integer) number n 1 of such lanes on this car-
riageway are defined in Table 3.2 , which are specified in the code. For var-
iable carriageway widths, the number of notional lanes should be defined in
accordance with the principles used for Table 3.2 . Where the carriageway
on a bridge deck is physically divided into two parts separated by a central
reservation, then each part, including all hard shoulders or strips, should be
separately divided into notional lanes if the parts are separated by a perma-
nent road restraint system. Where the whole carriageway, central reservation
included, should be divided into notional lanes if the parts are separated by a
temporary road restraint system, the locations of notional lanes should not be
necessarily related to their numbering. For each individual verification
(e.g., for a verification of the ultimate limit state of resistance of a cross sec-
tion to bending), the number of lanes to be taken into account as loaded,
their location on the carriageway, and their numbering should be so chosen
so that the effects from the load models are the most adverse. For fatigue
representative values and models, the location and the numbering of the
lanes should be selected depending on the traffic to be expected in normal
conditions. The lane giving the most unfavorable effect is Lane Number 1,
the lane giving the second most unfavorable effect is Lane Number 2, etc.

Table 3.2 Load Model 1: Characteristic Values Specified in EC1 [ 3.1 ]

Tandem System, TS UDL System

q ik or (q ik ) (kN/m 2 ) Location Axle loads Q ik (kN)

Lane number 1 300 9

Lane number 2 200 2.5

Lane number 3 100 2.5

Other lanes 0 2.5

Remaining area ( q rk ) 0 2.5