Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Contents
Contents
Acknowledgement of author Advantages of steel bridges 1 2 Design standards Conceptual design 2.1 Spans and component lengths 2.2 Cross sections 2.3 Intermediate supports 2.4 Bracings 2.5 Steel grades 2.6 Further guidance 3 Initial sizes and overall unit weight 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Use of charts 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 4 Plate girder flange sizes Plate girder web sizes Overall unit weight Universal beams List of symbols This guide is an update of a publication originally prepared by A.C.G. Hayward. Corus gratefully acknowledges the work of Mr Hayward and the contribution made by D.C. Iles, The Steel Construction Institute, during this update.
Worked examples use of charts 4.1 Continuous plate girder bridge 4.2 Simply supported universal beam bridge
5 6
References Figures Figure 4 Simply supported bridges Figure 5 Continuous bridges span girders Figure 6 Continuous bridges pier girders Figure 7 Girder spacing factors Figure 8 Overall unit weights plate girder bridges Figure 9 Universal beams elastic stress analysis Figure 10 Universal beams plastic stress analysis
Slender appearance. Reduces costs of earthworks in approaches. Falsework costs eliminated. Significant if more than 8m above ground. Better appearance. Improved durability. Improved running surface. Aesthetic gain. Sustainable product.
1. Design standards
The current bridge code BS 5400 (Ref. 1) was conceived in 1967. Its ten parts cover the more common structural media. The 1980 conference in Cardiff introduced the Code relating to steel and made use of research carried out since 1970. Part 3 (Design of Steel Bridges) is compatible with the workmanship standards and tolerances defined in Part 6, drawn up jointly with industry. The Code uses limit state principles. The ultimate limit state (ULS) and serviceability limit state (SLS) must be satisfied. In practice the ULS generally governs, exceptions being the checking at SLS for slip of HSFG bolts and the design of shear connectors. While most rolled universal beams, columns and BS 5400 encourages the use of steel for a number of reasons: (i) Plastic stress analysis option offers the use of lighter members and extends the span range of rolled sections. For structural analysis, elastic methods are utilised using gross sections (i.e. not allowing for shear lag or effective width). channels will be compact, plate girders will often be non-compact and must be stressed elastically. (See also Section 3.2.4.) For compact sections, the entire load can also be assumed to act on the composite section even if the steelwork is unpropped, provided that SLS checks are made. Use of the plastic modulus is permitted for stress analysis of compact sections and where the slenderness is controlled by sufficient restraints, the effects of shrinkage and differential temperature can be neglected. (ii) Design clauses are easier to use than previous Codes. (iii) Workmanship requirements, including tolerances, are rationalised. (iv) Longitudinal web stiffeners to girders are rarely needed.
Redistribution of moments arising from the formation of plastic hinges is not permitted, but redistribution due to cracking of concrete over intermediate supports may be assumed using Part 5.
For example: (i) (ii) Do not locate welded attachments close to or on flange edges (class 'G'). Re-entrant corners should be radiused. (iii) Use HSFG bolts for permanent bolted connections. (iv) Restrict doubler flange ends to areas of low stress (class 'G'). (v) Avoid single sided partial penetration butt welded joints which are subject to tensile stress. (vi) Avoid welded cruciform joints, which are subject to significant tensile stresses. An example is when using integral crossheads (see Figs. 1B & 1F) where fillet welds should be used in preference to full penetration butt welds. If butt welds are necessary, the use of steel with through-thickness quality (Z-grades to BS EN 10164 Ref 14) may be considered in view of the strains which will be caused during welding.
Combined bending and shear is dealt with using interaction formulae. This is sometimes critical at intermediate supports. The Code contains no specific limits on slenderness of members or proportion of plate panels. Longitudinal web stiffeners are usually only necessary for very deep girders or those with curved soffits. For rolled sections the full shear yield stress can generally be used without the need for intermediate stiffeners. Bearing stiffeners are virtually mandatory at supports, together with lateral bracing or a system of bracing to maintain verticality. Fatigue is checked to Part 10, although for highway bridges this rarely demands a reduction in working stresses provided good detailing practice is used.
1. This page: A69 Haltwhistle Viaduct (Photo courtesy of Cleveland Bridge (UK) Ltd.) Northumberland, England 2. Right: Festival Park Flyover Stoke, England 3. Far right: Simon De Montford Bridge Evesham, England
Conceptual design
2. Conceptual design
2.1 Spans and component lengths
Spans are usually fixed by site restrictions and clearances. Where freedom exists, budget costing including foundations is desirable to determine the economic span. A range of 25m to 50m is likely. Where deep piled foundations are needed, cost will encourage the use of longer spans, thus keeping foundations to a minimum. Skew and plan tapered bridges may also be built in Multiple spans Multiple spans of approximately 24m suit universal beams, this being the longest readily available length and because continuous spans are convenient and economic. Site splices may be bolted with HSFG bolts or welded near points of contraflexure. The length of end spans should ideally be about 0.8 of the penultimate span. Continuous spans The optimum for using plate or box girders for continuous spans is about 45m, because 27m long span girders can be spliced with pier girders of a single plate 18m long. For longer spans, more shop or site splices are needed. Component lengths for shop fabrication should be the maximum possible consistent with delivery and site restrictions to reduce the amount of on-site assembly. The maximum length for road delivery without restrictions is normally 27.4m although longer lengths can readily be transported by arrangement. A minimum number of shop butt welds should be used consistent with plate sizes available. The decision whether to introduce thickness changes within a fabricated length should take account of the cost of butt welds compared with the potential for material saving (Ref. Documents in Section 2.6). Integral bridges The Highways Agency requires consideration of integral bridge forms for spans up to 60m with the objective of improved durability by elimination of bridge deck movement joints (Ref. 4 & 5). Girders may then be required to develop a degree of continuity with substructures at end supports such that axial forces and reverse moment effects need to be considered in the design of the composite deck. Design principles remain the same but girder sizes and bracing provision may be influenced. Further guidance is available from the Steel Construction Institute (Ref. 8, 9, 10 & 10a). steel. Ideally, plan layout should be as simple as possible (Ref. Documents in Section 2.6). Curved bridges Curved bridges in plan may be formed using straight fabricated girders, with direction changes introduced at each site splice. However, steel girders can be curved in plan which simplifies the cantilever formwork and permits the use of standard systems. An example is the A69 Haltwhistle Viaduct (radius 540m)
Conceptual design
Where permanent formwork is envisaged, the slab should be made sufficiently thick to accommodate the details taking account of reinforcement cover and practical tolerances (Ref. 7). When using composite part depth planks such as Omnia then a minimum thickness of 250mm may be needed. Universal beams and plate girders Universal beams may be appropriate for bridges up to 25m span and above when continuous, or when use can be made of the plastic modulus. For spans above 22m, plate girders, especially if continuous, can be economic because lighter sections can be inserted in mid-span regions. Costs per tonne of painted and erected universal beams were traditionally lower but, more recently, automated fabrication and less expensive plate material has allowed economic supply of plate girders for the shorter spans. A girder spacing of 3.0m to 3.5m is usual with a deck slab of about 250mm thick (see Figs. 1A and 1B). Edge cantilevers should not exceed half the beam spacing and to simplify falsework should, where possible be less than 1.5m. Shorter cantilevers are usually necessary with a locally thickened slab where very high containment parapets are specified, e.g. over rail tracks. An even number of girders achieves better optimisation of material (ordering) and allows bracing in pairs. For wide girder spacings, the slab may be haunched, but use of standardised permanent formwork is unlikely to be possible and construction depth is increased (see Fig. 1C). Where spans exceed 40m, twin plate girders with a central stringer have been used on some single carriageway decks up to about 13m wide (see Fig. 1D). Twin girders and cross beams (often referred to as ladder decks) have proved economic for a wide range of spans (Ref. 10b). They can be used for single carriageway decks (see Fig. 1E) and for wider decks supporting more lanes.
Box girders Where spans exceed 100m box girders are likely to be more economic than plate girders with which flange sizes would be excessive. Other reasons for using box girders include aesthetics (where justifiable), aerodynamic stability, severe plan curvature, the need for single column supports or very limited depth. Other than in the cases noted, box girders being heavier than plate girders are more expensive because although less flange material may be demanded due to inherent torsional properties, this is usually more than offset by the amount of internal stiffening and extra costs for workmanship. Fabrication costs are higher because the assembly/welding processes take longer and more shop space is needed. However, erection work is often reduced because box girders require little or no external bracing. Multiple box girders have in the past proved to be economic for spans of around 50m in particular situations. Using narrow cross sections eliminates the need for longitudinal stiffeners (see Fig. 1F). An example of which is the M25/M4 Poyle Interchange. For box girders, consideration of the safety of personnel in confined spaces is essential during fabrication, erection and for maintenance. Detailing must recognise the need to avoid internal welding as far as possible and to allow sufficient ventilation and openings for access and recovery in emergency situations. Open-topped trapezoidal and rectangular shaped box girders have been used efficiently, but provisions are needed to preserve stability during erection, for example the Forrest Way Bridge, Warrington. Plate girder flanges Plate girder flanges should be as wide as possible but consistent with outstand limitations in BS 5400 (i.e. 12t in compression if fully stressed and up to the 20t robustness
Conceptual design
limit), to give the best achievable stability during erection and to reduce the number of bracings. For practical reasons a desirable minimum width is about 400mm to accommodate detailing for certain types of permanent formwork, especially precast concrete. A maximum flange thickness of 63mm is recommended to avoid heavy welds, minimise pre-heating requirements and also limit the reduction in design yield strength. Limiting the thickness also has benefits in terms of notch toughness specification.
Intermediate bracings require to be spaced at about 20 x top flange width and need to be adequate to prevent lateral torsional buckling. Bracing is necessary at supports if only to prevent overturning during erection. At abutments this can be a channel trimmer composite with the slab and supporting its free end. Over piers a channel section can be used between each pair of girders of up to about 1.2m deep. For deeper girders triangulated angle bracings are usual (see Fig. 1B). Intermediate lateral bracings are usually necessary in hogging regions with a maximum spacing of about 12 x bottom flange width. If the bridge is curved they should be close to the site splices where curvature induces torsion. Bracings may be of a triangulated form or of single channel sections between each pair of girders of up to 1.2m deep (see Fig. 1A). Alternatively, bracings can take the form of inverted 'U' frames, but for spans exceeding around 35m it may be necessary to interconnect all the girders by bracings during erection so that transverse flexure from wind is adequately shared. Although plan bracing systems are uneconomic and should be avoided, they may be required for spans exceeding 55m for temporary stability, especially if launch erection is used (Ref. Documents in Section 2.6). Use may be made of bracings in distributing live loads between girders. This may offer reduced flange sizes under HB loading but the uniformity of current loading to BD37 across the carriageway (HB + 2 lanes HA + 0.6 HA other lanes) tends to discourage this. An optimum design is likely to include bracings only between pairs of girders, such discontinuous bracings attracting minimal effects under deck loading except in cases of heavy skew or curvature where a different system may be appropriate. Bracings should be included in the global analysis to check for possible overload or fatigue effects.
2.4 Bracings
For most universal beam or plate girder bridges, lateral bracings are needed for erection stability and during deck concreting.
1. Far Left: Nene Bridge Peterborough, England 2. Left: Forrest Way Bridge Warrington, England 3. Right: M20 Road Bridge Folkstone, England
Conceptual design
DECK WIDTH W
2.5 TO 3.5
1. Left: Humber Road Bridge Immingham, England 2. Right: Thelwall Viaduct M6, Warrington, England
Conceptual design
1.0 TO 3.3
6.0 TO 7.0
230 TO 250 mm 1E Twin P.G. & Cross Girders (N=2) 3.0 TO 3.5 c/c
>7.0
0.9 TO 1.2
temperatures to be determined from isotherms of minimum and maximum shade air temperature for a particular site location. Limiting thicknesses for steel parts are prescribed in BS 5400: Part 3, as implemented by BD13 (Ref. 3), as appropriate to these effective bridge temperatures, and the other factors mentioned above. Weathering steel To eliminate the need for painting, weathering steels to BS EN 10025-5: 2004 (Ref. 13) should be considered. Although it can be shown that the commuted costs of repainting are less than 1% of the initial bridge cost, weathering steel bridges can be more economical on a
1. Above: Findhorn Viaduct Inverness, Scotland 2. Left: Westgate Bridge Gloucester, England 3. Right: Slochd Beag Bridge Inverness, Scotland
first cost basis and are particularly useful in eliminating maintenance where access is difficult over a railway, for example.
design standard BD 7 (Ref. 6) and Corus Publication Weathering steel bridges (Ref. 11).
(viii) Steelwork is unpropped and therefore not acting compositely under its own weight and that of the concrete slab. The steel is however composite for all superimposed loads after the concrete has cured. (ix) Sufficient transverse bracings are included such that bending stresses are not significantly reduced due to buckling criteria. (x) Top flanges in sagging regions are dictated by the maximum stress during concreting allowing for formwork and live load to BS 5975 (Ref. 15). Continuous bridge mid-span regions are concreted in turn followed by portions over the piers. (xi) Live loading HA (assuming 3.5m wide lanes), or alternatively 45 units of HB loading with co-existent HA loading (BD37). (xii) Continuous spans are approximately equal.
soffit area. Steel grade S355. Span to depth ratios L/D of 20 & 30. Plate girder webs have vertical stiffeners at approx. 2.0m centres where such stiffening is required. (vii) Elastic stress analysis is used for plate girders. If however the plastic modulus is used for compact cross sections, then economies may be possible.
The charts also show actual flange sizes using 400mm x 15mm to 1000mm x 75mm. Flange area of pier girders of continuous unequal spans can be estimated by taking the greater of the two adjacent spans. End spans of continuous bridges may be estimated using L = 1.25 x actual span.
depth (L/D) ratio for each span based upon the average girder depth (D) within that span. For box girder bridges a rough estimate may be obtained assuming that N = 2 x number of box girders in the cross section (see Fig. 1F where N = 2 x 3 = 6). For continuous bridges the end spans should be assumed as 1.25 x actual span, following which the mean span for use in Fig. 8 may be determined as follows:
L14 + L24...Ln4 n
1. Left: Milton Bridge Lesmahagow, Scotland 2. Right: Fossdyke Bridge (Photo courtesy of Cleveland Bridge (UK) Ltd.) Lincoln, England
Universal beam size Serial size (mm) 914 x 419 Mass per metre (kg/m) 388 343 914 x 305 289 253 224 201 838 x 292 226 194 176 762 x 267 197 173 147 686 x 254 170 152 140 125 610 x 305 238 179 149 610 x 229 140 125 113 101
388 343 289 253 224 201 226 194 176 197 173 147 170 152 140 125 238 179 149 140 125 113 101
921.0 911.8 926.6 918.4 910.4 903.0 850.9 840.7 834.9 769.8 762.2 754.0 692.9 687.5 683.5 677.9 635.8 620.2 612.4 617.2 612.2 607.6 602.6
A fb A ft D
Unit weight of steelwork in bridge expressed as: total steelwork weight (kg) W x overall bridge length
s tw W n N
Average girder spacing defined as W/N (m) Web thickness (mm) Overall deck width including parapets (m) Number of spans Number of girders (refer to Section 3.2.3 for box girders)
Notes (i) Where relevant, symbols correspond with BS 5400 Part 3. (ii) Units where relevant are shown in parentheses.
Table 1 above defines the referencing system for the serial sizes in Figs. 9 and 10, which is based on the mass per metre of universal beams. Larger sizes are available (e.g. 1016), but are unlikely to be economic compared to fabricated plate girders.
W = 12m
D = 1.75m
Span girder
Pier girder
Span girder
Pier girder
Span girder
24m Span A
40m Span B
32m Span C
1. Left: Trent Viaduct Newark, England 2. Right: A69 Haltwhistle Viaduct (Photo courtesy of Cleveland Bridge (UK) Ltd.) Northumberland, England
Span A: 24m
This is an end span so take L = 1.25 x 24m = 30m Therefore L/D = 30m/1.75m = 17, so assume L/D = 20 Top flange A ft = A ft (from Fig. 5) x K af = 0.006 x 0.85 = 0.0051m2 400 x 15 top flange Bottom flange A fb = A fb(from Fig. 5) x K af = 0.014 x 0.87 = 0.012m2 500 x 25 bottom flange Web t w = t w (from Fig. 5) x K tw = 10 x 0.95 = 9.5mm Use 10mm web
Pier girders Take L as the greater of the two adjacent spans, i.e. assume L = 40m at both supports, hence, L/D = 40m/1.75m = 22.9 Top flange A ft = A ft (from Fig. 6) x K af = 0.017 x 0.87 = 0.015m2 400 x 40 top flange Bottom flange A fb = A fb(from Fig. 6) x K af = 0.033 x 0.87 = 0.029m2 500 x 60 bottom flange Web t w = t w (from Fig. 6) x K tw = 16.8 x 0.95 = 16mm Therefore use 18mm web
Span B: 40m
Span girder L/D = 40m/1.75m = 22.9 Top flange A ft = A ft (from Fig. 5) x K af = 0.009 x 0.85 = 0.0077m 400 x 20 top flange Therefore mean span Bottom flange A fb = A fb (from Fig. 5) x K af = 0.020 x 0.87 = 0.017m2 500 x 35 bottom flange
4 4 2
Steel tonnage
Girder spacing for end span A: for centre span B: for end span C: = 3.0m L = 1.25 x 24m = 30m L = 40m L = 1.25 x 32m = 40m
Web t w
Span C: 32m
This is an end span so take L = 1.25 x 32m = 40m therefore sizes as 40m span.
= kg/m2 (from Fig. 8) x Kw (from Fig. 7) = 145kg/m2 x 1.04 = 151kg/m2 Hence, steel weight = 151 kg/m2/1000 x (24m + 40m + 32m) x 12m wide = 174 tonnes
W = 9.6m
24m
(a) For an elastic stress analysis refer to Fig. 9 For 4 beams 'S' = 9.6m/4No. = 2.4m. Use 388 i.e. 914 x 419 x 388kg/m Universal Beam
(b) For a plastic stress analysis refer to Fig. 10 For 'S' = 2.4m. Use 289 i.e. 914 x 305 x 289kg/m universal beam Total weight approx.
(the 1.08 factor allows for 8% bracing + stiffener allowance) = 40.2 tonnes (i.e. 174kg/m )
2
Thus, plastic stress analysis offers a significant reduction in beam size but SLS checks must be made.
References
5. References
1. BS5400, Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges. British Standards Institution. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB): 2. DMRB 1.3 BD37 Loads for Highway Bridges. 3. DMRB 1.3 BD13 Codes of Practice for Design of Steel Bridges. 4. DMRB 1.3 BD & BA 57 Design for Durability. 5. DMRB 1.3 BA 42 Design of Integral Bridges. 6. DMRB 2.3 BD7 Weathering Steel for Highway Structures. 7. DMRB 2.3 BA36 The Use of Permanent Formwork. Steel Construction Institute Publications 8. P163: Integral Steel Bridges Design Guidance. 9. P180: Integral Steel Bridges Design of a Single Span Bridge. 10. P250: Integral Steel Bridges Design of a Multi Span Bridge. 10a. P340: Technical Report on Integral Steel Bridges. 10b. P339: Design Guide for Ladder Deck Bridges. 11. Corus Publication Weathering steel bridges. Material Standards (EN) 12. BS EN 10025-2 Non-alloy structural steels. 13. BS EN 10025-5 Structural Steels with improved atmospheric corrosion resistance. 14. BS EN 10164 Steel products with improved deformation properties perpendicular to the surface of the product. Other Standards (BS) 15. BS 5975 Code of Practice for Falsework.
BS 5400 Part
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Title
DMRB Document*
MCDHW Document**
Volume 1 Series 1800 Volume 1 Series 1700
General Statement Specification for Loads Code of Practice for Design of Steel Bridges Code of Practice for Design of Concrete Bridges Code of Practice for Design of Composite Bridges Specification for Materials & Workmanship, Steel Specification for Materials & Workmanship, Concrete, Reinforcement & Prestressing Tendons Recommendations for Materials & Workmanship, Concrete, Reinforcement & Prestressing Tendons Bridge Bearings Code of Practice for Fatigue
* Design Manual for Roads and Bridges published by the Stationery Office for the Overseeing Organisations. ** Manual of Contract Document for Highway Work published by the Stationery Office for the Overseeing Organisations.
6. Figures
Figure 4: Simply supported bridges flange (at mid-span) and web (at support)
1000 x
75
70
HB
30
65 0.06
800 x
60
75
HA
55 0.05
70
65
650 x
Afb
HA /HB
Aft
30
50
60
75
600 x
HB
HA
20 20
Afb
45 0.04
70
55
75
Afb
65
70
50
500 x
60
65 0.03
Afb
20
45
55
60
40
50
55
HB HA/
tw (mm)
45
50
35 0.02
40
45
Aft
15 tw 30 14 13 0.01
tw
35
40
30
35
25
30
25
75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20
12 11
20
400 x 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 0 20 25 30 35
10 40 45 Span (m) 50 55 60
Figures
Figures
S = 3.5m
650 x
600 x
Af (m2)
70
75
65
70
500 x
0.04
60
65
55
60
50
55
30
tw (mm)
0.03
45
50
40
45
Afb
Afb
30
HA
20
Afb HB
15
35
40
30
35
0.02
20
30 14
25
30
20
HA
25
75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20
0.01
Aft
Aft
Afb HA/HB
20
13
400 x 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15
HA/HB
tw
12 11 tw 30 10
0 25 30 35 40 Span (m) 45
50
55
60
S = 3.5 Af (m2)
1000 x
800 x
60 0.05
H B A/H Afb
75
L / 30 D
tw (mm) 21 20 tw 30
70
55
65
650 x
50 0.04
60
75
600 x
20
45
55
70
75
19
65
70
50
500 x
60 0.03
65
Afb HA/ HB
Aft B HA/H
20
18 tw
30
45
55
60
20
17 16 15
Aft
40
50
55
35 0.02
45
50
40
45
35
40
30
35
14
HA/HB
25 0.01
30
25
13 12 11
75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20
10 45 50 55 60
Figures
Figures
2.0 Kw 1.9
-sp an mi To p Fla n ge d
Ka f
Kaf, Ktw, Kw
Ka
Kt
24 Composite steel highway bridges 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3
Ktw
on ly
L=40
L=60
0.7
Cross girders
400
380
30 L / D 30
360
HB
HA
20
340
300
280
HB
20
260
HA
Kg/m2
240
30
20 20
220
HB
200
HA
al b
180
ea
140
HB
120
100
80 30 35 40 Span (m) 45 50 55 60
Figures
20
25
Continuous
160
Un ive
rs
HA
Simply supported
320
Figures
34
28
224
253
8 38
9
1 20
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
7 19
3.0
4 19
/23
2.9
19
4/2
38
201
2.8
17
2.7
17
2.6
79
2.5
2.4
17
173
2.3
22
28
3 25
3 34
14
6 22
12
13
14
Figures
HB
HA
8 38
25
8 38
25
28 9
3
20
21
34
22
28
23
24
34
26
27
28
29
22
2 53
6
20 1
4 22
6 22 20 1
19
22 4
7/2
38
17
6
17 3
19
4/2
197 176
17
79 0/1
14 2.2 12 13
173 170
15
7 14
9(6 86) (61 0)
3.2
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.3
179
/14
15
14 40/
140
125
38
16
17
19
18
Span (m)
19
www.corusgroup.com
Care has been taken to ensure that this information is accurate, but Corus Group plc, including its subsidiaries, does not accept responsibility or liability for errors or information which is found to be misleading. Copyright 2005 Corus Designed and produced by Orchard Corporate Ltd.
Corus Construction & Industrial Technical Sales & Marketing PO Box 1 Brigg Road Scunthorpe North Lincolnshire DN16 1BP T +44 (0) 1724 405060 F +44 (0) 1724 404224 E tsm@corusgroup.com www.corusconstruction.com
English language version CC&I:CD:3000:UK:04/2005/r