Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
These features have implications for design and The U-frame stiffness (expressed as the
detailing, some of which are described below. parameter Cd in EN 1993-2) is determined by
the aggregate stiffness of the three component
The most important aspect of the half-through parts of the frame, viz:
configuration, from the structural point of view, the deck and/or transverse members form-
is that stability of the top compression flange, ing the invert of the U-frame.
or chord, in sagging moment regions, is
the webs of the main members, plus asso-
achieved by virtue of the flexural stiffness of
ciated stiffeners, that form the vertical legs
‘U-frames’ formed by the webs (usually having
of the U-frame.
vertical stiffening which aligns with the cross
members) and the deck slab and/or cross the joint between the deck and the main
member. The ends of the main members will members.
often be restrained by stiffer end U-frames or
It should be noted that Table D.3. in EN 1993-2
by a suitable arrangement of trimmer beam
gives expressions for Cd that do not include a
and bearing stiffeners. Line rocker bearings
term for joint stiffness/flexibility but the flexibil-
may also be used to provide end restraint.
ity of the joints should be allowed for. (The
point is made, in principle, in EN 1993-1-1,
The stiffer the U-frames, the greater the de-
5.1.2, and EN 1993-1-8, 5.1.1, although the
gree of restraint afforded to the top flange or
rules are expressed in terms more familiar to
chord and hence the greater capacity of the
building designers.) The joint flexibility can be
main members Inevitably, however, a com-
allowed for by adding the term h2EIv/Sj in the
promise has to be reached between
maximising the bending capacity of the main denominator of the expression in row 1a of
members and providing an optimum U-frame Table D.3, where Sj is the stiffness of the joint.
configuration related to the selected cross (In the absence of values of Sj appropriate to
member spacing and web stiffening require- the type of joints used in bridge U-frames,
ments. values of 1/f may be used as guidance, where
f is the flexibility parameter given in Section 9
The mathematical model underlying design of PD 6695-2:1980.
guidance for half-through decks (i.e. that in EN
1993-2 (Ref 4)) is the beam on elastic founda- Individual U-frames must possess sufficient
tion (BEF) model. The model comprises a stiffness and strength if they are to restrain the
strut (the isolated compression flange) laterally compression flanges in the desired manner.
SCI P185 Guidance notes on best practice in steel bridge construction 1.10/1
GN110R3 Revision 3
Guidance Note
No. 1.10
Although it is stiffness rather than strength proach embankments, or where the depth of a
which theoretically determines the effective- cutting must be minimised, for example when
ness or otherwise of the lateral restraint, the a new roadway is to be constructed beneath
requirement for adequate strength cannot be an existing railway. This may or may not be
ignored. Lateral forces on the top flange or significant for a particular scheme.
chord from vehicle impact may need to be
allowed for. Codified design guidance there- Typical applications of half through decks
fore provides both minimum stiffness and Perhaps the two most common applications of
strength criteria for U-frames. half through construction are pedestrian bridg-
Where a continuous half-through deck is used es (Figure 2) and railway bridges (Figure 3).
in a multiple span application, stress in the top For railway bridges it is usual practice for
flange or chord becomes tensile in hogging intermediate vertical stiffeners to be external to
moment regions and, consequently, buckling simplify the form of joints to cross girders..
instability is not in question. In these regions Guidance on railway bridge design is given in
the compression (i.e. lower) flange or chord is Reference 1; this illustrates various forms of
laterally restrained by the deck. half through construction and discusses the
considerations for their design.
A general point is worthy of note here: a point
of contraflexure in the bending moment dia- Half through construction has not been used to
gram is not equivalent to a lateral restraint. A the same extent for highway underbridges.
point of contraflexure, with no lateral restraint There are perhaps a few reasons for this:
framing in to it, can displace laterally; conse- Minimum effective construction depth is
quently it cannot be relied upon to form a rarely the overriding design consideration.
‘node’ in the plan buckling configuration.
Required deck widths are frequently large
Second order 3-dimensional analysis may be enough to render the U-frames very flexi-
appropriate to evaluate action effects and ble. In turn, this means low levels of
considerations of buckling stability of half restraint to the compression flange and in-
through bridges, especially for heavily skewed efficient use of material in the main
spans. The successful completion of such an girders.
analysis will need to ensure a rigorous treat- The increased risk of vehicle collisions with
ment of the effects of worst case geometric the main girders (vehicles carried by the
imperfections, joint / material non-linearities half through bridge). In some cases it may
and residual stresses. Correlation of the be necessary to provide ‘P6’ parapets to
analysis output against physical testing and minimise the risk of collision damage to
research results is recommended whenever the main girders.
possible.
The aesthetics of a plate girder half through
deck may be less acceptable especially if
Advantages of half through construction
main girders are stiffened on the external
The principal advantage afforded by the
face.
half-through deck is minimum effective con-
struction depth; see Figure 1. (This is also Nevertheless, half through highway bridges
true for a fully through deck, where, instead of based on plate girders or trusses are perfectly
U-frame action, lateral bracing is provided possible (Figures 4 & 5), provided that decks
above the traffic.) Consequently, where deck are not too wide.
soffit levels are constrained to be as high as
possible and carriageway or rail levels on the Erection Considerations
structure as low as possible, a through or Although compression flange stability is pro-
half-through deck will frequently be the pre- vided by U-frame action in the completed
ferred, if not the only feasible, solution. structure, the erection scheme must consider
buckling and overall stability before the
Minimum effective construction depth some- U-frames are formed and the permanent plan
times has the added advantage of minimising rigidity has been achieved.
the volume of fill material required for ap-
No. 1.10
Primary Primary
girder girder
Stiffened web
No lateral restraint forming leg of
to fop flanges U-frame
SCI P185 Guidance notes on best practice in steel bridge construction 1.10/3
GN110R3 Revision 3
Guidance Note
No. 1.10
1000
2700
Z type
E type
1745
6300
U-type
Figure 3 Standard half-through railway bridges
No. 1.10
15000 45000 15000
Elevation
12500
Section
Elevation
13000
4850
Section
SCI P185 Guidance notes on best practice in steel bridge construction 1.10/5
GN110R3 Revision 3