Section 2: Structure Type
Anchor: #i1015077Superstructure
Selecting an appropriate superstructure type is a critical factor in the planning and design process. District design engineers, area engineers, or their consultants usually make the choice of superstructure type, as they prepare the preliminary bridge layouts.
The following figures illustrate the most common superstructure types currently used by TxDOT:
- Figure 5-1: Cast-In-Place, Simple Slab Span
- Figure 5-2: Cast-In-Place, Continuous Slab Unit
- Figure 5-3: Cast-In-Place, Pan Form Spans
- Figure 5-4: Prestressed - Precast, I-Beam Slab Span
- Figure 5-5: Prestressed - Precast, Double Tee Beam Spans
- Figure 5-6: Prestressed - Precast, TxDOT Box Beam Spans
- Figure 5-7: Prestressed - Precast, Slab Beam Spans
- Figure 5-8: Prestressed - Continuous Slab Units
- Figure 5-9: Prestressed - Precast, U-Beam Spans
- Figure 5-10: Segmental, Continuous Box Girder Units
- Figure 5-11: Segmental, Simple Span Box Girder Units
- Figure 5-12: Steel, I-Beam Units
- Figure 5-13: Steel, Continuous Plate Girder Units
- Figure 5-14: Steel, Continuous Trapezoidal Girder Units
The figures show the economical and practical span limits, and some advantages and disadvantages of each superstructure type.
In some cases the district may have a preference for certain structure types. If there is any doubt as to the proper design for the situation, district personnel should contact the bridge project development manager or the director of Bridge Design for assistance in determining structure type and span lengths.
Currently, over 30,000 bridges and bridge class culverts exist on the state highway system. The most common types of superstructure in use, and a quantity breakdown, are shown in "Types of Superstructure and Quantity Breakdown of On-System Bridges in Texas (FY 2000)" table to further aid in selecting a superstructure type.
Figure 5-1. Cast-in-Place, Simple Slab Span (see following explanatory notes) (Online users can click here to view this illustration in PDF.)
Anchor: #i1015190Explanatory notes for Figure 5-1
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|---|---|
|
1. Minimum depth for short spans 2. Ease of design and detail 3. Aesthetic for small stream crossings |
1. Deck joints at each bent 2. Complicated for skews over 15 degrees 3. Not the most economical solution 4. Requires formwork support 5. Limited span length |
Figure 5-2. Cast-in-Place, Continuous Slab Unit (see following explanatory notes) (Online users can click here to view this illustration in PDF.)
Anchor: #i1015206Explanatory Notes for Figure 5-2
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|---|---|
|
1. Absolute minimum depth 2. No deck joints 3. Aesthetic for small stream crossings |
1. Limited to 30 degree skew 2. Not the most economical solution 3. Limited span length 4. Requires formwork support |
Figure 5-3. Cast-in-Place, Pan Form Spans (see following explanatory notes) (Online users can click here to view this illustration in PDF.)
Anchor: #i1015222Explanatory Notes for Figure 5-3
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|---|---|
|
1. Absolute minimum cost for short spans 2. Standard details available 3. No shoring required |
1. Limited span capabilities 2. Tendency to maintenance problems 3. Not aesthetically pleasing |
Figure 5-4. Prestressed – Precast, I-Beam Slab Span (see following explanatory notes) (Online users can click here to view this illustration in PDF.)
Anchor: #i1015238Explanatory Notes for Figure 5-4
|
|
Beam Type |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Span (ft) |
A |
B |
C |
IV |
VI (MOD) |
|
45 |
3.167 |
3.667 |
|
| |



