You are on page 1of 294

COMBRI DESIGN MANUAL

Part I: Application of Eurocode rules

A project carried out with a financial grant from the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) of the European Community.

COMBRI DESIGN MANUAL
Part I: Application of Eurocode rules

A project carried out with a financial grant from the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) of the European Community.

Although all care has been taken to ensure the integrity and quality of this publication and the information herein, no liability is assumed by the project partners and the publisher for any damage to property or persons as a result of the use of this publication and the information contained herein.

1st Edition Copyright © 2008 by project partners Reproduction for non-commercial purpose is authorised provided the source is acknowledged and notice is given to the project coordinator. Publicly available distribution of this publication through other sources than the web sites given below requires the prior permission of the project partners. Requests should be addressed to the project coordinator: Universität Stuttgart Institut für Konstruktion und Entwurf / Institute for Structural Design Pfaffenwaldring 7 70569 Stuttgart Germany Phone: +49-(0)711-685-66245 Fax: +49-(0)711-685-66236 E-mail: sekretariat@ke.uni-stuttgart.de

The present document and others related to the research project COMBRI+RFS-CR-03018 “Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges by Improved Steel Plated Structures” and the successive dissemination project RFS2-CT-2007-00031 “Valorisation of Knowledge for Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges”, which have been co-funded by the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) of the European Community, can be accessed for free on the following project partners’ web sites: Belgium: France: Germany: Spain: Sweden: www.argenco.ulg.ac.be www.cticm.com www.uni-stuttgart.de/ke, www.stb.rwth-aachen.de www.labein.es, www.apta.org.es cee.project.ltu.se

Printed and bound in Sweden

Cover pictures (from left to right): Valley bridge Haseltal near Suhl, Germany, 2006 (© KE) Valley bridge Dambachtal near Suhl, Germany, 2005 (© KE) Viaduct over Dordogne river near Souillac, France, 2000 (© Sétra)

Preface
This design manual is an outcome of the research project RFS-CR-03018 “Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges by Improved Steel Plated Structures - COMBRI” [7] and the successive dissemination project RFS2-CT-2007-00031 “Valorisation of Knowledge for Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges - COMBRI+” which have been funded by the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) of the European Community. Within the RFCS research project essential knowledge has been acquired to enhance the competitiveness of steel and composite bridges and this has been incorporated in the design manual at hand which has been also presented in the frame of several seminars and workshops. The manual is subdivided into two parts to provide the reader with clearly arranged and concise documents: ► Part I: Application of Eurocode rules In the research project the different national background of each partner how to apply and interprete Eurocode rules was brought together and a European melting pot of background information and general knowledge has been created. In order to maintain this valuable information two composite bridge structures - a twin-girder and a box-girder bridge - are covered in this part of the COMBRI Design Manual on the basis of worked examples for which the knowledge is written down in a descriptive manner. The examples include references to current Eurocode rules. ► Part II: State-of-the-Art and Conceptual Design of Steel and Composite Bridges The national state-of-the-art in bridge design can be different so that firstly bridge types of the project partners’ countries - Belgium, France, Germany, Spain and Sweden - are introduced. They reflect the current practice in those countries and common bridge types as well as unusual bridges intended to solve special problems and some solutions being part of development projects are presented in Part II of the COMBRI Design Manual [8]. Also, improvements which can be provided to the design of steel and composite bridges are discussed and the possibilities and restrictions given by the current Eurocode rules are highlighted. Moreover, the features of software EBPlate [13] developed in the research project to determine the elastic critical buckling stresses are presented in its contributive application for bridge design. Finally, the authors of this design manual gratefully acknowledge the support and financial grant of the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) of the European Community. Ulrike Kuhlmann, Benjamin Braun Universität Stuttgart, Institute for Structural Design / Institut für Konstruktion und Entwurf (KE) Markus Feldmann, Johannes Naumes RWTH Aachen University, Institute for Steel Structures Pierre-Olivier Martin, Yvan Galéa Centre Technique Industriel de la Construction Métallique (CTICM) Bernt Johansson, Peter Collin, Jörgen Eriksen Luleå University of Technology, Division of Steel Structures (LTU) Hervé Degée, Nicolas Hausoul Université de Liège, ArGEnCo Département José Chica Fundación LABEIN Joël Raoul, Laurence Davaine, Aude Petel Service d'études sur les transports, les routes et leurs aménagements (Sétra) October 2008

.

.....................................................2 2.....................................1................3.......................................................29 Reinforcement.......................................................6 2..1 2...............................1 1...................................3........25 Modelling the slab to calculate the general longitudinal bending.....3....................................................................................................................47 Thermal gradient ...................V 1 Introduction and scope ..........................................................................................................................................1 Description of the slab reinforcement ..........................3 2...............................5 2............3..................19 Reinforcement of the concrete slab ..................................................................................1..............4 2.....3..................................................3............1 2.......................................................................3 2...........2 2...................2...1..................................................25 2......................25 Structural steel...............................11 Longitudinal elevation............3...................................2..........................................................................................................1 2...............................................1 Introduction............................49 I Description of the deck and global analysis...................1..........................................................17 Construction phases..........................................................................3.............................................31 Partial safety factors for materials.............................................1 2.........................................25 Material properties..........................2.............................49 Design situations .4 2............2 2.............................3 2........Table of Contents Table of Contents Page Notations .................1 1..........................1 2.................31 Permanent loads ....................................................3..........3.......4 2.....................................5 Transverse cross-section......................................29 Concrete ............................................3 2..1......4 2.....3..3......................3.................................3 Twin-girder bridge.......................................................2 2....................................................................3...........................33 Concrete shrinkage......................2...................35 Creep – Modular ratios...4.................................................2 2 2..............2...4 2...........................................3.............................................................5 Structural steel distribution..39 Torque ...3..2.....5 Construction phases........................................................15 Structural steel distribution..........2.......................37 Traffic loads .......3......................1 Structure of the document..........................................31 Combinations of actions ...5 2...15 Transverse cross-section.....................................................................1 Longitudinal elevation..........3....................2................3...........................................................................2 2....................................3..............3 2............................................2 2.........49 ............................................................29 Actions...........3......1...........................................................3........................3 2.............................................................................3............................15 General common data ...........................................2 2......5 Box-girder bridge............

................................4......................83 Internal forces and moments ....1 Twin-girder bridge...............1.95 Check of cross-section at mid-span P1-P2 ................1..........97 Material properties ............95 Material properties ...4........................................1................................................................4........................51 Global analysis............................................2 3...................3....................2.1 3..................2........................COMBRI Design Manual ..1............................3.............69 Internal forces and moments – Stresses.......2...............3 2..53 2...................4......................1............................................2...........................1..5........................5 3................................................111 Subpanel 1 ............4.................................5 3....................2 2...97 Check of cross-section at the internal support P2....................4 2...........................1...........................1.............4...........................................1......................................................107 II .......................................................Material properties .......95 Geometry.53 3 Cross-section verifications ..............2 3..................2..............81 Material properties ...................................................................................................................................................2 2..................................................1............................1.....65 Results...........................1....1...................................3 Geometry........3 3..................................79 3...........2 2........................4 3....................................1..........2................................1....................65 Organisation of the global analysis calculations .............103 Subpanel 1 ........1 3....3...........5 3.....1.....63 Shrinkage and cracked zones .....51 SLS combinations .........85 Plastic section analysis...3....4........................................................2 General .............................2 2................1 General remarks ............53 Shear lag in the concrete slab.95 Determination of the cross-section class.......2 3.1 2............4.............1 2...........................................4.........49 ULS combinations other than fatigue .............95 Plastic section analysis........1 3........4 3......................................................................2............................79 3.5 3..........................................................................2..................................1....95 Internal forces and moments ................79 Check of cross-section at the end support C0..3..............................111 Check of cross-section at mid-span C0-P1.................Part I 2.........................................................1.................4...........................87 Geometry.................................................1.....2.....99 Internal forces and moments ...........4 2...1 3..3 3............................Geometry.....................................................................1.....53 Effective width...............5..4 3..................55 Determination of the cracked zones around internal supports ..3....1..........3 2.......................................101 Determination of the cross-section class...........4 2...............3 3.....3 3........2 3.........1....................4...........................................Internal forces and moments ..................2.......................81 3............1......................53 Numerical model.2........................................................................................1........................4 3...5 2...........3.................101 Plastic section analysis..................................1 3.....................4........................4..........1........4.................................................................3.....4..........5......4.....85 Determination of the cross-section class..........................................................6 Concrete cracking ..................53 General ..................107 Subpanel 1 ...........4......................................4...

...........................................1....10 Subpanel 2 ...8 3....................................................155 Mechanical properties of the gross cross-section......193 4................. EN 1993-1-5 .....197 Verifications according to Section 10.....................................2....Geometry.................1 3....1 3...........................1......................................127 3.................179 Shear resistance verification ..............................4 3.1.............8 3....2.....Determination of the cross-section class..........9 4 4........5 3....3 3................3 4........5......2....................................................2...................................3 3.........151 Material properties .............5............2...........................145 Interaction between bending moment and shear force......2................................................7 3...........Material properties ............5...5.......1......141 Internal forces and moments .............................1....2...............8 3....................................................................151 Verifications during erection..5..133 3..........189 Check of cross-section at the internal support P3................................207 III .......................115 Subpanel 2 ....................137 3...........153 Internal forces and moments ..............................193 Verifications according to Sections 6 and 7..Determination of the cross-section class.12 Subpanel 3 ....2 General ...............145 Shear resistance verification ......................................133 3..Material properties ........................................................4 General ................................2...........................2......3.........1....................5..5..................Internal forces and moments ..................11 Subpanel 3 ..14 Subpanel 3 ....1....Elastic section analysis ..............5...................1.2 3............2..143 Determination of the cross-section class......111 Subpanel 1 ......5...............5.2.133 3............... EN 1993-1-5....2.....5 3.........127 Subpanel 2 ...........................2..179 Interaction between bending moment and shear force...............193 Twin-girder bridge.......................2.........................................1 3.....4 3..............................2................Elastic section analysis .........5................................133 3......................4 3.............15 Subpanel 3 .2.........127 3.137 Check of cross-section at mid-span P1-P2 .........................................127 Subpanel 2 ..151 Geometry.....2 Box-girder bridge...3 3.....2............................................131 3.......................................................2......141 Reduction due to shear lag effect ..........Table of Contents 3...............................1.........2................Elastic section analysis ..........3....3...................................................127 Subpanel 2 ........2..............................................1...................7 3............................3........................2............................1.........2............................1...................139 Material properties ......3...................1.3..........Geometry..........................................157 Effective area of the web..........................2 4....6 3..........................................................6 3..Internal forces and moments ...........................1 4.................5 3...........2....................................2.155 Effective area of the bottom flange ....................143 Bending resistance verification ................................................2.....13 Subpanel 3 ......139 3............173 Bending resistance verification .6 3.2....5.1 Geometry.............................................................2.......................................3.............1..3.................1..9 Subpanel 1 ........................................2 3............3.........................1..199 Results ....................2...Determination of the cross-section class........................7 3............................................

......................269 List of tables ........................................................2 General .......................215 Launching situation “2” ....2 4.......221 Webpanel (Launching situation “1” only) ................................................................................................................................................................................................3 4........................209 Verifications according to Section 6...................1 4........................................COMBRI Design Manual ..........................................Part I 4..1 4...........2..........2 Box-girder bridge...2......................................1 4................... EN 1993-1-5.........215 4..2.......................................261 5 Summary .....................................3 4..2.............................2......................................2.....................273 IV ................................................................................................................................223 Results ...........................................209 4............2...................................................221 Launching situation “3” ........241 Verifications according to Section 10................................................................................................................................2............................................2 4..........................................................................................3.................3..........2.........................265 References .....................2..... EN 1993-1-5..4 Launching situation “1” ................2.......................................2...............................267 List of figures .......223 Bottom plate....

Notations Notations Small Latin letters a bb bbf beff bi btf bp bslab bsub b0 b1 b2 b3 cbf cw clr cur e fcd fck fctk. tf2. tf. tf1.95 fctm fcm fsk fu fy fyd h ha. p) Design yield strength (possible lower indices: w. tf2. p) Height of the beam Effective elastic neutral axis (ENA) of the structural steel part only Effective elastic neutral axis of the composite cross-section V .05 fctk. tst. tst.0.0. w) Width of the bottom flange Width of the bottom flange of the beam Effective width of the concrete slab Actual geometric width of the slab associated to the main girder Width of the top flange of the beam Width of the panel Thickness of the concrete slab Width of each subpanel of the bottom flange Center-to-center distance between the outside stud rows Distance between webs of stiffener Width of stiffener flange Width of each stiffener web Part of the bottom flange subject to compression Part of the web subject to compression Distance between the centroid of each lower longitudinal reinforcing steel layer and the near free external surface Distance between the cenroid of each upper longitudinal reinforcing steel layer and the near free external surface Thickness of the concrete slab Design value of concrete compressive strength Characteristic compressive cylinder strength at 28 days 5% fractile of the characteristic axial tensile strength 95% fractile of the characteristic axial tensile strength Mean value of axial tensile strength Mean value of concrete cylinder strength at 28 days Yield strength of the reinforcing steel bars Ultimate stress of the structural steel Yield strength of the structural steel (possible lower indices: w. tf1.seff heff Length of a web plate between adjacent vertical stiffeners (possible lower indices: p. tf.

n0 nL nst nur p q qfk qmin qmax qnom slr sur t t t0 tf tini tslab tst tst. …) Spacing in lower layer of steel reinforcement of the concrete slab Spacing in upper layer of steel reinforcement of the concrete slab Plate thickness (possible lower indices: tf. st) Time Age of the concrete put in place at each construction phase Thickness of the flange of the beam (possible lower indices: 1.COMBRI Design Manual .st mq nlr n.eff hwe1. w.eq tw w x z zna zpl Height of the web of the beam Effective height of the web in compression of the beam Distribution of the effective height of the web in compression of the beam Height of stiffener Plate buckling coefficient for normal stress (possible lower indices: c. p.2 hst kσ kτ kτ. tf2. w. tf1. 2) Time at traffic opening Thickness of the concrete slab Thickness of stiffener Equivalent thickness of stiffener web Thickness of the web of the beam Width of all traffic lanes Abscissa of bridge Position of the centre of gravity of the cross-section Position of the centre of gravity of the composite cross-section Position of the plastic neutral axis (PNA) of the composite cross-section VI .Part I hw hw. LT. pavement. op) Plate buckling coefficient for shear stress Plate buckling coefficient for shear stress for plate with longitudinal stiffeners Torque loads due to distributed loads Total number of steel reinforcement in lower layer Structural steel / concrete modular ratio for short-term loading Structural steel / concrete modular ratio for long-term loading Number of stiffeners (equally spaced) of the bottom flange Total number of steel reinforcement on in upper layer Perimeter of the concrete slab Eccentric distributed traffic loads Characteristic value of the uniformly distributed load due to pedestrian and cycle traffic Minimum value of the line load due to bridge equipment Maximum value of the line load due to bridge equipment Nominal value of the line load due to bridge equipement (safety devices. p. pbf. pw.

eff Aatf Aaw Ac Ac.Notations Capital Latin Letters Aa Aabf Aa.loc Aclr Aclur Acur Aeff Aslr Astw Asur Atot Atslr Atsur Ea Ecm Es Gk Gk. 2) Cross-sectional area of the web Total cross-sectional area of the concrete slab. Gross area of the bottom flange with stiffeners neglecting parts supported by adjacent plate elements Effective local area of the bottom flange with stiffeners Cross-sectional area of the concrete located under the lower layer of steel reinforcement of the slab Cross-sectional area of the concrete located between the lower and upper layer of steel reinforcement of the slab Cross-sectional area of the concrete located above the upper layer of steel reinforcement of the slab Effective cross-sectional area of the composite cross-section Cross-sectional area of one steel reinforcement of the lower layer of the slab Cross-sectional area of the web stiffener Cross-sectional area of one steel reinforcement of the upper layer of the slab Gross cross-sectional area of the composite cross-section Cross-sectional area of the total steel reinforcement of the lower layer of the slab Cross-sectional area of the total steel reinforcement of the upper layer of the slab Elasticity modulus of structural steel Elasticity modulus of concrete Elasticity modulus of reinforcing steel Characteristic (nominal) value of the effect of permanent actions Characteristic value of a favourable permanent action (nominal value of self-weight and minimum value of non-structural equipments) taking account of construction phases Characteristic value of an unfavourable permanent action (nominal value of self-weight and maximum value of non-structural equipments) taking account of construction phases Second moment of area Effective second moment of area of the structural steel part Effective second moment of area of the cross-section The St.inf Gk.eff Ieff It Itot IΔ Le Li . Venant torsional stiffness Gross second moment of area of the composite bridge Second moment of area (around a horizontal axis Δ located at the steel/concrete interface) Equivalent span length in the considered cross-section Length of the span i VII I Ia.sup Cross-sectional area of the structural steel section Cross-sectional area of the bottom flange Effective cross-sectional area of the steel structural part only Cross-sectional area of the top flange (possible lower indices: 1.eff.

Rd MQ Na Nabf Natf Naw Nc Nclr Ncur Nclur Nsl Nsu Q Qk1 Qki. 1 in EN 1991-2 Design value of the shear resistance in case of shear plate buckling in the structural steel web Design value of the shear resistance of the flange in case of shear plate buckling in the structural steel web Design value of the shear resistance of the web in case of shear plate buckling in the structural steel web Design shear force Projection of the design shear force in the direction of the web Design value of the shear resistance Design value of the plastic shear resistance Design value of the plastic shear resistance of the structural steel cross-section .a.COMBRI Design Manual .Rd Vbw.Rd Vbf.Rd VEd VEd.Part I Ma.Rd Vpl.Ed Mf.i≥2 S Sna TSk UDLk Vb. proj VRd Vpl.Rd MEd Mpl.Ed Mc.Rd VIII Design bending moment acting on the structural steel cross-section Design bending moment acting on the composite cross-section Design value of the plastic resistance moment of a cross-section consisting of the flanges only Design bending moment Design value of the plastic bending moment resistance Torque loads due to concentrated loads Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the structural steel cross-section Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the structural steel bottom flange Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the structural steel top flange Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the structural steel web Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the concrete slab in compression Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the concrete in compression located under lower layer of steel reinforcement Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the concrete in compression located above upper layer of steel reinforcement Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the concrete in compression located between lower and upper layer of steel reinforcement Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the lower layer of steel reinforcement Design value of the plastic normal force resistance of the upper layer of steel reinforcement Eccentric concentrated traffic loads Characteristic value of the leading variable action 1 Characteristic value of the accompagning variable action i Envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to concrete shrinkage Gross first moment of area of the composite cross-section Envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to the vertical concentrated loads from Load Model no. 1 in EN 1991-2 Envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to the vertical uniformly distributed loads from Load Model no.

2. factor 235 N / mm ² (possible lower indices: tf. w. η 3 η1 . p. LT.ser γS ε εca εcd εcs η Factor.Notations Small Greek letters α αQi αqi αqr β γC γM γM0 γM1 γM2 γM. angle. local instability) Partial safety factor for resistance of structural steel (Resistance of members to instability) Partial safety factor for resistance of structural steel (Resistance of joints) Partial safety factor for resistance of structural steel at Serviceability Limit State (SLS) Partial safety factor for resistance of reinforcing steel Strain.…) Adjustment factor on load model LM1 on the remaining area Reduction factor for shear lag effect Partial safety factor for resistance of concrete Partial safety factor for resistance of structural steel Partial safety factor for resistance of structural steel (Yielding. w. pw. p. tf2. op) Moment of area Poisson’s ratio Stress at the upper edge of the bottom flange (possible lower indices: eff) Stress at the lower edge of the bottom flange (possible lower indices: eff) Stress at the lower edge of the top flange (possible lower indices: eff) Stress at the upper edge of the top flange (possible lower indices: eff) Longitudinal upper fibre tensile stress in the concrete slab Elastic critical plate buckling stress Elastic critical Euler’s stress Design value of a direct stress in a cross-section Stress in the lower reinforcement of the concrete slab (possible lower indices: eff) IX η1 . tf1. 2. …) Adjustment factor on uniformly distributed load UDL of LM1 on lanes i (i =1. compressed height percentage Adjustment factor on concentrated load TS of LM1 on lanes i (i = 1. pbf. η3 θω κ λ μ ν σabfu σabfl σatfl σatfu σc σcr σE σEd σtslr . st) fy Autogenous shrinkage strain Drying shrinkage strain Total shrinkage strain Coefficient of the yield strength of structural steel Ratio between applied stress and yield strength in a structural steel cross-section Ratio between applied force and resistance in a structural steel cross-section Incline angle of the web with reference to the vertical direction Factor to take into account shear lag Reduced slenderness (possible lower indices: c.

COMBRI Design Manual . p.0) for effective area of a structural steel cross-section Reduction factor for effectivep width Reinforcement ratio in a concrete cross-section Elastic critical shear buckling stress Design value of a shear stress in a cross-section Creep function Diameter of the steel reinforcement of the concrete slab Diameter of the upper steel reinforcement of the concrete slab Diameter of the upper steel reinforcement of the concrete slab Reduction factor (≤ 1) for instability (possible lower indices: c.Part I σtsur σsup. w) Stress ratio between opposite edges of a structural steel plate (possible lower indices: w) Creep multiplier for modular ratio Factor for the combination value of a variable action Factor for the frequent value of a variable action Factor for the quasi-permanent value of a variable action Area bordered by the mid-planes of the internal elements of the box cross-section X .reinf ρ ρc ρs τcr τEd ϕ φ φlr φur χ ψ ψL ψ0 ψ1 ψ2 Ω Stress in the upper reinforcement of the concrete slab (possible lower indices: eff) Maximal ULS Stress in the upper reinforcement of the concrete slab in the cracked behaviour (sagging moment) Reduction factor (≤ 1.

Notations XI .

.

However.11 . [36]. in which this design manual has its origin.g. [2].a twingirder and a box-girder bridge . the different national background of each partner how to apply and interprete Eurocode rules was brought together and a European melting pot of background information and general knowledge has been created. we are mainly dealing with EN 1993-1-5 “Plated Structural Elements”. [32]. this summary of references does not attempt to provide a comprehensive overview on available literature so that much more excellent work may exist which is not mentioned here. [39]. Figure 1-1 shows how many standards can be involved in the design of a composite bridge. In some parts. [34].2 Composite bridges General rules .1 Introduction In the COMBRI research project [7]. Part 1 . it is assumed that the reader is familiar with general design and modelling issues of bridges because this design manual gives a detailed view on plate buckling topics but it can of course not cover all other topics related to the verification of the design.g.steel Part 1 . [6]. [4]. In this context. EN 1993-2 “Steel bridges” and EN 1994-2 “Composite bridges”. Here. it was decided to cover two steel-concrete composite bridges . on actions without aiming to present the theoretical background or the modelling in detail. As the examples focus in detail on the application and interpretation of Eurocode rules which are related to plate buckling verifications.1 Perma ctio nent a ns Ac EN P ar t 1-4 ns tio ac rt al Pa m -6 er 1 Th ec u 9 tio 91 ns 1 s Ba 90 n 19 esig EN of d is d Win ex ns Acc iden Pa rt tio Part 2 r Pa tal a du 1- t r in 7 ctio g ns 5 1- ne Ap xA pli 2 ca tio nf or br idg An tio n es Figure 1-1: Eurocodes to be used in a composite bridge design. the overall view on bridge design cannot be covered. EN 1993-2 and EN 1994-2 with regard to plate buckling verifications. [41]. this design manual introduces general assumptions e. [33]. [37]. In addition to that. In order to facilitate the implementation of Eurocodes EN 1993-1-5. For further information to the aforementioned topics.in order to present the knowledge with the help of worked examples and in a very descriptive manner.Introduction and scope 1 Introduction and scope 1. [35]. the reader is referred to e. Traffic Ac 1 .10 Par t1 -1 Ge ner al r ule sco rt 1 Br ittl e Pa ncr ete fra Pa ctu rt re 1 Cable s -9 ue tig -8 1 Fa rt Pa nts Jo i e -2 ret nc 92 Co 19 es dg bri EN St e EN el br 19 idge s 93 Pa lates ned p Stiffe rt 1 -5 -2 Part 1 -1 EN 1994 .

Actions during execution [19] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-7: General actions. references to the Eurocodes used herein is given. Snow loads [16] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-4: General actions. seismic actions and rules for buildings [28] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 2: Bridges [29] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 5: Foundations. Wind actions [17] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-5: General actions. retaining structures and geotechnical aspects [30] Throughout the document.COMBRI Design Manual . imposed loads for buildings [15] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-3: General actions. self-weight. Accidental actions [20] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges [21] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings [22] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-5: Plated structural elements [23] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 2: Steel Bridges [24] Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings [25] Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 2: General rules and rules for bridges [26] Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design – Part 1: General rules [27] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 1: General rules. 2 .Part I The design of steel and composite bridges with the Eurocodes For the design of steel and composite bridges the following Eurocodes are mandatory [3]: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • EN 1990/A1 EN 1991-1-1 EN 1991-1-3 EN 1991-1-4 EN 1991-1-5 EN 1991-1-6 EN 1991-1-7 EN 1991-2 EN 1993-1-1 EN 1993-1-5 EN 1993-2 EN 1994-1-1 EN 1994-2 EN 1997-1 EN 1998-1 EN 1998-2 EN 1998-5 Eurocode: Basis of structural design – Application for bridges [14] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-1: General actions Densities. Thermal actions [18] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-6: General actions.

Secondly. background information and interpretation issues on the left-hand side and the example calculation on the right. the worked examples are presented in a double-sided layout with comments. Chapters 3 and 4 look at the verifications during the final stage and the execution stage. the examples are a twin-girder and a box-girder bridge which allows to look basically at a design without and with longitudinal stiffeners. the global analysis is presented for both bridges and the relevant results . Last but not least. As mentioned above. an overview on the bridge geometry. All relevant references to current Eurocode rules are provided. a general section follows in which common data such as material properties and actions as well as combinations thereof are given.are summarised for the verifications. Based on that. each chapter is subdivided into a part dealing with the verifications of the twin-girder bridge or the box-girder bridge.Introduction and scope 1. 3 . Here.internal forces and moments . For this purpose.2 Structure of the document In the following. In Chapter 2 the deck of the twin-girder and the box-girder bridge is described and the global analysis of both bridges is introduced. material distribution and construction sequences is given firstly.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 4 .

The transverse cross-section of the concrete slab and of the non-structural equipment is symmetrical with reference to the axis of the bridge.2 Transverse cross-section The bridge carries a two-lane traffic road.Description of the deck and global analysis . The slab thickness varies from 0. 2.Twin-girder bridge 2 Description of the deck and global analysis 2. The centre-to-centre spacing between main girders is 7 m and the slab cantilever on each side is 2.25 m at its free edges. 2. hard shoulders of 2 m width on each side and a standard safety barrier (see Figure 2-2). Each main girder has a constant depth of 2400 mm and the variations in thickness of the upper and lower flanges face towards the inside of the girder. The total slab width is 12 m.1. The lower flange is 1000 mm wide whereas the upper flange is 800 mm wide.1.e.with two 3.00 m C3 Figure 2-1: Elevation of the twin-girder bridge. but it has been modelled as a 0. 60 m and 50 m (i.5 m wide lanes.325 m deep rectangular cross-section. 5 .1 Longitudinal elevation The bridge is a symmetrical twin-girder composite structure with three spans of 50 m.1.1 Twin-girder bridge 2. a total length between abutments of 160 m).00 m P2 50.3 Structural steel distribution The structural steel distribution for a main girder is presented in Figure 2-4.5 m. This is a theoretical example for which a few geometrical simplifications have been made: • • • • C0 50.4 m above the main girders to 0.00 m Straight horizontal alignment Flat top face of the deck Straight bridge Constant height of 2400 mm for the structural steel main girders P1 60.

Part I 6 .COMBRI Design Manual .

50 2.5 m and at about 4 m from the internal supports. vertical stiffeners are added at 1.50 Figure 2-2: Cross-section with traffic data of the twin-girder bridge.50 3.5% 2400 7000 Figure 2-3: Transverse cross-bracing on supports of the twin-girder bridge.50 3.00 2. The optimisation of the stiffening will be discussed in Design Manual Part II [8].Twin-girder bridge 2. 2.50 7.333 m in side spans (C0-P1 and P2-C3) and every 7.5% 2. In order to justify the shear resistance of the internal support sections.00 3. Figure 2-3 illustrates the geometry adopted for this transverse cross-bracing on supports.00 2.4 Girder no 2 2.00 12.00 3.5 m in the central span (P1-P2). The two main girders have transverse bracings on abutments and on internal supports as well as every 8.00 Girder no 1 2.50 2. according to the results of COMBRI research project [7].Description of the deck and global analysis . 7 .

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 8 .

00 m 50.C0 50. 20000 x 35 8000 x 45 6000 x 65 15000 x 95 9000 x 65 4000 x 50 28000 x 40 LOWER FLANGE Constant width 1000 mm Description of the deck and global analysis .00 m P1 P2 C3 2400 UPPER FLANGE Constant width 800 mm 28000 x 40 4000 x 50 15000 x 95 20000 x 35 19 x160000 9000 x 65 6000 x 65 8000 x 45 8000 x 45 6000 x 65 15000 x 95 9000 x 65 4000 x 50 28000 x 40 WEB 28000 x 40 4000 x 50 15000 x 95 9000 x 65 6000 x 65 8000 x 45 Figure 2-4: Structural steel distribution for a main girder of the twin-girder bridge.Twin-girder bridge 9 .00 m 60.

5. 6. Wherever possible. Stages and sequence of construction (1)P Appropriate analysis shall be made to cover the effects of staged construction including where necessary separate effects of actions applied to structural steel and to wholly or partially composite members. (2) The effects of sequence of construction may be neglected in analysis for ultimate limit states other than fatigue.2(3) (3) In execution.5.6.2. deformation should not be imposed on a shear connection until the concrete has reached a cylinder strength of at least 20 N/mm2. EN 1994-2.4.4. 10 .COMBRI Design Manual . for composite members where all cross-sections are in Class 1 or 2 and in which no allowance for lateral-torsional buckling is necessary.Part I EN 1994-2. the rate and sequence of concreting should be required to be such that partly matured concrete is not damaged as a result of limited composite action occurring from deformation of the steel beams under subsequent concreting operations.

the calculation of internal forces and moments in the deck should take construction phases into account (EN 1994-2.00 m 160. Given these choices.00 m Figure 2-5: Order for concreting the slab segments of the twin-girder bridge. 11 .5. Table 2-1 shows the ages of the various slab segments and the mean value of the age t0 for all the concrete put in place at each construction phase.2(3)).00 m 50. The start of pouring the first slab segment is the time origin (t = 0). Its definition is necessary for determining the respective ages of the concrete slab segments during the construction phasing. The time taken to pour each slab segment is assessed to three working days.Description of the deck and global analysis . They are poured in the order indicated in Figure 2-5.Twin-girder bridge 2. 6.00 m 3 2 1 2 3 16 15 14 4 5 6 7 13 12 11 10 9 8 50. 5. Finally. The first day is devoted to the concreting.1) On-site pouring of the concrete slab segments by casting them in a selected order: The total length of 160 m has been broken down into 16 identical 10-m-long concreting segments. 4 1 10.4).4. The following construction phases have been adopted: • • Erection of the structural steel structure by launching (see Section 4. the second day to its hardening and the third day to moving the mobile formwork. so that the deck is fully constructed at the date t = 48 + 32 = 80 days. They are also necessary to determine the values of steel/concrete modular ratios (see Paragraph 2.00 m 60.2.1.3.3.4 Construction phases The assumptions regarding the construction phases are important for all the verifications during erection of the structural steel structure of the deck and during concreting. • Installation of non-structural equipments: It is assumed to be completed within 32 days. The slab is thus completed within 48 days (EN 1994-2.6.3).

Part I 12 .COMBRI Design Manual .

Twin-girder bridge Table 2-1: Age of concrete slab segments at the end of the construction phasing of the twingirder bridge.Description of the deck and global analysis . 13 .

Part I 14 .COMBRI Design Manual .

50 0.50 meter wide and the two outside ones are bordered by a 2.70 0. The centre-to-centre spacing between the webs in the upper part is 12.00 m P2 120.2.2 Box-girder bridge 2. 3 x 120 m and 90 m (i. This is a theoretical example for which a few geometrical simplifications have been made: • • • • Straight horizontal alignment Flat top face of the deck Straight bridge Constant height of 4000 mm for the structural steel box-girder C0 90.06 1. 21.50 m wide slab has been modelled with a theoretical constant thickness of 0.00 4.50 6. 2.75 0.75 m. Standard safety barriers are located outside the traffic lanes and at the middle of the slab width (see Figure 2-7).2. Each lane is 3.50 Figure 2-7: Cross-section with traffic data of the box-girder bridge.10 3.00 m C5 Figure 2-6: Elevation of the box-girder bridge.325 m.00 m and the slab cantilever on each side is 4.06 meter wide safety lane. 15 .00 m P3 120.Description of the deck and global analysis .00 m P4 90.50 3.20 0.50 2.2 Transverse cross-section The bridge carries a four-lane traffic road.50 6.Box-girder bridge 2.50 2.50 12.00 m P1 120.1 Longitudinal elevation The bridge is a symmetrical box-girder composite structure with five spans of 90 m. The transverse cross-section of the concrete slab and of the non-structural equipment is symmetrical with reference to the axis of the bridge.e.06 3.00 4.50 3. The 21. a total length between abutments of 540 m).50 2.

Part I 16 .COMBRI Design Manual .

It helps during the concreting phases of the slab and participates in the resistance of the composite cross-section as additional section for the upper steel flanges.Description of the deck and global analysis . The width of this additional upper flange is 1400 mm.2.5 m from the internal supports. whereas web longitudinal stiffeners are only used for the panels surrounding the intermediate supports.00 m centre-to-centre distance between the webs in the lower part: 6. Figure 2-8: Transverse cross-bracings on supports of the box-girder bridge. In order to justify the shear resistance in the webpanels adjacent to an intermediate support. The web longitudinal stiffeners have the same dimensions as the bottom flange longitudinal stiffeners. The bottom flange is 6700 mm wide whereas the upper flanges are 1500 mm wide.50 m width of lower flange: 6. An additional steel rolled I-girder. Figure 2-8 illustrates the adopted geometry of this transverse cross-bracing on supports.00 m centre-to-centre distance between the webs in the upper part: 12. The thickness is 15 mm for the webs and the flange of the stiffeners.0 m in side and central spans. Axis of the bridge 17 . An additional upper flange is necessary around the intermediate supports.70 m 2. It is located below the main upper flange. which is located along the longitudinal bridge axis of symmetry. They have been added to justify the shear resistance of the web. The box section has transverse frames on abutments and on internal supports as well as every 4. The box-girder has a constant depth of 4000 mm and the variations in thickness of the upper and lower flanges face towards the inside of the box-girder. They are continuous along the whole bridge. The stiffening design has been made following the recommendations of the COMBRI research project [7].Box-girder bridge The concrete slab is connected to an open box section with the following features: • • • • • total depth: 4. transverse frames are added at 2. they are located at mid-depth of the webs.50 m width of upper flanges: 1. has been connected to the concrete slab. leading to dimensions which are bigger than the classical ones.3 Structural steel distribution The structural steel distribution is presented in Figure 2-10. so that the total height of the box-girder is always equal to 4000 mm. Figure 2-9 illustrates the dimensions of the bottom flange longitudinal trapezoidal stiffeners.

EN 1994-2.4. Stages and sequence of construction (1)P Appropriate analysis shall be made to cover the effects of staged construction including where necessary separate effects of actions applied to structural steel and to wholly or partially composite members.2. 18 . for composite members where all cross-sections are in Class 1 or 2 and in which no allowance for lateral-torsional buckling is necessary.4.2(3) (3) In execution.Part I EN 1993-1-10. (2) The effects of sequence of construction may be neglected in analysis for ultimate limit states other than fatigue. the rate and sequence of concreting should be required to be such that partly matured concrete is not damaged as a result of limited composite action occurring from deformation of the steel beams under subsequent concreting operations.COMBRI Design Manual . Table 2.6.1 EN 1994-2. Wherever possible. 5. 6.5. deformation should not be imposed on a shear connection until the concrete has reached a cylinder strength of at least 20 N/mm2.

Description of the deck and global analysis . NOTE2: Different thickness ratios could be obtained by using S355 with quality M or ML around the intermediate supports. Table 2. They are poured in the order indicated in Figure 2-11. so that the deck is fully constructed at the date t = 135 + 35 = 170 days.3. The first day is devoted to the concreting.5. So a design in steel S355 M/ML allows a main 120 mm thick upper flange and an additional 70 mm thick upper flange at intermediate supports.20 0.015 0.3. The slab is thus completed within 135 days (EN 1994-2. Finally the calculation of internal forces and moments in the deck should take construction phases into account (EN 1994-2. 5. On-site pouring of the concrete slab segments by casting them in a selected order: The total length of 540 m has been broken down into 45 identical 12-m-long concreting segments.6.2. They are also necessary to determine the values of steel/concrete modular ratios (see Paragraph 2.50 Figure 2-9: Detail of a bottom flange longitudinal stiffener of the box-girder bridge. Given these choices Table 2-2 shows the ages of the various slab segments and the mean value of the age t0 for all the concrete put in place at each construction phase. according to EN 10025-3.4 Construction phases The assumptions regarding the construction phases are important for all verifications during erection of the structural steel structure of the deck and during concreting.1. The start of pouring the first slab segment is the time origin (t = 0). Its definition is necessary to determine the respective ages of the concrete slab segments during the construction phasing. the second day to its hardening and the third day to move the mobile formwork. The time taken to pour each slab segment is assessed to three working days.2).2(3)). whereas according to EN 10025-4 by using S355 M/ML the yield strength is equal to 320 MPa for up to 120 mm thick plates. The following construction phasing has been adopted: • • Erection of the structural steel structure by launching (see Section 4. 2. an additional upper flange of 1400 mm x 90 mm is welded to the main upper flange. Indeed. For simplification reasons.4).50 19 . by using steel S355 N/NL the main upper flange thickness is limited to 100 mm to keep a yield strength equal to 315 MPa. The choice of plate thickness should also fulfil the requirements of EN 1993-1-10.2. 6.3). 0. • Installation of non-structural equipments: It is assumed to be completed within 35 days.4. NOTE1: On the intermediate supports.Box-girder bridge 0. Chapter 3 [8]. NOTE3: An alternative design with a single upper flange made of S 460 is studied in Design Manual Part II. no allowance has been made to non-working days.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 20 .

Box-girder bridge Figure 2-10: Structural steel distribution for a main girder of the box-girder bridge. 21 .Description of the deck and global analysis .

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 22 .

5 12 … 58.5 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 3 60 61.5 63 64. Table 2-2: Age of concrete slab segments at the end of the construction phasing of the boxgirder bridge.Box-girder bridge Figure 2-11: Order for concreting the slab segments of the box-girder bridge. Mean age t0 of the concrete at the time t segment 39 segment 40 segment 41 segment 42 segment 43 segment 44 pouring of the segment 1 pouring of the segment 2 pouring of the segment 3 pouring of the segment 4 pouring of the segment 5 pouring of the segment 6 pouring of the segment 7 pouring of the segment 8 … pouring of the segment 39 pouring of the segment 40 pouring of the segment 41 pouring of the segment 42 pouring of the segment 43 pouring of the segment 44 pouring of the segment 45 end of the slab hardening superstructures End of construction phasing 0 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 3 … Loading segment 45 segment 1 segment 2 segment 3 segment 4 segment 5 segment 6 segment 7 segment 8 time t 0 3 4.5 9 10.5 69 12 12 15 15 12 18 18 15 12 21 21 18 15 12 … … … … … … … … … 114 114 111 108 105 102 99 96 93 … 117 117 114 111 108 105 102 99 96 … 120 120 117 114 111 108 105 102 99 … 123 123 120 117 114 111 108 105 102 … 126 126 123 120 117 114 111 108 105 … 12 129 129 126 123 120 117 114 111 108 … 15 12 132 132 129 126 123 120 117 114 111 … 18 15 12 135 135 132 129 126 123 120 117 114 … 21 18 15 12 170 170 167 164 161 158 155 152 149 … 56 53 50 47 44 41 38 104 170 170 167 164 161 158 155 152 149 … 56 53 50 47 44 41 38 104 23 .Description of the deck and global analysis .5 6 7.5 66 67.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 24 .

00 m 22.3. The lengths of these regions are illustrated in Figure 2-12 and Figure 2-13.96% of the concrete section) • Intermediate support regions: High bond bars with diameter Φ = 20 mm and spacing s = 130 mm in upper layer.e.2 Modelling the slab to calculate the general longitudinal bending For simplification reasons the actual slab cross-section of a half-deck (see Figure 2-15) is modelled by a rectangular area with the actual width (i.General common data 2. 2. • Span regions: High bond bars with diameter Φ = 16 mm and spacing s = 130 mm in upper and lower layers (i.1. in total ρs = 0.0 m 36.3 General common data 2.e.00 m 72.00 m 48. For the example dealt with herein.00 m 22. 72.00 m 42.0 m 40.00 m 72.3.00 m Figure 2-13: Location of mid-span and support sections for longitudinal reinforcing steel of the box-girder bridge. the cross-sections have been classified between span regions and intermediate support regions for calculation of the longitudinal reinforcing steel. high bond bars with diameter Φ = 16 mm and spacing s = 130 mm in lower layer (i.1 Reinforcement of the concrete slab 2.00 m 48. 6 m). 25 .e.00 m 72. Only longitudinal reinforcement is described. in total ρs = 1.5 cm.00 m Figure 2-12: Location of mid-span and support sections for longitudinal reinforcing steel of the twin-girder bridge.00 m 42.22% of the concrete section) 40. The height e of this rectangle is calculated so that the actual and modelled sections have the same area.1.Description of the deck and global analysis .00 m 72.3.1 Description of the slab reinforcement This report does not deal with the transverse reinforcement. This gives e = 32.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 26 .

5 · 0.000 27 .500 6.000 2.65 m 0.50 Figure 2-14: Modelling the concrete slab for the longitudinal global bending (twin-girder bridge).325 1.250 Figure 2-15: Modelling the concrete slab for the longitudinal global bending (box-girder bridge).99 m² Second moment of area (around a horizontal axis Δ located at the steel/concrete interface): IΔ = 21. 4. Box-girder bridge • • • Area: Ab = 21.246 m4 Perimeter : p = (21.800 1.000 3.750 0.5 + 0.325 10.50 3.325 ) · 2 = 43.5 · 0.137 m4 Perimeter: p = 24.325 / 2)2 = 0.65 m 0.3253 / 12 + Ab · (0.9 m² Second moment of area (around a horizontal axis Δ located at the steel/concrete interface): IΔ = 0.325 = 6.Description of the deck and global analysis .General common data The mechanical properties of the whole transverse cross-section of the slab are: Twin-girder bridge • • • Area: Ab = 3.

10-6 per K (for T ≤ 100 °C) NOTE: For calculating the structural effects of unequal temperatures in composite concretesteel structures according to EN 1994 the coefficient of linear thermal expansion is taken as α = 10. Strength and deformation characteristics for concrete 28 .2. 3.6.COMBRI Design Manual . Table 3. Design values of material coefficients (1) The material coefficients to be adopted in calculations for the structural steels covered by this Eurocode Part should be taken as follows: • • • • modulus of elasticity E = 210000 N/mm² shear modulus G = E ≈ 81000 N/mm² 2 (1 + ν ) Poisson’s ratio in elastic stage ν = 0.10-6 per K.3 coefficient of linear thermal expansion α = 12.Part I EN 1993-1-1.1. EN 1993-1-10 and EN 10164 EN 1992-1-1.

1): • • • • • • Characteristic compressive cylinder strength at 28 days: fck = 35 MPa Mean value of axial tensile strength: fctm = -3.48 0.3 = 34 077 MPa 29 .3.3. ρs (%) Mid-span cross-sections top layer bottom layer Support cross-sections top layer bottom layer 0.2.0.48 0. This value takes account of the concrete cover and the fact that the transverse reinforcing bars are placed outside the longitudinal reinforcing bars (on the side of the slab free surface).48 The centroid of each longitudinal reinforcing steel layer has been assumed to be located at 60 mm away from the closest horizontal face of the concrete slab.2.1 Structural steel Steel grade S355 is considered for this bridge.2 MPa 5% fractile of the characteristic axial tensile strength: fctk. The subgrades (also called quality) N or NL have been adopted (depending on the plate thickness). The reinforcing steel areas are introduced into the numerical model as percentages of the total area of the concrete slab: Table 2-3: Areas of the steel reinforcement.3.2 MPa Mean value of concrete cylinder strength at 28 days: fcm = fck + 8 = 43 MPa Modulus of elasticity: Ecm = 22 000 (fcm / 10)0. 3.2 MPa 95% fractile of the characteristic axial tensile strength: fctk.74 0. In order to avoid any lamellar tearing. The corresponding structural steel mechanical properties are given in EN 10025-3.General common data Similarly.6).05 = -2. Table 2-4: Decrease of fy and fu according to the plate thickness t. t [mm] fy [MPa] fu [MPa] > 16 ≤ 16 355 470 ≤ 40 345 470 > 40 ≤ 63 335 470 > 63 ≤ 80 325 470 > 80 ≤ 100 315 470 > 100 ≤ 150 295 450 The structural steel has a modulus of elasticity Ea = 210 000 MPa (EN 1993-1-1. 2. Table 3.2.2 Concrete Normal concrete C35/45 is used for the reinforced slab. The main mechanical properties are as follows (EN 1992-1-1. to model the reinforcing bars.1. each longitudinal reinforcement layer is replaced by a single point-shaped bar with the same area and located in the plane of the main steel web. the steel has a though-thickness ductility quality Z15 for the main web (when a transverse bracing is welded to it) according to EN 1993-1-10 and EN 10164.2 Material properties 2. 3.Description of the deck and global analysis .2. 2.95 = -4.0.

Limitations for stress 30 .4.6.2. the design value of the modulus of elasticity Es may be taken as equal to the value for structural steel given in EN 1993-1-1. EN 1992-1-1. 3.2.3(1). Partial safety factors for materials EN 1993-2. 2.1 and Table 6. 6. General EN 1993-2. 7.2(2). Reinforcing steel EN 1994-2.2 and Annex C.2. Reinforcing steel (2) For composite structures.4.COMBRI Design Manual . 3.Part I EN 1992-1-1. 3.

4. only six different load cases have been defined: 1.25 Reference EN 1992-1-1.2. Creep 6.4. Traffic load LM1 Specifications to apply these loads on the bridge are explained below.General common data 2. Self-weight of the non structural bridge equipments 4.1 and Table 6. γC (concrete) 1. Table 2-6: Partial safety factors for materials (SLS).3. In EN 1992-1-1 the elasticity modulus of reinforcing steel is Es = 200 000 MPa.1 γM2 =1. Self-weight of the structural steel 2. Shrinkage 5.1 For Serviceability Limit State (SLS) see Table 2-6.4 Partial safety factors for materials For Ultimate Limit State (ULS) see Table 2-5. 3. Self-weight of the reinforced concrete slab (with construction phasing. 2.3 Actions In order to simplify the calculations.3 (1) 2.2.Description of the deck and global analysis . so in fact 16 load cases for the twin-girder bridges and 45 load cases for the box-girder bridge) 3. γM (structural steel) Yielding.2. 6.3 Reinforcement The reinforcing steel bars used in this project are class B high bond bars with a yield strength fsk = 500 MPa (EN 1992-1-1. 31 .0 EN 1993-2.0 EN 1992-1-1. Table 2-5: Partial safety factors for materials (ULS).15 γM1 =1.4 γS (reinforcing steel) 1.2 and Annex C). local instability Resistance of members to instability Resistance of joints EN 1993-2.3.3.4. EN 1994-2 allows the use of Es = Ea = 210 000 MPa which will be done in this project (EN 1994-2. 2. 7. in order to simplify the modulus used for the structural steel. 2.2. Design situation γC (concrete) γS (reinforcing steel) γM0 =1. However.ser (structural steel) 1.5 1. 3.0 γM.0 Persistent Transient 1.2(2)).

Construction materials-metals EN 1991-1-1.COMBRI Design Manual .4.Part I EN 1991-1-1. Table A.1. Table A. Construction materials-concrete and mortar 32 .

25 31.3.22 2.8 1 1 1 qnom qmax qmin (kN/m) (kN/m) (kN/m) 4. 2.245 15.1 Self-weight The density of the structural steel is taken as equal to 77 kN/m3 (EN 1991-1-1.8 0.638 0. Box-girder bridge The self-weight of the in-span located transverse frames is modelled by a vertical uniformly distributed load of 8000 N/m for the total width of the bridge (about 12.245 18.2 m.General common data 2. 5. 25 kN/m3 65 kg/m 25 kg/m Maximum multiplier 1.19 28. Table A-4).5 0.2 Non-structural equipment The nominal value of the waterproofing layer is multiplied by ±20% and the nominal value of the asphalt layer by +40% / -20% for all spans (EN 1991-1-1. 25 kN/m3 8 cm thick.8 2.64 0. 25 kN/m3 Maximum multiplier 1.1 Permanent loads Distinction is made for permanent loads between the self-weights of the structural steel girders.4 1 1 1 Minimum multiplier 0.2 1.3.26 9.8 1 1 1 qnom qmax qmin (kN/m) (kN/m) (kN/m) 7.2 m.82 3.638 0.64 0.25 40.18 2.50 0.13 16. 2. of reinforced concrete slab and of non-structural equipments.4 2.3. Table 2-7: Loads of the non-structural equipment (twin-girder bridge).88 6.5 0. Item Waterproofing layer Asphalt Characteristics 3 cm thick.66 20.31 2. The density of the reinforced concrete is taken as equal to 25 kN/m3 (EN 1991-1-1. Item Waterproofing layer Asphalt Concrete support for the safety barrier Safety barriers Cornice Total Characteristics 3 cm thick.5 0. For calculation of the internal forces and moments and the stresses for the longitudinal bending global analysis. 25 kN/m3 girder Safety barrier Cornice Total 65 kg/m 25 kg/m 33 .638 0.50 0.4 1 1 1 Minimum multiplier 0. Table A-1).04 15.58 5.2 1.54 Table 2-8: Loads of the non-structural equipment (box-girder bridge).Description of the deck and global analysis .2.1.36 8.3.3).8 0.245 23.50 0.64 0.68 Safety barrier ground area 0. 25 kN/m3 8 cm thick.5 x 0.1. 25 kN/m3 area 0.5 x 0.3.25 25.2 % of the weight of the full box-girder).3. the self-weights are modelled as follows: Twin-girder bridge The self-weight of the in-span located transverse cross girders is modelled by a vertical uniformly distributed load of 1300 N/m applied on each main girder (about 12% of the weight of this main girder).2 11 2.

should be taken into account if the material is expected to consolidate. a deviation of the total thickness from the nominal or other specified values should be taken into account. such as ballast on railway bridges. during use. 4. See also EN 1990. NOTE: Suitable specifications may be given in the National Annex.1. pipes and service ducts. void formers. the characteristic values should be taken equal to the nominal values unless otherwise specified. NOTE: Suitable specifications may be given in the National Annex. 34 . An allowance for voids filling with water may be made depending on the project. NOTE: A suitable value may be given in the National Annex (3) To determine the upper and lower characteristic values of self-weight of waterproofing.COMBRI Design Manual . Additional provisions specific for bridges (1) The upper and lower characteristic values of densities for non structural parts. parapets. (2) The nominal depth of ballast on railway bridges should be specified. where the variability of their thickness may be high. safety barriers. (4) For the self-weight of cables.3. kerbs and other bridge funiture. NOTE: Suitable values may be given in the National Annex. or fill above buried structures such as culverts. Unless otherwise specified. NOTE: Suitable specifications may be given in the National annex.2. a deviation from the mean value of the self-weight of ± 20 % should be taken into account. To determine the upper and lower characteristic values of the depth of ballast on railway bridges a deviation from the nominal depth of ±30 % should be taken into account.2(4) (5) For the self-weight of other non structural elements such as: • • • hand rails. 5. joints/fasteners. the upper and lower characteristic values should be taken into account. and to + 40 % and – 20 % if such a coating is not included. this deviation should be taken equal to ± 20 % if a postexecution coating is included in the nominal value.Part I EN 1991-1-1. Unless otherwise specified. surfacing and other coatings for bridges. become saturated or otherwise change its properties.

it has been decided not to consider it in the calculations.4(6)) have been taken into account.1.Description of the deck and global analysis . for the box-girder bridge date tini = 170 days) Table 2-9 summarises the values of autogenous and drying shrinkage deformation for persistent design situation at traffic opening for the twin-girder bridge and the box-girder bridge respectively. 2. Table 2-9: Shrinkage at traffic opening for the persistent design situation at traffic opening (tini).3. In order to simplify the analysis and because thermal shrinkage at early age is part of national choices.20E-05 box-girder bridge 5.3. Two values of the total deformation εcs have been then calculated: Shrinkage deformation for persistent design situation at traffic opening (for the twin-girder bridge date tini = 80 days.88E-05 1. 35 .44E-05 2. Safety barrier Concrete support for the safety barrier 8 cm thick asphat layer Cornice 3 cm thick waterproofing layer Figure 2-16: Non-structural bridge equipment details. three different concrete shrinkage deformations should be considered in the design.2 Concrete shrinkage According to Eurocode 4.36E-05 6. Only autogenous and drying shrinkage deformations (εcs = εca + εcd with notations from EN 1992-1-1.67E-05 Shrinkage deformation for persistent design situation at infinite time Table 2-10 summarises the values of autogenous and drying shrinkage deformation for persistent design situation at infinite time for the twin-girder bridge and the box-girder bridge. twin-girder bridge Autogenous shrinkage Drying shrinkage Total 4. 3.General common data Figure 2-16 details the non-structural bridge equipment used for the example.23E-05 7.

1 or Table 11. Creep and shrinkage (2) Except for members with both flanges composite. The modular ratios depending on the type of loading (subscript L) are given by: nL = n0 (1 +ψL/ϕt) where: n0 Ecm ϕt ψL (5.3.1.3.t0) according to EN 1992-1-1. 0.2 (2). Table 3.2.1 for permanent loads.3.5 for prestressing by imposed deformations 36 . is the creep multiplier depending on the type of loading.55 for primary and secondary effects of shrinkage and 1.Part I EN 1994-2. is the creep coefficient ϕ (t. the effects of creep may be taken into account by using modular ratios nL for the concrete. 3. which be taken as 1.6) is the modular ratio Ea / Ecm for short-term loading. is the secant modulus of elasticity of the concrete for short-term loading according to EN 1992-1-1.4. depending on the age (t) of concrete at the moment considered and the age (t0 ) at loading.4 or 11.1.COMBRI Design Manual . 5.

55 1.1 t0 (days) 24 1 57.3. a shrinkage deformation of 6.67·10-5 (for the boxgirder-bridge) is applied to each slab segment following the concreting order.683 1. t0 ) and the modular ratio values nL used in the design of the twin-girder bridge and the box-girder bridge.74 37 .3 = 6.3.3 Creep – Modular ratios 2.2 Modular ratio for long-term loading For a given long-term loading L applied to the bridge when the mean age of concrete is equal to t0. Load case Concreting Shrinkage Non structural bridge equipments ψL 1. See Table 2-1 and Table 2-2 for further details on the ages t0. 2.215 2.25E-05 1. Load case Concreting Shrinkage Non structural bridge equipments ψL 1. a shrinkage deformation of 2.Description of the deck and global analysis .40E-04 Finally for calculating the internal forces and moments for the persistent design situation at traffic opening.3.55 1.4·10-4 (for the 2 bridges) is applied to the whole slab after finishing all concreting phases.2(2)): nL = n0 (1 + ψ Lϕ ( ∞. 5.1 0.1 Modular ratio for short-term loading n0 = Ea = Ecm 210000 ⎛f ⎞ 22000 ⎜ cm ⎟ ⎝ 10 ⎠ 0.3. t=infinite Autogenous shrinkage Drying shrinkage Total 6. the modular ratio is defined by the following equation for the calculations of the bridge at infinite time (EN 1994-2.t 0 ) ) Table 2-11 and Table 2-12 summarise the intermediate values for the calculation of the creep factor ϕ ( ∞.1 t0 (days) 67.3.256 nL 16.5 1 104 ϕ ( ∞.3. t0 ) 1. t0 ) 1.General common data Table 2-10: Shrinkage at infinite time.2·10-5 (for the twin-girder-bridge) and 7.4.484 2.77E-04 2.3.22 15. For the persistent design situation at infinite time.118 nL 14.23 13. Table 2-11: Modular ratio for long-term loading (twin-girder bridge).1 0.2.40 15.3.68 Table 2-12: Modular ratio for long-term loading (box-girder bridge).5 ϕ ( ∞.674 1.25 14.1625 2.

for repair.g. the number of notional lanes should be defined in accordance with the principles used for Table 4. Table 4. should be divided into notional lanes if the parts are separated by a temporary road restraint system. then: (a) each part. NOTE: The National Annex may define the minimum value of the height of the kerbs to be taken into account.COMBRI Design Manual . etc. The recommended minimum value of this height is 100 mm. e. (2) The width wl of notional lanes on a carriageway and the greatest possible whole (integer) number nl of such lanes on this carriageway are defined in Table 4.1: Number and width of notional lanes (3) For variable carriageway widths. allowing for envisaged future modifications of the traffic lanes on the deck. Divisions of the carriageway into notional lanes (1) The carriageway width.Part I EN 1991-2.3.1. should be measured between kerbs or between the inner limits of vehicle restraint systems. NOTE: For example.4 ≤ w < 9 m 3 where 9 m ≤ w < 12 m. 4. and should not include the distance between fixed vehicle restraint systems or kerbs of a central reservation nor the widths of these vehicle restraint systems. (4) Where the carriageway on a bridge deck is physically divided into two parts separated by a central reservation. (b) the whole carriageway.4 m 2 where 5. NOTE: The rules given in 4. the number of notional lanes will be: • • • 1 where w < 5. 38 . should be separately divided into notional lanes if the parts are separated by a permanent road restraint system . central reservation included.2.2. including all hard shoulders or strips.1.3(4) may be adjusted for the individual project. w.

3. The unfavourable parts of each longitudinal influence line are then loaded according to the transverse distribution of the traffic vertical loads UDL and TS between the two main girders.3.00 Traffic lane no 1 0.00 Remaining area Girder no 1 Axis of the bridge Girder no 2 3. 39 . Twin-girder bridge A straight transverse influence line is used (see Figure 2-20 and Figure 2-22) with the assumption that a vertical load introduced in the web plane of a main girder is entirely resisted by this girder.00 3.4.3. 1 2 or more Remaining area αQi (for TS) 0. So they have not been considered in the calculations (and the corresponding modular ratio is not mentioned here).General common data The hyperstatic effects (also called “secondary effects” in Eurocode 4) of creep are negligible compared to the other action effects.0 / αqr / / 1 2. 1 in Figure 2-17) and for the box-girder.3.3. αqi and αqr.1. Lane no. 2. for a highway or motorway traffic category) (EN 1991-2.8 / αqi (for UDL) 0.2 (3)): Table 2-13: Adjustment coefficients for LM1.3. Here.50 Figure 2-17: Traffic lanes positioning for calculating the girder no.2 Transverse positioning of LM1 UDL and TS are positioned longitudinally and transversally on the deck so as to achieve the most unfavourable effect for the studied main girder (girder no. 4.7 1.4.00 Traffic lane no 2 3.Description of the deck and global analysis . the following values have been assumed (coming from the French National Annex to EN 1991-2.4 Traffic loads 2. Axis of the modeled main girder 1.3.00 Traffic lane no 3 2.50 3. Only minimum recommended values are given in EN 1991-2. These coefficients are given in the National Annex of each country.50 3.9 0.1 Adjustment coefficients The definition of the LM1 vertical loads (consiting of the tandem system TS and the uniformly distributed load UDL) includes a series of adjustment coefficients αQi.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 40 .

The eccentric traffic loads Q (TS) and q (UDL) are modeled by using centered loads with the same values Q and q.22 m wide remaining area can be placed within this 20. On the contrary this transverse positioning of the traffic lanes influences the results of the torque global analysis. which separates the two ways of the road in the middle of the deck.3.00 Traffic lane no 6 2.General common data The pavement width between the internal vertical faces of the concrete longitudinal supports of the safety barriers reaches w = 11 m. has not been considered when applying the traffic load model 1 on this 20.00 Traffic lane no 5 3. centered on the deck axis. This latter assumption corresponds to the use of the horizontal transverse influence line in Figure 2-21 and Figure 2-23. It corresponds to the assumption that sufficient stiffening is provided to prevent the deformation of the cross-sections. Figure 2-19 shows the most unfavourable lane distribution when studying torque. Torque has been studied and its calculation is explained in Paragraph 2.3).11 3.Description of the deck and global analysis . Q C yC = Q C Bending + MQ = Q yC C Torque Figure 2-18: Calculation of the box-girder for eccentric concentrated load. 1. Axis of the bridge 41 . The transverse positioning of traffic lanes doesn’t matter for studying the effect of the centered vertical loads Q and q.5.00 Traffic lane no 4 3.22 m.2. The safety barrier.22 Remaining area Figure 2-19: Traffic lanes positioning for calculating the box-girder. with the 0. Box-girder bridge A horizontal straight transverse influence line is used (see Figure 2-21 and Figure 2-23). The traffic lanes are thus arranged in the most unfavourable way for the studied girder no. and torque loads (MQ for the concentrated one and mq for the distributed one. The pavement width between internal vertical faces of the concrete longitudinal supports of the external safety barriers reaches 20.22 m wide pavement. Six traffic lanes each 3. 4. as each load is resisted equally by the two webs. 1 according to the diagram in Figure 2-20 (EN 1991-2.5 imposed value at each main web location.00 Traffic lane no 1 3. see Figure 2-18). centered on the deck axis.3.00 m wide and a 2.22 m wide pavement. Three traffic lanes each 3 m wide and a 2 m wide remaining area can be placed within this width.00 Traffic lane no 3 3.00 Traffic lane no 2 3.

when used with the basic values.1) αq are adjustment factors.5αq Qk. . it covers the effects of a special vehicle of 600 kN as defined in Annex A.3. Load Model 1 (1) Load Model 1 consists of two partial systems: (a) Double-axle concentrated loads (tandem system: TS).Each axle of the tandem system should be taken into account with two identical wheels. having the following weight per square metre of notional lane: αq qk where : (4.The contact surface of each wheel should be taken as square and of side 0. (b) Uniformly distributed loads (UDL system). should be taken from Tab 4. longitudinally and transversally. (4) The characteristic values of ik Q and ik q.2b). . . .2(1) (a).2) αq are adjustment factors.Part I EN 1991-2.For the assessment of general effects.COMBRI Design Manual . Table 4.2: Load model 1: characteristic values 42 . The uniformly distributed loads should be applied only in the unfavourable parts of the influence surface.2b). . NOTE: LM1 is intended to cover flowing. congested or traffic jam situations with a high percentage of heavy lorries. the load per wheel being therefore equal to 0. dynamic amplification included. each tandem system should be assumed to travel centrally along the axes of notional lanes (see (5) below for local verifications and Figure 4.2.No more than one tandem system should be taken into account per notional lane.40 m (see Figure 4. 4. each axle having the following weight: αq Qk where: (4.Only complete tandem systems should be taken into account. In general.

50 girder no 1) R1 R2 2.5 0.00 (Reaction force in the girder no 2) Transverse influence line Figure 2-20: Tandem TS loading on the deck for the twin-girder bridge.8 x 200 = 160 kN TS 3 per axle : 0.2. Figure 2-20 indicates the transverse position of the three tandems considered with respect to the main structural steel girders (EN 1991-2.39 Figure 2-21: Tandem TS loading on the deck for the box-girder bridge.39 R2 (Reaction force in the web no 2) 43 .5 Transverse influence line for longitudinal bending 2. Each traffic lane can only support a single tandem TS in the longitudinal direction. The three used tandem TS (one per lane) could not be necessarily located in the same transverse cross-section.00 1. TS 1 per axle : 0.61 3.9 x 300 = 270 kN 1 TS 2 per axle : 0.3. Table 4.8 x 100 = 80 kN 0.8 x 200 = 160 kN TS 3 per axle : 0. Axis of the bridge R1 (Reaction force in the web no 1) 0.2(1) (a)). TS 1 per axle : 0. The vertical load magnitudes per axle are given in EN 1991-2.8 x 100 = 80 kN 0 Axis of the bridge (Reaction force in the 0.Description of the deck and global analysis .9 x 300 = 270 kN TS 2 per axle : 0. 4.General common data Tandem System TS Each axle of the tandem TS has to be centered in its traffic lane.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 44 .

00 force in the girder no 2) Transverse influence line Figure 2-22: UDL tranverse distribution on the bridge deck for the twin-girder bridge.5 x 3 = 7.5 x 3 = 7.61 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 0. Transverse influence line for longitudinal bending Load on lane no 1: 0. 3 extended beyond the axis of main girder no.e.0·TS the frequent value of LM1 : 0.0 x 2.00 1.39 3.22 = 5.5 Load on lane no 3: 1.5 x 3 = 7.3 Longitudinal positioning of LM1 The software used to calculate the internal forces and moments automatically moves along the bridge the part of the traffic loads TS and UDL which transversally comes into the modelled girder no.5 kN/m Load on lane no 6: Load on remaining area Load on lane no 5: Load on lane no 4: 1.38 LANE 5 LANE 6 R2 (Reaction force in the web no 2) 0.4·UDL + 0.5 kN/m 1. 4.5 x 3 = 7. It directly gives the envelopes of bending moments and shear forces for: • • the characteristic value of LM1 : 1.5 kN/m 1.0 x 2. 2 (see Figure 2-22) i. For the box-girder bridge. 1 (the most loaded one according to the analysis in the Paragraph 2.99 0. 2 it would only be partly loaded in the positive zone of the transverse influence line. 2.39 3.0 x 2. the traffic lanes are loaded with UDL up to the axis of girder no.9 kN/m Load on lane no 2: 1.0 x 2.5 kN/m Load on lane no 3: 1.3.0 x 2. see Figure 2-30).7 x 9 x 3 = 18.3.55 kN/m 0.2 (EN 1991-2.5 LANE 1 R1 (Reaction force in the web no 1) 2.5 x 3 = 7. the whole pavement width is loaded with UDL The vertical load magnitudes of UDL are given in EN 1991-2. given the transverse influence line.Description of the deck and global analysis . NOTE: that if lane no.0 x 2.39 Axis of the bridge Figure 2-23: UDL tranverse distribution on the bridge deck for the box-girder bridge.5 x 3 = 7.75·TS 45 .39 2.50 girder no 2) R1 R2 (Reaction 0 2.4. Load on lane no 1: 0.3.3.0·UDL + 1.0 x 2.5 x 3 = 7.5 x 2.9 kN/m 1 Load on lane no 2: 1.2.2(1) (b)).3.4.7 x 9 x 3 = 18. the positive part of the transverse influence line.5 kN/m 1. Table 4.5 kN/m 0.General common data Uniformly Distributed Load UDL For the twin-girder-bridge.0 x 2.5 kN/m LANE 1 LANE 2 Axis of the bridge LANE 3 (Reaction force in the 0.

In areas where the concrete slab is assumed to be cracked due to bending and where membrane shear stresses are so large that shear reinforcement is required. 46 .2(11).COMBRI Design Manual . 5.3(6). Effects of cracking of concrete (6) The torsional stiffness of box-girders should be calculated for a transformed cross-section. 5. EN 1994-2. Creep and shrinkage (11) The St. unless the effect of cracking is considered in a more precise way.2.4. The effects of creep should be taken into account in accordance with (2) with the modular ratio nLG = n0G (1 + ψLϕt). Venant torsional stiffness of box-girders should be calculated for a transformed cross-section in which the concrete slab thickness is reduced by the modular ratio n0G = Ga/Gc where Ga and Gc are the elastic shear moduli of structural steel and concrete respectively. the calculation should be performed considering a slab thickness reduced to one half.2.Part I EN 1994-2.4.

4 m² 2 1 +ν c 1 . l ∫e 47 l Thus. So the torque in the sections will be only produced by LM1.75 = 7. If the section is located in a cracked zone of the global bending analysis.325 5. this section gives: I t = . Venant torsional stiffness of each box section has been calculated by using the following formula: It = 4Ω 2 l ∫e Ω represents the area bordered by the mid-planes of the internal elements of the box cross-section.05 + 0.3.325 5.2 for the longitudinal bending.2 1 +ν a n 0 G = n0 lower flange: each web: l 6.5 = = 184 e 0.1625 = 5.3.96 m4.m/m.2.m for UDL.Description of the deck and global analysis . the linear torque moment is equal to: 18. 5.69 l 10. Considering the vertical loads applied on the left hand side of the longitudinal axis of the deck: • • for TS.15 =38.61 m + 160 kN x 5.9 kN/m x 8.4.8 kN/m x 3.4. the software automatically moves along the bridge the traffic loads TS and UDL to calculate the most unfavourable torsional moment in each section.69 each upper composite flange: upper flange with only concrete: ⇒ ∑ e = 990 4Ω 2 = 5.5 Torque All the loads applied on the box-girder bridge are transversally symmetrical.5 + 12 4. except the traffic loads.3 = 6. As already mentioned in Paragraph 2.61 m + 80 kN x 2.0 = e 0.3. the thickness e is divided by the modular ratio n0G for short-term loading according to EN 1994-2.2.025 l 4.018 l 0.61 m = 3431 kN.3. the torque moment (for one axle per tandem) is equal to: 270 kN x 8.3 (6)).55 m = 226 kN. For the concrete element. it gives: Ω= 6.8 = 266 = e 0.5 = = 260 e 0. The St. The influence of the thickness variations on the location of the shear centre has been neglected.General common data 2.69 1 .61 m + 17.4. So every section of the bridge is assumed having the same shear centre.2 (11). For the section located in the middle of the bridge (x = 270 m). the slab thickness is reduced to one half to take the effect of cracking into account (EN 1994-2 5.

i ⎪ j ≥1 i >1 ⎨ ⎪∑ ξ j γ G . Design values of actions (STR/GEO) (Set B) 48 .10a) (6.1. alternatively for STR and GEO limit states.9b) may either be expressed as: ∑γ j ≥1 G.1 "+ " ∑ γ Q .3. in (6.1 "+ " ∑ γ Q . j "+ "γ P P "+ "γ Q . the less favourable of the two following expressions: ⎧∑ γ G .4. Characteristic values of actions EN 1990.i Qk .2.Part I EN 1990.i Qk . Table A2.2(3). j Gk .1ψ 0.10) or.iψ 0. Annex 2.COMBRI Design Manual . j Gk . Combinations of actions for persistent or transient design situations (fundamental combinations) (3) The combination of actions in brackets { }.iψ 0.4(B). j "+ "γ P P "+ "γ Q .i i >1 (6.1Qk . j Gk .i Qk . 4.10b) ∑ ξ is a reduction factor for unfavourable permanent actions G EN 1990.1Qk . 6.iψ 0.i i >1 ⎩ j ≥1 where: "+" implies "to be combined with" implies "the combined effect of" (6. j "+ "γ P P "+ "γ Q .1Qk .1 "+ " ∑ γ Q .

3.General common data 2. the thermal gradient is not addressed in this report. The nominal value of the self-weight is considered (EN 1990. are studied in Chapter 4.2).3. the amplitude of the concrete stress envelope which would have been wider. considering the final envelopes of internal forces and moments.sup and Gk.at traffic opening. 1 in EN 1991-2 TSk : envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to the vertical concentrated loads from Load Model no. The combinations of actions indicated below have been established using EN 1990 and its normative Annex A2 "Application for bridges”.4. launching of the structural steel part.3.2 General remarks The notations used are those of Eurocodes: • • • • • Gk.during and after concreting of each slab segment (16 or 45 situations for the example following the bridge). The shrinkage is not taken into account if its effect is favourable. Taken the thermal gradient into account would have had an influence on: the value of the stresses at Serviceability Limit State (SLS) due to primary effects of the gradient – but this Design Manual focuses on the ULS buckling phenomena.at infinite time.Description of the deck and global analysis .1 Design situations The bridge should be verified for the following design situations: • Transient design situations: .3.4 Combinations of actions 2.1. i. . • Permanent design situations: . .inf is necessary for the permanent loads. too.4. 49 . 1 in EN 1991-2 An envelope calculation with Gk.3. 2. 4. 2.inf : characteristic value of a favourable permanent action (nominal value of self-weight and minimum value of non-structural equipments) taking account of construction phases S : envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to concrete shrinkage UDLk : envelope of characteristic values of internal forces and moments (or deformations) due to the vertical uniformly distributed loads from Load Model no. and consequently the cracked zones of the global analysis. Both permanent design situations will be included in the global analysis (through the use of two sets of modular ratios). only because of the variability of the deck surfacing load. The transient design situations.sup : characteristic value of an unfavourable permanent action (nominal value of self-weight and maximum value of non-structural equipments) taking account of construction phases Gk.for the structural steel alone under its self-weight (launching steps).6 Thermal gradient To simplify the study.e. The verification of the bridge will then be performed once.

COMBRI Design Manual .1. 50 . with all γ factors being taken as 1.6) taking into account the serviceability requirements and the distinction between reversible and irreversible limit states. Deformations should be calculated in accordance with EN 1991 to EN 1999.2. Annex 2. A2. Recommended values of ψ factors for road bridges EN 1990. NOTE: Serviceability requirements and criteria may be defined as appropriate in the National Annex or for the individual project.14a) to (6.4 and EN 1992 to EN 1999.1.0. (2) The serviceability criteria should be defined in relation to the serviceability requirements in accordance with 3.6 except if differently specified in EN 1991 to EN 1999. NOTE1: γ factors for traffic and other actions for the serviceability limit state may be defined in the National Annex. Table A. The recommended design values are given in Table A2.6: Design values of actions for use in the combination of actions NOTE 2: The National Annex may also refer to the infrequent combination of actions. Table A2.16b) (see Table A2.4.Part I EN 1990 Annex 2.6. General (1) For serviceability limit states the design values of actions should be taken from Table A2. by using the appropriate combinations of actions according to expressions (6.

inf) + (1.inf) + (1.4.0 or 0. 6.0 or 0.0 or 0. TSk Quasi-permanent SLS combination: Gk.4.4 (B) of Annex A2 to EN 1990.4 SLS combinations According to A2.0) S 51 .4.35 Gk.1 of Annex A2 to EN 1990.3.Global analysis 2.sup (or 1. The γ values have been taken from Table A.2.35 { UDLk + TSk } The above-mentioned combination of actions corresponds to Equation (6.0 or 0.sup (or Gk.75.10 b) have not been used.4. 2.0) S + 0. Equations (6. The ψ0 factors used for defining the combination value of a variable action have been taken from Table A.0) S + UDLk + TSk Frequent SLS combination: Gk.2.3.4.sup (or Gk.3.1 of Annex A2 to EN 1990.0 Gk.3 ULS combinations other than fatigue 1.2.inf) + (1.0) S + 1.sup (or Gk. the following combinations should be considered: • • • Characteristic SLS combination: Gk. UDLk + 0.Description of the deck and global analysis .inf) + (1.10 a) and (6.10) in EN 1990.

5. In regions where the extreme fibre tensile stress in the concrete due to the envelope of global effectsexceeds twice the strength fctm or flctm .COMBRI Design Manual .4. is then determined by re-analysis.2. and deformation if appropriate.1. First the envelope of the internal forces and moments for the characteristic combinations. A new distribution of internal forces and moments.3. This distribution of stiffness may be used for ultimate limit states and for serviceability limit states.2.1 or Table 11. 6.3.5.3(2).12. including long-term effects should be calculated using the flexural stiffness Ea I1 of the un-cracked sections. 5. the stiffnessshould be reduced to Ea I2. see EN 1990. This is defined as “cracked analysis”. 52 . see EN 1992-1-1. This is defined as “uncracked analysis”. Table 3.Part I EN 1994-2. see 1. Effects of cracking of concrete (2) The following method may be used for the determination of the effects of cracking in composite beams with concrete flanges.

53 .4.called „cracked analysis“ .Global analysis 2.2 Shear lag in the concrete slab The shear lag in the concrete slab is taken into account by reducing the actual slab width to an “effective” width. This is achieved by two successive global analysis (EN 1994-2.g.1 Twin-girder bridge To analyse the global longitudinal bending.4.2. it has been chosen to calculate the cracked lengths around internal supports instead of using the simplified “15%-method”.Description of the deck and global analysis .4.4 MPa in the example) under characteristic SLS combination of actions.4. 2.1. taking into account the construction phases and the cracking of concrete around intermediate supports.of this cracked analysis should be used to verify all the transverse cross-sections of the deck.1.2. This criterion thus defines cracked zones on both sides of the intermediate supports. the deck is modelled as a continuous line of bar elements which corresponds to the neutral fiber of the modelled main girder and which is simply supported on piers and abutments. 5.2.2 Internal forces and moments – Stresses 2.1. See also Paragraph 2. The internal forces and moments .called „uncracked analysis“ .2 for the calculation of effective widths in this project.1 Concrete cracking For the example.1. the global analysis of a two-girder bridge is a first order linear elastic analysis. It thus influences the cross sectional properties of the cross-sections which are used in the global analysis (EN 1994-2.the concrete slab stiffness in the cracked zones is reduced to the stiffness of its reinforcing steel.1 General The global analysis is the calculation of the whole bridge to determine the internal forces and moments and the corresponding stresses in all its cross-sections.1 Numerical model 2. In a second global analysis .4. then the concrete of this cross-section should be considered as cracked in the second global analysis. This is calculated by respecting the defined construction phases and by considering two particular dates in the bridge life – at traffic opening (short term situation) and at infinite time (long-term situation). With respect to a fixed reference (which can be attached e. According to Eurocode 4.4. In a given cross-section if the longitudinal upper fibre tensile stress σc in the concrete slab is higher than -2·fctm (= -6. This is due to the different modular ratios to be considered and to the fact that a given cross.4. 2.4.4. to the final longitudinal profile of the pavement) this neutral fiber changes throughout the calculation according to the cross sectional properties (areas and second moments of area) allocated to the bar elements in the model.2).2.4 Global analysis 2. • • See also the chart in Figure 2-28.as well as the corresponding stress distributions . 5.the concrete is considered as uncracked for calculating the cross-sectional properties of all the cross-sections in the modelled main girder.3(2)): • In a first global analysis . 2.

For typical continuous composite beams.1. measured at mid-depth of the concrete flange.3) 54 . bei is the value of the effective width of the concrete flange on each side of the web and taken as Le/8 ( but not greater than the geometric width bi . (5. may be determined as: beff = b0 + ∑bei where: b0 is the distance between the centres of the outstand shear connectors. The value bi should be taken as the distance from the outstand shear connector to a point mid-way between adjacent webs. Effective width of flanges for shear lag At mid-span or an internal support. where a moment envelope from various load arrangements governs the design.2(5). Le may be assumed to be as shown in Figure 5. see Figure 5. the total effective width beff .Part I EN 1994-2. except that at a free edge bi is the distance to the free edge.4. 5.1.1.COMBRI Design Manual . and for cantilevers. The length Le should be taken as the approximate distance between points of zero bending moment.

2. A half box-girder is studied (i.1 Twin-girder bridge In a given cross-section of one of the main girder.4.3.2.1.2 Effective width 2. Every load case is introduced into the numerical model with the corresponding mechanical properties of the cross-sections. the bar element length is limited to 1.4. to the final longitudinal profile of the pavement) this neutral fiber changes throughout the calculation according to the mechanical properties (areas and second moments of area) allocated to the bar elements in the model. This is due to the different modular ratios to be considered and to the fact that a given crosssection could be composite or not. the effective width of the concrete slab is the sum of 3 terms (see Figure 2-24): beff = b0 + β1be1 + β2be2 (EN 1994-2. 5.2).1.4. already described in Paragraph 2. see also Paragraph 2. some particular cross-sections are worthy of being at the bar element ends: • • • • at the quarter and three-quarters of each span (to define the effective widths of the slab to calculate the stress distribution. 2.Global analysis section could be composite or not.2.Description of the deck and global analysis . in order to have a good precision of the cracked zone length.4.4. at the thickness changes in the structural steel distribution.2 (5)) 55 . 2.2 Box-girder-bridge Global analysis of the bending moment The box-girder is modelled as a twin-girder bridge whose bottom flange width is half of the bottom flange of the box-section. Global analysis of the torque The first model is a 2D model and only represents a half deck. The torque study requires a 3D model with the definition of the torsional stiffness all along the bridge and of the whole box cross-section of the deck. see also Paragraph 6. To analyse the global longitudinal bending. following the phases of the global analysis. some peculiar crosssections are worthy of being at the bar element ends: • • • at the quarter and three-quarters of each span (to define the effective widths of the slab to calculate the stress distribution. with a cracked concrete or not. at the thickness changes in the structural steel distribution. with a cracked concrete or not.25 m in the end spans. In addition to the cross-sections on internal and end supports and at mid-spans. Every load case is introduced into the numerical model with the corresponding mechanical properties of the cross-sections. Major differences are the traffic lane positioning and the transverse influence line. In addition to the cross-sections on internal and end supports and at mid-spans. at the ends of every slab concreting segment.3.2.5 m in the central span and to 1.e. following the phases of the global analysis.2. at the ends of every slab concreting segment. With respect to a fixed reference (which can be attached.4.2). for example.2. the equivalent of one girder for a twin-girder bridge). the deck is modelled as a continuous line of bar elements which corresponds to the neutral fiber of the modelled half box-girder and which is simply supported on piles and abutments.

1.2(6). Effective width of flanges for shear lag The effective width at an end support may be determined as: beff = b0 + ∑βi bei with: (5.0 where: bei is the effective width. see (5).025 Le / bei) ≤ 1.55 + 0.5) βi = (0.4) (5.COMBRI Design Manual .4. 5. Figure 5. of the end span at mid-span and Le is the equivalent span of the end span according to Figure 5.1: Equivalent spans for effective width of concrete flange 56 .Part I EN 1994-2.1.

634 m on end support C0 to 6.5 m for the cross-sections located on internal supports P1 and P2.88 < 1.1).55 + 0.7·L2 = 0.025·Le1/be2 = 0.0.1.Global analysis with b0 (= 650 mm for the example).1). β1 = β2 = 1 except for the cross-sections on end supports C0 and C3 where βi = 0.0 m up to the abscissa 2·L1 + L2 – 0.5/3. 5. Le2 = 0.7·60 = 42 m for the cross-sections located in the central span P1-P2.04 but as β2>1 β2 = 1 is retained The slab width will therefore vary linearly from 5. β2 = 0.55 + 0.85·50 = 42.4. The equivalent spans are: Le1 = 0.0 m to 5. 57 .2 (6)).175 mm b 2 = 2. Figure 5. bi} where Le is the equivalent span length in the considered cross-section and where bi is the actual geometric width of the slab associated to the main girder.175 = 1. (EN 1994-2.5 m for the cross-sections located in the end spans C0-P1 and P2-C3 and for the cross-sections located on end supports C0 and C3 (EN 1994-2.55 + 0. As Lei/8 is always greater than bi for the example it is deduced that the effective width is equal to the actual width except for the cross-sections on end supports C0 and C3 where the factor βi has an impact: β1 = 0.25·L1 = 147.634 m on end support C3.5 m and then it will vary linearly from 6.25· (L1 + L2) = 0.0 with bei taken as equal to the effective width at mid-end span b eff β1b e1 b 0 = 650 mm β 2b e2 Axis of the bridge b 1 = 3.025. Figure 5.55 + 0. Afterwards it will be constant and equal to 6.Le/bei < 1.025·42. Le3 = 0.025·42.85·L1 = 0.175 = 0.25· (50+60) = 27.25·L1 = 12.85·L1 = 0.55 + 0. bei = min {Le/8 .Description of the deck and global analysis . the center-to-center distance between the outside stud rows.175 mm Figure 2-24: Effective slab width for a main girder in a given cross-sectionof the twin-girder bridge.5 m in the span C0-P1 (EN 1994-2.025·Le1/be1 = 0.5/2.0 m for the abscissa 0.

5. and for cantilevers. 5. where a moment envelope from various load arrangements governs the design.2(4).4.1.4) (5. or the value beff. 5. EN 1994-2. EN 1994-2. bei is the value of the effective width of the concrete flange on each side of the web and taken as Le/8 ( but not greater than the geometric width bi . Le may be assumed to be as shown in Figure 5. except that at a free edge bi is the distance to the free edge.1.3) The effective width at an end support may be determined as: beff = b0 + ∑βi bei with: (5. see Figure 5.1. This value may be taken as the value beff.4.55 + 0.Part I EN 1994-2.2 at the support for a cantilever. The length Le should be taken as the approximate distance between points of zero bending moment.1. For typical continuous composite beams.1 at mid-span for a span supported at both ends. may be determined as: beff = b0 + ∑bei where: b0 is the distance between the centres of the outstand shear connectors.4.2(6). of the end span at mid-span and Le is the equivalent span of the end span according to Figure 5. Effective width of flanges for shear lag (5. Effective width of flanges for shear lag At mid-span or an internal support.0 where: bei is the effective width. Figure 5.1: Equivalent spans for effective width of concrete flange 58 . The value bi should be taken as the distance from the outstand shear connector to a point mid-way between adjacent webs.2(5). see (5).1. a constant effective width may be assumed over the whole of each span. measured at mid-depth of the concrete flange.1. the total effective width beff .COMBRI Design Manual .5) βi = (0.025 Le / bei) ≤ 1. Effective width of flanges for shear lag When elastic global analysis is used.

25· (90+120) = 52.4.2 (5)) (EN 1994-2. bi} where Le is the equivalent span length in the considered cross-section and where bi is the actual geometric width of the slab associated to the main girder.025·Le/bei < 1.85·L1 = 0. P2-P3 and P3-P4.7·L2 = 0.7·120 = 84 m for the cross-sections located in the central spans P1-P2. To calculate the internal forces and moments with a linear elastic global analysis. Le3 = 0.25 m b 1 = 5.25· (120+120) = 60 m for the cross-sections located on internal supports P2 and P3. Le2 = 0.1. The equivalent spans are: Le1 = 0.2(4)). Figure 5. For the example this means that the calculation can be performed with the actual slab width over the entire bridge length. bei = min {Le/8 . Le4 = 0.3750 m b2 = 4.25· (L1 + L2) = 0.2 (6)).55 + 0.4. 5. 5. β1 = β2 = 1 except for the cross-sections on end supports C0 and C5 where βi = 0.1).0 with bei taken as equal to the effective width at mid-end span b eff 0.5 m for the cross-sections located on internal supports P1 and P4.1250 m Figure 2-25: Effective slab width for a main girder in a given cross-section of the box-girder bridge.4.Global analysis This variable effective width is always taken into account to calculate the longitudinal stress distribution.325 β 1 be1 b0 β 2 be2 Axis of the bridge b0 = 1.1. 5.4.2.1.Description of the deck and global analysis . the effective width of the concrete slab is the sum of 3 terms (see Figure 2-25): beff = b0 + β1·be1 + β2·be2 with: b0 (= 1250 mm for the example).2 Box-girder bridge Effective width of the concrete slab In a given cross-section of one of the main girder.85·90 = 76.2.5 m for the cross-sections located in the end spans C0-P1 and P4-C5 and for the cross-sections located on end supports C0 and C5 (EN 1994-2. constant widths have been used for each span by considering the values at mid-span (EN 1994-2.85·L1 = 0. 59 . the center-to-center distance between the outside stud rows. (EN 1994-2.25· (L2 + L2) = 0. ⇒ beff = 6 m 2.

Shear lag at the ultimate limit states (1) At the ultimate limit states shear lag effects may be determined as follows: a) elastic shear lag effects as determined for serviceability and fatigue limit states.3 (1).1: Effectivep width factor β 60 .4) tf is the flange thickness.eff.Part I EN 1993-1-5.β (3.eff. which may be taken as β determined from Table 3.1 with α0 replaced by: * α0 = Ac .eff. NOTE2: The combined effects of plate buckling and shear lag may be taken into account by using Aeff as given by: Aeff = Ac. NOTE1: The National Annex may choose the method to be applied. 3.4 and 4. c) elastic-plastic shear lag effects allowing for limited plastic strains.βκ ≥ Ac.COMBRI Design Manual . the method in NOTE: 3 is recommended.3) where Ac. Table 3.eff is the effectivep area of the compression flange due to plate buckling (see 4. The expressions in NOTE: 2 and NOTE: 3 may also be applied for flanges in tension in which case Ac. b) combined effects of shear lag and of plate buckling.eff b0 t f (3.5) where β and κ are taken from Table 3. Unless specified otherwise in EN 1993-2 to EN 1993-6.5).βult (3.1. βult is the effectives width factor for the effect of shear lag at the ultimate limit state. NOTE3 Elastic-plastic shear lag effects allowing for limited plastic strains may be taken into account using Aeff as follows: Aeff = Ac.eff should be replaced by the gross area of the tension flange.

5 m and then it will vary linearly from 10. to be chosen by the National Annex. Figure 5. The method recommended in NOTE: 3 of EN 1993-1-5. β2 = 0.025·76.906 < 1.24 m at end support C5.1.75 m to 10. This variable effective width is always taken into account to calculate the longitudinal stress distribution. constant widths have been used for each span by considering the values at mid-span (EN 1994-2. shear lag is taken into account by an effective width of the steel bottom flange each side of the web which is equal to the smallest of the values between the actual total half width of the steel bottom flange and L/8 (on each side of the web). beff = min (b0 . To calculate the internal forces and moments with a linear elastic global analysis. 3. SLS stresses: Shear lag is taken into account at SLS via the reduction factor β . ⇒ beff = 10. This method gives values of β κ nearly equal to 1 (higher than 0. 3. Factors β and κ are given in EN 1993-1-5 Table 3.7 for crosssections located near the intermediate supports.5 m in the span C0-P1 (EN 1994-2. The shear lag is then taken into account at ULS via the reduction factor β κ .0 then β2 = 1 The slab width will therefore vary linearly from 10.025·76.25·L1 = 517.Global analysis As Lei/8 is always greater than bi for the example it is deduced that the effective width is equal to the actual width except for the cross-sections at end supports C0 and C5 where the factor βi has an impact: β1 = 0.01 > 1. Afterwards it will be constant and equal to 10.75 m Effective width of the box-girder bottom flange Global analysis For the box-girder bridge global analysis. for the central spans.97 in every section).55 + 0. is adopted here.75 m up to the abscissa 2·L1 + 3·L2 – 0. Section analysis Distinction is made between the shear lag effects for calculating stresses at SLS and at fatigue ULS on one hand.1). and the shear lag effects for calculating stresses at ULS on the other hand. L1/8) = b0 with L1 = 90 m.75 m for the abscissa 0. A bottom flange with a half-width b0 = 3250 mm gives: • • for the end spans. ULS stresses: At ULS three methods of calculating the effective width for shear lag are proposed in EN 1993-1-5.125 = 1.3.5/4.55 + 0.3(1). the shear lag effect does not reduce the width at all for the bottom plate.55 + 0. beff = min (b0 . L2/8) = b0 with L2 = 120 m. In this design example.Description of the deck and global analysis . Shear lag in the bottom flange is nevertheless described below.5/5. For the example this means that the calculation can be performed with the actual slab width over the entire bridge length. 5.025·Le1/be2 = 0.25·L1 = 22.0.55 + 0. 61 .2(4)).1. The corresponding SLS stresses have not been systematically calculated as they do not govern the design of the cross-sections and they are not the objective of this Design Manual.24 m at end support C0 to 10.025·Le1/be1 = 0.4.375 = 0. given the fairly large span lengths. which values are around 0. where L is the span length. ULS stresses are calculated with gross mechanical characteristics (without considering shear lag in the bottom flange and reductions for buckling).

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 62 .

63 .3 Determination of the cracked zones around internal supports Firstly.Description of the deck and global analysis . The internal forces and moments as well as the longitudinal stresses σc in the concrete slab are calculated by considering the concrete participation in the bending stiffness of all the cross-sections. 8 Stresses in the upper fiber of the concrete slab (MPa) 6 4 2 0 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 concrete slab upper fiber 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 -10 section x (m) Figure 2-26: Cracked zonesof the twin-girder bridge used in the global analysis. Figure 2-26 and Figure 2-27 show the stresses thus obtained under SLS characteristic combination of actions as well as the zones where this stress exceeds 2·fctm in the upper fibre of the concrete slab.4.2. a global uncracked analysis is performed for the example.Global analysis 2. 9 Stresses in the upper fiber of the concrete slab (MPa) 6 3 0 0 -3 -6 -9 concrete slab upper fiber 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 -12 section x (m) Figure 2-27: Cracked zones of the box-girder bridge used in the global analysis.

2(8) (8) In regions where the concrete slab is assumed to be cracked. 64 .Part I EN 1994-2.4.2. 5.COMBRI Design Manual . the primary effects due to shrinkage may be neglected in the calculation of secondary effects.

5. 6.3 % for the cracked length in the central span).8 m (i.4 m (i.e.εcs.e. 7.0 m (i.e. a cracked zone around P3 which starts at the abscissa x = 304.7 % for the cracked length in the central span). 22.e. 21.2.5 Organisation of the global analysis calculations Figure 2-28 shows the sequence considered for the longitudinal bending calculations in the example.6 % for the cracked length in the central span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 338.4 Shrinkage and cracked zones During the second step of the global analysis. • • • Most of these cracked zones are smaller than 15% of the span lengths. the corresponding tensile stresses are not because their values include the self-balancing stresses due to the shrinkage (called “primary effects” or “isostatic effects” in EN 1994-2). 4. Although the bending moment is equal to zero in the cross-sections at the deck ends. a cracked zone around P3 which starts at the abscissa x = 444.2 (8)).e. 1. a cracked zone around P2 which starts at the abscissa x = 109.1 m (i.4.0% for the cracked length in the right end span).1 m (i.5 m (i.e.7 % for the cracked length in the central span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 457.2.e.e. and the isostatic effects themselves (see Figure 2-29).7 % for the cracked length in the right end span). 2. 5.4.7 % for the cracked length in the left end span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 98.8 m (i.1 m (i.Ab which is applied to the center of gravity of the concrete slab) is no longer applied in the cross-sections located in the cracked zones around internal supports (EN 1994-2.e.e.e 6.0% for the cracked length in the central span). The « hyperstatic » or « secondary » effect of shrinkage is finally considered as the difference between the internal forces and moments calculated in the continuous girder by the elastic linear analysis under the action of the isostatic effects of shrinkage.1 % for the cracked length in the central span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 217.8 m (i. 2. the cracked zones modify the introduction of the concrete shrinkage in the numerical model. 4.4.e.Global analysis The observed discontinuities in these envelope curves correspond to the end cross-sections of the concreting slab segments and to the cross-sections in which the thicknesses of the structural steel change. In fact the isostatic (or “primary”) effect of shrinkage (Nb = Ecm. 8.5 m (i.Description of the deck and global analysis .0% for the cracked length in the left end span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 53.5 % for the cracked length in the central span). They are assymmetric due to the choice made for the order for concreting the slab segments (see Figure 2-5 and Figure 2-11). as it would have been directly considered by using the alternative simplified method of EN 1994-2. 65 . • Box-girder bridge • a cracked zone around P1 which starts at the abscissa x = 83. 5. this gives: Twin-girder bridge • a cracked zone around P1 which starts at the abscissa x = 47. a cracked zone around P2 which starts at the abscissa x = 183.2.5% for the cracked length in the central span) and which ends at the abscissa x = 112 m (i. This especially includes the changes of cross sectional properties of the cross-sections following the successive introduction of the load cases into the model with respect to the adopted construction phases.1 m (i. 7. In practical terms.

Part I 66 .COMBRI Design Manual .

Description of the deck and global analysis . 67 .Global analysis Figure 2-28: Global analysis organisation chart.

Part I 68 .COMBRI Design Manual .

20 15 10 6.81 -4.Global analysis 2.63 60 80 100 120 140 160 -10 -10.92 5 Mz (MN.99 40 -5.14 -15 frequent LM1 max frequent LM1 min characteristic LM1 max characteristic LM1 min -20 Section x (m) Figure 2-30: Bending moments under the uniformly distributed load and tandem traffic load (frequent and characteristic LM1) for the twin-girder bridge.4.6.Description of the deck and global analysis .6 Results 2.95 0 0 -5 20 -2.2.2.m) 0 0 -2 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 -4 -6 LT hyper shrinkage LT iso+hyper shrinkage LT iso shrinkage -8 Section x (m) Figure 2-29: Isostatic and hyperstatic bending moments due to the long-term concrete shrinkage for the twin-girder bridge.4.m) 7. 69 .1 Twin-girder bridge Figure 2-29 to Figure 2-32 present a few results of internal forces and moments coming from the global analysis of the twin-girder bridge. 8 6 4 2 Mz (MN.92 2.

Part I 70 .COMBRI Design Manual .

8 6 4 2 Ty (MN) 0 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 Section x (m) 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 characteristic SLS fondamental ULS Figure 2-32: Shear forces under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the twin-girder bridge.Description of the deck and global analysis . 71 .m) 0 0 -20 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 -40 -60 characteristic SLS fondamental ULS -80 Abscisse (m) Figure 2-31: Bending moments under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the twin-girder bridge.Global analysis 60 40 20 Mz (MN.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 72 .

6.4.Description of the deck and global analysis . 25 20 15 10 Mz (MN.Global analysis 2.2.m) 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Section x (m) LT hyper shrinkage LT iso+hyper shrinkage LT iso shrinkage Figure 2-33: Isostatic and hyperstatic bending moments due to the long-term concrete shrinkage for the box-girder bridge.2 Box-girder bridge Figure 2-33 to Figure 2-37 present a few results of internal forces and moments coming from the global analysis of the box-girder bridge. frequent LM1 max frequent LM1 min characteristic LM1 max characteristic LM1 min 50 40 30 20 10 Mz (MN.m) 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Section x (m) Figure 2-34: Bending moments under the uniformly distributed load and tandem traffic load (frequent and characteristic LM1) for the box-girder bridge 73 .

m) -100 -200 -300 -400 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Section x (m) characteristic SLS fundamental ULS Figure 2-36: Bending moments under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the box-girder bridge.Part I 25 20 15 10 Mx (MN.COMBRI Design Manual . 74 .Mx max characteristic LM1 .Mx min Figure 2-35: Torque under characteristic LM1 for the box-girder bridge. 200 100 0 Mz (MN.m) 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Section x (m) characteristic LM1 .

Global analysis 75 .Description of the deck and global analysis .

COMBRI Design Manual . 76 .Part I 20 15 10 Ty (MN) 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 Section x (m) characteristic SLS fundamental ULS Figure 2-37: Shear forces under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the box-girder bridge.

Description of the deck and global analysis .Global analysis 77 .

.

1. see Section 3. Figure 3-2: Checked sections of the twin-girder bridge. 79 .Twin-girder bridge 3 Cross-section verifications 3.1 Twin-girder bridge 3. the three subpanels shown in Figure 3-3 must be checked.3 At mid-span P1-P2.5 Figure 3-1: Position of vertical stiffeners of the twin-girder bridge. For the internal support P2.1.1. For each critical section. see Section 3. the different critical sections to check are displayed in Figure 3-2: • • • • At the end support C0.2 At mid-span C0-P1.1. see Section 3. see Section 3.4 At the internal support P2. the verification is done on a panel which is located between two vertical stiffeners.1.Cross-section verifications .1 General According to the location of the vertical stiffeners of the twin-girder bridge (see Figure 3-1) and the shape of the bending moment and shear diagrams at ULS (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32).

Part I 80 .COMBRI Design Manual .

2 Check of cross-section at the end support C0 3.1. 81 . 3.1 Geometry At end support C0 at ULS the concrete slab is in compression over its whole height.Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 Figure 3-3: Different subpanels on the internal support P2.Cross-section verifications . Its contribution is therefore taken into account in the cross-section resistance.2. Figure 3-4: Cross-section at the end support C0.1.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 82 .

011 cm² Atslr = nlr Aslr = 92.825 f yw fyf = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tf = 40 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) εf = f ydw = f ydf = 235 N / mm ² = 0.36 m² sur = 130 mm slr = 130 mm cur = 60 mm clr = 60 mm beff = 6 m beff nur = = 46.2.816 cm² Acur = cur beff = 0.5 cm φur = 16 mm φlr = 16 mm Aatf = ttf btf = 0.2 Material properties Structural steel fyw = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tf = 19 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) εw = 235 N / mm ² = 0.107 m² Asur = 2 π dur 4 = 2.32 m e = 32.Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 General properties of the twin-girder bridge in cross-section C0 Main areas of the different parts of the composite section L1 = 50 m a = 8.23 m² Aclr = clr beff = 0.333 m h = 2400 mm tw = 19 mm btf = 800 mm bbf = 1000 mm tf = 40 mm hw = h − 2tf = 2.95 m² (see notation and Figure 3-4) nlr = beff slr = 46.816 cm² Aslr = 2 π dlr 4 = 2.011 cm² Atsur = nur Asur = 92.36 m² Ac = ebeff = Acur + Aclur + Aclr = 1.1.044 m² Aabf = tbf bbf = 0.154 3.154 sur Aclur = ( e − cur − clr ) beff = 1.Cross-section verifications .032 m² Aaw = tw hw = 0.825 f yf f yw γM0 f yf = 345 N/mm² = 345 N/mm² γM0 Ea = 210000 N/mm² 83 .04 m² Aa = Aatf + Aaw + Aabf = 0.

6 84 .COMBRI Design Manual .Part I EN 1994-2. Classification of composite sections without concrete encasement A steel compression flange that is restrained from buckling by effective attachment to a concrete flange by shear connectors may be assumed to be in Class 1 if the spacing of connectors is in accordance with 6.2(1). 6.5. EN 1994-2.5.6. 5.5.

734 N/mm2 Es = Ea = 210000 N/mm² 3.1.Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 Concrete fck = 35 N/mm² f cd = γc f ck = 23.333 m: x = 8.4 Determination of the cross-section class • • • Bottom flange is in tension: no buckling problem Top flange is composite and connected to the slab following the recommendations of EN 1994-2.163 Ecm 34077 Reinforcement fsk = 500 N/mm² f sd = γs f sk = 434.3 Internal forces and moments The internal forces and moments in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32): MEd = 26.8 MN 85 .333 N/mm² Ecm = 34077 N/mm² n= Ea 210000 = = 6.208 MN o Design plastic resistance of the structural steel bottom flange: N abf = Aabf γM0 = 13.675 MN o Design plastic resistance of the structural steel top flange: N atf = Aatf f yf γM0 f yw = 11.Cross-section verifications .333 m) VEd = 3.156 MNm (at the end of the panel a = 8.2.85. 6. Ac γc f ck = 38. the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as: o Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression: N c = 0.977 MN (at the support C0: x = 0 m) 3.2.6: Class 1 To classify the steel web.04 MN o Design plastic resistance of the structural steel web: N aw = Aaw γM0 f yf = 15.1.

Rd : a) there is full interaction between structural steel.Part I Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under positive moment MPl. where fcd is the design cylinder compressive strength of concrete. Alternatively. constant over the whole depth between the plastic neutral axis and the most compressed fibre of the concrete.2(1). reinforcement in compression in a concrete slab may be neglected.2. reinforcement. Typical plastic stress distributions are shown in Figure 6. d) the effective area of concrete in compression resists a stress of 0.1.Rd of a composite cross-section (1) The following assumptions should be made in the calculation of Mpl. c) the effective areas of longitudinal reinforcement in tension and in compression are stressed to their design yield strength fsd in tension or compression.2. and concrete.COMBRI Design Manual . Figure 6.Rd RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Naw + Natf + Nc Nabf + Naw ≥ Naft + Nc and Nabf < Naw + Natf + Nc Na ≥ Nc and Nabf + Naw < Natf + Nc Na ≥ Ncur + Nclur and Na < Nc Na + Nsl ≥ Ncur and Na+ Nsl < Ncur + Nclur Na+ Nsl + Nsu < Ncur PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the web PNA in the top flange PNA in the slab under lower reinforcements PNA in the slab between reinforcements PNA in the slab above upper reinforcements EN 1994-2. b) the effective area of the structural steel member is stressed to its design yield strength fyd in tension or compression.2: Examples of plastic stress distributions for a composite beam with a solid slab and full shear connection in sagging and hogging bending 86 . 6. Plastic resistance moment Mpl.85 fcd.

5.85beff f cd As the PNA is located in the top flange.715 MN.14 MN o Design plastic resistance of the lower steel reinforcements: N sl = Atslr γs f sk = 4.85.1. MEd = 26.Cross-section verifications .395 MN o Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located under lower reinforcements: N clr = 0.2.1.035 MN o Location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA): Na = 40.597 MNm Reinforcement in compression in the concrete slab is neglected according EN 1994-2.2.048 MN o Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located above upper reinforcements: N cur = 0.1 Bending resistance check The design plastic resistance moment is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mpl.2.Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 Design plastic resistance of the structural steel: N a = N atf + N aw + N abf = 40. Thus.1.675 MN and Nabf + Naw = 29.85.035 MN o Design plastic resistance of the upper steel reinforcements: N su = Atsur γs f sk = 4.85.14 MN o Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located between reinforcements: N clur = 0.156 MNm ≤ Mpl. Aclr γc f ck = 7.048 MN ≥ Nc = 38.Rd = 57. the PNA is deduced to be located in the top flange at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fibre of the bottom flange.5 Plastic section analysis 3. Acur γc f ck = 7. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA: z pl = h − e − Na = 2. 3.597 MNm ⇒ Bending resistance is verified! 87 . 6.008 MN< Natf + Nc = 49. the whole web is in tension and therefore in Class 1.Rd = 57.2(1). Aclur γc f ck = 24.398 m 0. Conclusion: the cross-section at the external support C0 and C3 is in class 1 and is checked by a plastic section analysis.

H and box sections. f y [ N / mm 2 ] ε for an unstiffened web. Rd ≤ η f yw 3γ M 1 hwtw (5. tw is the web thickness.2(1). Design Resistance For unstiffened or stiffened webs the design resistance for shear should be taken as: Vb . where ε = .2) and the contribution from the flanges Vbf. assuming the plate supported and free to rotate at its four edges: • • • 88 using Kloppel und Sheer charts using EBPlate software using the Annex A of EN 1993-1-5 as follows . Rd = Vbw. Rd + Vbf .Part I EN 1993-1-5. or η 31 EN 1994-2-5. 6.COMBRI Design Manual . load parallel to web : AV = η ∑ ( hwtw ) where hw is the depth of the web.2.4. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 (5. Rd = Av f y 3γ M 0 where Av is the shear area.6. Resistance to vertical shear EN 1993-1-5.2.1) in which the contribution from the web is given by: Vbw. 5. should 72 η be checked for resistance to shear buckling and should be provided with transverse stiffeners at 235 the supports. (3) The shear area Av may be taken as follows: d) for welded I. 5. EN 1993-1-5. Comments on the assessment of kτ: kτ is the critical coefficient giving the critical shear stress of the plate through the relation: τcr = kτ σE with: σE = π 2 E t2 12 (1 − ν 2 ) b 2 kτ an be assessed by several ways.1(2) Plates with hw/t greater than ε kτ for a stiffened web.Rd is according to 5. 6.2. Shear (2) In the absence of torsion the design plastic shear resistance is given by: V pl .

kτ st = 0 because there is no longitudinal stiffeners a hw = 3. η tw The maximum design shear resistance is given by VRd = min (Vb. are assumed to be rigid (to be checked by using Section 9 of EN1993-1-5).Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 Figure 3-5: Design Plastic resistance moment at external support C0.Rd) where Vb .2.1. In this example.592 ≥ 1 ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5. Rd + Vbf .578 MN ⎟ 3γ M 1 ⎠ V pl .536 MN where η = 1. Longitudinal stiffeners are not considered.34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st = 5.679 then the web should be checked in terms of shear buckling. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ + cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f . The web is stiffened at supports. A beam stiffened by vertical stiffeners only at its supports should be considered as having an unstiffened web to apply this previous criterion.2 Shear resistance check The web should be checked in terms of shear buckling if: • • hw 72 > ε w for an unstiffened web tw η hw 31 > ε w kτ for a stiffened web tw η The stiffening considered here above is provided by intermediate stiffeners.a .105 > ε w kτ = 50. They are equally spaced by a = 8. Rd = Vbw. the web is stiffened by intermediate vertical stiffeners.Rd.2 for steel grades up to and including S460 89 . Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ηf h t ⎟ ≤ yw w w = 9.333 m.5.a. Comments: The vertical stiffeners at the bracing transverse frames which border the webpanel adjacent to the support C0 and located in span C0-P1. 3. Vpl.65 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 hw 31 = 122. Rd = η f yw 3γ M 0 hwtw = 10.Cross-section verifications .

34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw ≥ 1 ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 4 + 5. Isl is the sum of the stiffness of the individual stiffeners. 5. For webs with two or more longitudinal stiffeners. see Figure 5. Annex A3.3: Web with transverse and longitudinal stiffeners EN 1993-1-5. not necessarily equally spaced.3(3) (3) The slenderness parameter λw may be taken as follows (for transverse stiffeners at supports and intermediate transverse or longitudinal stiffeners or both): λw = hw 37.34 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw < 1 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 2 where ⎛h ⎞ kτ st = 9 ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ 2 4 ⎛ I sl ⎞ ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎝ t hw ⎠ 3 but not less than kτ st = 2. Isl is the second moment of area of the longitudinal stiffener about the z-axis.3 (b). Figure 5. 5.COMBRI Design Manual . Shear buckling coefficients (1) For plates with rigid transverse stiffeners and without longitudinal stiffeners or with more than two longitudinal stiffeners. the factor χw for the contribution of the web to the shear buckling resistance should be obtained from Table 5.3).3(1) (1) For webs with transverse stiffeners at supports only and for webs with either intermediate transverse stiffeners or longitudinal stiffeners or both.1: Contribution from the web χw to shear buckling resistance 90 . the shear buckling coefficient kτ can be obtained as follows: ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5.Part I EN 1993-1-5. Table 5.1.4twε w kτ EN 1993-1-5.1 ⎛ I sl ⎞ 3 ⎜ ⎟ t ⎝ hw ⎠ a is the distance between transverse stiffeners (see Figure 5.

579 ( 0. The formulae for calculating Vbf. ⎛ 1. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 hw λw = ⇒ 37. Contribution from flanges (1) When the flange resistance is not completely utilized in resisting the bending moment (MEd ≤ Mf.6b f t 2 f yf f c = a ⎜ 0.Rd should be used with the lower steel flange properties.4twε w kτ = 1.25 + 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 91 . Rd b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .37 = 0. Rd b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .8) bf and tf are taken for the flange which provides the least axial resistance.7 + λw ) Vbw.625 MN Contribution from the flanges Vbf.Cross-section verifications . bf being taken as not larger than 15·ε·tf on each side of the web.k γM0 = is the moment of resistance of the cross-section consisting of the area of the effective composite flanges only.4(1). EN 1993-1-5. The lower flange of the cross-section is a structural steel section whereas its upper flange is a composite section (structural steel + concrete slab + eventually reinforcing steel bars). the contribution from the flanges should be obtained as follows: Vbf .Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 Contribution of the web Vbw. M f . Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ bf and tf are taken for the flange which provides the least axial resistance. bf being taken as not larger than 15εtf on each side of the web.08 χw = 1. 5.Rd). Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 4.Rd Vbw.Rd Vbf . Rd = M f . Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (5.664 ≥ 1.

5.6 and 5. Rd ⎥ M Pl .2. If η3 is more than 0.5 should be met.COMBRI Design Manual . Rd ⎤ 2 ⎥ [ 2η3 − 1] ≤ 1 for η1 ≥ M pl . the design resistance to bending moment and axial force need not be reduced to allow for the shear force. 92 .1(1) the design plastic resistance to bending of the effective composite section excluding the steel web should be used. Rd Vbw. Rd In addition the requirements in sections 4. Action effects should include global second order effects of members where relevant.Rd is the design plastic resistance of the cross-section consisting of the effective area of the flanges and the fully effective web irrespective of its section class.Rd RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Naw + Natf + Nc Nabf + Naw ≥ Naft + Nc and Nabf < Naw + Natf + Nc Na ≥ Nc and Nabf + Naw < Natf + Nc Na ≥ Ncur + Nclur and Na < Nc Na + Nsl ≥ Ncur and Na+ Nsl < Ncur + Nclur Na+ Nsl + Nsu < Ncur PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the web PNA in the top flange PNA in the slab under lower reinforcements PNA in the slab between reinforcements PNA in the slab above upper reinforcements EN 1993-1-5.1(1). Mpl. Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under positive moment MPl. 7. Interaction between shear force. Rd M f .Rd is the design plastic moment of resistance of the section consisting of the effective area of the flanges. η3 = Ed M Pl .Rd in EN 1993-1-5. 7. 6.2. η1 = M Ed V . Rd ⎦ (7.5(2) (2) For the calculation of Mf.5 the combined effects of bending and shear in the web of an I or box-girder should satisfy: η1 + ⎢1 − ⎢ ⎣ ⎡ M f .Part I EN 1994-2.1) where Mf. bending moment and axial force (1) Provided that η3 (see below) does not exceed 0.

93 . Vpl.Rd. there is no interaction.5 VRd = 2. Ed = 0.25m ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .beff f cd = 2. 10.2.Rd of the cross-section consisting of the flanges only (structural steel flange + concrete slab + eventually reinforcing steel bars) should be first calculated. Rd = Vbw.85. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA: z pl = h + e − N abf + N atf + N sl 0. Then flanges of the steel girder take the bending moment and web of the steel beam takes shear force.Rd is negligible compared to contribution from the web.746.704 MNm.746 MN Cross section verification The verification should be performed as follows: VEd = 3.Rd.875 MN < Ncur+ Nclur = 31.3 M-V-interaction VEd = 3.Rd is calculated as Mpl.Rd so that according to EN 1993-1-5.746 MN ≤ η f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 9.121 = 4.1(1).Twin-girder bridge at the end support C0 The design plastic bending resistance Mf. 7.977 MN ≤ VRd = 4.Rd = 38. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ = 0. Rd + Vbf .875 MN ≥ Ncur = 7.a.121 MN ⎟ ⎠ The contribution of the flanges Vbf.Rd neglecting the web contribution. Vb .6b f t 2 f yf f c = a ⎜ 0.25 + 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎝ Vbf .Rd) = min(4.373 MN Therefore the M-V-interaction should be checked. Rd ⎞ ⎟ = 2.676 ≤ 1 . ⎛ 1.535 MN Thus the PNA is deduced to be located in the concrete slab between reinforcements at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange.536) = 4. the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined (by using the same definition than in Paragraph 3. Rd = 4. To calculate Mf. ⇒ There is no interaction.838 ≤ 1 VRd η3 = ⇒ Shear resistance is verified! 3. M Ed V = 0. Rd MEd < Mf.1.4) as: Nabf + Natf + Nsl = 28.482 m The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mf.Cross-section verifications .86 ≤ 1 M f . Mf.578 MN VRd = min (Vb.746 MN VEd = 0. Rd Vbw.1.14 MN and Nabf + Natf + Nsl = 28. It means that the flanges are enough to resist alone the bending moment so that the entire web can be used for the resistance to the shear force.977 MN ≥ 0.5.625 + 0. Then the contribution of the flanges may be neglected.2.

Further explanations on the shear resistance check See Paragraph 3.2.1.2. page 89ff. page 87f.1.5. 94 .COMBRI Design Manual .2. Further explanations on the bending resistance check See Paragraph 3.Part I Further explanations on the determination of the cross-section class See Paragraph 3.4.2.5.1.1. page 91f.

1.1 Geometry The geometry is the same as for the check of cross-section at external support C0 (see Paragraph 3.016 ≥ 1⇒ Vbf.2.5.314 MNm ≤ Mpl.3 Check of cross-section at mid-span C0-P1 3. 3.1.) At mid-span C0-P1 at ULS the concrete slab is in compression over its whole height. Vbw.3.3.1. MEd = 39.5.314 MNm (at a distance of 25 m of the external support C0: x = 25 m) VEd = 1. Rd = 0 MN ≤ M f .2.2. maximum values of internal forces acting on this panel are used to check it.1. Mpl. The effective width of the slab is the same as for the check of cross-section at external support C0 (see Paragraph 3. 3.1.Rd does not change: Mpl.1.3.1.597 MNm ⇒ Bending resistance is verified! 3.2 Material properties See Paragraph 3.2.952 MN (at a distance of 20 m of the external support C0: x = 20 m) The check is realised on the third panel located at mid-span CO-P1 (see Figure 3-2).1.704 MN ⇒ η f yw hwtw M Ed = 9.1.3.5 Plastic section analysis 3.3.1. In a safe way. as Vbf.1 Bending resistance check As the geometry of the section at mid-span C0-P1 is the same as in C0. Rd = 38.625 MN On the contrary.3.Rd = 57.Cross-section verifications .1.2.2 Shear resistance check As the geometry of the section at mid-span C0-P1 is the same as in C0. 3.1).1. 6.3.Rd = 57.1.1.) Conclusion: the cross-section at mid-span C0-P1 and P2-C3 is in class 1 and is checked by a plastic section analysis. Rd 3γ M 1 95 .2.597 MNm Reinforcement in compression in the concrete slab is neglected according to EN 1994-2.3 Internal forces and moments The bending moment and shear force in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32): MEd = 39. Rd is a function of MEd and because MEd changes: Mf. ⇒ beff = 6 m 3.4 Determination of the cross-section class The Class of section is the same as for the check of cross-section at external support C0 (see Paragraph 3. Rd = 4.Twin-girder bridge at mid-span C0-P1 3.1.2(1). Rd does not change: Vbw.578 MN = 1. Its contribution is therefore taken into account in the cross-section resistance.

2. 96 . page 93.3.COMBRI Design Manual .Part I Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3.5.1.

3.1.625 MN Cross-section verification The verification should be performed as follows: VEd = 1. see Section 3.3 M-V-interaction VEd = 1.1 Geometry At mid-span P1-P2 at ULS the concrete slab is almost in compression over its whole height. Figure 3-6: Cross-section at mid-span P1-P2.625 MN is verified.Twin-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 Then: VRd = Vbw.318 MN ⇒ There is no need to check the M-V-interaction. 3. The values in bold are the values which only change compared to the check of the cross-section at external support C0.1.952 MN ≤ VRd = min (4.422 ≤ 1 VRd η3 = ⇒ Shear resistance is verified! 3.1.5·VRd = 2.2.4. Its contribution is therefore taken into account in the cross-section resistance.952 MN ≤ 0.Cross-section verifications . 97 . Rd = 4.536) = 4.625.4 Check of cross-section at mid-span P1-P2 3. VEd = 0.5.1. 10.

Part I 98 .COMBRI Design Manual .

011 cm² e = 32.5 cm φur = 16 mm φlr = 16 mm sur = 130 mm slr = 130 mm cur = 60 mm clr = 60 mm beff = 6 m Atsur = nur Asur = 92.Twin-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 General properties of the twin-girder bridge in cross-section P1-P2 L2 = 60 m a = 7.36 m² Aclur = ( e − cur − clr ) beff = 1.36 m² = 46.Cross-section verifications .816 cm² Acur = cur beff = 0.95 cm² (see notation and Figure 3-6) 3.4.825 f yw fyf = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tf = 35 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) εf = f ydw = f ydf = 235 N / mm² = 0.1.154 nur = nlr = beff sur beff slr Ac = ebeff = Acur + Aclur + Aclr = 1.044 m² Aabf = tbf bbf = 0.107 m² Asur = 2 π dur h = 2400 mm tw = 19 mm btf = 800 mm bbf = 1000 mm tf = 35 mm hw = h − 2tf = 2.011 cm² Atslr = nlr Aslr = 92.825 f yf f yw γM0 f yf = 345 N/mm² = 345 N/mm² γM0 Ea = 210000 N/mm² 99 .2 Material properties Structural steel fyw = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tf = 19 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) εw = 235 N / mm² = 0.816 cm² Aslr = 2 π dlr 4 = 2.23 m² Aclr = clr beff = 0.028 m² Aaw = tw hw = 0.33 m 4 = 2.035 m² Aa = Aatf + Aaw + Aabf = 0.154 = 46.5 m Principle areas of the different part of the composite section Aatf = ttf btf = 0.

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

Further explanations on the determination of the cross-section class

See Paragraph 3.1.2.4, page 91f.

100

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2

Concrete

See Paragraph 3.1.2.2.
Reinforcement

See Paragraph 3.1.2.2.

3.1.4.3 Internal forces and moments
The internal forces and moments in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32):
MEd = 30.17 MNm (at mid-span of the second span L2 panel: x = 80 m) VEd = 2.152 MN (at a distance a = 7.5 m of the mid-span of the second span L2: x = 87.5 m)

3.1.4.4 Determination of the cross-section class
• • • Bottom flange is in tension: Class 1 Top flange is composite and connected to the slab following the recommendations of EN 19942, 6.6: Class 1 To classify the steel web, the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as:
o

Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located above upper reinforcements of the slab:
N cur = 0.85. Acur

γc

f ck

= 7.14 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located between upper and lower reinforcements of the slab:
N clur = 0.85. Aclur

γc

f ck

= 24.395 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression located under lower reinforcements of the slab: N clr = 0.85. Aclr

γc

f ck

= 7.4 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the concrete in compression:

N c = N cur + N clur + N clr = 38.675 MN
o

Design plastic resistance of the total upper reinforcements: N sur = Atsur f sd = 4.035 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the total lower reinforcements:

N slr = Atslr f sd = 4.035 MN
o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel top flange: N atf = Aatf f yf

γM0
f yw

= 9.66 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel web: N aw = Aaw

γM0

= 15.273 MN
101

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under positive moment MPl,Rd

RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Naw + Natf + Nc Nabf + Naw ≥ Naft + Nc and Nabf < Naw + Natf + Nc Na ≥ Nc and Nabf + Naw < Natf + Nc Na ≥ Ncur + Nclur and Na < Nc Na + Nsl ≥ Ncur and Na+ Nsl < Ncur + Nclur Na+ Nsl + Nsu < Ncur

PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the web PNA in the top flange PNA in the slab under lower reinforcements PNA in the slab between reinforcements PNA in the slab above upper reinforcements

Further explanations on the bending resistance check

See Paragraph 3.1.2.5.1, page 87f.

Further explanations on the shear resistance check

See Paragraph 3.1.2.5.2, page 89ff.

102

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel bottom flange: N abf = Aabf f yf

γM0

= 12.075 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel : N a = N atf + N aw + N abf = 37.008 MN

o

Location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA): Na = 37.008 MN ≥ Ncur + Nclur = 31.535 MN and Na = 37.008 MN < Nc = 38.675 MN Thus, the PNA is deduced to be located in the slab in the lower reinforcements at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA: z pl = h + e − Na = 2.414 m 0.85beff f cd

As the PNA is located in the slab below lower reinforcement, the whole web is in tension and therefore in Class 1.
Conclusion: the cross-section at the mid-span P1-P2 is in class 1 and is checked by a plastic section analysis.

3.1.4.5 Plastic section analysis
3.1.4.5.1 Bending resistance check

The design plastic resistance moment is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mpl,Rd = 53.532 MNm Reinforcement in compression in the concrete slab is neglected according EN 1994-2, 6.2.1.2(1). MEd = 30.17 MNm ≤ Mpl,Rd = 53.532 MNm ⇒
Bending resistance is verified!

3.1.4.5.2 Shear resistance check

The web should be checked in terms of shear buckling if:
hw 72 > ε w for unstiffened web tw η

hw 31 > ε w kτ for stiffened web tw η In this case, the web is stiffened by vertical stiffeners. hw 31 = 122.632 > ε w kt = 51.019 then the web should be checked in terms of shear buckling. η tw The maximum design shear resistance is given by: VRd = min (Vb,Rd; Vpl,a,Rd)

103

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

104

Rd = Vbw.333 m. the PNA is deduced to be located in the concrete slab between reinforcements at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 4. kτ st = 0 because there is no longitudinal stiffeners a hw = 3.77 MN< Ncur+ Nclur = 31.58 ( 0. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 b f t f f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed ⎜1 − ⎜ + cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .2 for steel grades up to and including S460 Contribution of the web Vbw.Twin-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 where Vb . Rd + Vbf . Rd = η f yw 3γ M 0 hwtw = 10. To calculate Mf. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA: 105 .7 + λw ) Vbw. Rd b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .Rd of the cross-section consisting of the flanges only should be first calculated.77 MN ≥ Ncur = 7.Rd Vbf .4twε w kτ = 1.14 MN and Nabf + Natf + Nsl = 25.66 ≥ 1.4) as: Nabf + Natf + Nsl = 25. bf being taken as not larger than 15εtf on each side of the web. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 The vertical stiffeners at the bracing transverse frames which border the webpanel located in span P1– P2.653 MN Contribution from the flanges Vbf.2.Rd but neglecting the web contribution. The design plastic bending resistance Mf. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ bf and tf are taken for the flange which provides the least axial resistance.Rd should be used with the lower steel flange properties.1.37 = 0.219 ≥ 1 ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5.Rd is calculated as Mpl. The lower flange of the cross-section is a structural steel section whereas its upper flange is a composite section (structural steel + concrete). Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ηf h t ⎟ ≤ yw w w = 9.726 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 λw = ⇒ hw 37.Cross-section verifications .a .535 MN Thus. the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined (by using the same definition than in Paragraph 3.62 MN ⎟ 3γ M 1 ⎠ V pl .34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st = 5.582 MN where η = 1. Mf.Rd Vbw. are assumed to be rigid (to be checked by using Section 9 of EN 1993-1-5). The formulae for calculating Vbf. They are equally spaced by a = 8.Rd.08 χw = 1.

3.2.5. page 93.COMBRI Design Manual .1. 106 .Part I Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3.

Rd = 34.688 MN Cross-section verification The verification should be performed as follows: VEd = 2. at each side of the internal support P2.281 MNm ⎛ 1. 107 .688 MN VEd = 0.5 Check of cross-section at the internal support P2 Two vertical stiffeners are added to reduce the length a of each webpanel located at each side of the interal support P2.Geometry At internal support P2 at ULS the concrete slab is in tension over its whole height.25 + 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎝ Vbf .152 MN ≤ 0.035MN ⎟ ⎠ The contribution Vbf. Vb .344 MN ⇒ There is no need to check the M-V-interaction.667 + 0.Rd) = min(4. According to Figure 3-3. NOTE: Here a subpanel denotes a longitudinally unstiffened webpanel which is only bordered by flanges and transverse stiffeners on each side. Its contribution is therefore neglected in the cross-section resistance.Rd. 10.508 m The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mf.1. 2 and 3. Rd = Vbw.5.459 ≤ 1 VRd η3 = ⇒ Shear resistance is verified! 3.1 Subpanel 1 .035 = 4.688 MN VRd = min (Vb.582) = 4.5.beff f cd = 2.989 m ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f . 3. Vpl. Rd = 4. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ = 0. Rd + V f .6b f t 2 f yf f c = a ⎜ 0.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 z pl = h + e − N abf + N atf + N sl 0. these two vertical stiffeners divide the panel in three parts: denoted subpanel 1. 3. Rd ⎞ ⎟ = 1.3 M-V-interaction VEd = 2.152 MN ≤ VRd = 4.Cross-section verifications .1.4.5 VRd = 2.Rd of the flanges is negligible.85.688.a.1.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 108 .

154 (see notation and Figure 3-7) 109 .21 m e = 32.997 cm² Aslr = 2 π dlr 4 = 2.011 cm² Atslr = nlr Aslr = 92.Cross-section verifications .36 m² Aclur = ( e − cur − clr ) beff = 1.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 Figure 3-7: Cross-section at the internal support P2.5 m h = 2400 mm tw = 19 mm btf = 800 mm bbf = 1000 mm tf = 95 mm hw = h − 2tf = 2.076 m² Aaw = tw hw = 0.142 cm² Atsur = nur Asur = 144.154 = 46.213 m² Asur = 2 π dur 4 = 3.23 m² Aclr = clr beff = 0.042 m² Aabf = tbf bbf = 0.36 m² Ac = ebeff = Acur + Aclur + Aclr = 1. L2 = 60 m a = 1.95 cm² nur = nlr = beff sur beff slr = 46. General properties of the twin-girder bridge in cross-section P2 Main areas of the different parts of the composite section L1 = L3 =50 m.816 cm² Acur = cur beff = 0.5 cm φur = 20 mm φlr = 16 mm sur = 130 mm slr = 130 mm cur = 60 mm clr = 60 mm beff = 6 m Aatf = ttf btf = 0.095 m² Aa = Aatf + Aaw + Aabf = 0.

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

EN 1993-1-1, Table 5.2 (sheet 2 of 3), Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts

110

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2

3.1.5.2 Subpanel 1 - Material properties
Structural steel

fyw = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tf = 19 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4)

εw =

235 N / mm ² = 0.825 f yw

fyf = 315 N/mm² because 80 mm < tf = 95 mm ≤ 100 mm (see Table 2-4)

εf =
f ydw = f ydf =

235 N / mm ² = 0.825 f yf
f yw

γM0
f yf

= 345 N/mm² = 315 N/mm²

γM0

Ea = 210000 N/mm²
Concrete

See Paragraph 3.1.2.2.
Reinforcement

See Paragraph 3.1.2.2.

3.1.5.3 Subpanel 1 - Internal forces and moments
The internal forces and moments in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32):
MEd = 65.44 MNm (at the internal support P2: x = 110 m) VEd = 6.087 MN (at the internal support P2: x = 110 m) The maximum value of bending moment and shear force is in the internal support P2 (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32). Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32 are not perfectly symmetric.

3.1.5.4 Subpanel 1 - Determination of the cross-section class
• •

The top flange is in tension: Class 1 The bottom flange is in compression :
cbf tf = bbf − tw

2t f

= 5.163 ≤ 9ε = 7.774 therefore in Class 1

The web is in tension in its upper part and in compression in its lower part. To classify the steel web, the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as follows:
o

Design plastic resistance of total reinforcements of the slab:
N su + N sl = ( Atsur + Atslr )

γs

f sk

= 10.339 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel top flange:

111

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under negative moment MPl,Rd

RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Naw + Natf + Nsl + Nsu Nabf + Naw ≥ Natf + Nsl + Nsu and Nabf < Naw + Natf + Nsl + Nsu Na ≥ Nsl + Nsu and Nabf + Naw < Natf + Nsl + Nsu Nsl + Nsu > Na

PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the web PNA in the top flange PNA in the slab

EN 1993-1-1, Table 5.2 (sheet 1 of 3), Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts

112

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2

N atf = Aatf
o

f yf

γM0

= 23.94 MN

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel webassumed to be entirely in compression:
N aw = Aaw f yw

γM0
f yf

= 14.487 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel bottom flange:
N abf = Aabf

γM0

= 29.925 MN

o

Design plastic resistance of the structural steel :
N a = N atf + N aw + N abf = 68.352 MN

o

Location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) : Nabf + Naw = 44.412 MN ≥ Natf + Nsl + Nsu = 34.279 MN and Nabf = 29.925 MN < Naw + Natf + Nsl + Nsu = 48.766 MN Thus, the PNA is deduced to be located in the steel web at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA:
z pl =

2hbtf f yf + N su + N sl - N a 2btf f yf

= 1.532 m

More than half the web height is in compression:

α=

( z pl − t f )
hw

= 0.65 > 0.5

Therefore the limiting slenderness between Class 2 and Class 3 is given by:
cw hw 456ε w = 50.492 = = 116.316 >> 13α − 1 tw tw
The steel web is at least in Class 3 and reasoning is now based on the elastic stress distribution at ULS given by the global analysis which taken into account the history of the construction (erection phasing: see Paragraph 2.1.4):

σ abfu = -276.93 N/mm² σ atfl = 265.58 N/mm²
And the elastic stress disrtibution at ULS:

ψw =

σ atfl −266.71 = = -1.043 ≤ 1 σ abfu 265.58

Therefore the limiting slenderness between Class 3 and Class 4 is given by:

cw hw = = 116.316 > 62ε (1 − ψ w ) −ψ w = 106.737 tw tw
It is deduced that the steel web is in Class 4.
Conclusion: the cross-section at the internal support P1 and P2 is in Class 4 and is checked by a elastic section analysis.
113

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

EN 1993-1-5, 4.6(3)

(3) The plate buckling verification of the panel should be carried out for the stress resultants at a distance 0.4a or 0.5b, whichever is the smallest, from the panel end where the stresses are the greater. In this case the gross sectional resistance needs to be checked at the end of the panel.

EN 1993-1-5, 4.4, Plate elements without longitudinal stiffeners

(1) The effectivep areas of flat compression elements should be obtained using Table 4.1 for internal elements and Table 4.2 for outstand elements. The effectivep area of the compression zone of a plate with the gross cross-sectional area Ac should be obtained from: Ac,eff = ρ Ac where ρ is the reduction factor for plate buckling. (2) The reduction factor ρ may be taken as follows:

(4.1)

internal compression elements:

ρ = 1,0 ρ=

for λ p ≤ 0,673 for λ p > 0,673, where (3 + ψ) ≥ 0

λ p − 0,055(3 + ψ ) ≤1 λ p2

outstand compression elements:

ρ = 1,0 ρ= λ p − 0,188 ≤1 λ p2
fy

for λ p ≤ 0,748 for λ p > 0,748

where λ p =

σ cr

=

b /t 28, 4ε kσ

ψ is the stress ratio determined in accordance with 4.4(3) and 4.4(4)
b is the appropriate width to be taken as follows (for definitions, see Table 5.2 of EN 1993-1-1) bw for webs; b for internal flange elements (except RHS); b - 3 t for flanges of RHS; c for outstand flanges; h for equal-leg angles; h for unequal-leg angles; kσ is the buckling factor corresponding to the stress ratio ψ and boundary conditions. For long plates kσ is given in Table 4.1 or Table 4.2 as appropriate;

114

4ε kσ 28.1.eff = Aatf + Aabf + ( hweff + hw − hs + t f ) tw = 0.971 m (1 −ψ w ) Then the effective height of the web in compression can be calculated: hweff = And this effective height of the web can be distributed as show in Table 4.58 MPa ψw = σ atfl = -1. 4.388 m hwe 2 = 0.1 of EN 1993-1-5: hwe1 = 0. 4ε f kσ bf λ pbf = ⇒ = = 0. The full bottom flange is effective. 4.5.043 ≤ 1 σ abfu 2 kσ w = 5.993 > 0. there is a reduction of the height of the steel web λ p2 ρ w hw = 0.6hweff = 0.583 m Final mechanical properties of the effective structural steel twin-girder section (only flanges and web) The effective cross-sectional properties can be calculated: Aa.Elastic section analysis 3. 4ε kσ 2t f 28.4hweff = 0. 4.1 of EN 1993-1-5.1 Bending resistance check The section is in Class 4 so that its effective cross-section under bending moment has to be calculated according to section EN 1993-1-5.21 m² 115 .673 28.953 (see Table 4.98 (1 − ψ ) = 24. Bottom flange in compression kσ bf = 0.5.1.055(3 + ψ w ) = 0.4. 4ε w kσ w hw tw ρw = λ p − 0.93 MPa σ abfu = 265.5.5 Subpanel 1 .Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 3. Web in bending Stresses at the end of the web are given by global analysis: σ atfl = -276.43 (see Table 4.4: outstand elements) bbf − tw b /t 28.4: internal compression elements) λ pw = ⇒ b /t = = 0.748 ρbf = 1 there is no reduction of the width of the bottom flange.2 of EN 1993-1-5.321 ≤ 0.898.Cross-section verifications .

Internal compression elements 116 . Table 4.COMBRI Design Manual .4.4. Table 4. 4.2.1.Part I EN 1993-1-5. Outstand compression elements EN 1993-1-5. 4.

233 m² The effective elastic neutral axis (ENA) must be determinated from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange: ⎞ ⎟ + Atslr ( h + clr ) + Atsur ( h + e − cur ) ⎠ h + hw − hs + t f ⎞ ⎛ h ⎞ ⎛ + hwe1tw ⎜ t f + we1 ⎟ + ( hwe 2 + hw − hs + t f ) tw ⎜ h − t f − we 2 ⎟ 2 ⎠ 2 ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ = 1.eff Aabf tf t ⎛ + Aatf ⎜ h − f 2 2 ⎝ ha.85 MPa 117 .241 m 4 2 ⎝ ⎠ 2 Final mechanical properties of the effective composite twin-girder section (structural steel and reinforcements) The effective cross-sectional properties can be calculated: Aeff = Atsur + Atslr + Aatf + Aabf + ( hweff + hw − hs + t f ) tw = 0.288 m 4 The stress in the upper reinforcement of the concrete slab is given by the global analysis: σ tsur = -185.seff − we1 − t f ⎟ 12 2 ⎝ ⎠ hwe 2 + hw − hs + 3t f ⎛ ⎞ + ( hwe 2 + hw − hs + t f ) tw ⎜ h − − ha.seff ⎟ = 0.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 The effective elastic neutral axis (ENA) must be determinated from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange: ⎞ hwe1 ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ + hwe1tw ⎜ t f + 2 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ h + hw − hs + t f ⎞ ⎛ + ( hwe 2 + hw − hs + t f ) tw ⎜ h − t f − we 2 ⎟ 2 ⎝ ⎠ = 1.seff ⎟ 12 2⎠ 12 2 ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ 2 bbf t 3 f 2 2 t h3 h ⎛ ⎞ + w we1 + hwe1tw ⎜ ha.Cross-section verifications . the effective second moment of area of the cross-section: I a.eff t f ⎞ btf t 3 tf ⎛ ⎛ ⎞ f = + Aabf ⎜ ha.seff − ⎟ + + Aatf ⎜ h − − ha.106 m = Aa.seff And it can be deduced.257 m = Aeff Aabf tf t ⎛ + Aatf ⎜ h − f 2 2 ⎝ hseff And it can be deduced. the effective second moment of area of the cross-section: I eff t f ⎞ btf t 3 tf ⎛ ⎛ ⎞ f = + Aabf ⎜ hseff − ⎟ + + Aatf ⎜ h − − hseff ⎟ 12 2⎠ 12 2 ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ 2 bbf t 3 f 2 2 t h3 h ⎛ ⎞ + w we1 + hwe1tw ⎜ hseff − we1 − t f ⎟ 12 2 ⎝ ⎠ hwe 2 + hw − hs + 3t f ⎛ ⎞ + ( hwe 2 + hw − hs + t f ) tw ⎜ h − − hseff ⎟ 2 ⎝ ⎠ + Atslr ( h + clr − hseff 2 ) 2 + Atsur ( h + e − cur − hseff ) 2 = 0.

118 .COMBRI Design Manual . NOTE: The extreme fibres may be assumed at the midplane of the flanges for ULS checks. its resistance should be based on an elastic distribution of strains across the cross-section. For fatigue see EN 1993-1-9. 6. Compressive stresses should be limited to the yield strength at the extreme fibres.2.1. Table 4.1(9).Part I EN1993-1-1. Internal compression elements (9) Where all the compression parts of a cross-section are Class 3.

Ed = M Ed − M c . Ed ( h − hseff ) I eff = |-297.216 MNm Then.674| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434.eff I eff I eff + M c . Ed ( h + clr − hseff ) = |-159.873| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434. Ed (h − t f − ha.511 N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm² = 268. f ydw ) = 315 N/mm² σ atfueff = σ tslreff = σ tsureff = M a .945 ≤ 1 The cross-section at subpanel 1 on the internal support P2 is therefore checked for bending at ULS. Ed ( h − ha. Ed (ha.224 MNm The bending moment taken by the structural steel twin-girder section (only flanges and web): M a .Cross-section verifications . f ydw ) = 315 N/mm² σ atfleff = M a . Ed (hseff − t f ) I eff ≤ min ( f ydf . the stress on each level of the cross-section can be easily determinated: σ abfleff = σ abfueff = − M a . Ed (h − t f − hseff ) I eff = -274. Ed hseff I eff + = 291.44 + 38.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 Final mechanical properties of the gross composite twin-girder cross section (structural steel and reinforcement) The cross-sectional properties can be calculated: A = Atsur + Atslr + Aatf + Aabf + Aaw = 0.237 m² The elastic neutral axis (ENA) must be determinated from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange: Aabf hs = tf t ⎛ + Aatf ⎜ h − f 2 2 ⎝ ⎞ hw ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ + Aaw ⎜ t f + ⎟ + Atslr ( h + clr ) + Atsur ( h + e − cur ) 2 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ = 1.seff I a.eff + M c .184 N/mm² − M a .eff + − M c .224 = -27. Ed ha. Ed (h + e − cur − hseff ) The bending moment resistance is governed by the resistance of the top flange: η1 = σ atfueff f ydf = 0.788| N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm² M c . the effective second moment of area of the cross-section: 2 t f ⎞ btf t 3 tf ⎛ ⎛ ⎞ t h3 h⎞ ⎛ f I= + Aabf ⎜ hs − ⎟ + + Aatf ⎜ h − − hs ⎟ + w w + Aaw ⎜ hs − ⎟ 12 2⎠ 12 2 12 2⎠ ⎝ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ bbf t 3 f + Atslr ( h + clr − hs ) + Atsur ( h + e − cur − hs ) = 0.seff ) I a.247 m A 2 2 And it can be deduced.29 m 4 2 2 The bending moment taken by the composite twin-girder section (structural steel and reinforcements): M c . 119 . Ed = -65.seff − t f ) − M c .783 N/mm² = |-186.seff ) I a.462 N/mm² ≤ min ( f ydf .eff I a.783 N/mm² M c . Ed = σ tsur I h + e − cur − hs = -38.

120 .Part I Further explanations on the shear resistance check See Paragraph 3. page 89ff.2.COMBRI Design Manual .5.1.2.

5. Rd = Vbw.5 m.1. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ + cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .Rd) where Vb . depending on the span.a .5. Vpl. The maximum design shear resistance is given by VRd = min (Vb. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ηf h t ⎟ ≤ yw w w = 9.124 MN ⎟ 3γ M 1 ⎠ V pl . are assumed to be rigid (to be checked by using Section 9 of EN 1993-1-5).Rd Vbw. Rd = η f yw 3γ M 0 hwtw = 10.33 m.a.188 then the web should be checked in terms of shear buckling.Cross-section verifications . Rd + Vbf . They are equally spaced by a = 7. the first subpanel has a length a = 1.Rd.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 The verifications are here performed with the stresses in the extreme fibres of the structural steel flanges. Remember that the use of the stresses in the mid-plan of the flanges is also allowable.2 Shear resistance check The web should be checked in terms of shear buckling if: • • hw 72 > ε w for unstiffened web tw η hw 31 > ε w kt for stiffened web tw η hw 31 = 116. η tw In this case.5 m or 8. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 The vertical stiffeners at the bracing transverse frames which border the webpanel adjacent to the support P1 and located in span P1-P2.037 MN where η = 1.Rd of the flanges only at internal support support P2. the web is stiffened by vertical stiffeners. 121 .316 > ε w kt = 84. Near the support P2. ⇒ Bending resistance is verified! 3.2 for steel grades up to and including S460 Contribution of the web Vbw. Figure 3-8: Design Plastic resistance moment Mf.

Part I 122 .COMBRI Design Manual .

692 ≤ λw = 0.94 MN Design plastic resistance of the structural steel bottom flange: N abf = Aabf γM0 = 29.Rd = 71.954 < 1.865 MN ≥ Nsu + Nsl. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA deduced: z pl = 2hbtf f yf N su + N sl − N abf − N atf 2btf f yf = 2. = 10. bf being taken as not larger than 15·ε·tf on each side of the web.314 m The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mf.34 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st = 15.Rd is calculated as Mpl. The design plastic bending resistance Mf.569 MNm 123 .679 ≤ 1 ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 4 + 5.83 η ⇒ = 0.Rd should be used with the lower steel flange properties.Cross-section verifications .925 MN < Natf + Nsu + Nsl.Rd neglecting the web contribution. Mf.339 MN Design plastic resistance of the structural steel top flange: N atf = Aatf f yf γM0 f yf = 23.08 χw = λw = 0. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 6.279 MN Thus.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 kτ st = 0 because there is no longitudinal stiffeners a hw = 0.= 34.Rd Vbf . The formulae for calculating Vbf.87 Vbw. the PNA is deduced to be located in the top flange at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange.83 hw 37. To calculate Mf. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ bf and tf are taken for the flange which provides the least axial resistance.592 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 0. Rd b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .Rd of the cross-section consisting of the flanges and the reinforcing steel should be first calculated. The lower flange of the cross-section is a structural steel section whereas its upper flange is a composite section (structural steel + reinforcing steel).4twε w kτ = 0.925 MN Nabf + Natf = 53.613 MN Contribution from the flanges Vbf.339 MN and Nabf = 29.Rd. the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as: Design plastic resistance of total reinforcements of the slab: N su + N sl = ( Atsur + Atslr ) f sk γs = 10.

6. 7.2. 7. 6. EN 1994-2.4(3) (3) For cross-sections in Class 3 and 4. For larger values VEd the weld between flanges and webs should be ( ) designed for the shear flow η f ywt ( 3γ M 1 .3.Rd in 6. Shear EN 1993-1-5.3. 9.1(2) (2) The criterion given in (1) should be verified at all sections other than those located at a distance less than hw/2 from a support with vertical stiffeners. EN 1993-1-5.2.3.5. page 93.5.COMBRI Design Manual .2.1 is applicable using the calculated stresses of the composite section.Rd in 6. EN 1993-1-5.2. Rd where VEd is the design shear force including shear from torque.5. 9. ) (2) In all other cases welds should be designed to transfer forces along and across welds making up. EN 1993-1-5.2. allowance should be made for its effect on the resistance moment.2. 124 .3.2.2. whichever is the smaller. EN 1994-2.Part I EN 1993-1-5. 5.2. Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3. Welds (1) The web to flange welds may be designed for the nominal shear flow VEd / hw if VEd does not exceed χ w f yw hwt 3γ M 1 .1.2 or Vb. Verification (1) The verification should be performed as follows: η3 = VEd ≤1 Vb .4(1) (1) Where the vertical shear force VEd exceeds half the shear resistance VRd given by Vpl.

621 = 7. MEd ≤ Mf.Rd so that according to EN 1993-1-5.Rd) = min(7. Rd + Vbf .234.Rd is not negligible compared to contribution from the web and represents 8.234 MN η3 = ⇒ VEd = 0.a.1 (1).Rd.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 ⎛ 1. Rd VEd = 0.841 ≤ 1 VRd Shear resistance is verified! 3.1.Cross-section verifications .3 M-V-interaction VEd = 6. there is no interaction. Rd = Vbw.6 % of the design shear buckling resistance.25 + 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎝ Vbf .893 ≤ 1 Vbw. ⇒ There is no interaction.234 MN ≤ η f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 9.44 MNm ≤ Mf. Rd = 6.037) = 7.234 MN The following checks should also be performed: • • The web to flange weld should be designed for the shear stress per unit length of η f yw γ M1 3 tw .234. Vb .545 m ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f . The flanges are not completely used for resisting to bending moment (i. 125 .e.5. It means that the flanges are enough to resist alone the bending moment so that the entire web can be used for the resistance to the shear force.037) = 7.613 +0.569 MNm Cross-section verification The verification should be performed as follows: VEd = 6.5. Rd = 71.5 VRd = 3.621 MN ⎟ ⎠ In this case. 7. Rd ⎝ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ = 0. Then flanges of the steel girder take the bending moment and web of the steel beam takes shear force.087 MN ≤ VRd = min (7. the contribution of the flanges Vbf. Rd MEd < Mf.6b f t 2 f yf f c = a ⎜ 0. 10.124 MN VRd = min (Vb. Rd ⎞ ⎟ = 0. 10.617 MN Therefore the M-V-interaction should be checked. M Ed = 0. Vpl.087 MN ≥ 0. Rd which is verified in the example: MEd = 65.914 ≤ 1 M f . The tranverse stiffeners along the webpanel edges (and possibly the longitudinal stiffeners) should act as rigid end post.

5.1.5. and Paragraph 3.1. Further explanations on the bending resistance check See Paragraph 3.1. 126 .Part I Further explanations on the determination of the cross-section class See Paragraph 3.4.COMBRI Design Manual .5.1. page 87f.1. page 121ff. page 117ff.5.2.

0. As the geometry of the cross-section does not change compared to subpanel 1.4·a .5.105) = 1 m Then the value of the bending moment becomes: MEd (min(0.181 N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm² = 238.5 m) VEd = 5.4a .5b)) = 53. 0. The material properties of the cross-section of the subpanel 2 are identical to the material properties of the cross-section of the subpanel 1.eff + − M c .seff ) I a.1 Bending resistance check The plate buckling verification of the panel should be carried out for the stress resultants at a distance 0.1. f ydw ) = 315 N/mm² σ atfleff = M a .2.132| N/mm² ≤ min ( f ydf .5. Ed (hseff − t f ) I eff ≤ min ( f ydf .5·b: min(0.1. Ed (h − t f − hseff ) I eff = |-243.4.1.Elastic section analysis 3.5. 1. Ed (h − t f − ha.Material properties See Paragraph 3.4·a or 0.Cross-section verifications .222 MNm (at the internal support P2: x = 111.eff + M c .Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 3. 3.Internal forces and moments The internal forces and moments in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32): MEd = 58. f ydw ) = 315 N/mm² σ atfueff = M a .843 MN (at the internal support P2: x = 111.1) At internal support P2 at ULS the concrete slab is in tension over its whole height.5.7 Subpanel 2 .1.10 Subpanel 2 .5 m) 3.seff I a. Ed (ha.1.Geometry Follow the same procedure as for subpanel 1 (see Paragraph 3.5.1.835| N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm² 127 . Ed ( h − ha.10.Determination of the cross-section class See Paragraph 3.5·b) = min(1 .5.1.eff + M c .5.659 MNm The stress on each level of the cross-section can be easily determined: σ abfleff = σ abfueff = − M a . the cross-section class is the same for subpanel 2. Ed ( h − hseff ) I eff = |-263.seff − t f ) − M c .8 Subpanel 2 . 3.9 Subpanel 2 .5.seff ) I a. Ed ha. Its contribution is therefore neglected in the cross-section resistance.1. The geometry of the cross-section of the subpanel 2 is totaly the same as the geometry of the crosssection of the subpanel 1. Only the length of the panel change (a = 2.1.6 Subpanel 2 . Ed hseff I eff + = 259.5.478 N/mm² − M a .eff I a.5 m) 3.

2.Part I Further explanations on the shear resistance check See Paragraph 3.2. 128 .1.COMBRI Design Manual . page 89ff.5.

035 so that the check is necessary.Rd Vbw.783 N/mm² M c . Rd = 10. Near the support P2. Rd = = 5.Cross-section verifications .838 ≤ 1 Bending resistance is verified! 3.a.687 ( 0.783 N/mm² = |-170.221 MN 129 . η tw The maximum design shear resistance is given by# VRd = min (Vb.08 ⇒ χw = 1.141| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434.Rd) where Vb . Ed (h + e − cur − hseff ) The bending moment resistance is governed by the resistance of the top flange: η1 = ⇒ σ atfueff f ydf = 0. Rd = χ w f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 The vertical stiffeners at the bracing transverse frames which border the webpanel adjacent to the support P2 and located in span P1-P2.a .Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 σ tslreff = σ tsureff = M c .124 MN where η = 1. kτ st = 0 because there is no longitudinal stiffeners a hw = 1.037 MN η f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 9.2 for steel grades up to and including S460 Contribution of the web Vbw. Rd = Vbw.295 ≥ 1.7 + λw ) Vbw.1.378| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434.2 Shear resistance check The web should be checked in terms of shear buckling if: hw 31 = 116. are assumed to be rigid (to be checked by using Section 9 of EN 1993-1-5).4twε w kτ = 1. Vpl.10.37 = 0.316 > ε w kt = 62. Ed ( h + clr − hseff ) I eff I eff = |-145. Rd ≤ V pl .466 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 λw = hw 37.Rd.34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st = 8.5 m. the second subpanel has a length a = 2.131 ≥ 1 ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5. They are equally spaced by a = 7.5. Rd + Vbf .5 m.

COMBRI Design Manual .3.Part I Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3.5.5.5.1.2.1. page 93 and Paragraph 3. page 131. 130 .3.

Rd = 71.222 MNm ≤ Mf. Rd Vbw.Rd is not negligible compared to the contribution from the web and represents 12.037) = 5. Rd = 71.Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2 Contribution from the flanges Vbf.99. Only the length of the panel change (a = 4.124) = 5. Rd + Vbf .1.99.5.Rd.25 + ⎟ = 0.5.814 ≤ 1 . ⇒ There is no interaction. Rd which is verified in the example: MEd = 58.1 (1). It means that the flanges are enough to resist alone the bending moment so that the entire web can be used for the resistance to the shear force.e.10.Rd The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA (see Paragraph 3. Rd ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ In this case. Rd = 5. = 0. there is no interaction.Rd so that according to EN 1993-1-5.909 m 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 2 b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed ⎞ ⎞ f ⎜1 − ⎜ Vbf .333 m) 131 .843 MN ≤ VRd = min (5. Rd = Vbw. 9.Geometry Follow the same procedure as for sup-panel 1 (see Paragraph 3.5. Vb .1. The geometry of the cross-section of the subpanel 3 is totaly the same as the geometry of the crosssection of the subpanel 1. 10. Its contribution is therefore neglected in the cross-section resistance.1.1.99 MN The flanges are not completely used to resist the bending moment (i.3 M-V-interaction VEd = 5. Then flanges of the steel girder take the bending moment and web of the steel beam takes shear force. 3. Vpl.124 MN VRd = min (Vb.995 MN Therefore the M-V-interaction should be checked.769 = 5.569 MNm Cross-section verification The verification should be performed as follows: VEd = 5. MEd ≤ Mf.8 % of the design shear buckling resistance.843 MN ≥ 0. M Ed VEd = 0.11 Subpanel 3 . 7. the contribution of the flanges Vbf.975 ≤ 1 VRd η3 = ⇒ Shear resistance is verified! 3.975 ≤ 1 M f .99 MN ≤ η f yw hwtw 3γ M 1 = 9.99 MN VEd = 0.6b f t 2 f yf ⎞ f c = a ⎜ 0.5 VRd = 2.5.Rd) = min(5.5.2): Mf.1) At internal support P2 at ULS the concrete slab is in tension over its whole height.a. Rd = ⎟ ⎟ = 0. Rd MEd < Mf.221 + 0.769 MN cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f .569 MNm ⎛ 1.Cross-section verifications .

1.5.Part I Further explanations on the determination of the cross-section class See Paragraph 3.5.1.4. and Paragraph 3.COMBRI Design Manual .1. 132 .1.5.1. Further explanations on the bending resistance check See Paragraph 3. page 121ff.2. page 87f. page 117ff.5.

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2

3.1.5.12 Subpanel 3 - Material properties
See Paragraph 3.1.5.2. The material properties of the cross-section of the subpanel 3 are identical to the material properties of the cross-section of the subpanel 1.

3.1.5.13 Subpanel 3 - Internal forces and moments
The internal forces and moments in this cross-section are (see Figure 2-31 and Figure 2-32):
MEd = 47.188 MNm (at the internal support P2: x = 114 m) VEd = 5.435 MN (at the internal support P2: x = 114 m)

3.1.5.14 Subpanel 3 - Determination of the cross-section class
See Paragraph 3.1.5.4. As the geometry of the cross-section does not change compared to subpanel 1, the cross-section class is the same for subpanel 3.

3.1.5.15 Subpanel 3 - Elastic section analysis
3.1.5.15.1 Bending resistance check

The plate buckling verification of the panel should be carried out for the stress resultants at a distance 0.4·a or 0.5·b: min(0.4·a ; 0.5·b) = min(1.733 ; 1.105) = 1.105 m Then the value of the bending moment becomes: MEd (min(0.4a ; 0.5b)) = 42.707 MNm The stress on each level of the cross-section can be easily determinated:
− M a , Ed ha.seff I a.eff I a.eff − M c , Ed hseff I eff +

σ abfleff = σ abfueff =

+

= 209.739 N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm² = 193.052 N/mm²

− M a , Ed (ha.seff − t f )

− M c , Ed (hseff − t f ) I eff

≤ min ( f ydf ; f ydw ) = 315 N/mm²

σ atfleff =

M a , Ed (h − t f − ha.seff ) I a.eff

+

M c , Ed (h − t f − hseff ) I eff

= |-195.141| N/mm²

≤ min ( f ydf ; f ydw ) = 315 N/mm²

σ atfueff = σ tslreff = σ tsureff =

M a , Ed ( h − ha.seff ) I a.eff I eff I eff

+

M c , Ed ( h − hseff ) I eff

= |-211.828| N/mm² ≤ f ydf = 315 N/mm²

M c , Ed ( h + clr − hseff )

= |-123.815| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434.783 N/mm² = |-144.905| N/mm² ≤ f sd = 434.783 N/mm²

M c , Ed (h + e − cur − hseff )

The bending moment resistance is governed by the resistance of the top flange:

η1 =

σ atfueff
f ydf

= 0.672 ≤ 1

Bending resistance is verified!
133

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

Further explanations on the shear resistance check

See Paragraph 3.1.2.5.2, page 89ff.

134

Cross-section verifications - Twin-girder bridge at the internal support P2

3.1.5.15.2 Shear resistance check

The web should be checked in terms of shear buckling if:
hw 31 = 116.316 > ε w kt = 53.856 then the web should be checked in terms of shear buckling. η tw

The maximum design shear resistance is given by
VRd = min (Vb,Rd; Vpl,a,Rd)

where Vb , Rd = Vbw, Rd + Vbf , Rd ≤
V pl ,a , Rd =

η f yw hwtw
3γ M 1

= 9.124 MN

η f yw
3γ M 0

hwtw = 10.037 MN

where η = 1.2 for steel grades up to and including S460
Contribution of the web Vbw,Rd
kτ st = 0 because there is no longitudinal stiffeners a hw = 1.961 ≥ 1
⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5.34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st = 6.381 ⎝ a ⎠
2

λw =

hw 37.4twε w kτ

= 1.492 ≥ 1.08

⇒ χw =

1.37 = 0.625 ( 0.7 + λw )

Vbw, Rd = = 4.753 MN

Contribution from the flanges Vbf,Rd

The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA (see Paragraph 3.1.5.5.2): Mf, Rd = 71.569 MNm
⎛ 1.6b f t 2 f yf f c = a ⎜ 0.25 + 2 ⎜ thw f yw ⎝
Vbf , Rd

⎞ ⎟ = 1.576 m ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠
2

b f t 2 f yf ⎛ ⎛ M Ed f ⎜1 − ⎜ = cγ M 1 ⎜ ⎜ M f , Rd ⎝ ⎝

⎞ ⎟ = 0.742 MN ⎟ ⎠

The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA: Mf,Rd = 71.569 MNm In this case, the contribution of the flanges Vbf,Rd is not negligible compared to contribution from the web and represent 13.5 % of the design shear buckling resistance.
Vb , Rd = Vbw, Rd + Vbf , Rd = 4.753 + 0.742 = 5.494 MN ≤

η f yw hwtw
3γ M 1

= 9.124 MN

VRd = min (Vb,Rd; Vpl,a,Rd) = min(5.494; 10.037) = 5.494 MN
135

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

Further explanations on the M-V-interaction

See Paragraph 3.1.2.5.3, page 93 and Paragraph 3.1.5.5.3, page 131.

136

Cross-section verifications - Box-girder bridge

The flanges are not completely used for resisting to bending moment (i.e. MEd ≤ Mf, Rd which is verified in the example: MEd = 47.188 MNm ≤ Mf, Rd = 71.569 MNm
Cross-section verification

The verification should be performed as follows:
VEd = 5.435 MN ≤ VRd = min (5.494; 10.037) = 5.494 MN
VEd = 0.989 ≤ 1 VRd

η3 =

Therefore the cross-section at support P2 is checked under shear force.
3.1.5.15.3 M-V-interaction

VEd = 5.435 MN ≥ 0.5 VRd = 2.747 MN

Therefore the M-V-interaction should be checked.
VEd M Ed VEd = 0.659 ≤ 1 ; = 1.106 ≥ 1 ; = 0.989 ≤ 1 Vb. Rd M f , Rd Vbw, Rd

MEd < Mf,Rd so that according to EN 1993-1-5, 7.1 (1), there is no interaction. It means that the flanges are enough to resist alone the bending moment so that the entire web can be used for the resistance to the shear force.

Thus, the flanges of the steel girder take the bending moment and web of the steel beam takes shear force.

There is no interaction.

3.2 Box-girder bridge
3.2.1 General
According to the shape of the bending moment and shear force diagrams at ULS (see Figure 2-36 and Figure 2-37), the two different critical sections to check are displayed in Figure 3-9:
• •

At mid-span P1-P2, see Section 3.2.2 At the internal support P3, see Section 3.2.3
P1-P2 P3
P2 120.00 m 120.00 m P3 120.00 m P4 90.00 m C5

C0 90.00 m

P1

Figure 3-9: Checked sections of the box-girder bridge.

For each critical section, the verification is done on a panel which is located between two vertical stiffeners.

137

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 138 .

075 m² Aaw = tw hw = 0.525 cm² Ac = tslab bslab = 6.525 cm² Aslr = 2 π dlr 4 = 2.Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 3. Figure 3-10: Cross-section of the box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2.5 m (see notation and Figure 3-10) 139 .2.tf − t p ) cos(θ w ) tw = 18 mm bp = 6500 mm tp = 25 mm tslab = 32.2 Check of cross-section at mid-span P1-P2 3.w + b2. General properties of the box-girder bridge in cross-section P1-P2 Main areas of the different parts of the composite section L1 = L2 = 120 m a=4m h=4m hw = Aatf = ttf btf = 0. Its contribution is therefore taken into account in the cross-section resistance.Cross-section verifications .011 cm² Atsur = nur Asur = 332.5 cm φur = 16 mm φlr = 16 mm 4 = 2.763 m Aabf = t p bp = 0.086 m² Ast .w = 2hst .451 cm2 = 4.w = 184.st .v.wtst .1 Geometry At mid-span P1-P2. at ULS the concrete slab is almost in compression over its whole height.2.987 m2 sur = 130 mm slr = 130 mm cur = 60 mm clr = 60 mm bslab = 21.011 cm² Atslr = nlr Aslr = 332.wtst .2.163 m² Asur = 2 π dur (h − tt .

Part I 140 .COMBRI Design Manual .

163 34077 Ecm Reinforcement fsk = 500 N/mm² f sd = γs f sk = 434.2 Material properties Structural steel fy (tw) = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tw = 18 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (tw ) = 235 N / mm ² = 0.w ) = f y (tst . = 355 N/mm² γM0 = 335 N/mm².2.3 Internal forces and moments The internal forces and moments are obtained from the design model at ULS based on the cracked global analysis (see Section 2.825 f y (t p ) fy (ttf) = 335 N/mm² because 40 mm < ttf = 50 mm ≤ 63 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (ttf ) = 235 N / mm ² = 0.825 f y (tw ) fy (tp) = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tp = 25 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (t p ) = 235 N / mm ² = 0. they are as follows for the whole box section (see Figure 2-36 and Figure 2-37): 141 .Cross-section verifications .w = 15 mm ≤ 16 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (tst .w ) = f yd (tw ) = f yd (ttf ) = 235 N / mm ² = 0.w ) f y (tw ) γM0 f y (ttf ) = 345 N/mm².814 f y (tst .2) and.333 N/mm² Ecm = 34077 N/mm² n= Ea 210000 = = 6.2.w ) γM0 Ea = 210000 N/mm² Concrete fck = 35 N/mm² f cd = γc f ck = 23.4. considering the construction steps.2.Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 3. f yd (t p ) = f y (t p ) γM0 = 345 N/mm². f yd (tst .838 f y (ttf ) fy (tst.2.734 N/mm2 Es = Ea = 210000 N/mm² 3.w) = 315 N/mm² because tst.2.6.

Part I Further explanations on the determination of the cross-section class See Paragraph 3. page 117ff.5.1.COMBRI Design Manual .4. 142 .

967 MN ⎣ ⎦ ( ) • Design plastic resistance of the 2 webs N a. proj = 2 12 − bp ) = 0.697 MN = 5.bf = nst ⎡tst f yd (tst .02 1 1 ⎞ 2 ⎛ 1 + 6 ⋅⎜ κ − ⎟ + 1.Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 MEd = 2·150.6 ⋅ κ otherwise if 0.394 MN VEd = 3.158 MN ⎣ ⎦ 143 . Shear lag parameters: A sl α° 0 := 1+ 2 b0 ⋅ t p = 1.Cross-section verifications .5 Determination of the cross-section class The web is in tension in its upper part and in tension in its lower part.2.2.7 L2= 84 m b0 = bp/2 = 3.4 Reduction due to shear lag effect Verification if shear lag effect has to be taken into account: Bridge span: Effective length: Considered width: ⇒ L1 = 120 m and L2 = 120 m Le = 0.411 MNm = 300.509° where θ w = a tan( 2h 3.25 m b0 < Le/50 requirement not fulfilled! Shear lag effect has to be taken into account.602 =34.2.297 κ := α° 0 ⋅ = 0. it is a Class 1 element.2. the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as follows: • Design plastic resistance of the bottom flange κ N a.989 κ 3.h f yd (tw ) ⎤ = 59.w = 2 ⎡( h − ttf − t p )tw.6 ⋅κ 2500 ⋅ κ ⎠ ⎝ 1 8. To classify the steel web.w )(b2 + 2b3 ) + t p f yd (t p )(b1 + bsub ) ⎤ + t p f yd (t p )(0.273 MN in each steel web by taking its inclination into account 2cos(θ w ) i.05 Le β ult := b0 1 if κ ≤ 0. V Ed .822 MNm for the whole cross-section VEd = 2·2. As the upper flange is perfectly connected to the slab.2m + bsub ) β ult = 95.02 < κ ≤ 0.e.795 β ult = 0.7 β ult = 0.

2.Part I Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under positive moment MPl. 144 .5. page 87f.1. Further explanations on the shear resistance check See Paragraph 3.1.2. page 89ff.COMBRI Design Manual .5.1.2.Rd RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Naw + Natf + Nc Nabf + Naw ≥ Naft + Nc and Nabf < Naw + Natf + Nc Na ≥ Nc and Nabf + Naw < Natf + Nc Nc > Nabf + Naw + Natf PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the web PNA in the top flange PNA in the slab Further explanations on the bending resistance check See Paragraph 3.

2.5): ⎛ tp ⎞ ( h − ttf + t p ) ⎞ + N ⎛ h + tslab − z ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ M pl .223 m ≤ b1.585 MN • Location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) Nabf + Naw + Natf = 206.1.2.2.2(1).Rd = 524.7.w = 0.2. MEd = 300. the PNA is deduced to be located in the top flange at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange.bf − N a.044 MNm Bending resistance is verified! 3.w ⎜ z pl − c⎜ pl ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ 2⎠ 2 2 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ + ( h − z pl ) 2 2 btf f yd (ttf ) + ( h − t f − z pl ) 2 2 = 524.tf 4btf f yd (ttf ) = 3.st .1 Shear in the box-girder webs The box-girder web is transversally stiffened on both sides at mid-span P1-P2 (aw = 4 m).967 m Thus. Conclusion: the cross-section at mid-span P1-P2 is in Class 1 and is checked by a plastic section analysis.158 MN • Design plastic resistance of the concrete slab in compression N a.tf = 0.2.tf = 2btf ttf f yd (ttf ) = 59.234 MN < Nc + Natf = 188.044 MNm btf f yd (ttf ) Reinforcement in compression in the concrete slab is neglected according EN 1994-2.2.2. Figure 5.bf ⎜ z pl − ⎟ + N a. Stiffened webpanel To evaluate the shear buckling coefficient of the stiffened webpanel. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA gives: z pl = 4hbtf f yd (ttf ) + N c − N a.835 MN Thus.85tslab bslab f cd = 138. Rd = N a.7 Shear resistance verification 3.2.w − N a. the whole web is in tension.822 MNm < Mpl.Cross-section verifications .585 MN and Nabf + Naw = 156. 6.484 MN ≥ Nc = 138.Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 • Design plastic resistance of the 2 structural steel top flange 1 N a.25 m 2 The elastic neutral axis of the web stiffener with the width 15ε ( tw ) tw on both sides of the stiffener is: 145 .3: 15ε ( tw ) tw = 0.6 Bending resistance verification The design plastic resistance moment is calculated from the position of the PNA (see Paragraph 3. the second moment of area of the longitudinal stiffener must be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5. 3.2.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 146 .

the shear bspw 2.wtst .w t ⎞ ⎛h +t ⎞ ⎛ 2hst .384 MPa with σ E = 2 π 2 Ea t w = 2.w + 4 ⋅ 15ε ( tw ) tw The second moment of area of the web stiffener is: ⎡ t h3 ⎤ h 2 I st . the two web subpanels must be also checked.sp ⎛ bw. the shear buckling coefficient is: hw 6.383 = = 264.617 > η 18 tw Thus.w = b2.w 12 2 ⎣ ⎦ = 9.w.st .w ( st .st .w + tst .984 ≥ 1.w − zst .84 ≤ 3.wtst .34 + 4 ⎜ ⎟ = 6. 2 3 = 29.287 The transverse stiffeners of the bracings frames bordering the webpanel close to mid-span P1-P2 are assumed to be rigid. The reduced slenderness of the stiffened webpanel: hw 37. the reduced slenderness can be calculated by another way which gives the same results. as the aspect ratio is α w = w = = 1. w 3 tw hw α 2 w + 2.w − zst . hw 4763 31 ε (tw ) kτ . the stiffened webpanel must be checked against shear buckling.w hst . as there is only one stiffener in the web and the aspect ratio is a α w = w = 0.w ⎜ hst .w ⎜ st .w = 115.w λw = = 1.sp ⎞ = 5.wtst .4twε (tw ) kτ .584 NOTE: Alternatively.1 + I sl . the two webs subpanels have the same width and the same reduced slenderness. As the longitudinal stiffeners is located at the middle of the height of the web.3 + 0.584 Web subpanels It is possible that one or both of the two web subpanels are more critical than the stiffened webpanel.wσ E = 79. The elastic critical shear buckling stress is given by: τ cr = kτ .016 buckling coefficient is: kτ .w ) 2 + 2 ⎢ st . Annex 3(2).w = I sl .wtst .wtst .18 kτ .w (hst .v.v.w ) 2 ⎥ + 4 ⋅ 15ε (tw )twtw zst .w = 4.Cross-section verifications .711 MPa 2 12 (1 − ν 2 ) hw ⇒ λw = f y (t w ) τ cr 3 = 1. Thus.w st .Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 zst .w 3 tw hw I sl .w + b2. a 4 According to EN 1993-1-5.w w ⎟ + b2. Annex 3(1).v.158m 2 2hst .st .w + w ⎟ 2 2⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ = = 0.829·10-4 m4 According to EN 1993-1-5.356 ⎝ aw ⎠ 2 147 .

Rd is the design elastic shear resistance calculated using (4) and (5).Part I EN 1993-1-1.5. 148 .Rd as given in (2). Shear (1) The design value of the shear force VEd at each cross-section should satisfy: VEd ≤ 1. For elastic design Vc. For plastic design Vc. 5. Rd where VEd is the design shear force including shear from torque.Rd is the design plastic shear resistance Vpl.Rd is the design shear resistance. Rd = Av f y / 3 ( ) γM0 (6. 6. 0 Vc .17) where Vc. EN 1993-1-5.18) where Av is the shear area. Verification (1) The verification should be performed as follows: η3 = VEd ≤1 Vb .6.2.COMBRI Design Manual . (2) In the absence of torsion the design plastic shear resistance is given by: V pl . Rd (6.

Box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 bw.545MPa 2 Stw The shear force in the web due to torque is: VEd .a.8.845 MNm (see Figure 2-35).sp = = 1.Rd.a .Rd = Vbw.493MN VEd 3.sp 37.37 = 0.325 ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ (12 + 6. Vpl.w. The area inside the median line of the cross-section of the box-girder bridge is: S= (b + b ) ⎛ h + t 2 ⎜ t p slab ⎝ 2 0.733 MN Thus.Cross-section verifications . the web subpanels must be checked against shear buckling.Rd neglecting the flange contribution to the resistance: ⎛ χ w f y (tw )hwtw η f y (tw )hwtw ⎞ . Vbw.T .08 ≤ λw .w = 53.sp ) = 1. it is the stiffened webpanel which is critical: λw = max(λw .015 > ε (tw ) kτ .312 Shear resistance is verified! Addition of torsional effect The maximum torque on the box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2 is equal to MT = 1.6 ( 0. web tw hw = 0.sp tw = 31 2016 = 112. web = MT = 8.774 MNm = 11. The reduced slenderness of the web subpanel: bw.351 < 1 VRd 9. the reduction factor is: χw = 1. Rd = so that η3 = η f y (tw )hwtw 3γ M 0 = 20.584 As the webpanel close to mid-span P1-P2 is assumed to be rigid and 1.312 MN ⎜ 3γ M 1 3γ M 1 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ V pl .T .503 m2 2 The shear stress in the web is given by the Bredt formula: τ Ed .273 = = 0.5 ) ⎜ 4 + ⎟ 2 ⎠ ⎠= ⎝ = 38. λw.35.4twε (tw ) kτ . Rd = min ⎜ ⎟ = 9.T .439 Shear resistance verification Thus.754 18 η Thus. the verification of shear including torsional effects gives: 149 . web = τ Ed .Rd) with Vb.sp λw.7 + λw ) The maximum design value of the shear resistance is given by VRd = min (Vb.

2.1.Part I Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3.COMBRI Design Manual .3. 150 . page 93.5.

733 = 0.1btf .126 m² Aaw = tw hw = 0.2 btf .3 Check of cross-section at the internal support P3 3.5 m h=4m (h − tt .w = 184.3. Figure 3-11: Cross-section of the box-girder bridge at the internal support P3.2.43 < 1 9.142 cm² 151 .122 m² = 4.1 Geometry As the concrete slab is in tension around the internal support P3.tf .43 ≤ 0.5 cm 4 = 3.wtst .5 Vbw.2.tf .1 = ttf .2.451 cm2 Aabf = t p bp = 0. 3.Cross-section verifications .2 = ttf .2 = 0.273 + 0.8 Interaction between bending moment and shear force η3 = ⇒ VEd = 0.312 Shear resistance inluding shear from torque is verified! 3.v.488 m² Asur = 2 π dur tw = 27 mm bp = 6500 mm tp = 75 mm tslab = 32.wtst . the strength is not taken into account for checking the cross-section.1 = 0. web VRd = 3.533 m hw = Ast .w + b2. Rd There is no need to check the M-V-interaction.15 m² Aatf .2 − t p ) cos(θ w ) Aatf .2.w = 2hst .1 − tt . Only the longitudinal slab reinforcement is considered.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 η3 = VEd + VT . General properties of the box-girder bridge in cross-section P3 Main areas of the different parts of the composite section L1 = L2 = 120 m a = 2.st .

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 152 .

2 ) = f y (ttf .Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 General properties of the box-girder bridge in cross-section P3 Main areas of the different parts of the composite section φur = 20 mm φlr = 16 mm sur = 130 mm slr = 130 mm cur = 60 mm clr = 60 mm bslab = 21.1 ) γM0 = 315 N/mm² f yd (ttf .1 ) = = 355 N/mm² f y (ttf .2.Cross-section verifications .85 f y (t p ) fy (ttf.864 f y (ttf .w ) γM0 Ea = 210000 N/mm² Concrete See Paragraph 3.825 f y (tw ) fy (tp) = 325 N/mm² because 63 mm < tp = 75 mm ≤ 80 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (t p ) = 235 N / mm² = 0.w) = 355 N/mm² because tst.w ) f y (tw ) γM0 γM0 = 345 N/mm².2) = 315 N/mm² because 80 mm < ttf.2.525 cm² Ac = tslab bslab = 6.864 f y (ttf .2.w ) = f y (tst .987 m2 (see notation and Figure 3-11) 3.3.011 cm² Atslr = nlr Aslr = 332.5 m Atsur = nur Asur = 519.1) = 315 N/mm² because 80 mm < ttf.2 Material properties Structural steel fy (tw) = 345 N/mm² because 16 mm < tw = 27 mm ≤ 40 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (tw ) = 235 N / mm² = 0.2 = 90 mm ≤ 100 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (ttf .571 cm² Aslr = 2 π dlr 4 = 2.1 ) fy (ttf.2 ) = 315 N/mm². f yd (t p ) = f y (t p ) γM0 = 325 N/mm².814 f y (tst .2 ) = 235 N / mm² = 0.2 153 .1 ) = 235 N / mm² = 0.2.w = 15 mm ≤ 16 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (tst .2 ) fy (tst. f yd (ttf .w ) = f yd (tw ) = 235 N / mm² = 0. f yd (tst .2 Reinforcement See Paragraph 3.1 = 100 mm ≤ 100 mm (see Table 2-4) ε (ttf .2.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 154 .

1 ⎣ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ( ) ( ) ( ( ) ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Sna = 3..081 ⋅ m 3 155 . Ed = M Ed − M c .Ed = -418.2 − tp h − ttf.2 ⋅⎜ h − ttf.598 MPa The bending moment Mc.778 MNm for the cross-section VEd = 2·16.1 − ⎟⎥ .re inf = -144.1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ⎟ + btf.2 − tp ⋅ tw.617 MN = 33.889 MNm = -739.124 MNm Thus. the bending moment MEd is the sum of the moment Ma.e...h ⋅ + Ast.re inf I tot h + tslab − cur − zna = -321. proj = 2 VEd = 20.Cross-section verifications .Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 3.124 MNm applied to the box section (structural steel part only) as long as it behaves as a pure structural steel structure (before the concreting step of the slab segment which includes the studied box section) and of the bending moment Mc.1 + btf.1 ⋅ ttf.w⎤ .(-321. considering the construction steps.4.w ⋅ ⎥ .532 m 2 • First moment of area Sna := Atsur ⋅ h + tslab − c ur + Atslr ⋅ h + c lr .2.602 = 34....654 MNm The bending moment Ma applied to the structural steel is: M a .165 MN in each steel web by taking its inclination into account 2cos(θ w ) 12 − bp where θ w = a tan( ) = 0.1 − ttf. Ed = -739..4 Mechanical properties of the gross cross-section The mechanical properties of the composite box section (structural steel part and reinforcement) are: • Area Atot := Atsur + Atslr + 2 ⋅ btf.1 ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ ⎛ + 2 ⋅ ⎢btf.1 − ttf.3.Ed = -321.2 + tp⎤ ⎡ + 2 ⋅ ⎢ h − ttf.1 − ttf.1 − ttf.2) and..2 − tp ⋅ tw.h + Ast.2 ⎞⎤ ttf.2. ⎣ ⎦ + nst ⋅ ⎡tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 + tp ⋅ b1 + bsub ⎤ + bsub + 0.654 MNm applied to the composite box section (structural steel part + reinforcement).3. 2 ⎠⎦ 2 ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ h − ttf.654 MNm) = .6.234 MN for the whole cross-section i. Ed applied to the composite box section (structural steel part + reinforcement) is: M c .418.509° 2h The maximal ULS stress in the upper reinforcement in cracked behaviour (hogging moment) given by the global analysis is: σ sup. Ed = σ sup.1 ⋅ ttf.2 ⋅ ttf. they are as follows for the whole box section (see Figure 2-36 and Figure 2-37): MEd = 2·-369.2 + 2 ⋅ ⎡ h − ttf.2m ⋅ tp⎤ ⋅ zsl. 2 2 ⎣ ⎦ + ⎡nst ⋅ ⎡tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 + tp ⋅ b1 + bsub ⎤ + bsub + 0.778 MNm .2m ⋅ tp ⎣ ⎦ ( ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ) Atot = 1.2. 3. ttf.2 ⋅ttf. VEd .3 Internal forces and moments The internal forces and moments are obtained from the design model at ULS based on the cracked global analysis (see Section 2.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 156 .

2 + 2 ⋅⎢ + ( btf.1 − ttf.1 ⎜ na 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎤ ⎡b ⋅ t 3 ttf.h ⋅( h − ttf.. 2 ⎡b ⋅ t 3 t ⎞⎤ ⎢ tf.1 General In the following. Section 3.2) ⋅⎜ h − ttf.2.4925 m tst = 15 mm nst = 6 ( ≥ 3!) ap = 4.2m) ⋅tp ⋅( zna − zsl..014m 3..1 tf..1 − ttf.Cross-section verifications .3.eq b1 bsub b3 b2 hst b1 Figure 3-12: Geometry of the trapezoidal stiffeners..5 m tp = 75 mm tst tp b2 tst..5 Effective area of the bottom flange 3.5.1 − − zna⎟ . 2 ⎝ ⎠ 2 + ⎡nst ⋅⎡tst ⋅( b2 + 2⋅b3) + tp ⋅( b1 + bsub)⎤ + ( bsub + 0.2 ⋅ttf. 3.2 Plate parameters Geometry of the panel Number of stiffeners (equally spaced): Length of panel: Width of panel: Thickness of panel: Geometry of the trapezoidal stiffeners Distance between webs of stiffener: Width of stiffener flange: Height of stiffener: Thickness of stiffener: b1 = 0.1) + nst ⋅Isl.0 m bp = 6.2 − tp w.5.2.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 • Distance between the center of gravity and the lower face of the bottom flange Sna zna := = 2.2. Section 4 and Annex A.w ⋅⎜ − zna⎟ . 2 12 ⎣ ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎞ ⎛ h − ttf.011 m Atot • Second moment of area Itot := Atsur⋅ h + tslab − cur − zna + Atslr⋅ h + clr − zna .1 − ttf.2 p ⎢ + 2⋅ + tw.1 tf.1 ⎤ ⎣ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ 4 ( )2 ( )2 Itot = 5.1 tf.1 − z ⎟ ⎥ .5 m b2 = 0. the ultimate resistance of the longitudinal stiffened bottom plate is determined according to EN 1993-1-5. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 3 2 ⎤ ⎡t ⋅ ( h − t − t − t ) ⎞⎥ ⎛ h − ttf. 157 . + 2⋅ tf.3.h tf..2 tf.2 − tp) ⋅⎜ − zna⎟ .1 + ( b ⋅t ) ⋅⎛ h − tf..2 m hst = 0..2 + tp + 2 ⋅Ast..2 ⎞⎥ ⎛ tf.3.

loc = As .eff ⋅ t c (4.loc As . eff ⋅ t (4. stiffeners with gross area Asℓ located in the compression zone.4.4(2) for each subpanel.loc + ∑ bedge. eff . bc.1.COMBRI Design Manual .4 to account for local plate buckling.loc is the effectivep section areas of all the stiffeners and subpanels that are fully or partially in the compression zone except the effective parts supported by an adjacent plate element with the width bedge. eff is the sum of the effectivep sections according to 4.Part I EN 1993-1-5. (4) The area Ac. The stiffened plate with effectivep section areas for the stiffeners should be checked for global plate buckling (by modelling it as an equivalent orthotropic plate) and a reduction factor ρ should be determined for overall plate buckling.eff. (2) The effectivep section area of each subpanel should be determined by a reduction factor in accordance with 4. see Figure 4.5) where Ac.eff .6) applies to the part of the stiffened panel width that is in compression except the where ∑ c parts bedge.eff.4 of all longitudinal is the width of the compressed part of each subpanel.5.4: Stiffened plate under uniform compression NOTE: For non-uniform compression see Figure A.eff. (3) The effectivep area of the compression zone of the stiffened plate should be taken as: Ac . see example in Figure 4.1. ρloc Figure 4.loc should be obtained from: Ac .eff + ∑ ρloc ⋅ bc. 4. General (1) For plates with longitudinal stiffeners the effectivep areas from local buckling of the various subpanels between the stiffeners and the effectivep areas from the global buckling of the stiffened panel should be accounted for. eff = ρc ⋅ Ac . is the reduction factor from 4.4.eff. 158 .

000 1.2 0.68 ⋅ mm 2 3.5 m 75 mm 15 mm 15 mm 75 mm 0. Panel 1 2 3 sub b t ⎯λlocal ρlocal beff 0. t) < 0.948 1. t) := b t ⋅ 28.000 0.2 m 0.eff + bsub.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Resulting parameters Width of each subpanel: bsub := bp − nst ⋅ b1 (nst + 1) 2 = 0.eq := tst ⋅ b3 hst = 15.743 0.000 0. t) − 0.138 1.289 0.138 0.eff + 2 ⋅ b3.556 m2 ⎦ 159 .5.673 λ local( b .Cross-section verifications .eff + tp ⋅ b1.22 λ local( b .2.488 0.515 m 0.4 ⋅ ε ⋅ kσ Reduction factor for internal compression elements: ρ local( b . t) 2 otherwise Geometry of local panels and resulting effectivep width due to local buckling: Table 3-1: Resulting effectivep width of subpanels and stiffener plates.515 m ⎝ 2 ⎠ Equilvalent thickness of stiffener ⎠ web: ⎝ tst.5 m 0.5 m Width of each stiffener web: ⎛ b1 − b2 ⎞ b3 := hst + ⎜ ⎟ = 0.3 Effectivep cross-section of subpanels and stiffeners Stress distribution: ψ=1 Buckling factor for internal compression elements: kσ = 4 Slenderness of analysed plate: λ local( b .loc := nst ⋅ ⎡tst ⋅ b2. t) := 1 if λ local( b .5 0.3.5 Effective local area (without edges): Ac.eff ⎣ ( ) ( )⎤ = 0.eff.

Part I EN 1993-1-5. see Figure A.5 σ1 Ip Ap b is the second moment of area of the whole stiffened plate. NOTE4: For stiffened plates with at least three equally spaced longitudinal stiffeners the plate buckling coefficient kσ. Annex A.p (global buckling of the stiffened panel) may be approximated by: kσ . 12(1 − ν 2 ) 10.1. γ = s . where: Isℓ Ip ΣAsℓ bt 3 bt 3 is the second moment of area for bending of the plate = = .1) and (A. 2 (A. α = ≥ 0. NOTE2: σcr. is the smaller edge stress. p = with 4 (1 + γ ) (ψ + 1) (1 + δ ) ψ= σ2 ΣA I a ≥ 0.1.92 is the sum of the gross areas of the individual longitudinal stiffeners.5 .p is the elastic critical plate buckling stress at the edge of the panel where the maximum compression stress occurs. Calculation of critical stresses for stiffened plates A. alternatively charts for discretely located stiffeners may be used provided local buckling in the subpanels can be ignored and treated separately.1) NOTE1: The buckling coefficient kσ. p 2 1+α 2 +γ −1 = α 2 (ψ + 1) (1 + δ ) (( ) 2 ) if α ≤ 4 γ if α > 4 γ (A.p stiffeners smeared over the plate.COMBRI Design Manual . is the larger edge stress. is the thickness of the plate. (2) The elastic critical plate buckling stress of the equivalent orthotropic plate may be taken as: σ cr .2) should be replaced by hw. NOTE3: Where a web is of concern.2) kσ . Ap σ1 σ2 160 . is the gross area of the plate = bt. p = kσ . the width b in equations (A.1 Equivalent orthotropic plate (1) Plates with at least three longitudinal stiffeners may be treated as equivalent orthotropic plates. p ⋅ σ E π 2 ⋅ E ⋅ t2 ⎛t⎞ where σ E = = 190000⎜ ⎟ in [MPa] 2 2 12(1 − ν ) ⋅ b ⎝b⎠ is the buckling coefficient according to orthotropic plate theory with the kσ.p is obtained either from appropriate charts for smeared stiffeners or relevant computer simulations. b t is defined in Figure A. δ = s .

Cross-section verifications .732 otherwise Euler stress: σ E := 2 2 π ⋅ E ⋅ tp 2 12 ⋅ 1 − ν ⋅ bp ( ) 2 = 25.3..2.107 × 10 ⋅ mm Ap := bp ⋅ tp = 4.048 × 10 ⋅ cm 4 4 6 4 Ip := bp ⋅ t p 12 ⋅ 1 − ν ( ) = 2.561 m ⎣ ⎦ ( ) ( ) 2 3.724 δ := = 0.eq ⋅ ⎜ − zsl ⎟ + + b2 ⋅ tst ⋅ ( hst − zsl) ⎥ .674 ⋅mm 2 3 ⎡ ⎡h ⋅t ⎤ ⎤ ⎞ ⎥ tst ⋅b2 ⎛ hst st st. Isl := nst ⋅ 12 ⎣ ⎣ 12 ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦ ⎦ + bp ⋅ tp 12 3 + bp ⋅ tp ⋅ zsl 3 2 2 Isl = 1.511 × 10 ⋅ cm Asl := nst tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 = 1.875 × 10 ⋅ mm γ := 5 2 ( ) 5 2 Isl Ip Asl Ap ap bp = 41.eq 2 ⎢2 ⋅⎢ + hst ⋅ tst.5.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Gross area (without edges): Ac := nst ⋅ ⎡tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 + tp ⋅ b1 + bsub ⎤ = 0.eq ⋅ hst + ⎜ hst + Ac 3 zsl := ⎡ ( ⎣ ) ⎛ ⎝ tp − tst ⎞ 2 ⎤ ⎟ ⋅tst ⋅b2⎥ ⎠ ⎦ = 63.615 = 0.227 α := = 0.5 kσ.p := 2 ⋅⎣ 1 + α 2 ⎡( 2 )2 + γ − 1⎤ ⎦ if α ≤ 4 γ α ⋅ ( ψ + 1) ⋅ ( 1 + δ ) 4 ⋅(1 + γ ) ( ψ + 1) ⋅ ( 1 + δ ) kσ.4 Effectivep cross-section of the whole bottom flange Determination of the elastic critical plate buckling stress (global buckling) Plate parameters: nst ⋅ ⎢ hst + tp tst..p = 91.269 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 161 .

c = π 2 ⋅ E ⋅ t2 12 (1 − ν 2 ) ⋅ a 2 (4.1 . where σcr. NOTE: For calculation of σcr.loc with β A.sℓ of the stiffener closest to the panel edge with the highest compressive stress as follows: σ cr .2.c is related to the compressed edge of the plate.7). see Figure A.c may be obtained from σ cr .c may be determined from the elastic critical column buckling stress σcr. relative to the out-of-plane bending of the plate.11) β A.1. c = .c may be obtained from σ cr . Column type buckling behaviour (1) The elastic critical column buckling stress σcr.c ⋅ f y Ac .1 for stiffened plates (4.1.7) where Ac is the gross area of the compression zone of the stiffened plate except the parts of the subpanels supported by an adjacent plate. c As . c = π 2 ⋅ E ⋅ I s .1 is the gross cross-sectional area of the stiffener and the adjacent parts of the plate according to Figure A.eff.3(3).eff is the effective cross-sectional area of the stiffener and the adjacent parts of the plate with due allowance for plate buckling.1. if relevant) with due allowance made for possible plate buckling of subpanels and/or stiffeners.5. (2) For an unstiffened plate the elastic critical column buckling stress σcr. 4. Asℓ. (2) The reduction factor ρ for the equivalent orthotropic plate is obtained from 4.Part I EN 1993-1-5.c = σ cr . eff As .c of an unstiffened (see 4. p Ac (4. c f y σ cr .1.1 is defined in 4. Asℓ.1 ⋅ a 2 (4. Plate type behaviour (1) The relative plate slenderness p l of the equivalent plate is defined as: λp = β A.8) (3) For a stiffened plate σcr. 162 . see 3.3).1. Ac.1 and bc are geometric values from the stress distribution used for the extrapolation. 4. Asℓ.5) plate should be taken as the buckling stress with the supports along the longitudinal edges removed.4(2) provided⎯λp is calculated from equation (4.c = σ cr .p see Annex A. (4) The relative column slenderness⎯λc is defined as follows: […] λc = with β A.COMBRI Design Manual .5.eff .s ⋅ bc / bsl . and bsℓ.1 As . see Figure A. EN 1993-1-5.loc is the effective area of the same part of the plate (including shear lag effect.4 (to be multiplied by the shear lag factor if shear lag is relevant. NOTE: σcr.5.9) is the second moment of area of the gross cross-section of the stiffener and the where Isℓ.1 adjacent parts of the plate.3. see Figure 4.4) or stiffened (see 4.

eff.1 = 1.eq + h ⋅t ⎥ ..p := kσ.eq ⋅ hst + ⎜ hst + Asl.1 := st st..p ( ) = 0.c ⋅ fy tp σ cr.sl ⋅ tp 12 3 + b1.673 λ p − 0.eff := tst ⋅ b2.sl = 9.1 ⎟ + 12 + b2 ⋅ tst ⋅ ( hst − zsl.345 × 10 ⋅ mm ( ) ( ) 4 2 zsl.1 := ( hst + tp tst.264 × 10 ⋅ mm ( ) ( ) 4 2 Elastic critical bucking stress for an equivalent column: σ cr.p ⋅ σ E = 2.674 ⋅ mm 2 3 ⎤ ⎤ ⎡ ⎡h 3⋅t ⎞ ⎥ tst ⋅b2 ⎛ hst 2 ⎢2 ⋅⎢ st st.1 Asl.c := Ac.Cross-section verifications .sl := bsub + b1 = 1 m Asl.382 × 10 ⋅ N ⋅ mm 3 −2 163 .sl.1 ) ⎛ ⎝ tp − tst ⎞ 2 ⎟ ⋅tst ⋅b2 ⎠ = 63.loc Ac = 0.eq ⋅ ⎜ 2 − zsl.718 × 10 ⋅ mm 9 4 Effective net cross-section of stiffener: b1.22 =1 2 λp otherwise Column type buckling behaviour Effective gross-section of stiffener: b1.1) ⎣ ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ ⎦ + b1.1 2 Isl.sl := 2 π ⋅ E ⋅ Isl.eff + b1.318 × 10 ⋅ N ⋅ mm Plate type behaviour Reduction factor βA. Isl.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Elastic critical plate buckling stress of equivalent orthotropic plate: 3 −2 σ cr.eff + tp ⋅ b1.1 := tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 + tp ⋅ b1.sl.eff = 9.sl ⋅ tp ⋅ zsl.991 Relative slenderness of the equivalent plate: λ p := β A.c: β A.1 ⋅ ap 2 = 2.1.eff = 1 m Asl.eff := bsub.eff + 2 ⋅ b3.373 Reduction factor for internal compression elements: ρ p := 1 if λ p < 0.

34 (curve b) for closed section stiffeners.1(2). EN 1993-1-5.4(1). p − 1 but 0 ≤ ξ ≤ 1 σ cr .1.1.12) i= I s .5.5.1 e = max (e1.2 of EN 1993-1-1. Column type behaviour (5) The reduction factor χc should be obtained from 6. σcr. χc ρ is the reduction factor due to column buckling.3. 164 .1 As .09 ie (4. For stiffened plates its value should be increased to: αe = α + with 0.4.COMBRI Design Manual .13) σ cr . = 0.p (4. see Figure A. Interaction between plate and column buckling (1) The final reduction factor ρc should be obtained by interpolation between χc and ρ as follows: ρ c = (ρ − χ c ) ξ (1 − ξ ) + χ c where ξ = σcr.3(2) and (3). respectively.49 (curve c) for open section stiffeners. α = 0. e2) is the largest distance from the respective centroids of the plating and the one-sided stiffener (or of the centroids of either set of stiffeners when present on both sides) to the neutral axis of the effective column. 4. is the reduction factor due to plate buckling.c is the elastic critical column buckling stress according to 4. 4. see Annex A. c is the elastic critical plate buckling stress.21 corresponding to buckling curve a should be used.Part I EN 1993-1-5. see 4.3. For unstiffened plates α = 0.5.

p σ cr.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α e ⋅ λ c − 0.2 + λ c ⎣ χ c := χ c ( φ ) = 0.sl −1 ξ = 0 Final reduction factor ρc: ρ c := ρ p − χ c ⋅ ξ ⋅ ( 2 − ξ ) + χ c = 0.eq ⋅ hst + tst ⋅ b2 2 ( ( ) ) e2 := zsl.513 Reduction factor for column buckling: χ c ( φ ) := 1 if λ c < 0.c: β A.sl ( ) = 0.1 Asl.09 i e = 0.1 = 260.eq ⋅ hst + tst ⋅ b2 e1 := + − zsl.c.1 = 0.368 i := Isl.911 ( ) 2 ⎤ ⎦ = 0.991 Relative column slenderness: λ c := β A. := Asl.1 = 0.1.674 ⋅ mm e := e1 if e1 ≥ e2 e2 otherwise Imperfection factor αe: α e := α 0 + 0. ⋅ fy tp σ cr.136 m tp hst tst.c.Cross-section verifications .Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Reduction factor βA.2 1 φ + φ 2 2 otherwise − λc φ := 0.1 = 63.611 Interaction between plate and column buckling Weighting factor ξ: ξ := σ cr.127 ⋅ mm 2tst.eff Asl.911 ( ) ( ) 165 .

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 166 .

5. From the diagram the following conclusions can be drawn: 1.50 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 tp [mm] n.50 0. 2. This effect can be minimized by using EBPlate with discrete stiffeners.00 1.st = 4 n.eff ⋅ tp = 5.5.eff [m²] 1.65 0.75 0. NOTE: The parameter study has been performed with the hand-calculation formulae of EN 1993-1-5. (continous lines are not straight). From the Ac. With increasing plate thickness tp the effective area Ac. slight non-linearity of the behaviour described in 2. the characteristic value of the yield strength fy decreases.70 0. With increasing bottom plate thickness tp. nst = 3] there is no reduction due to local buckling of the bottom plate.00 Figure 3-13: Utilisation level (left ordinate) and effectivep area (right ordinate) of bottom plate in function of bottom plate thickness tp.eff-function it can be seen that by increasing the thickness tp about 8 mm the number of stiffeners can be decreased down to four stiffeners.80 0.85 0.3. Annex A.loc + bsub.00 167 .10 0.20 0.55 0.80 0.437 × 10 ⋅ mm 5 2 3. In conclusion the slenderness⎯λ increases.70 0.eff/Ac 0.30 0. curve parameter = number of stiffeners nst.Cross-section verifications .90 0.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Effectivep area of compression zone: Ac.90 0. η = Ac.2. 4. With increasing bottom plate thickness tp.60 0. Decreasing of the continous lines (utilisation level η). This would mean a benefit with regard to number of welds and amount of labour.st = 6 n.st = 3 0.st = 5 n.40 0.eff. This is due to the fact that with increasing plate thickness and with constant stiffener-geometry the stiffening effect of the stiffeners decreases.eff := ρ c ⋅ Ac. Ac. Apart from case [tp = 35.60 0. 3.eff and thus the maximum axial force in the bottom plate increases (broken lines).5 Parameter study Figure 3-13 summarises the results of the above performed design calculation for a variation of number of stiffeners nst and thickness of bottom plate tp.95 0. the critical buckling stress σp and thus the reduction factor ρc decreases.

Shear lag at the ultimate limit state NOTE3: Elastic-plastic shear lag effects allowing for limited plastic strains may be taken into account using Aeff as follows Aeff = Ac.1: Effective length Le for continuous beam and distribution of effectives width Table 3.1(2). 168 (3. 3. EN 1993-1-5. For all other cases Le should betaken as the distance between adjacent points of zero bending moment.2.1. (2) Provided adjacent spans do not differ more than 50% and any cantilever span is not larger than half theadjacent span the effective lengths Le may be determined from Figure 3.2. Effective width (1) The effectives width beff for shear lag under elastic conditions should be determined from: beff = β b0 (3.1) where the effectives factor β is given in Table 3. see 3.Part I EN 1993-1-5.1: Effectives width factor β EN 1993-1-5. Figure 3. 3. This effective width may be relevant for serviceability and fatigue limit states.1) . General (1) Shear lag in flanges may be neglected if b0 < Le/50 where b0 is taken as the flange outstand or half the width of an internal element and Le is the length between points of zero bending moment.COMBRI Design Manual .3.eff β κ ≥ Ac.1.1.1.eff β where β and κ are taken from Table 3.1. 3.

6 ⋅ κ β ult = 0. Shear lag parameters: A sl α° 0 := 1+ b0 Le 2 b0 ⋅ t p = 0.eff ⋅ b ult = 0.2 Atot.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 3.8 New mechanical properties of the cross-section The new mechanical properties of the cross-section are then calculated by replacing the gross area of the bottom flange by its effective area.6 Reduction due to shear lag effect Verification if shear lag effect has to be taken into account: Bridge span: Effective length: Considered width: ⇒ L1 = 120 m and L2 = 120 m Le = 0.3.1 − ttf.06 = 1.3.02 < κ ≤ 0. this stiffener is not considered in the bending verification.a.2 − tp ⋅ tw.eff = 1.7 Effective area of the stiffened plate Effective area of compression zone taking into account effects of plate buckling and shear lag: AeffEP := Ac. h − ttf.108 κ := α° 0 ⋅ β ult := 1 if κ ≤ 0.a.331 m 2 ( ) ( ) 169 .25 (L1 + L2)⋅120 m = 60 m b0 = bp/2 = 3.2.h + 2 btf.02 ⎞ + 1.5.2.2 ⋅ ttf.754 1 1 if 0.5.1 ⋅ ttf.7 3. The web has been stiffened by a longitudinal closed stiffener located at mid-depth due to shear verifications.2.535 m k 2 3.6 ⋅κ 2 1 + 6 ⋅⎛ κ − ⎜ ⎟ 2500 ⋅ κ ⎠ ⎝ 1 otherwise 8.1 + btf.eff := AeffEP + 2. New mechanical properties of the steel part of the box-section The new mechanical properties of the steel part (structural steel only) of the box section are: • Area: Atot.5.Cross-section verifications . For simplification reasons.25 m b0 < Le/50 requirement not fulfilled! Shear lag effect has to be taken into account.3.

Part I 170 .COMBRI Design Manual .

666 ⋅ m 3 • Distance between the center of gravity and the lower face of the bottom flange: Sa.1 ⋅ ttf.1 − ttf.2 p ⎜ 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥ 3 ⎢ t ⋅(h − t − t − t ) ⎥ tf.eff := Atot..eff • Second moment of area: 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ⎤ ttf.1 tf.na ⎟ .023 ⋅ m ( ) ( ) 3 • Distance between the center of gravity and the lower face of the bottom flange: Sna ztot..na ztot.eff := 2 ⋅ + ( btf.na := 2 ⋅ ⎢btf.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 • First moment of area: Sa.1 ⎛ ⎞⎥ tf.2 ⋅ttf.1 Itot..1 tot.1 − ⎟⎥ .h ⋅ ( h − ttf.2 + ( b ⋅t ) ⋅⎛ h − t − tf.1 New mechanical properties of the composite box-section The mechanical properties of the composite box section (structural steel part and reinforcement) are: • Area: Atot.a.eff 171 .2 − z ⎥ + 2⋅ tf.na := = 2.2 − tp) ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ + AeffEP ⋅zsl.⎥ .Cross-section verifications .na + Atsur ⋅ h + tslab − c ur + Atslr ⋅ h + c lr = 3.na ⎟ .a.eff = 4. 2 ⎠ 2 ⎠⎦ ⎝ ⎛ h − ttf.308 m 4 ( )2 + nst ⋅Isl.2 p ⎢+ w...1 ⋅ ttf.1 tf.na = 2.1 ⎢ Itot.eff + Atsur + Atslr = 1.1 − ttf.a.2 + tp ⎞ ⎤ ⎢t ⋅( h − t − t − t ) ⋅⎛ + 2 ⋅ w.134 m Atot.a.1 2 ⎝ ⎠ ⎡ ⎣ ⎛ ⎝ ttf.2 ⋅⎜ h − ttf.a...na − zsl. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 t ⎞⎤ ⎢ tf.1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡ h − ttf.h − ztot.1 − ttf..2 ⎞⎤ ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ + btf.1 Sa.2 tf.a.003 m Atot.a.a.416 m 2 • First moment of area: Sna := Sa..h ⎥ 12 ⎣ ⎦ + AeffEP ⋅ ztot.a. tf.1 tf.2 + tp ⎞ + 2 ⋅ tw.2 tf.2 ⎜ tf.na ⎟ ..1 ) ⋅ ⎜ h − − ztot.na := = 2.

COMBRI Design Manual . Maximum width-to-thickness ratios for compression parts 172 .2 (sheet 1 of 3). Table 5.Part I EN 1993-1-1.

eff = -290.681 0.2 + 2 ⋅⎢ + ( btf.h ⎥ 12 ⎣ ⎦ ( )2 + Atslr ⋅(h + c lr − ztot.2.na − t p ) I tot . 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ttf.2.1 General From the values of the bending moments Ma and Mc (see Paragraph 3..3.2 + tp ⎞ ⎤ + 2 ⋅ ⎢tw.6..Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 • Second moment of area: Itot.eff + = 328. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡ ⎛ h − ttf.1 + 2 ⋅⎢ + ( btf..na − t p ) I tot .67 + 0.2 tf.1 − ttf.2.na ⎟ .69 m 4 ( )2 + nst ⋅Isl.eff := Atsur ⋅ h + tslab − c ur − ztot.1 tf.a..6.2 − ztot .1 Itot.885 > -1 σ abfu Thus. Reasoning is based on the elastic stress distribution at ULS given by Paragraph 3.263 N/mm² σ atfl = -290.2 − tp) ⋅ ⎜ − ztot.33 ⋅ψ w tw tw It is deduced that the steel web is in Class 4.na ) I tot .. 173 .3.373 N/mm² And the elastic stress distribution at ULS: ψw = σ atfl = -0.eff M c ( h − ttf .6 Effective area of the web 3. the limiting slenderness between Class 3 and Class 4 is given by: cw hw 42ε = = 167. + AeffEP ⋅ ztot.Cross-section verifications .⎥ .2.na)2 .na − zsl.2 ) ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf.2 ⋅ ttf.3.. Thus.1 ⋅ ttf.6 which takes into account the effects of plate buckling and shear lag: σ abfu = 328.1 3.872 > = 91. so that the whole section is already classified (elastic analysis should be performed).263 MPa M a ( h − ttf . the normal extreme stresses in the web at ULS are as follows: σ abfu = σ atfl = − M a ( ztota.a.373 MPa 3.2.h ⋅ ( h − ttf. it has to be only determined if the web is a Class 3 or Class 4 panel in order to eventually reduce it.na ⎟ ⎥ .1 − ttf . 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥ ⎢ t ⋅(h − t − t − t )3 ⎥ tf.3) and of the mechanical properties in Paragraph 3.1 ) ⋅ ⎜ h − − ztot.2 ⎞⎤ ⎛ tf.a..na 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ttf.1 − − ztot.3.3.1 tf..1 − ttf..eff + − M c ( ztot .na ) I tot .1 − ttf .na ⎟ ⎥ .1 ⎛ ⎞⎤ tf.5.2 p ⎢+ w.2.2 − ztot .3.eff = 4..2 Determination of the cross-section class The bottom flange is already a class 4 element due to the webs of the stiffeners.

1 should be obtained using a stress distribution based on the effective area of the compression flange and the gross area of the web.1. For web elements the stress ratio ψ used in Table 4.COMBRI Design Manual . 4. Internal compression elements EN 1993-1-5. 4.4(3) (3) For flange elements of I-sections and box-girders the stress ratio ψ used in Table 4.2.4 Table 4. 4.Part I EN 1993-1-5.1 and Table 4.2 should be based on the properties of the gross cross-sectional area.4 Table 4. 174 . due allowance being made for shear lag in the flanges if relevant. Outstand compression elements EN 1993-1-5.

1.2 − ⎟ + 2 ⋅tw ⋅hw.1 ⋅ ttf. 3.eff := AeffEP + 2.na = 2. Internal compression elements) 2 λ pw = ⇒ b /t 28. 4.1: ⎛ −ψ w ⎞ hwe1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⋅ hw + 0.e1 ⋅ cos ( q w ) ⎞ ⎛ + 2 ⋅ tw ⋅ hw.1 + btf.127 + 0.3 Effective mechanical properties of the box section The final effective mechanical properties of the cross-section are calculated by replacing the gross area of the bottom flange and web by their effective areas.w + 2 btf.425 m (1 −ψ w ) Thus. 2 ⎠ 2 ⎠⎦ ⎝ ⎝ hw.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Conclusion: the cross-section at the internal support P1.562 > 0.e2 ⋅ tw = 0.2 ⎞⎤ ⎛ ⎛ ⎟ + btf. so that its effective cross-section under bending moment has to be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5.2 ⋅ ttf..na := 2 ⋅ ⎢btf. The reverse calculation would not lead to the same effective area of the cross-section at P3 and it would not comply with EN 1993-1-5. Final mechanical properties of the steel part of the box-section The final mechanical properties of the effective steel box section (structural steel only) of the box section are: • Area: Aeff.3.613 ⋅ m 3 175 .096 m ( ) 2 Atot.2.1 ⎞ ttf.6.98 (1 − ψ ) = 21. There is a reduction of the height of the steel web 2 λ pw ρ w hw = 1.a..e1 + hw. Web in bending kσ w = 5.6hweff = 2.2 ⋅⎜ h − ttf.57 m NOTE:The effective area of the box section webs is determined after that of its stiffened bottom flange. the effective height of the web in compression can be calculated: hweff = And this effective height of the web can be distributed as shown in EN1993-1-5.1 − ⎟⎥ + AeffEP ⋅zsl. Table 4. 4ε kσ = hw tw 28.1 ⋅ ttf.1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf. 4ε w kσ w = 1.055(3 + ψ w ) = 0.4hweff = 0.Cross-section verifications .1 .w := hw.593. 4.1 − ttf. P2 and P3 is in Class 4 and is checked by a elastic section analysis.673 ρw = λ pw − 0.4.2 ⋅ttf.2 = 1.278 m ( ) 2 • First moment of area: Sa.e2 ⋅ cos ( q w ) hw.e1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf. Table 4. The web is in Class 4.983 m ⎝ 1 −ψ w ⎠ hwe 2 = 0.Aeff.e2 ⋅ 2 2 ⎝ ⎠ ⎡ ⎣ Sa.855 = 2.4.027 (see EN1993-1-5.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 176 .

na ⎟ ⎥ ..e1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf..a. + AeffEP ⋅ ztot.a..na ⎟ ..364 m 2 • First moment of area: Sna := Sa.eff = 4.e1 + 2⋅ + tw ⋅ hw.. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ttf.Cross-section verifications .178 m Atot.1 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 3 2 ⎡t ⋅(h ⋅ cos ( q w ) ) hw.1 tf.h w. .na ⎟ .97 ⋅ m ( ) ( ) 3 • Distance between the center of gravity and the lower face of the bottom flange: Sna ztot.1 + 2 ⋅⎢ + ( btf.a.2 ) ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf.2 − − ztot.1 Final mechanical properties of the composite box-section The final mechanical properties of the composite box section (structural steel part and reinforcement) are: • Area: Atot.e2 ⋅ cos ( q w ) ⎞ ⋅ cos ( q w ) ) ⎛ ⎢+ w.na 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ⎤ ttf.e1 ⋅ cos ( q w ) ⎛ ⎞ ⎥ ⎢ w.. 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ⎤ ttf. tf.1 + ( b ⋅t ) ⋅⎛ h − tf..2 + 2 ⋅⎢ + ( btf.na − zsl.2 tf.eff + Atsur + Atslr = 1.1 ⎜ tot.h w.a.a.na ⎟ .eff := Atot.1 ⋅ ttf.e1 ⋅ ⎜ h − ttf. 12 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥ 3 2 ⎢ t ⋅(h ⎥ hw.044 m Atot.na := = 2.h w.e1 + 2⋅ + tw ⋅ hw.2 + ( b ⋅t ) ⋅⎛ h − t − + 2⋅ ⎜ − ztot..1 − ttf..⎥ .e2 ⋅ ⎜ ztot.61 m 4 ( )2 + nst ⋅Isl.a...eff := Atsur ⋅ h + tslab − c ur − ztot.e2 ⎥ + tw ⋅ hw.1 − ttf.na ⎟ .2 tf..244 m 4 ( )2 + nst ⋅Isl. 12 2 ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥ 3 2 ⎢ t ⋅(h ⎥ ⋅cos ( q w ) ) hw.a..na − zsl.e1 ⋅ cos ( q w ) ⎛ ⎞ ⎤ ⎢ w..1 tf.na − tp − ⎟ 12 2 ⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ + AeffEP ⋅ ztot.2 ⋅ ttf.a.1 177 . 2 ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ 3 2 ⎤ ⎡t ⋅(h ⋅ cos ( q w ) ) hw.na + Atsur ⋅ h + tslab − c ur + Atslr ⋅ h + c lr = 2.1 − − ztot.2 ⎛ ⎞⎤ tf.eff • Second moment of area: Itot.2 tf.2 tf.1 tf.na := = 2.na)2 .1 ⎛ ⎞⎥ tf.eff • Second moment of area: 2 ⎡b ⋅t 3 ⎤ t ⎞⎥ ⎢ tf.e2 ⋅ cos ( q w ) ⎞ ⎛ ⎢+ w.h w.1 ) ⋅ ⎜ h − − ztot.1 − z Itot.1 Itot.eff := 2 ⋅ tf.2 − − ztot.eff = 4.na ztot.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 • Distance between the center of gravity and the lower face of the bottom flange: Sa..a.2 ⎞⎥ ⎢ tf..1 Itot.a.e2 ⋅ ⎜ ztot..e2 ⎥ + tw ⋅ hw.na − tp − ⎟ 12 2 ⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ ( )2 + Atslr ⋅(h + c lr − ztot.na ⎟ ..

is the design bending moment. Ed + N Ed e y . N M z . NOTE: For members subject to compression and biaxaial bending the above equation 4. Ed + N Ed ez .5.14) γM0 Where Aef eN MEd NEd Weff γM0 γM0 is the effective cross-section area in accordance with 4.2. is the effective elastic section modulus.Ed.6(1) Member verification for uniaxial bending should be performed as follows: η1 = N Ed M + N Ed eN + Ed ≤ 1.eyN. page 89ff.14 may be modified as follows: η1 = M y . see application parts EN 1993-2 to 6.Part I EN 1993-1-5.1. is the partial safety factor.0 f y Aeff f yWy .3(3).0 f y Aeff f yWeff (4. N N Ed + + ≤ 1. 178 . see 4.Ed are the design bending moments with respect to y and z axes respectively.15) γM0 γM0 γM0 My.3(4). is the shift in the position of neutral axis. 4.3(3). see 4. Mz. ezN are the eccentricitieswith respect to the neutral axis.eff f yWz .COMBRI Design Manual . is the design bending moment.eff (4. Further explanations on the shear resistance check See Paragraph 3.2.

3.8 Shear resistance verification 3.na ) = -302. The calculation should normally be carried out with a lower value calculated in the cross-section located at the distance min [0.1 ) γM0 f y (ttf .a.na ) + = -319. abfl = 1.eff σ s.015 > 1.reinf = 0. The stress in the lower flange and in the upper flange is too high (η1 > 1.7 Bending resistance verification From the values of the bending moments Ma and Mc (see Paragraph 3. Figure 5.eff M a (h − ttf .3.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 3.na ) I tot .2. atfl = 0.599 MPa I tot .na ) I tot .0 ⇒ η1.eff − M c (h + tslab − cur − ztot .2 − ztot .a.eff I tot .2.783 MPa I tot .3) and of the mechanical properties in Paragraph 3.a.1 ) = σatfu ≥ f yd (ttf .962 < 1.2.Cross-section verifications .1 Shear in the box section webs The box section web is transversally stiffened on both sides at the internal support P3 (aw = 2.3.0 σatf2l ≥ f yd (ttf .5·hw] from the support P3.eff I tot .0 ⇒ η1.3: 179 .2. atfl = 1.na ) = -145.783 MPa The effective box section has been checked here with the calculated bending moment in the crosssection at support P3.a.2 − ztot . atfl = 0.808 MPa σ atf 2l = σ atf 1l = σ atfu = − M c (h − ttf .1 − ztot . the stresses should decrease under the limit value (η1 = 1.na ) I tot .1 ) = σsreinf ≥ f sd = f sk f y (ttf . By doing this.4·a.954 MPa M a ( h − ztot .eff M a (h − ttf .0 ⇒ η1.1 − ztot . the normal extreme stress at ULS are: σ abfl = − M a ( ztot .na ) − M c ( ztot .eff = -287.2. Moreover.0).a.a. the second moment of area of the longitudinal stiffener must be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5. 0.6.1 − ttf .eff I tot .8.0 ⇒ η1.335 < 1. the stresses can be checked at middepth of the flanges.1 ) γM0 γs = 434.eff + + − M c (h − ttf .3.5 m).na ) + = 353. s.1 − ttf .a.087 > 1.na ) − M c (h − ztot .2 ) γM0 f y (ttf .0).a. 3.3. Stiffened webpanel To evaluate the shear buckling coefficient of the stiffened webpanel.re inf = It is then clearly verified that: σabfl ≤ f yd (t p ) = f y (t p ) γM0 = 325 MPa = 315 MPa = 315 MPa = 315 MPa ⇒ η1. NOTE: The bending moment resistance does not take into account in the calculation the presence of the web stiffener.914 < 1.374 MPa I tot .2 ) = σatf1l ≥ f yd (ttf .

3: Web with transverse and longitudinal stiffeners (2) The equation (A.1 ⎛ I sl ⎞ 3 ⎜ ⎟ t ⎝ hw ⎠ a Isl is the distance between transverse stiffeners (see Figure 5.5) also applies to plates with one ort wo logitudinal stiffeners.3 (b).5) Figure 5. if the aspect a satisfies α ≥ 3.4·a or 0. 2 3 (A. NOTE: No intermediate non-rigid transverse stiffeners are allowed for in equation (A.34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw ≥ 1 ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 4 + 5. see Figure 5. the shear buckling coefficient kτ can be obtained as follows: ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5. For webs with two or more longitudinal stiffeners.34 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw < 1 ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛h ⎞ where kτ st = 9 ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ 2 4 2 2 (A. EN 1993-1-5.5·b.1 + I sl t 3 hw I sl t hw 3 α 2 + 2. from the panel end where the stresses are the greater.6) 180 . Isl is the sum of the stiffness of the individual stiffeners. is the second moment of area of the longitudinal stiffener about the z-axis.3). 4. not necessarily equally spaced.6(3) The plate buckling verification of the panel should be carried out for the stress resultants at a distance 0. Annex A3.18 kτ = 4. In this case the gross sectional resistance needs to be checked at the end of the panel.Part I EN 1993-1-5.3 + 0.COMBRI Design Manual .5) ⎛ I sl ⎞ ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎝ t hw ⎠ 3 but not less than kτ st = 2. Shear buckling coefficients (1) For plates with rigid transverse stiffeners and without longitudinal stiffeners or with more than two longitudinal stiffeners. For plates with one ort wo longitudinal stiffeners and an aspect ratio ratio α = hw α < 3 the shear buckling coefficient should be taken from: 6. whichever is the smallest.

st .w − zst . the shear buckling coefficient is: hw 6.wtst . the web subpanels must be checked against shear buckling.v.111 m 2hst . hw 4533 31 = = 167.016 buckling coefficient is: kτ .w.119 The transverse stiffeners of the bracings frames bordering the webpanel close to support P3 are assumed to be rigid.636 tw 27 η Thus.w t ⎞ ⎛ + b2.w ) tw 2hst .w hst .w = b2.wtst .Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 15ε ( tw ) tw = 0. the two webs subpanels have the same width and the same reduced slenderness. the two web subpanels must be also checked.sp ⎞ = 5.34 + 4 ⎜ ⎟ = 7. as there is only one stiffener in the web and the aspect ratio is a α w = w = 0. The reduced slenderness of the web subpanel: bw. the shear bspw 2.st .5 According to EN 1993-1-5.085 27 η Thus. w 3 tw hw α 2 w + 2. Thus.w 3 tw hw I sl .215.w + tst . 2 3 = 38.sp tw = 31 2016 = 74.v.st .v.1 + I sl .10-3 m4 According to EN1993-1-5.w = 4. the stiffened webpanel must be checked against shear buckling.w )2 ⎥ + [ 2 ⋅15ε (tw )tw + b1.w = 60.st .w zst .w + w ⎟ 2 2⎠ ⎝ = = 0.sp ⎛ bw. As the longitudinal stiffeners is located at the middle of the height of the web.sp λw.sp 37.w 12 2 ⎣ ⎦ = 1.w st .858 181 .wtst .wtst .w )2 + 2 ⎢ st .872 > ε (tw ) kτ .4twε (tw ) kτ .18 kτ .st .w ] tw zst .w.w (hst .881 Web subpanels It is possible that one or both of the two web subpanels are more critical than the stiffened webpanel.w = 0.24 ≥ 1. as the aspect ratio is α w = w = = 1.942 ⎝ aw ⎠ 2 bw.w λw = = 0.w + ( 2 ⋅ 15ε ( tw ) tw + b1.sp = = 0.25 m 2 The elastic neutral axis of the web stiffener with the width 15ε ( tw ) tw on both sides of the stiffener is: tw + hst .w − zst . Annex A3(1).wtst .Cross-section verifications .552 ≤ 3. Annex A3(2).4twε (tw ) kτ .3 + 0. The reduced slenderness of the stiffened webpanel: hw 37.677 > ε (tw ) kτ .w + b2.w = I sl .334m ≥ b1.w ⎜ hst .st .w The second moment of area of the web stiffener is: ⎡ t h3 ⎤ h 2 I st .w = 131.w ( st . a 2.

Verification (1) The verification should be performed as follows: η3 = VEd ≤1 Vb . 6.Rd as given in (2).Part I EN 1993-1-1. 6.18) where Av is the shear area.Ed ⎥ V pl .Rd is the design elastic shear resistance calculated using (4) and (5).Rd to Vpl.COMBRI Design Manual .T .Rd is the design shear resistance. Rd = Av f y / 3 ( ) γM0 (6.6. Rd ≤1 (6.Rd is given in 6.25) in which Vpl.Rd may be derived as follows: • for a structural hollow section: ⎡ ⎤ τ t . Torsion (9) For combined shear force and torsional moment the plastic shear resistance accounting for torsional effects should be reduced from Vpl.0 Vc . Shear (1) The design value of the shear force VEd at each cross-section should satisfy: VEd ≤ 1. For elastic design Vc. EN 1993-1-1. (2) In the absence of torsion the design plastic shear resistance is given by: V pl .17) where Vc. Rd where VEd is the design shear force including shear from torque.T .2. EN 1993-1-5.T. 182 .2. For plastic design Vc.2.7(9).28) where Vpl.T. 5.Rd is the design plastic shear resistance Vpl. Rd = ⎢1 − ⎢ fy 3 γ M0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ( ) (6.Rd and the design shear force should satisfy: VEd V pl .6.5. Rd (6. Rd V pl .

881 MN ⎜ 3γ M 1 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ V pl .503 m2 2 The shear stress in the web is given by the Bredt formula: τ Ed . web tw hw = 1. Rd = η f y (tw )hwtw 3γ M 0 = 29.a . it is the stiffened webpanel which is critical: λw = max(λw . the verification of shear including the torsional effect gives: η3 = VEd + VT .5 ) ⎜ 4 + ⎟ 2 ⎠ ⎠= ⎝ = 38. web = MT = 13.08 .165 = = 0.T .881 MN ⎛ η f y (tw )hwtw ⎞ Vb .761 MNm = 28.325 ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ (12 + 6.251MN so that η3 = VEd 20.Rd) with Vb. 183 .65 = 1.881 As the webpanel close to support P3 is assumed to be rigid and 0.966 ≤ 1 VRd 20. The area inside the median line of the box-girder bridge: S= (b + b ) ⎛ h + t 2 ⎜ t p slab ⎝ 2 0.881 Shear resistance is verified! Addition of torsional effect The maximum torque on the box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 is equal to MT = 1.65 MN Thus.sp ) = 0.Rd = Vbw.35·20. Rd .83 λw = 0.027 MNm (see Figure 2-35).T .Rd neglecting the flange contribution to the resistance: Vbw. Rd = min ⎜ Vbw.a. web = τ Ed . the reduction factor is: χw = 0.T .165 + 1.8 ≤ λw ≤ 1.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Shear resistance verification Thus. ⎟ = 20. Rd = χ w f y (tw )hwtw 3γ M 1 = 20. λw.Rd. but the maximum torque value is combined with the maximum design value of the shear resistance which do usually not appear at the same time.942 The maximum design value of the shear resistance is given by VRd = min (Vb. Vpl.881 η3 > 1. web VRd = 20.045 >1 20.48MPa 2 Stw The shear force in the web due to torque is: VEd .Cross-section verifications .

Part I EN 1993-1-5. if the aspect a ratio α = satisfies α ≥ 3. For plates with one ort wo longitudinal stiffeners and an aspect ratio hw α < 3 the shear buckling coefficient should be taken from: 6.COMBRI Design Manual .5) where kτ st a Isl ⎛h ⎞ = 9⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ 2 4 ⎛ I sl ⎞ ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎝ t hw ⎠ 3 but not less than kτ st = 2.34 + 4 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw ≥ 1 ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 4 + 5. NOTE: No intermediate non-rigid transverse stiffeners are allowed for in equation (A.5) also applies to plates with one ort wo logitudinal stiffeners.5) Figure 5. is the second moment of area of the longitudinal stiffener about the z-axis.3).1 + I sl t 3 hw α 2 + 2. For webs with two or more longitudinal stiffeners.18 kτ = 4.3 (b).34 ⎜ w ⎟ + kτ st when a hw < 1 ⎝ a ⎠ 2 2 (A. not necessarily equally spaced.1 ⎛ I sl ⎞ 3 ⎜ ⎟ t ⎝ hw ⎠ is the distance between transverse stiffeners (see Figure 5. Shear buckling coefficients (1) For plates with rigid transverse stiffeners and without longitudinal stiffeners or with more than two longitudinal stiffeners.3: Web with transverse and longitudinal stiffeners (2) The equation (A. the shear buckling coefficient kτ can be obtained as follows: ⎛h ⎞ kτ = 5. 2 3 I sl t hw 3 (A.6) 184 . Isl is the sum of the stiffness of the individual stiffeners.3 + 0. Annex A3. see Figure 5.

a = 19.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Shear verification including torsional effect The shear area of the box section: Av = hwtw = 0.max is calculated considering the construction phases and using the initial gross cross-section.3.01 m) and which corresponds to a shear stress in the bottom flange equal to: τ Ed .c = ⇒ τ Ed .a μt .T .165 = 0.8. τEd.2 Shear in the stiffened bottom flange of the box section Calculation of the shear stress in the bottom flange The shear stress in the bottom flange varies from τEd.a + τ Ed . zna.a is the moment of area of the botton flange with respect to the elastic neutral axis of the cross-section: μt .T .max at the junction of the bottom flange with the main web. 185 .015 m4.max = τ Ed .674 MPa I tot t p bp 2 t p zna = 0.49 m3 where μt .a = 0.25 MPa I tot .251 MN γM0 The reduced design plastic shear resistance: ⎡ ⎤ τ t .459 m3 VEd.924 MPa The shear stress due to torsion should be added to this value by using the same way than in previous Paragraph 3.c = 43.1.c μt .a = 1.122 m² The design plastic shear resistance: V pl .272 Shear resistance inluding shear from torque is verified! 3.3. Rd = ⎢1 − ⎢ fy 3 γ M0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ( ) Thus.559 MN applied to the composite box section (Itot = 5. the verification in shear including torsional effect gives: VEd V pl .2.a t p where μt.882 m) and which corresponds to a shear stress in the bottom flange equal to: τ Ed .234 MN at support P3 is broken down into: • VEd.a = 4.c = 13.588 m4.min = 0 in the vertical symmetry axis of the crosssection to τEd.a = VEd .2.c = VEd .Rd = 20.a = 26.a = 2.a = • bp 2 t p zna. Rd = η Av ( f y 3) = 29.675 MN applied to the structural steel box section only (Itot. Ed ⎥ V pl . Rd = 27. The shear force VEd = 33.272 MN V pl .Cross-section verifications .8. zna.739 ≤ 1 27.c = 17.

Part I 186 .COMBRI Design Manual .

p = 314.T .957 m ≥ sub = 0.w − zst.w + p st .265 ⎟ = 164. It is therefore deduced that no global plate buckling occurs due to shear stress in the bottom flange.w ) t p t p + hst .wtst . p ⎛ I sl .w (hst.2) η3 = τ Ed .w st.st .015 = 86.5 m) and longitudinally stiffened every bsub = 0. p = 1.25 m and 15ε ( t p ) t p = 0. p 3 = 3.w ⎜ hst .385 ≤ 1. the shear buckling coefficient is: bp kτ .119 < 1 τ Rd 187 .5 m by six closed-section stiffeners equally spaced.3: 15ε ( t p ) t p = 0. the bottom flange must not be checked against shear buckling.w The second moment of area of one bottom flange stiffener is: ⎡ t h3 ⎤ [bsub + b1. p ⎜ 3 ⎜t b ⎝ p p ⎞ 2.max / 2 = 0. p = 0.st .c + τ Ed . p ⎛ bp ⎞ = 4 + 5.853MPa 2St p τ Ed .st .w + ( bsub + b1. p = 6 I st . p + 2 12 ⎣ 12 ⎦ 3 I st . ⇒ ⇒ τEd.776 MPa Shear stress check in the global stiffened bottom flange The bottom flange is transversally stiffened on both sides at the internal support P3 (aw = 2.388 MPa ≤ τ Rd = η f y (t p ) γ M1 3 = 204. p )2 ⎥ + [bsub + b1. as there are six stiffeners in the bottom flange and the aspect a ratio α p = w = 0. p = 204.1 I sl .w )2 + 2 ⎢ st .bf = ⇒ MT = 4. the second moment of area of the bottom flange stiffener must be calculated according to EN 1993-1-5. Figure 5.957 m ≥ b1.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 The shear stress in the web is given by the Bredt formula: τ Ed .a + τ Ed .v.w zst .max = τ Ed .w ] t p h 2 I st.st. Annex A3 (2).w ⎟ 2 2 ⎠ ⎝ = 63.w − zst .wtst .25 m 2 2 Then the elastic neutral axis of the web stiffener with the width 15ε ( t p ) t p (with the upper limit bsub/2 or b1.w + tst.697 MPa (with η = 1.342 ⎝ aw ⎠ ⎛ bp ⎞ = 9⎜ ⎟ ⎝ aW ⎠ 2 4 2 where kτ st .w ] tw zst .wtst . p = t −t ⎞ ⎛ + b2. bp tp = 31 6500 ε (t p ) kτ .T .v.bf = 48.243 ≥ ⎟ tp bp ⎠ 3 The tranverse stiffeners of the bracings frames bordering the bottom flange panel close to support P3 are assumed to be rigid.Cross-section verifications .01 m4 According to EN 1993-1-5.st1w/2) on both sides of the stiffener is: 2hst .st .st .st.776 MPa/2 = 24.whst .v.674 mm 2hst .max /2= 48.667 < η 75 Thus.wtst . p = b2.w + b2.718.34 ⎜ ⎟ + kτ st .w b = 0. To evaluate the shear buckling coefficient of the stiffened bottom flange panel.w ( st.10-3 m4 The second moment of area of the six bottom flange stiffeners is: I sl .wtst .

2. assuming the longitudinal stiffeners to be rigid. 188 .1(1) taking Mf. see (5).20) is the design value of the shear force S is the first moment of area about the centroidal axis of that portion of the cross-section between the point at which the shear is required and the boundary of the cross-section I t is second moment of area of the whole cross-section is the thickness at the examined point NOTE: The verification according to (4) is conservative as it excludes partial plastic shear distribution. which is permitted in elastic design. EN 1993-1-5.6 (4) (4) For verifying the design elastic shear resistance Vc.Rd the following criterion for a critical point of the cross-section may be used unless the buckling verification in EN 1993-1-5.1(5) (5) A flange in a box-girder should be verified using 7. Further explanations on the M-V-interaction See Paragraph 3.Rd according to equation (6. page 93. 7. 6.5.19) where τEd may be obtained from: τ Ed = where VEd (6. EN 1993-1-5.1.17) cannot be performed.3.COMBRI Design Manual .0 VEd S It (6. Section 5 applies: τ Ed fy 3γM0 ≤ 1.6(1). 7.Part I EN 1993-1-1.2.1(2) (2) The criterion given in (1) should be verified at all sections other than those located at a distance less than hw/2 from a support with vertical stiffeners.Rd = 0 and τEd taken as the average shear stress in the flange which should not be less than half the maximum shear stress in the flange and η1 is taken as η1 according to 4.3. Therefore it should only be carried out where the verification on the basis of Vc. In addition the subpanels should be checked using the average shear stress within the subpanel and χw determined for shear buckling of the subpanel according to 5.

namely the one bordering the main steel web of the box section where the average shear stress reaches.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 Shear stress check in each subpanel of the bottom flange The longitudinal stiffeners are assumed to be rigid.3.914 ≥ 0. the subpanels of the bottom flange must not be checked against shear buckling.517 tp η 75 Thus. as well as the plastic bending moment resistance of the flanges only.Rd the position of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) is determined as follows: 189 .Cross-section verifications . The web is in tension in its upper part and in compression in its lower part.2.9. Rd ⎥ [ 2η3 − 1] ≤ 1 if η1 = M Pl . Rd M Pl .1 M-V-interaction in the box-girder webs The section to be verified is located at a distance hw/2 = 2.5 Vbw. It is therefore deduced that no local buckling occurs in the bottom flange due to shear. The verification is only performed in the most loaded subpanel.697 MPa (with η = 1. Rd ⎥ ⎦ The plastic bending moment resistance of the section.776 + ( 4. Annex 3(2).5 ⎝ aw ⎠ 2 τ Ed = τ Ed .22 ≤ 1 τ b. These subpanels should be individually checked for shear resistance. is calculated with the effective cross-sections of the flanges (taking into acccount the shear lag effect and the possibility of plate buckling).398 MPa ≤ τ b . Rd = η f y (t p ) γ M1 3 = 204.9 Interaction between bending moment and shear force 3.max + (τ Ed . as the aspect ratio α sub = w = 5 ≥ 1. Rd ⎤ M M Ed 2 ≥ f . the shear buckling bsub coefficient is: kτ . η3 = VEd = 0.sub = 0 The transverse stiffeners of the bracings frames bordering the bottom flange panel close to support P3 are assumed to be rigid.266 m from support P3.2) η3 = τ Ed = 0.776 ) 500 2 = 45. bsub 500 31 = = 6. 6500 2 a According to EN 1993-1-5.34 + 4 ⎜ sub ⎟ + kτ st .487 MNm and VEd = 18. In the bottom flange they define subpanels of the size aw = 2500 mm and bsub = 500 mm. Rd Shear resistance is verified! 3.sub = 5.3.398 MPa where kτ st . p ⎛b ⎞ = 5.2. To calculate Mf.853 − 48. Rd The M-V-interaction should be checked by justifying the following criterion in the box section webs: η1 + ⎢1 − ⎢ ⎣ ⎡ M f .667 < ε (t p ) kτ . ⇒ ⇒ τEd = 45.bf − τ Ed .sub = 51. Rd M pl .max ) bsub 2 bp 2 = 48. In this section MEd = -670.932 MN (considering the inclination of the web).t .

1 + Natf.Rd RELATIONS Nabf ≥ Natf.2 + Natf.1 + Nsl + Nsu Nsl + Nsu > Nabf + Natf.2 + Nsl + Nsu Nabf + Natf.COMBRI Design Manual .1 ≥ Nsl + Nsu and Nabf + Natf.1 + Nsl + Nsu and Nabf < Natf.1 + Natf.Part I Relations to find the location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) under negative moment MPl.2 + Nsl + Nsu Nabf + Natf.2 ≥ Natf.2 < Natf.2 PNA LOCATION PNA in the bottom flange PNA in the top flange 2 PNA in the top flange 1 PNA in the slab 190 .1 + Natf.

η3 < 0.357 MN < Natf.2 4btf .38 MN ( ) • Design plastic resistance of the upper steel reinforcement: Nsu := As.tf .1 − ttf .1 ⋅ ttf.5.59 MN • Design plastic resistance of the lower steel reinforcement: Nsl := As.2 Interaction M-V in the bottom flange of the box section The value η3 = 0. Thus.1 ⎜ h − tf .2 = 79.2 = 275.3.2 f yd (ttf .lr ⋅ fsd = 14.1 := 2 ⋅ btf.2.2. Rd = N su (h + tslab − cur − z pl ) + N sl (h + clr − z pl ) (h − t + tf .857 MN ≥ Natf.2 ⋅ ttf.928 MN Thus the PNA is deduced to be located in the top flange 2 at a distance zpl from the extreme lower fiber of the bottom flange.ur ⋅ fsd = 22.tf.1 ⋅ fyd ttf.2.N a.827 m The design plastic resistance moment of the flanges only is calculated from the position of the PNA: M f .2 (h − t )+ tf .1 − z pl ⎟ + N a.2 := 2 ⋅ btf.eff ) + t p f yd (t p )(b1.2 ⋅ fyd ttf.1 + Natf.359 MN • Design plastic resistance of the two structural steel top flanges 1: Na.tf.119 has already been calculated in Paragraph 3.2 f yd (ttf .9.2 f yd (ttf .1 + N su + N sl .2 − z pl ) 2 2 2btf .eff + 2b3.eff ) ⎦ βult = ⎣ ⎦ = 181.623 MNm t t ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ + N a.1 + Nsl + Nsu = 131. there is finally no need to verify the interaction criteria.623 MNm.458 MN • Location of the Plastic Neutral Axis (PNA) Nabf + Natf.3.Box-girder bridge at the internal support P3 • Design plastic resistance of the bottom flange: ⎡ ⎤ κ N a.548 MN and Nabf = 181. Writing the force equilibrium around the PNA deduced: z pl = 4 ( h − ttf . ⇒ There is no need to check the M-V-interaction.2m + bsub.tf . 3.Rd = 714.bf = ⎣ nst ⎡tst f yd (tst .Cross-section verifications .tf .5 MN ( ) • Design plastic resistance of the two structural steel top flanges 2: Na.1 ) btf .w )(b2.bf ⎜ z pl − p ⎟ 2 2⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ As │MEd│= 709.eff ) ⎤ ρc + t p f yd (t p )(0.2 ) + N a.2 + Nsl + Nsu = 210.513 MNm < Mf.bf − N a.2 ) = 3.2 f yd (ttf .2 ) = 714.eff + bsub.1 = 94.1 − z pl ) 2 2 2btf .8. 191 .

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 192 .

75 m C0 P1 P2 C3 Bending moments Shear forces Figure 4-1: Most unfavourable launching situation. A provisional wind bracing is added between the two steel girders for the launching process.1 Twin-girder bridge 4. The bridge is launched from one side (abutment C0) only. in the following. 111.1.1 General The construction phasing of the twin-girder bridge is done according to the following scheme: firstly.2 and according to Section 10. initially the most unfavourable launching situation has been determined as shown in Figure 4-1 which corresponds to a location of the steel girders at a position of x = 111. 3.3.75 m and its total weight decreases from 18 kN/m at the cross-section connected to the bridge girders to 12 kN/m at its free end. On the safe side.5 m here. the concrete slab is cast in-situ according to the order already described in Section 2. the steel superstructure of the twin-girder bridge is erected by the incremental launching technique. i. During erection. EN 1993-1-5 in Section 4. At the supports. The determination of the patch loading resistance is done both according to Section 6. EN 1993-1-5 in Section 4. In order to recover and to reduce the deflection of the cantilever part when approaching a support.1.Verifications during erection . The launching nose has a length of 11. the verifications during erection focus on the patch loading resistance of the steel girders during launching.75 m. the non-structural equipment is installed.1. However. usually each cross-section has to be verified at every construction stage which cannot all be part of this section. Finally. 193 . The dimensions of the studied panel at the decisive cross-section are given in Figure 4-2.5 m are used.Twin-girder bridge 4 Verifications during erection 4. additional stiffeners which may have been added for shear verification are not considered.1. sliding skates with a loading length of ss = 1. Secondly. The web is longitudinally unstiffened and the spacing of the vertical stiffeners is based on the verifications against lateral torsional buckling.4. Thus. a launching nose is used.e.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 194 .

max –FEd/2 = 0 MN FEd = 1.bot = 79.4 ss = 1.73 MN VEd. the internal design forces (for use with Section 6. EN 1993-1-5) acting at the studied panel is shown in Figure 4-3.095 0.26 MNm VEd.Ed.3 MPa Figure 4-3: Stress field acting at the studied panel.095 195 . From the global analysis.Verifications during erection .Ed = 45.max = 0.5 1.8 2. σx. 0.0 Figure 4-2: Dimensions of the studied panel in [m].applied = VEd.75 0.75 1.1 MPa σx.46 MN The resulting stress field (for use with Section 10. EN 1993-1-5) are given below for one main steel girder.0 0.top = -96.0 0.5 0.019 1. MEd = -19.Ed.7 MPa σz.Twin-girder bridge 3.

( ) 196 .Part I Buckling value kF The formula given for the buckling value kF must be exclusively used for the determination of the critical load Fcr because the reduction curve χ F λ F has been calibrated based on this formula for kF.COMBRI Design Manual .

5 λF if λ F > 0. The interaction between transverse force and bending moment is checked according to Section 7.Twin-girder bridge 4. := m2 = 10.2 Verifications according to Sections 6 and 7.22 197 .63 MN ly if ly ≤ a a if ly > a Fy := ly ⋅ tw ⋅ fyw Determination of the slenderness parameter λ F λ F := Fy Fcr λ F = 2.5 which is a precondition to use the above formula for m2.1. EN 1993-1-5 is determined. For λ F ≤ 0.9 ⋅ kF ⋅ 210000MPa ⋅ h w Fcr = 3. Determination of the reduction factor χF χ F := 1.5 χ F = 0.27 Here. m2 should be set to zero according to Paragraph 6.82 m1 + m2 ( ) ly = 3148 mm Fy = 20.80 tw 3 Fcr := 0. EN 1993-1-5 In the following.99 MN Determination of the yield load Fy m1 := fyf ⋅ bf fyw ⋅ tw 2 m1 = 48.5(1).0 if λ F ≤ 0.05 ⎛ hw ⎞ m2 := 0. Determination of the critical load Fcr ⎛ hw ⎞ kF := 6 + 2 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ 2 kF = 6. EN 1993-1-5.Verifications during erection .5 0.5. EN 19931-5.02 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ tf ⎠ ly := s s + 2 ⋅ tf ⋅ 1 + ly. the patch loading resistance according to Section 6. the slenderness parameter is larger than λ F = 0.

the interaction should be determined as follows: η 2 + 0. Interaction between transverse force and bending moment In Section 7.Part I Improved resistance to transverse forces In the COMBRI research project and in [31] it has been shown that in case the value m2 is set to zero and.8 ⋅ η1 ≤ 1. 198 . it can be shown that the influence of bending moment must be taken into account only for η1 > 0.0 is assumed.2(1). the reduction curve is recalibrated. see the COMBRI Final report [7].4 If η2 = 1. EN 1993-1-5.5. due to the changed definition of the yield load. not only the resistance to transverse forces can be improved but also the scatter of the resistance model becomes smaller.COMBRI Design Manual . For details.

1. EN 1993-1-5 is determined.Ed.03 MPa Elastic critical longitudinal stress acc.08 σ cr.g.x = 407.353 .4 4.05 + ψ if 1 ≥ ψ > 0 2 7. However. in the following the calculation according Section 7. to Table 4.12 if −1 ≥ ψ > −3 199 .98 ⋅ ( 1 − ψ ) σ cr. Section 4.9 mm FRd = 4. by a hand-calculation) ⎛ tw ⎞ σ E := 189800MPa ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ hw ⎠ 2 σ E = 14.270 = 0. so that the interaction verification becomes 0.Twin-girder bridge Determination of the patch loading resistance Leff := χ F ⋅ ly fyw ⋅ Leff ⋅ tw γ M1 Leff = 691.x σ x.x := kσ. Determination of αcr The determination of the minimum load amplifier αcr for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • for each component of the stress field (e.78ψ 5.Verifications during erection .353 Interaction between transverse force and bending moment Here. EN 1993-1-5 kσ.12 MN FRd := η 2 := FEd FRd η 2 = 0.bot 2 if 0 ≥ ψ > −1 kσ.x = 29.3 Verifications according to Section 10.8 ⋅ η1 ≤ 1.353 + 0.8 ⋅ 0.x := 8.4. EN 1993-1-5 In the following.2 1. η1 = 0.x := σ cr.1.95 MPa α cr.4 Here η1 = 0. EN 1993-1-5 is shown: η 2 + 0. the patch loading resistance according to Section 10.265 < 0.x = 5.x ⋅ σ E α cr.569 < 1.5 so that the interaction with bending moment is not decisive.81 − 6.270 and η 2 = 0.29ψ + 9.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 200 .

Ed.Twin-girder bridge Elastic critical transverse stress with k = 2. τ. In the following calculations.z ⎠ 2 ⋅α cr. Determination of αult. := ∞ Minimum load amplifier acc.33 Elastic critical shear stress acc.29 MPa α cr.z σ z.z := k ⋅ σ E⋅ a ⋅ α cr. the minimum load amplifier can be determined in a single step as αcr = 1.bot + σ z.Ed. the value αcr = 1.Ed − σ x.Ed − σ x.bot ⋅ σ z.43 MPa α cr. τ := τ cr τ Ed 2 if 2 a ≥ 1 hw a < 1 hw if kτ = 6.98 201 .5).259.g.x 1+ψ 1 2 α cr = 1.z = 1.Ed + 3 ⋅ τ Ed 2 2 2 α ult. Section 10.z := σ cr.34 + 4. (10. EN 1993-1-5 ⎛ hw ⎞ kτ := 5.Ed + 3 ⋅ τ Ed 2 2 2 σ eq = 69. to Eq. to Table 8.12 [38] σ cr.z = 60.x 2α cr.Ed.k σ eq := σ x.g.34 ⋅ ⎜ ⎝ a ⎠ τ cr := kτ ⋅ σ E α cr. τ ⎝ 4α cr.6). Annex A.x 2α cr.276 • for the complete stress field (e. software EBPlate is used.3.k := fyw σ x. by using appropriate software) In case e.26 MPa α ult. EN 1993-1-5 α cr := 1 ⎛ 1+ψ + 1 ⎞ + 1−ψ + 1 + + ⎜ ⎟ 2 2 4α cr.k = 4.276 is further used.08 acc.bot ⋅ σ z.93 τ cr = 97.bot + σ z.Verifications during erection .00 + 5. to Eq.z α cr.00 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛ hw ⎞ ⎟ 4.Ed 1 s s + 2 ⋅ tf σ cr.Ed. (A.

It should be noted that this simplification may lead to unsafe results because σcr. Annex B.p/σcr. EN 1993-1-5 gives: λ p0 := 0. + 1 φ p. the ratio of σcr. (4. Section 4.c The determination of σcr.0 as given in Eq.80 α p := 0. Instead.5. EN 1993-1-5.1. (4. is not appropriate for patch loading stresses in the transverse direction. 202 .88·σE. for transverse stresses because this approach complies well with current Eurocode rules and could be easier implemented.7 (and not 2. which takes into account column-like buckling. e.13).c in the transverse direction should take into account the nonlinear stress distribution in the web for which no hand-calculation method exists at the moment. The shorter the loading lengths is. for a welded girder Table B.13).5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α p ⋅ λ p − λ p0 + λ p⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ( ) which is to be used in ρ := φ p. to Eq. Reduction curve for transverse stresses. Moreover. − λ p 2 This reduction curve is used on the right hand-side instead of Eq. for the new German DIN-Fachbericht 103 [12].COMBRI Design Manual .c = 1.1. for which column-like buckling needs to be considered. it has been decided to use the reduction curve of Annex B.g. Basically.c. to DIN 4114 as follows: σcr. := 0.g.34 φ p. a common approach is to assume a linearly varying stress distribution for a pin-ended strut which is zero at one end and which can be calculated acc. column-like behaviour and interpolation function In the COMBRI project it has been shown that the interpolation function acc. either a new interpolation function is required or a reduction curve should be used which can be used with the existing interpolation function. (4.Part I Elastic critical column-buckling stress σcr.4. by Seitz [40] and this method is introduced in the COMBRI Final report [7].5. Section 4.c is underestimated and in turn the ratio σcr.p/σcr. EN 1993-1-5. the larger this deviation is.4. Thus.13)).c. is overestimated so that column-like behaviour is not detected correctly. EN 1993-1-5. A new interpolation function has been derived e. However. should be 2.

.381 Check of column-like behaviour in the transverse direction Due to the nonlinear distribution of transverse stresses in the web. = 1. to the definition in the existing Section 4.976 Determination of the reduction factors The determination of the reduction factors for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • using different buckling curves Longitudinal stress acc.1.4.0. + φ p.z σ cr. − λ p 2 with φ p.. EN 1993-1-5.83 χ w = 0. Therefore column-like behaviour is not calculated in detail here. EN 1993-1-5 with η = 1. σ cr.4(6). to Table 5.k α cr λ p = 1.12 Because ξ > 1.12 ξ := σ cr.c −1 ξ = 1. EN 1993-1-5 ρ z.Verifications during erection . to Annex B. = 0. the determination of the critical column-buckling stress has been done here most accurately based on the energy method which takes into account the nonlinear stress distribution. := 1 φ p. EN 1993-1-5.1.5.0.83 0.c := 28. for panel aspect ratios a < 1.2). Section 4.3. EN 1993-1-5 ρ x := λ p − 0. Section 5. to Eq.420 203 . column-like behaviour does not have to be considered acc.2.4.Twin-girder bridge Determination of the slenderness parameter λ p λ p := α ult. Shear stress acc.c = 2. Transverse stress acc.055 ⋅ ( 3 + ψ ) λp 2 ρ x = 0.55MPa σ cr.688 ρ z.z σ cr.0 if λ p < 0. χ w := η 1.83 λp η if λ p ≥ 0. (4.481 Check of column-like behaviour in the longitudinal direction Column-like buckling in the longitudinal direction for plates should be checked according to Section 4..

to Seitz [40] would give: η Seitz = 0. the pure patch loading resistance leads to FRd = 3. EN 1993-1-5”.2 “Application of Section 6. EN 1993-1-5 overestimates the patch loading resistance by 22.13 MN) and from the buckling curve based on Annex B. This also shows that the application of existing Section 10.3 %. EN 1993-1-5 For comparison.1.Part I Use of a corrected interpolation function instead of the reduction curve acc.83 MN). 204 . results from the newly derived interpolation function (FRd = 3. EN 1993-1-5 (FRd = 3. EN 1993-1-5 [23] in combination with Section 4.COMBRI Design Manual .1.477 For comparison with Section 4. the use of the newly derived interpolation function acc.4% (FRd = 3. In contrast to this. to Annex B.13 MN.17 MN) correspond well with a difference of about 1.1.

Verifications during erection .381 Determination of the patch loading resistance • using different buckling curves ⎛ σ x.34 φ p. Annex B.Ed ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ ⋅⎜ fyw fyw ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ρ z⋅ ρ x⋅ ⎟ ⎜ γ M1 γ M1 ⎟ ⎜ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎝ 2 ⎞ ⎛ τ Ed ⎟ + 3 ⋅⎜ fyw ⎟ ⎜ χw ⋅ ⎟ ⎜ γ M1 ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 For comparison with Section 4.bot ⎞ ⎛ σ z.1.472 2 ⎞ ⎛ σ x. − λ p 2 ( ) φ p.727 η sin gle = 1 = 0. := 0. • using a single buckling curve α Rd = ρ ⋅ α ult .Ed.1.bot ⎞ ⎛ σ z. the pure patch loading resistance leads to FRd = 3. EN 1993-1-5”.1. EN 1993-1-5”.2 “Application of Section 6.1.k γ M1 α Rd = 1. EN 1993-1-5 λ p0 := 0.80 α p := 0.Ed.688 ρ = 0.Ed ⎟ +⎜ η diff := ⎜ fyw fyw ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ ρ z⋅ ρx⋅ ⎜ ⎜ γ M1 γ M1 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ η diff = 0. + 1 φ p. = 1.2 “Application of Section 6.579 α Rd For comparison with Section 4.17 MN.Twin-girder bridge • using a single buckling curve According to Table B. the pure patch loading resistance leads to FRd = 3.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α p ⋅ λ p − λ p0 + λ p⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ρ := φ p. 205 .17 MN.

Part I 206 .COMBRI Design Manual .

0 0 Section 6 Section 10 Pier P1 Pier P2 FEd.0 8.0 2. It can be shown that the most unfavourable launching situation (FEd = 1.0 6.4 Results In Figure 4-4 the distribution of the patch loading resistances is summarised along the whole bridge length. Patch loading resistance FRd [MN] 10.max = 1. 207 .75) but also with other crosssections in the span region.Twin-girder bridge 4.Verifications during erection .1.456 MN) can be easily verified not only with the cross-section near the support P2 (x = 111.0 4.0 0.456 MN 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Bridge axis x [m] Figure 4-4: Distribution of patch loading resistances according to EN 1993-1-5 along the bridge length.

Part I 208 .COMBRI Design Manual .

sliding skates with a loading length of ss = 3.1. x = 448 m C0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Bending moments Shear forces Figure 4-5: Launching situation “1” (most unfavourable both for maximum bending and pier cross-section). 209 . A provisional wind bracing is added between the upper flanges for the launching process. the different launching situations which will be checked are introduced. the concrete slab is cast in-situ according to the order already described in Section 2.2. usually each cross-section has to be verified at every construction stage which cannot all be part of this section.1 General The construction phasing of the box-girder bridge is done according to the following scheme: firstly. In the following. Thus.2. the verifications during erection focus on the patch loading resistance of the steel girders during launching.2 Box-girder bridge 4. At the supports. In all diagrams the internal forces and support reactions are given for one half of the box-girder.Box-girder bridge 4. the steel superstructure of the box-girder bridge is erected by the incremental launching technique. The bridge is launched from one side (abutment C0) only. The launching nose has a length of 28 m and its total weight decreases from 57 kN/m at the cross-section connected to the bridge girder to 28 kN/m at its free end.4. in the following.2.Verifications during erection . The most unfavourable launching situation for maximum bending has been determined as shown in Figure 4-1 which corresponds to a location of the steel girder at a position of x = 448 m. EN 1993-1-5 in Section 4. In order to recover and to reduce the deflection of the cantilever part when approaching a support. a launching nose is used. the non-structural equipment is installed. Secondly. Finally.0 m are used. The determination of the patch loading resistance is done both according to Section 6. During erection.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 210 .

0 m here. i. 4. and the spacing of the vertical stiffeners is based on the verifications against lateral torsional buckling. 211 .2·hw with reference to the neutral axis of the stiffener. x = 448 m C0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Bending moments Shear forces Figure 4-6: Launching situation “2” (most unfavourable for weakest end-span cross-section). The most unfavourable launching situation for unequal shear distribution has been determined as shown in Figure 4-7 which corresponds to a location of the steel girder at a position of x = 408 m. The dimensions of the studied panel at the decisive cross-sections are given in Table 4-1 and Figure 4-2. which is an efficient stiffener position in case of patch loading and might not necessarily be in accordance with the choice of stiffener position in the other sections of this document.Box-girder bridge The most unfavourable launching situation for the weakest cross-section has been determined as shown in Figure 4-6 which corresponds to a location of the steel girder at a position of x = 484 m. The web is longitudinally stiffened at 0. x = 408 m C0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Bending moments Shear forces Figure 4-7: Launching situation “3” (most unfavourable for weakest mid-span cross-section).e.Verifications during erection .

Part I 212 .COMBRI Design Manual .

213 .4 27 1015. the calculation for launching situation “1” is given in detail in Section 4.15 5. For these reasons. the additional shear force is almost negligible.top b1 hw with Isl.2.max .38 The calculations in Section 4.and endspan verifications.37 10.97 3.2 20 527. Launching situation “1” bf.2 showed that the negative bending moment has an influence on the patch loading resistance only for launching position “1”. the internal design forces (for use with Section 6.5 From the global analysis. only results are presented in Sections 4.2.FEd/2 FEd FEd.6 18 405.69 6.2.max VEd.17 -0.1 25 702.75 “2” -99.92 5.2 “3” 1500 50 4762.9 “2” 1500 70 4726. EN 1993-1-5) are given below.2. Table 4-2: Internal design forces.bot b1 [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] 1500 184 4539.applied = VEd. Launching situation “1” MEd VEd.2.bot · tf.16 -0.83 4.bottom plate [MNm] [MN] [MN] [MN] [MN] [MN] -217. In case of internal forces and support reactions the values are given for each web.91 “3” -50.83 8.2 and 4.top · tf.93 4.top tf.bot Figure 4-8: Notations of the studied panel in [mm].3.Verifications during erection .2.35 3.1 = 154894 cm4 bf. which are relevant for the mid.bot tf.29 5.2.62 2.web FEd.91 3.Box-girder bridge bf.25 -0.1 35 695.3 75 657. In all cases.1 whereas for launching situations “2” and “3”. Table 4-1: Dimensions of the studied panels in [mm].top hw tw bf.

the patch loading resistance increases with decreasing distance between stiffener and loaded flange. For details. Thus. In general. Whereas the work in [5] is related to the improved resistance model for longitudinally unstiffened girder according to [31]. due to the changed definition of the yield load.3 although this might be not true in reality. see [7] as well as [5] and [9]. the formula in EN 1993-1-5 describes only the increasing branch and is therefore limited to a range of application b1/hw ≤ 0.Part I Determination of the critical load Fcr In EN 1993-1-5 the determination of the critical load of a longitudinally stiffened web is based on the lowest buckling value kF. the example calculation according to [9] is shown.COMBRI Design Manual . the work of [9] can be used with current Eurocode rules. On the following page. in the German National Annex to EN 1993-1-5 [11] the proposal of [9] has been adopted for the national choice of the patch loading resistance model for longitudinally stiffened girders. 214 . In the diagram below buckling values for different panel aspect ratios and stiffener positions are given.3. In the COMBRI project. not only the resistance to transverse forces can be improved but also the scatter of the resistance model becomes smaller. Based on that. according to a EN 1993-1-5 calculation. the most advantageous stiffener position is at b1/hw = 0. see also the COMBRI Final Report [7]. Improved resistance to transverse forces In the COMBRI research project and in [5]. [9] it has been shown that in case the value m2 is set to zero and. For this reason. this paradox has been solved within the COMBRI project. the reduction curve is recalibrated.

21 ⎟ ⋅ γ s kF := 6 + 2 ⋅ ⎜ a ⎝ a ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ tw 3 2 kF = 12.3 − b1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ a ⎠ hw ⎟ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ γ s. EN 1993-1-5 is determined.min 3 ⎛ a ⎞ + 210 ⋅⎛ 0.02 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ tf ⎠ ly := s s + 2 ⋅ tf ⋅ 1 + lly := y m2 = 73.2.Box-girder bridge 4. ≤ γ s.1 hw ⋅ t w a 3 γ s.42 ⎛ hw ⎞ m2 := 0. EN 19931-5.9 ⋅ Isl.min = 37.46 MN Determination of the yield load Fy m1 := fyf ⋅ bf fyw ⋅ tw 2 m1 = 35.1 Launching situation “1” In the following.3 − b1 ⎞ if γ > γ ⎜ ⎟ 13 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ s. = 188.2. The interaction between transverse force and bending moment is checked according to Section 7.76 Fcr := 0.1 hw ⋅ t w 3 if γ s. Determination of the critical load Fcr γ s. := 10. EN 1993-1-5 4. s.Verifications during erection .2 Verifications according to Section 6.min a ⎠ ⎝ ⎝ hw ⎠ γ s = 37.26 MN ly if ly ≤ a a if ly > a Fy := ly ⋅ tw ⋅ fyw 215 .44 ⋅ − 0.9 ⋅ Isl.96 γ s.36 γ s := 10.26 m1 + m2 ( ) ly = 4000 mm Fy = 37.min := 13 ⋅ ⎛ ⎜ 3 ⎞ + 210 ⋅⎛ 0.9 ⋅ kF ⋅ 210000MPa ⋅ h w Fcr = 10.36 b1 ⎛ hw ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎟ + ⎜ 5. the patch loading resistance according to Section 6.2.

2 = 7. := Fcr. := ly.1 ⋅ Fcr.web FRd.6⋅ ⎜ ⎛ s s + 2⋅ tf ⎞ ⎟ + 0.2 = 40.1 = 10. .2 Fcr. FRd. = 1744. = 4000 mm Fy.1 := Fcr Fcr.2 := ⎢0.6⎥ ⋅⎛ ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎦ ⎜ b1 ⎠ ⎝ tw 3 0.8 ⋅ ⎜ ⎡ ⎣ ⎛ s s + 2 ⋅ tf ⎞ ⎤ a ⎞ ⎟ + 0.26 MN Determination of the slenderness parameter λ F λ F. := η 2 := 216 Leff.41 MN Fcr. := ly if ly ≤ a a if ly > a Fy.77 MN η 2 = 0.2 := kF.2 Fcr. = 2. = 14.56 ρ = 0.80 + λ F⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ρ := φ + 1 φ − λF 2 ( ) φ = 1.12 Fcr.436 Determination of the patch loading resistance Leff.46 MN kF.1 + Fcr. := Fy. m2. = 8. ⋅ tw ⋅ fyw ( m1 ) ly.21 ⋅ λ F − 0.COMBRI Design Manual .31 MN Determination of the yield load Fy The factor m2 has to be set to zero in this procedure. = 37.12 Determination of the reduction factor χF φ := 0. ⋅ tw γ M1 FEd. := ρ ⋅ ly.5 ⎝ a ⎠ kF.7 mm FRd. := s s + 2 ⋅ tf ⋅ 1 + ly. Fcr.2 ⋅ 189800MPa ⋅ b1 Fcr. λ F.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + 0. := 0 ly.Part I Example calculation based on the procedure according to Davaine [9] Determination of the critical load Fcr Fcr.687 fyw ⋅ Leff.

5 0.5(1). Instead they are shown for the sake of completeness using the value of the patch loading resistance according to Davaine [9]. the slenderness parameter is larger than λ F = 0.5 which is a precondition to use the above formula for m2.89 Here.Verifications during erection .97 MN FRd := η 2 := FEd.132 > 1.132 As η2 = 1.0 the patch loading verification can not be fulfilled and thus also the interaction cases are not fulfilled.web FRd η 2 = 1.5.Box-girder bridge Determination of the slenderness parameter λ F λ F := Fy Fcr λ F = 1.6 mm FRd = 8.26 Determination of the patch loading resistance Leff := χ F ⋅ ly fyw ⋅ Leff ⋅ tw γ M1 Leff = 1059.5 λF if λ F > 0. EN 1993-1-5. For λ F ≤ 0.0 if λ F ≤ 0. m2 should be set to zero according to Paragraph 6. Determination of the reduction factor χF χ F := 1.5 χ F = 0. 217 .

0 is assumed.) Based on the recommended procedure in EN 1993-1-5.5. When using EN 1993-1-5. From the investigations.8 ⋅ η1 ≤ 1. experimental and numerical studies on steel plated girders have been conducted in order to review and to propose an interaction equation for combined shear and patch loading. Here. the interaction should be determined as follows: η 2 + 0.the design models developed in [9] and [5] which are summarised in [7] allow to asses the existing higher patch loading resistance without using numerical simulation tools. it can be shown that the influence of bending moment must be taken into account only for η1 > 0. the patch loading verification can not be fulfilled and a solution would be to increase the web thickness tw to 30 mm. to [9] has been shown to improve the patch loading resistance with regard to the drawbacks described in the remark to the determination of the critical load Fcr. another stiffener position or longer loading length would not increase the calculated resistance decisively. the figurebelow shows two relevant construction stages: a) when the bridge girder is about to arrive at the support and a cantilever is existent. the procedure acc. EN 1993-1-5 . 218 . the specific conditions during bridge launching have to be taken into account. Interaction between transverse force and shear force In the frame of the COMBRI project. However.4 If η2 = 1. For this reason. In stage a) the introduced patch load is almost equally equilibrated resulting in a pure patch loading situation where the shear is already considered in the patch load model.2(1). it is obvious that the interaction between shear and patch loading is not negligible. Interaction between transverse force and bending moment In Section 7. b) when the bridge girder has reached the pier. Although the interaction might appear severely at first sight.COMBRI Design Manual .Part I Example calculation based on the procedure according to Davaine [9] (cont.

Interaction between transverse force and shear force Although the considered panel is subjected to an additional shear force of VEd = 0.Verifications during erection .60 Wbot takes into account the effects of plate buckling in the bottom flange and in the webs. this interaction is not taken into account in EN 1993-1-5.42 MPa η 1 := σ x.Box-girder bridge Interaction between transverse force and bending moment Here. 219 .Ed fyf η 1 = 0.Ed = 189. σ x.Ed := MEd Wbot σ x.58 γ M0 η 2 + 0.8 ⋅ η 1 = 1.580 > 0.83 MN which is not induced by the patch loading. η1 = 0.5 so that the interaction with bending moment has to be considered.

Interaction equation proposed in [7]: ⎜ ⎜ 1.71 ⎠ ⎛ 10. For this situation the interaction becomes relevant.6 b = 1.Part I Interaction between transverse force and shear force (cont.77 ⎠ 220 .0 which gives in this example with the patch loading resistance according to [9]: ⎛ 0.01 + 0.68 < 1.67 = 0. the average will result in reductions of around 10%.6 ⎛ V − 0. see interaction diagram below.0 with a = 1. however.5 ⋅ F ⎞ ⎛ F ⎞ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜F ⎟ VR ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ R⎠ a b ≤ 1.15 ⎞ +⎜ ⎟ = 0.COMBRI Design Manual .) In stage b) the maximum internal shear force approximates the value of the applied patch load which leads to an asymmetric patch loading condition.83 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 20.0 ⎝ 14.

294 Fy = 24. The cross-section cannot be verified for launching situation “3”.294 < 0.60 MN η 2 = 1. see also Figure 4-4 of the summary.2.Verifications during erection .2 Launching situation “2” The results for launching situation “2” are summarised below: Fcr = 4.510 Here.5 so that the interaction with bending moment is not considered.Box-girder bridge 4. η1 = 0.456 Fy = 27. η1 = 0. 4.05 MN FRd = 3.5 so that the interaction with bending moment is not considered.89 MN η 1 = 0.19 MN FRd = 4.2.84 MN η 2 = 1. 221 .2. The cross-section cannot be verified for launching situation “2”.96 MN η 1 = 0.3 Launching situation “3” The results for launching situation “3” are summarised below: Fcr = 3.413 Here.456 < 0. see also Figure 4-4 of the summary.2.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 222 .

3 Verifications according to Section 10. see Figure 4-3 (compression is taken as positive). Shear lag does not have to be considered because b0 < Le/50.Ed [MPa] σ.5 176.st σx.7 98.3.0 2569047 2081882 1750027 1232880 -1906.Box-girder bridge 4.25 m Le 50 = 3.7 124.Ed [MPa] s [mm] -183.5 3035.w” “top.1 Webpanel (Launching situation “1” only) In the following.5 1292. EN 1993-1-5.9 81. bp := 6.7 84.w lower subpanel „11“ Figure 4-9: Stress field acting on the studied panel.Verifications during erection .2.z. The moment of inertia of the gross steel section at position x = 448 m is Ia = 4.st” “bot.524·108 cm4.8 104.Ed zbot.68 m Table 4-3: Values of the studied panel.5 1834.0 3186.7 87. EN 1993-1-5 is determined.5m bp b0 := 2 Le := 2 ⋅ L3 L3 := 92m b0 = 3.st zst zbot. EN 1993-1-5 4.w” 880. Section 3. so that the values according to Table 4-3 have been determined directly. For this example launching situation “1” has been chosen.st” “st” “bot. The resulting stress field acting at the studied panel is shown in Figure 4-3.4 0. ztop.5 1086.8 3021.Ed σz. Position [Index] z-axis [mm] “top.3 -1186573 223 .1 3150. cf.w upper subpanel „12“ za.2.0 72.8 0. the patch loading resistance according to Section 10.Ed σx.7 W [cm3] σx.s z ztop.1.

Part I 224 .COMBRI Design Manual .

11 = 4.2.11 σ cr.11 := 8.1. by a hand-calculation) ⎛ tw ⎞ σ E.78ψ 11 5.11 := kσ. EN 1993-1-5 kσ.x.Verifications during erection .5 mm b11.x.11 σ x.81 − 6.05 + ψ 11 if 1 ≥ ψ 11 > 0 2 7. to Table 4.6 MPa.11 := α cr.674 σ cr. The stress ratios can be determined from Table 4-3: Overall: Lower subpanel “11”: Upper subpanel “12”: ψov = -1.1.453 225 .x.1 Verification of subpanel “11” The subpanel aspect ratio is α11 = 6.70 ψ12 = -2.x.11 = 8.11 = 1494.5 mm The value of additional shear stress is τEd = 0. 4.Box-girder bridge From section 4.Ed. the subpanels “11” and “12” and the longitudinal stiffener are verified individually.17 In the following verification procedure.x.29ψ 11 + 9.2 MPa ( )2 if −1 ≥ ψ 11 > −3 σ cr.7 MPa Elastic critical longitudinal stress acc.11 = 319.3.1 the following dimensions are already known.04 ψ11 = 0. Section 4.1. Subpanel widths: Subpanel widths up to centreline of stiffener: b11 = b1 = 657.9 mm b12 = 3381.11 := 189800MPa ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ b11 ⎠ 2 σ E.11 ⋅ σ E.bot.w α cr.98 ⋅ 1 − ψ 11 if 0 ≥ ψ 11 > −1 kσ.9 mm b12. Determination of αcr The determination of the minimum load amplifier αcr for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • for each component of the stress field (e.x.st = 3631.x.2 1.4.2.x.g.st = 907.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 226 .

Section 10. by using appropriate software) In case e.11 := 5.8 MPa α cr.11 = 3162.11 ⋅ σ E. τ. (A. the value αcr = 2.11 α cr. the determination of the elastic critical transverse stress is not possible by a hand-calculation. 227 .11 4α cr.x. τ.11 = 1741.g.638 • for the complete stress field (e.x.11 τ cr.3.11 := kτ.11 := α cr.g.x.6 Minimum load amplifier acc.11 σ z.11 ⎠ 2 ⋅α cr.z.z.490. software EBPlate is used.Verifications during erection .11 := 1 1 − ψ 11 ⎛ 1 + ψ 11 ⎞ 1 1 + + ⎜ + + ⎟ + 2 2 2α cr.00 + 5. EN 1993-1-5 α cr.11 = 3.z. (10.11 = 2.00 ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎛ b11 ⎞ ⎟ 4. τ.Ed α cr.Box-girder bridge Elastic critical transverse stress acc.z. In the following calculations.6).34 + 4. Thus.11 := 360. to Eq.67 Elastic critical shear stress acc.z. the minimum load amplifier can be determined in a single step as αcr = 3.7MPa σ cr.5).11 1 + ψ 11 1 2 α cr. Annex A.11 = 5.448 τ cr.11 := α cr. to EBPlate Because of the large subpanel aspect ratio of α = 6.z.1. EN 1993-1-5 ⎛ b11 ⎞ kτ.11 2α cr.638 is further used.34 ⋅ ⎜ ⎝ a ⎠ τ cr. in this case software EBPlate has been used: σ cr.11 τ Ed 2 if 2 a ≥ 1 b11 a < 1 b11 if kτ.11 ⎝ 4α cr. to Eq.

either a new interpolation function is required or a reduction curve should be used which can be used with the existing interpolation function. which takes into account column-like buckling. e. Moreover. + 1 φ p. The shorter the loading lengths is. Instead. for transverse stresses because this approach complies well with current Eurocode rules and could be easier implemented. should be 2. for the new German DIN-Fachbericht 103 [12].p/σcr.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α p ⋅ λ p − λ p0 + λ p⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ( ) which is to be used in ρ := φ p. by Seitz [40] and this method is introduced in the COMBRI Final report [7]. the larger this deviation is. (4.88 ⋅ s k := b 11 ⋅ σ z.st ⋅ s bot. (4.Ed. to DIN 4114 as follows: 1 + 0. Section 4.c The determination of σcr. it has been decided to use the reduction curve of Annex B.13).g. Section 4.c is underestimated and in turn the ratio σcr.c.bot.4. is not appropriate for patch loading stresses in the transverse direction.13).1. the ratio of σcr. Annex B.p/σcr.c in the transverse direction should take into account the nonlinear stress distribution in the web for which no hand-calculation method exists at the moment. Thus.4. EN 1993-1-5.st σ z. − λ p 2 This reduction curve is used on the right hand-side instead of Eq. EN 1993-1-5 gives: λ p0 := 0.34 φ p.88 ( ) It should be noted that this simplification may lead to unsafe results because σcr.COMBRI Design Manual . a common approach is to assume a linearly varying stress distribution for a pin-ended strut which is zero at one end and for which the buckling length sk can be calculated acc. Basically. := 0.Part I Elastic critical column-buckling stress σcr. However. EN 1993-1-5.5. for a welded girder Table B.5. (4. A new interpolation function has been derived e.0 as given in Eq.Ed ⋅ s s + 2 ⋅ t f 1. EN 1993-1-5.7 (and not 2. 228 . is overestimated so that column-like behaviour is not detected correctly. column-like behaviour and interpolation function In the COMBRI project it has been shown that the interpolation function acc. for which column-like buckling needs to be considered. Reduction curve for transverse stresses.c.13)). to Eq.80 α p := 0.1.g.

983 ρ z.c. the determination of the critical column-buckling stress has been done here most accurately based on the energy method which takes into account the nonlinear stress distribution.z.bot.Box-girder bridge Determination of αult.11 α cr.k σ eq.. σ cr.11 σ cr.11 σ cr. := 1 φ p.15.Ed + 3 ⋅ τ Ed 2 2 2 σ eq.11 = 153.Ed.w + σ z.. EN 1993-1-5 ρ z.bot.Ed.2 MPa σ cr.11 := fyw σ x.11 −1 ξ 11 = 0. + φ p.2).bot.055 ⋅ 3 + ψ 11 λ p.k.11 := α ult.Ed − σ x.bot. Section 4.Ed.w + σ z.w ⋅ σ z.z. to Annex B. (4.11 = 333. EN 1993-1-5 ρ x.842 Check of column-like behaviour in the transverse direction Due to the nonlinear distribution of transverse stresses in the web.Verifications during erection .11 = 0. Therefore column-like behaviour is not calculated in detail here.11 − 0.08 229 .w ⋅ σ z.11 = 1.Ed − σ x.Ed. Transverse stress acc. to Eq.k.923 Determination of the reduction factors The determination of the reduction factors for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • using different buckling curves Longitudinal stress acc.249 Determination of the slenderness parameter λ p λ p.844 Check of column-like behaviour in the longitudinal direction Column-like buckling in the longitudinal direction for plates under pure bending is only relevant for panel aspect ratios α < 0.4.11 2 ( ) ρ x.11 := λ p.11 = 0.11 := σ x.11 λ p.11 2 with φ p.c. = 0.4 MPa α ult..08 ξ 11 := σ cr.1.11 = 2.k. − λ p.c.Ed + 3 ⋅ τ Ed 2 2 2 α ult. = 0.

598 230 . to Seitz [40] is used.COMBRI Design Manual .11 = 0. The calculation gives: ηSeitz.Part I Use of the corrected interpolation function For comparison. here the use of the newly derived interpolation function acc.

Verifications during erection .bot.595 231 2 2 2 .11 ⋅ ξ 11 ⋅ 2 − ξ 11 + χ c.83 χ w.11 2 ( ) φ p.11 ≥ 0.bot.11 ⋅ f11 ( ) ρ c. = 0.83 0.11 − λ p0 + λ p.z.899 • using a single buckling curve According to Table B.11.w⎞ ⎛ σ z.11⋅ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ γ M1 ⎟ γ M1 ⎟ γ M1 ⎟ γ M1 ⎟ ⎜ γ M1 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ηdiff.11 = 0. Annex B. to Table 5.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α p ⋅ λ p. − λ p.w⎞ ⎛ σ z.z.11 = 0. pure column-like behaviour. + φ p. := 0.11⋅ χ w.11⋅ ρ x.11 = 0.842 ρ c. = 0.11.11 := 1 Φ11 + Φ11 − λ c.051 Φ11 := 0.11 2 2 χ c.11⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ρ 11 := 1 φ p.21 ⋅ λ c.0.z.3.11 + ρ 11 − χ c. EN 1993-1-5 χ w.11 := ρ z. section 5.Ed ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ ⋅⎜ ⎟ + 3 ⋅⎜ ⎟ ηdiff.Ed. := χ c.983 ρ 11 = 0.11. i.11 := ⎜ fyw ⎟ fyw ⎟ fyw ⎟ fyw ⎟ ⎜ fyw ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ρ c.651 Determination of the patch loading resistance • using different buckling curves τEd ⎞ ⎛ σ x.11⋅ ρ c.11 λ c.e.11 = 1.11 − 0.1.11⋅ ρ x.34 φ p.11 := 1.1.11 = 0.1.11.11 ⎣ ( ) 2 ⎤ ⎦ Φ11 = 1.c1. λ c.z.630 ρ c.663 Shear stress acc.11.11 if λ p.Ed.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + 0.142 χ c. EN 1993-1-5 λ p0 := 0.80 α p := 0.0 if λ p.11 := fyw σ cr.11.Ed ⎞ ⎛ σ x.Box-girder bridge Here ξ is close to 0.11.11 ( ) ( ) ρ c.83 λ p. − χ c.11 < 0.2 + λ c.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 232 .

11 γ M1 α Rd.332 η sin gle.g.12 = 3.k. Section 10.12 = 99.11 = 1 α Rd.k σ eq.st 1 top. EN 1993-1-5 kτ.12 σ z.9 MPa α cr.12 = 58.546 Elastic critical transverse stress with k = 3.2.g. Determination of αult.11 = 0.12 = 8. Section 4.12 [38] σ cr.1. EN 1993-1-5 α cr.top.Box-girder bridge • using a single buckling curve α Rd.616 • for the complete stress field (e.05 MPa α cr. k .1.4.z. by using appropriate software) In case e. by a hand-calculation) Elastic critical longitudinal stress acc. software EBPlate is used.2 Verification of subpanel “12” The subpanel aspect ratio is α12 = 1.907 σ cr.11 ⋅ α ult .12 = 91.z.5).735 233 .x.12 = 724.2 MPa α cr.z. In the following calculations.6).12 = 180.3. (10. Determination of αcr The determination of the minimum load amplifier αcr for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • for each component of the stress field (e.3 MPa α ult.889. the minimum load amplifier can be determined in a single step as αcr = 0.z.12 = 8. For further information the reader is referred to the previous section “verification of subpanel “11”.137 Minimum load amplifier acc.616 is further used.g.60 Elastic critical shear stress acc.12 = 0. to Table 4.18. Annex A.x.199 τ cr.x.12 := k12 ⋅ σ E.12 = 59.z.12 ⋅ a ⋅ s α cr.st σ cr.11 = ρ c.12 = 0. τ.Verifications during erection .Ed. to Eq. to Eq.12 := σ cr.11 = 1.751 4.3. the value αcr = 0. In the following only the results of the calculation are shown. (A. EN 1993-1-5 kσ.8 acc. to Table 8.

c is underestimated and in turn the ratio σcr.80 α p := 0. 234 .0 as given in Eq. for transverse stresses because this approach complies well with current Eurocode rules and could be easier implemented.7 (and not 2. Reduction curve for transverse stresses. Instead. it has been decided to use the reduction curve of Annex B. Section 4. (4.13).COMBRI Design Manual . should be 2. − λ p 2 This reduction curve is used on the right hand-side instead of Eq.p/σcr.g. Section 4.1. column-like behaviour and interpolation function In the COMBRI project it has been shown that the interpolation function acc. (4.c in the transverse direction should take into account the nonlinear stress distribution in the web for which no hand-calculation method exists at the moment.13)). for the new German DIN-Fachbericht 103 [12].34 φ p. for a welded girder Table B. to DIN 4114 as follows: σcr. However. to Eq.c. by Seitz [40] and this method is introduced in the COMBRI Final report [7]. the ratio of σcr.c The determination of σcr. a common approach is to assume a linearly varying stress distribution for a pin-ended strut which is zero at one end and which can be calculated acc. := 0.13). Moreover. EN 1993-1-5. Basically.4.5. + 1 φ p.5. EN 1993-1-5.c = 1.88·σE It should be noted that this simplification may lead to unsafe results because σcr. is overestimated so that column-like behaviour is not detected correctly. the larger this deviation is.1. EN 1993-1-5. for which column-like buckling needs to be considered. Thus.g.p/σcr.5 ⋅ ⎡1 + α p ⋅ λ p − λ p0 + λ p⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ( ) which is to be used in ρ := φ p. either a new interpolation function is required or a reduction curve should be used which can be used with the existing interpolation function.4.c. EN 1993-1-5 gives: λ p0 := 0. (4. is not appropriate for patch loading stresses in the transverse direction. Annex B. The shorter the loading lengths is. which takes into account column-like buckling. e.Part I Elastic critical column-buckling stress σcr. A new interpolation function has been derived e.

EN 1993-1-5 ρ x.c. σ cr.86 MPa σ cr.12 = 0. Section 4. EN 1993-1-5 φ p. (4.12.305 235 .1. the interpolation function is not safe-sided.399 Check of column-like behaviour in the longitudinal direction Column-like buckling in the x-direction for plates under pure bending is only relevant for panel aspect ratios a < 0.12 = 27. to Table 5. Transverse stress acc. Shear stress acc. EN 1993-1-5 ρ z. the determination of the critical column-buckling stress has been done here most accurately based on the energy method which takes into account the nonlinear stress distribution.3. = 2.12 = 2. EN 1993-1-5 χ w.305 Check of column-like behaviour in the transverse direction Due to the nonlinear distribution of transverse stresses in the web. as shown by Seitz.12 = 2.462 Determination of the reduction factors The determination of the reduction factors for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field can be either determined • using different buckling curves Longitudinal stress acc.Verifications during erection .4. Therefore column-like behaviour is not calculated in detail here.1. However. = 0. to Annex B.c. column-like behaviour does not have to be considered according to the code calculation.2).12 = 0.12.08 Because ξ > 1. to Eq.1.08 ξ 12 = 1.0.014 ρ 12 = 0. section 5. Annex B.1.Box-girder bridge Determination of the slenderness parameter λ p λ p.15.z.12 σ cr.337 • using a single buckling curve According to Table B.

Element (801) Additional verification for plates with transverse stresses σy For longitudinally stiffened plates with transverse stresses σy.12 = 0.915 DIN 18800 Part 3. • • 236 . Hinged boundaries are usually assumed between the subpanels and the longitudinal stiffener.Part I Use of the corrected interpolation function For comparison. the longitudinal stiffeners should be verified using a second order elastic method of analysis based on the following assunptions: • The considered longitudinal stiffener is treated as simply supported member with an initial sinusoidal imperfection w0 equal to bik/250. where bik is the smallest width of the adjacent subpanels. here the use of the newly derived interpolation function acc. The calculation gives: ηSeitz. the loading on the subpanels when they act together with the longitudinal stiffener should be taken into account. If the subpanels are considered to be rigidly connected to the longitudinal stiffener. The adjacent longitudinal boundaries are straight. to Seitz [40] is used. simply supported and rigid.COMBRI Design Manual .

12 = 0.3.1.4 ⋅ bc Ast := Asl.w bc.part := 0.63 mm Normal force acting on the stiffener The stiffener force is calculated with the direct stress σx.part := 3 − ψ 11 5 − ψ 11 ⋅ b11 b11.st ⎞ . In the latter case.part = 590.1 mm bc := b12 − ztop.Ed.part + bst + bc. in German standard DIN 18800 Part 3. ⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎝ 250 w 0 = 3. However.2 mm bc.2. the resistance of the longitudinal stiffener can be either calculated according to second-order theory or with the help of a buckling coefficient and a reduction curve.Verifications during erection .st = 6.12 = 1 α Rd. Thus.1 + tw ⋅ b11.84 cm 2 Nx. a buckling coefficient for the longitudinal stiffener could not be explicitly determined because the stiffener deflection was always found in combination with local subpanel eigenmodes of higher order. Element (801) [10] rules are provided for the verification of longitudinal stiffeners in panels which are subjected to transverse loading. it is of utmost importance to determine the buckling coefficient correctly to which advanced analysis software such as EBPlate [13] is able to highly contribute nowadays.1: b11. Determination of the initial stiffener imperfection w 0 := min⎜ ⎛ b11.st and the gross cross-section of the stiffener Ast. a verification on the basis of second-order theory is followed here.6 mm bc = 1475. Figure A.037 η sin gle.12 = 0.part Nx. These complementary rules will be used to determine the stiffener resistance in this example.st := Ast ⋅ σ x.3 Verification of the longitudinal stiffener Generally.897 • using a single buckling curve α Rd.st b12.965 4.Box-girder bridge Determination of the patch loading resistance • using different buckling curves η diff.st ( ) Ast = 575.03 MN 237 . The gross cross-section of the stiffener is determined according to EN 1993-1-5.part = 351. In contrast to EN 1993-1-5. in this example.12 = 1.

Part I 238 .COMBRI Design Manual .

the verification can be done.4 MPa q = 6.II = 0.cr of the stiffener and the influence of the elastic foundation cf.Ed.Ed.eq ⋅ tw ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ x. the elastic deformation wel.st b12.Ed.1 a 2 2 2 Nx.st acts on the stiffener along the loading length sst only.37 239 .cr = 200.st. π ⋅ 210000MPa ⋅ Isl.042 MNm MII := Nx.Ed.st.eq which acts on the whole stiffener length and a factor q as follows: ⎛ s st 1 ⎛ π⋅s s ⎞ ⎞ ⎟⎟ σ z.Box-girder bridge Transverse loading acting on the stiffener The transverse stress σz.Ed.st.1 η := σ fyw γ M1 σ = 115.II := w el. It can be recalculated to an equivalent transverse stress σz.st.8 MPa w el.st + ⋅z Isl.65 MN c f := ⎛ π ⎞ ⋅N ⎜ ⎟ x.eq = 80.eq := σ z.706 MPa With the critical force Nx.3 mm to the outer fibre and the moment of inertia Isl.st ⎝ b11.1 = 154894 cm4 of the longitudinal stiffener.21 mm MII = 0.Ed.1 st.Verifications during erection .cr := Nx.II MII σ := σ x.3 MPa η = 0.II and the bending moment MII according to second-order theory can be determined and with the maximum distance zst.st ⎠ ⎝ a ⎠ Second-order theory verification of the stiffener 2 σ z.cr ⎝a⎠ q ⋅w 0 cf − q c f = 123.cr ⋅ w el.st ⋅ ⎜ + ⋅ sin ⎜ ⎝ a π ⎝ a ⎠⎠ ⎛ 1 + 1 ⎞ + ⎛ π ⎞ ⋅N q := σ z.Ed.1 = 393.

Part I 240 .COMBRI Design Manual .

E σy. Section 2.2.E ss a σy. Verification if the longitudinal stiffeners fulfil the minimum requirements to act as fix supports for the subpanels acc. taking into account the horizontal component of the patch load. σx.2. 9 and 10 of EN 1993-1-5.E σy. 3. to EN 1993-1-5.3. to elastic bending theory: Remark: The above used „section modulus at bottom plate“y takes conservatively into account shear lag effect.6 N/mm² Determination of the stress field components acc. 2.4 N/mm² FEd.1 Application of Sections 3.E σy.2. Section 4.2. the ultimate resistance of the longitudinal stiffened bottom plate is determined acc.75 MN ss = 3.E bsub Figure 4-10: Stress field in bottom plate acc. to elastic bending theory (left hand side) and resulting conservative assumption for stress field in subpanel (right hand side).Box-girder bridge 4.Verifications during erection .93 MNm Wbot = 1150500 cm³ σx. 9 and 10.2. Specific cross-section parameters of considered bottom plate (cp.Ed = 189.2 Bottom plate 4. Correction of the axial stress distribution due to shear lag effect.Ed = 25. Figure 4-10 shows the idealized assumption of the stress distribution in the bottom plate acc. Section10. acc. Figure 2-9) fyf = 325 N/mm² MEd = 217.2. to EN 1993-1-5. EN 1993-1-5 to launching situation “1” In the following.3): Thickness of bottom plate: Number of stiffeners: Yield strength of steel: Bending moment in cross-section: Section modulus at bottom plate: Resulting axial stress in bottom plate: Horizontal component of patch load: Loading length: Resulting transverse stress: tf = 75 mm nst = 6 (Geometry cp. 241 .bot = 5.1. In disregard to the consistency this fact is neglected in the following to provide an entire design example.3. to Sections 3. to EN 1993-1-5 Section 3.E σx. if required.E bsub b b1 σx. to the elastic bending theory. cp. Verification of the subpanel resistance acc.0 m σy. Resistance is calculated for the erection phase. Section 9.E σx. The next required calculation steps are: 1.

3.1: Effectives width factor β 242 . Effective width (2) Provided adjacent spans do not differ more than 50% and any cantilever span is not larger than half theadjacent span the effective lengths Le may be determined from Figure 3. Figure 3. 3. For all other cases Le should betaken as the distance between adjacent points of zero bending moment. EN 1993-1-5.1: Effective length Le for continuous beam and distribution of effectives width Table 3.1.1.2.COMBRI Design Manual . see 3.1(2).1.Part I EN 1993-1-5. General (1) Shear lag in flanges may be neglected if b0 < Le/50 where b0 is taken as the flange outstand or half the width of an internal element and Le is the length between points of zero bending moment.2.

Ed = 189.106 bp ⋅ tf κ := α 0 ⋅ = 0.1): Effective length: Considered width: ⇒ Le = 120 m (conservative assumption) b0 = bp/2 = 3.Ed := = 208.02 < κ ≤ 0.Ed derived by the elasic bending theory.x.Ed − ⋅ σ 1. which is equal to the axial design stress σx.109 m Correction of axial stress distribution due to shear lag effect: ( ) 2 Shear lag parameters: α 0 := 1+ b0 Asl = 1.Ed := 1.Ed β the mean stress σx.2) ⋅ σ 1.mean := σ 1.Ed for the following value of σ1.x.x.2 σ x.mean in the bottom plate.6 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 Cross-check: σ x.Ed − ⋅ σ 1.Verifications during erection .mean := σ 1.mean becomes equal to the axial stress σx.mean which results in 1 0 = ∫ σ ( y ) dy b0 0 4 b σ x.x.x.25 ⋅ ( β − 0.03 Le β := 1 if κ ≤ 0.Ed − σ 2.4 ⋅ N ⋅ mm− 2 243 .02 2 ⎞ 1 + 6 ⋅⎛ κ − ⎜ ⎟ + 1.mean in the bottom plate is given by the integral σ x.4 ⋅ N ⋅ mm 5 4 ( ) −2 ! = σ x. Gross area of longitudinal stiffeners: Asl := nst ⋅ tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 = 0. which deliveres a mean stress value σx.Ed if β > 0.x.x.Ed in the middle of the bottom plate σ 2.Ed = 189.Ed: σ 1. 3.6 ⋅κ 2500 ⋅ κ ⎠ ⎝ 1 1 if 0. The mean stress σx.908 otherwise The axial stress σ1.x.x.Ed 5 ( ) with the axial stress σ2.Box-girder bridge Verification if shear lag effect has to be taken into account (EN 1993-1-5.Ed − σ 2.6 ⋅ κ β = 0.x.25 m b0 < Le/50 requirement not fulfilled! Shear lag effect has to be taken into account.7 1 8.x.Ed in the bottom plate (at location of web) is that value.x.

Ed ⎟⎜ ⎟⎜ f ⎠⎝ y ⎞ ⎛ τ Ed ⎟ + 3⎜ ⎟ ⎜ f ⎠ ⎝ y ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 2 (10.COMBRI Design Manual . 10.3.Ed and τEd are the components of the stress field in the ultimate limit state.2. Ed ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ ⎜ f ⎠ ⎝ y 2 ⎞⎛ σ z . Table 4. 4.Ed. For long plates kσ is given in Table 4.Part I EN 1993-1-5. Reduced stress method (4) In determining αult. σz. EN 1993-1-5. Figure 3. Stress distribution due to shear lag (1) The distribution of longitudinal stresses across the flange plate due to shear lag should be obtained from Figure 3. Ed ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ ⎜ f ⎠ ⎝ y 2 ⎞ ⎛ σ x .4.k the yield criterion may be used for resistance: 1 2 α ult . Ed ⎜ f ⎝ y ⎞ ⎛ σ z . Plate elements without longitudinal stiffeners (4) …kσ is the buckling factor corresponding to the stress ratio ψ and boundary conditions.2. k ⎛σ = ⎜ x .3) it is assumed that the resistance is reached when yielding occurs withoutplate buckling.2 as appropriate.1: Internal compression elements 244 .3) where σx.3: Distribution of stresses due to shear lag EN 1993-1-5.1 or Table 4. 3. NOTE: By using the equation (10.

x.sub := σ x bsub = 196.Ed = 208.6 y 2 2.x.7 1 1.x.115 Critical local buckling stress in x-direction: σ cr. Buckling verification of subpanels: .sub ( ) = 0.3 Figure 4-11: Axial stress distribution in bottom flange.x := 12 ⋅ 1 − ν ⋅ bsub ( 2 2 π ⋅ E ⋅ tf 2 ) 2 ⋅ kσ = 16701.sub σ 1.943 Buckling factor for internal compression elements: kσ := 8.x.Ed ⋅ σ y.p.k := fyf σ 1.Ed − σ 2.Ed − σ 1.2 y ⎞ ⎛ σ 1.sub := σ 1.2 1.3 2.Verifications during erection .6 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 −2 σ 2.k of subpanel: α ult.9 3.3 0.649 Stress distibution in subpanel: σ 1.x.Ed + σ y.1 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 245 .sub.6 2.Ed 2 2 ( ) = 1.05 + ψ = 4.Ed ⋅ ⎜ 1 − b0 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ( ) ⎛ y ⎞ 4 if β > 0.3 1.x.Ed + σ 1.x.7 ⋅ N ⋅ mm ψ := σ 2.Minimum load amplifier αult.Ed ⋅ ⎜ 1 − 5 ⋅ β ⋅ b0 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ axial stress (x-direction) 4 otherwise 0 0.Box-girder bridge Axial stress distribution in bottom flange (half bottom plate): σ x ( y) := σ 2.

τ ⎠ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ (10.6) α cr .τ and σ cr . ψz are determined from Section 4 and Section 6.COMBRI Design Manual .3(4). Reduced stress method (6) Where αcr values for the complete stress field are not available and only αcr. σz. 10. Reduced stress method (3) The plate slenderness⎯λp should be taken from λ = α ult . x 4α cr . Ed τ = cr τ Ed σcr. the stiffened plate may be modelled using the rules in section 4 and 5 without reduction of the second moment of area of longitudinal stiffeners as specified in 5. z ⎢⎜ 4α cr . x = where a b π 2 ⋅ E ⋅ t2 12 ⋅ (1 − μ 2 ) ⋅ b 2 1⎤ ⎡ ⋅ ⎢α + ⎥ α⎦ ⎣ 2 α length of the panel in direction of load width of panel (transvers to load-direction) = a/b EN 1993-1-5.x for a plate with an aspect ratio α ≤ 1 results from: σ cr . 246 . z 2α cr . see (6) NOTE1: For calculating αcr for the complete stress field.Ed and τEd can be used. z ⎣⎝ ⎞ 1 −ψ x 1 −ψ z 1 ⎟ + + + 2 2 2 ⎟ 2α cr . x σ x . z α cr . x 2α cr . σcr. x = where α cr . Ed σ = cr .Ed . ψx.i values for the arious components of the stress field σx. the αcr value may be determined from: 1 α cr 1 + ψ x 1 + ψ z ⎡⎛ 1 + ψ x 1 + ψ z = + + ⎢⎜ + 4α cr . τcr. 10.2) where αcr is the minimum load amplifier for the design loads to reach the elastic critical load of the plate under the complete stress field. NOTE2: When αcr cannot be determined for the panel and its subpanels as a whole. k α cr (10. separate checks for the subpanel and the full panel may be applied. EN 1993-1-5.z.x. x 4α cr .Part I Remark from author The exact elastic critical plate buckling stress σcr. z σ z .

803 .sub.sub.Interaction between plate and column-type buckling behaviour: The buckling behaviour in x-direction of the subpanel is pure plate-like.sub.8 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 Weighting factor ξ: ξ := σ cr.p.x σ 1.sub.y := ⋅⎜ + ⎟ = 4193.sub = 0. ψ ) := 1 if λ < 0.Ed 2 2 π ⋅ E ⋅ tf 2 = 164.Reduction due to local buckling of subpanels: Global plate slenderness of subpanel: λ := α ult.p.6 ⋅N ⋅mm 2) 2 a bsub ⎠ 12 ⋅ ( 1 − ν ⋅ a ⎝ Minimum load amplifier αcr.sub.sub.175 Reduction factor for internal compression elements: ρ sub ( λ .y σ cr.x + 1 α cr.055 ⋅ ( 3 + ψ ) λ 2 otherwise 247 .sub.k α cr.y: α cr.sub.sub.c.x := σ cr. Critical local column buckling stress in y-direction: σ cr. The buckling behaviour in y-direction of the subpanel has to be checked.063 Critical local buckling stress in y-direction: ⎛ bsub a ⎞ −2 σ cr.041 Resulting minimum load amplifier αcr for local subpanel bucking (with ψ ≈1): α cr.673 λ − 0.Box-girder bridge Minimum load amplifier αcr.sub := 1 1 α cr.sub.c.y := 2 2 π ⋅ E ⋅ tf 12 ⋅ bsub 2 = 3693.y := σ cr.sub.135 .sub = 80.sub.Verifications during erection . due to ist aspect ratio.y −1 ξ = 0.y = 53.p.p.x: α cr.y σ y.

1. bending moment.5) include an interaction between shear force. see Figure 9.3. where s is the smallest of a1.5. 10. Ed ⎞ ⎛ τ Ed ⎟ ≤1 ⎟ + 3⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ρ f / γ ⎟ ⎜ ρ f / γ ⎟ ⎜ ρ f / γ ⎟⎜ ρ f / γ ⎟ ⎜ χ f / γ ⎟ ⎝ x y M 1 ⎠ ⎝ z y M 1 ⎠ ⎝ x y M 1 ⎠⎝ z y M 1 ⎠ ⎝ w y M 1 ⎠ (10.5).5) only for the compressive parts.4) and (10. Ed ⎞ ⎛ σ z .k as interpolation function NOTE: This method leads to the verification format: ⎞ ⎛ σ x . (10. for shear stresses from 5. a2 or b. Figure 9.2. where each calculated for the slenderness⎯λp according to equation (10. section 7 should not be applied.. where a1 and a2 are the lengths of the panels adjacent to the transverse stiffener under consideration and b is the height between the centroids of the flanges or span of the transverse stiffener.5) NOTE 1: Since verification formulae (10. axial force and transverse force.] b) a value interpolated between the values of ρx. Minimum requirements for transverse stiffeners 2 2 2 (1) In order to provide a rigid support for a plate with or without longitudinal stiffeners. [.2. Ed ⎞⎛ σ z .2: Transverse stiffener (3) The transverse stiffener should carry the deviation forces from the adjacent compressed panels under the assumption that both adjacent transverse stiffeners are rigid and straight together with any external load and axial force according to the NOTE: to 9. (4) It should be verified that using a second order elastic method analysis both the following criteria are satisfied at the ultimate limit state: 248 .4) and (10.2). EN 1993-1-5. In case of panels with tension and compression it is recommended to apply equations (10. 9.COMBRI Design Manual . Eccentricities should be accounted for. intermediate transverse stiffeners should satisfy the criteria given below.3). for transverse stresses from 4.3(3).4(1) taking into account column-like behaviour relevant.2(1).5.4) and (10. The compressed panels and the longitudinal stiffeners are considered to be simply supported at the transverse stiffeners.4(1) taking into account column-like behaviour where relevant. Ed ⎞ ⎛ σ x . Reduced stress method (5) The reduction factor ρ may be determined using either of the following methods: a) the minimum value of the following reduction factors: ρx ρz χw for longitudinal stresses from 4. ρz and χw as determined in a) by using the formula for αult.Part I EN 1993-1-5. (2) The transverse stiffener should be treated as a simply supported member subject to lateral loading with an initial sinusoidal imperfection w0 equal to s/300. NOTE 2: The National Annex may give further information on the use of equations (10.

to Section 9.sub. ψ ) = 1 ρ sub.y := ρ sub ( λ .511 Resulting reduction factors ρ sub.Verifications during erection .sub ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ σ 1. 1. if the longitudinal stiffeners statisfy the criteria of a rigid support.sub.x ⋅ ρ c.2 ) + λ ⎣ χ sub := χ sub ( φ ) = 1 ⎦ = 0. an exact buckling check.Simplified second order elastic analysis of longitudinal stiffener: Discription of used parameters: tst tf b2 tst.Minimum requirements for the longitudinal stiffener: Maximum stress in stiffener: σ max ≤ fyf γ M1 Maximum additional deflection: w := a 300 .y ⋅ ρ sub.x ⋅ ρ c.sub ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ ⋅⎜ ⎟ = 0.2 are applied to the longitudinal stiffeners.Box-girder bridge Reduction factor for column buckling: χ sub ( φ ) := 1 if λ < 0.sub.x := ρ sub ( λ .General: Local subpanel bucking is governing.y − χ sub ⋅ ξ ⋅ ( 2 − ξ ) + χ sub = 1 ( ) Subpanel verification: η σ y. has to be performed.eq b1 bsub b3 b2 hst b1 Figure 4-12: Detail of bottom plate cross-section with trapezoidal stiffeners.Ed ⎛ σ 1.445 := ⎜ fyf ⎟ fyf ⎟ fyf ⎟ ⎜ fyf ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ρ sub. it can be expected that for the launching loads the stiffeners fulfill the simplified conservative check acc. using an appropiate computer program (e. In case that this handcalculation check fails. Therefore the minimum requirements for transverse stiffeners given in EN 1993-1-5 Section 9.Ed σ y.y := ρ sub.34 ⋅ ( λ − 0. As the bottom plate is designed for the Ultimate Limit State.y ⋅ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ γ M1 ⎟ γ M1 ⎟ γ M1 ⎟ ⎜ γ M1 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎠ 2 2 Global buckling verification of longitudinal stiffener: .g.2 1 φ + φ 2 −λ 2 otherwise 2 ⎤ φ := 0.0 ) = 1 ρ c. .5 ⋅ ⎡1 + 0. 249 . EBPlate).

Ed I st 1− 1− ⎜ ⎜ N cr . a simplified approach may be used. With new boundary conditions the solution of (9. only the boundary conditions change due to end moments MEN = Nst. p b ⎜ a1 a2 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ is the maximum compressive force of the adjacent panels but not less than the maximum compressive stress times half the effectivep compression area of the panel including stiffeners. 110-111) [.5. In this case expression (9.10) is still valid.Ed is related to the maximum eccentricity eo + wo and ΔNst.Ed from deviation force only to wo. are defined in 4.21) and after rearranging: σ max = where: N st . Ed w0 ⋅ emax + ⋅ Ast I st f 1 ⋅ (1 + qm ) ≤ y ΣN st . 9. σcr. Ed e0 ΣN st . The equilibrium equation (9. Commentary and worked examples to EN 1993-1-5 “Plated structural elements". Ed ΣN st . Ed ΣN st . where eo is the eccentricity of the centroid of single sided stiffener relative to the mid-plane of the web.1 [34] Minimum requirements for transverse stiffeners (p. Ed Ast ⎛ ⎜ emax ⎜ 1 1 + + N st .2. c N Ed ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ ⎜ + ⎟ σ cr .c. from (5) [. st N cr . 9. st (9.2: The mechanical model of a single sided stiffener It is considered that Nst. Figure 9.2.22) qm = 250 N st . Ed e0 ⋅ ⎜ ΣN st .. To overcome this problem.2. Minimum requirements for transverse stiffeners (6) If the stiffener carries axial compression this should be increased by ΔNst = σm⋅b2/π2 in order to account for deviation forces. The criteria in (4) apply but ΔNst need not be considered when calculating the uniform stresses from axial load in the stiffener.] where NEd σcr.10) becomes much more complicated than the solution given by (9.20) rewrites as follows: σ max = N st .COMBRI Design Manual .17) and is not suitable for practical use.. Ed w0 ⋅ ΣN st .p σm = σ cr .3 and Annex A.] For single sided transverse stiffeners the mechanical model is shown in Figure 9.19) and (9. st ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (9. Ed w0 .1.Part I EN 1993-1-5.Ed eo. based on the expression for maximum displacements and stresses at mid height of double sided stiffeners (9.20). Ed γ M1 1− N cr .

1 + min bst.sub.913 ⎞ m ⎟ ⎜ 0.75 ⋅ MN Maximum deviation stress from patch load: σ m := σ cr.eq ⋅ ⎜ 2 − zst ⎟ + b2 ⋅ tst ⋅ ( hst − zst ) st f st 12 ⎣ ⎣ 12 ⎝ ⎠⎦ ⎦ Eccentricity of single sided stiffener: e0 := zst = 0.35 ⋅N ⋅mm− 2 ⎜ b1 ⎟ a ⎜ bsub + ⎟ 2 ⎠ ⎝ ⋅⎛ 251 .sub.c.1 := ⎛ 2 ⋅15 ⋅ε ⋅tf ⎜ ⎜ bsub ⎝ ⎛ 2 ⋅15 ⋅ε ⋅tf bst.4 ⋅ mm zst = 55.y ≥ 0.Ed = 17.y NEd σ cr.sub.eq ⋅ hst + tst ⋅ b2) := Ast 2 2 ⎤ ⎤ b ⋅t 3 ⎡ ⎡h 3⋅t ⎞⎥ ⎛ hst 2 ⎢2 ⋅ ⎢ st st.eq + h ⋅t ⎥ + st f + b ⋅t ⋅z 2 I st := st st.2 = 0.056 m Maximum eccentricity of stiffener: tf emax := zst + = 0.c.p.2 := ⎜ ⎜ b1 ⎝ bst := min bst.bot = 5.63 ⋅ MN Reduction due to plate type behaviour of the adjacent panels (subpanels): σ cr.y ⋅ 2 ⎞ = 3. 300 ⎣300 ⎦ Axial load in stiffener: Nst.52 ⋅mm w 0 := min⎢ .sub.Verifications during erection .998 m Ast := tst ⋅ b2 + 2 ⋅ b3 + tf ⋅ bst = 93059.093 m 2 Amplitude of inital imperfection: b1 ⎞ ⎤ ⎡ ⎛ ⎜ bsub + ⎟⎥ ⎢ a ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎥ = 2.485 ⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ( ) ( ) hst ( tst.513 ⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ = ⎛ 1.6 ⋅ mm ( ) ⎞ ⎟ = ⎛ 1.Box-girder bridge Gross cross-section of stiffener: bst.5 Deviation force from patch load: NEd := FEd.y σ cr.Ed := Ast ⋅ σ x.p.913 ⎞ m ⎟ ⎜ 0.

25) For single sided stiffeners emax has to be understood as the distance from the web surface (opposite to the stiffener) to the stiffener centroid.11 in (9.24) w = w0 (1 + 1. if this distance is smaller than emax.22) were tested against the solution of the equilibrium equation (9.10).21) and (9.1) with the following simplified expressions: σ max = N st . In this case compression stresses from the axial force and from bending sum up at the web side of the stiffener. 252 .19) rewrites as follows: w = w0 1 (1 + qm ) ≤ b N cr . Ed (9.Part I If the same amplification factor (1+qm) is applied to the displacements.25 in (9. Ed f 1 ⋅ (1 + 1.25qm ) (9.23) Expressions (9. Ed γ M1 1− N cr . equation (9. that safe and very accurate results are obtained. st ≤ b 300 (9. Ed ΣN st . Based on an extensive parametric study it was found (Beg and Dujc [1]). Ed emax w0 + ⋅ Ast I st 1 N cr . See also [1]. This means that single sided transverse stiffeners may be checked to fulfil the requirements (9.23). st −1 ΣN st . st 300 −1 ΣN st .22) and by a factor 1.11 qm ) ≤ y ΣN st . when qm is multiplied by a factor 1.COMBRI Design Manual . This is due to the fact that the most unfavourable situation is present when the initial bow imperfection w0 extends to the stiffener side of the web.

In case that the longitudinal stiffeners do not satisfy these requirements. whereas the minimum load amplifier is governing the design of the whole crosssection.st −2 σ max = 260. 253 .Ed Ncr.6 ⋅ mm ( ) ≤ a = 13.Ed ⋅ emax ⋅ w 0 Ist ⋅ (1 + 1.Ed Ast + ΣN st.06 ⋅ MN Euler load of stiffener: Ncr.29 ⋅ MN Amplifier of deviation force: Nst. This calculation is not covered by the calculation example given above.5 ⋅ N ⋅ mm Minimum requirement for „maximum allowable stress“ fulfilled! Maximum additional deflection: 1 + 1. an exact global buckling analysis via appropriate computer software has to be performed.Ed ⋅ e0 qm := = 16.Ed := Nst. to Section 9 is a safe but conservative approach.25 ⋅ qm w := w 0 ⋅ Ncr.st := 2 π ⋅ E⋅ Ist a 2 = 216.11 ⋅qm) 1− ΣN st.Ed + ΔN st.9 ⋅ N ⋅ mm −2 ≤ fyf γ M1 = 295.44 ⋅ MN Resulting axial force in stiffener: ΣN st. Remark 1: The performed verification via hand-calculation acc.Box-girder bridge Additional axial force in stiffener: ΔN st.864 ΣN st.Ed = 23.3 ⋅ mm 300 Minimum requirement for „maximum allowable additional deflection“ fulfilled! Final conclusion: The bottom plate fulfilles the verification acc.st −1 ΣN st.Verifications during erection . to Sections 9 and 10 for the launching situation “1”.Ed := 2 σ m ⋅a π 2 = 5.Ed ⋅ w 0 Maximum axial stress in striffener: σ max := Nst. Remark 2: The verification of the local buckling resitance of the trapezoidal stiffeners can be done separately.Ed w = 6.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 254 .

437 0.175 0.432 0.max Ultilisation level of maximum allowable additional deflection in stiffener ηw [-] [m] [N/mm²] [N/mm²] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] 2 1.865 0.26 206.883 0.Ed Minimum load amplifier αult.496 5 0.0 185.91 207. Variation parameter nst.663 17.615 0.676 4.430 0.x.Verifications during erection .51 208.611 0.163 0.732 0.669 9.231 0.2 185.328 0.5 1. Number of stiffeners nst Subpanel width bsub Maximum axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect σ1.216 0.549 3 1.6 1.803 0.Box-girder bridge Parameter study Table 4-4: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “1”.8 184.135 0.520 0.Ed Axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect at location of 1st stiffener σ2.419 0.307 0.6 184.848 0.k Minimum load amplifier αcr.834 0.656 31.511 4 0.84 205.649 53.496 255 .0 1.8 1.2 1.4 185.496 6 0.441 0.sub Weighting factor ξ Global plate slenderness of subpanel⎯λ Ultilisation level of subpanel η Ultilisation level of maximum allowable axial stress in stiffener ησ.111 0.68 207.595 0.x.445 0.828 0.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 256 .

0 m σy.264 0.178 2.144 6.3 N/mm² Le = 120 m (conservative assumption) b0 = bp/2 = 3.259 0.163 0.8 2. Number of stiffeners nst Subpanel width bsub Maximum axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect σ1.sub Weighting factor ξ Global plate slenderness of subpanel⎯λ Ultilisation level of subpanel η Ultilisation level of maximum allowable axial stress in stiffener ησ.Ed = 157.bot = 3.9 2. Figure 2-9 fyf = 345 N/mm² MEd = 99.Verifications during erection .2 Application of Sections 3.k Minimum load amplifier αcr.726 0.444 6 0.128 11.x.3): Thickness of bottom plate: Geometry of stiffeners: Yield strength of of steel: Bending moment in cross-section: Section modulus at bottom plate: Resulting axial stress in bottom plate: Horizontal component of patch load: Loading length: Resulting transverse stress: Effective length: Considered width: tf = 35 mm cp.35 MNm Wbot = 630829 cm³ σx.033 0.457 257 .2.1 2.25 m Determination of the stress field components acc.501 0.026 0.5 2.216 0. Table 4-5: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “2”.328 1.161 3.26 173.5 N/mm² FEd.436 0. EN 1993-1-5 to launching situation “2” Specific cross-section parameters of considered bottom plate (cp.764 0.7 153.436 4 0.68 176. Section 2.731 0.Ed Minimum load amplifier αult.Ed = 37.458 0.713 0.708 0.287 0.428 0.Ed Axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect at location of 1st stiffener σ2.3 153.2.Box-girder bridge 4.3 152. Variation parameter nst.3.x.760 0.max Ultilisation level of maximum allowable additional deflection in stiffener ηw [-] [m] [N/mm²] [N/mm²] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] 2 1.615 1.2 0.51 177.2. to elastic bending theory: Verification if shear lag effect has to be taken into account: b0 < Le/50 requirement not fulfilled! Shear lag effect has to be taken into account.574 0.6 2.436 5 0.5 152.197 1.84 172.710 0. 9 and 10.91 175.704 0.0 153.912 MN ss = 3.444 3 1.037 0.135 0.

Part I 258 .COMBRI Design Manual .

2.Box-girder bridge 4.91 137.604 0.3 N/mm² FEd. 9 and 10.Verifications during erection . Table 4-6: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “3”. Number of stiffeners nst Subpanel width bsub Maximum axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect σ1.762 5.max Ultilisation level of maximum allowable additional deflection in stiffener ηw [-] [m] [N/mm²] [N/mm²] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] 2 1.Ed Minimum load amplifier αult.304 0.615 2.513 0.844 0.Ed = 45.68 139.308 6 0.6 2.135 0.526 0.x.51 141.308 3 1.25 m Determination of the stress field components acc.796 3.2.308 4 0.2 93.189 0.873 1.511 0.005 0.163 0.Ed Axial stress in bottom plate due to shear lag effect at location of 1st stiffener σ2.1 N/mm² Le = 60 m b0 = bp/2 = 3. to elastic bending theory: Verification if shear lag effect has to be taken into account: b0 < Le/50 requirement not fulfilled! Shear lag effect has to be taken into account.2 91.328 1.511 0.917 0.k Minimum load amplifier αcr.228 0.x. Section 2.7 2.939 0.bot = 3.682 0.3 2.897 0. EN 1993-1-5 to launching situation “3” Specific cross-section parameters of considered bottom plate (cp.26 136.3 Application of Sections 3.1 92.308 5 0.482 0.3): Thickness of bottom plate: Geometry of stiffeners: Yield strength of of steel: Bending moment in cross-section: Section modulus at bottom plate: Resulting axial stress in bottom plate: Horizontal component of patch load: Loading length: Resulting transverse stress: Effective length: Considered width: tf = 25 mm cp. Variation parameter nst.2.150 0.9 92.84 134.316 259 .216 1.117 0.0 2.833 2.6 91.62 MNm Wbot = 499908 cm³ σx.477 0.206 0.512 0.sub Weighting factor ξ Global plate slenderness of subpanel⎯λ Ultilisation level of subpanel η Ultilisation level of maximum allowable axial stress in stiffener ησ. Figure 2-9) fyf = 345 N/mm² MEd = 50.2 2.0 m σy.588 0.Ed = 101.3.38 MN ss = 3.

COMBRI Design Manual .Part I 260 .

15 MN FEd.2 = 6. in spite of the conservatism of the used handcalculation approach and the used “section modulus at bottom plate”. It can be seen that. see Section 4.0 6. @ 0.3. It can be however shown that the improvements made in the COMBRI project [7] lead to increase in the calculated resistances so that launching situation “1” can be verified as it is.p in the hand-calculation approach accounts for the influence of column type behaviour in the subpanels transverse direction that increases deviation forces and thus the equivalent axial stress in the stiffener. stiff. This means in fact.c/σcr.0 2.0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 FEd.max.3 = 5. This is due to the fact that with decreasing width of the plate the buckling behaviour of the subpanel becomes more column-like. the level of utilisation for subpanel and stiffener resistance is always below 100%. @ 0.2hw 480 540 Bridge axis x [m] Figure 4-13: Distribution of patch loading resistances according to EN 1993-1-5 [23] along the bridge length. EN 1993-1-5 the patch loading resistance cannot be verified for any of the cases.Verifications during erection .Box-girder bridge 4.0 Patch loading resistance FRd [MN] Pier P1 Pier P2 Pier P3 Pier P4 10. The ratio σcr.2.max. Furthermore it can be seen that: 1) for thin bottom plates (launching situation “2”.2 with regard to the bottom plate.0 0. 6. The calculation according to Section 6.0 4.2.2. that for the bottom plate the erection phase is not governing the design. Figure 4-14 and Figure 4-15 summarise the results of all parameter variations described in Section 4. For launching situations “2” and “3” a small increase in web thickness from tw(2) = 20 mm to 22 mm and tw(3) = 18 mm to 20 mm allows for a verification against patch loading. launching situation “3”) the number of stiffeners play a significant roll for its resistance.max.91 MN FEd.4 Results In Figure 4-4 the distribution of the patch loading resistances is summarised along the whole bridge length.97 MN Sec. 12. stiff. EN 1993-1-5 showed that at least for launching situation “1” the patch loading resistance could be verified. even if only two stiffeners are used. 261 . 2) with increasing number of stiffeners the maximum axial stress in the stiffeners is increasing.3.2hw Davaine. It can be shown that with the current resistance model of Section 6.1 = 10.0 8.1.

Part I 262 .COMBRI Design Manual .

2 0.5 0. ησ.9 0.max 1 0.max in function of number of stiffeners. 263 .4 0.4 0.7 0.5 launching situation "1" 0.7 0.3 2 3 4 launching situation "2" launching situation "3" 5 6 number of stiffeners nst Figure 4-15: Utilisation level of stiffener resistance ησ.1 0 2 3 4 5 6 launching situation "1" launching situation "2" launching situation "3" number of stiffeners nst Figure 4-14: Utilisation level of subpanel resistance η in function of number of stiffeners.9 0.Box-girder bridge η 1 0.Verifications during erection .8 0.6 0.3 0.8 0.6 0.

.

Summary

5 Summary
This publication is Part I of the Design Manual based on results from the research project „Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges by Improved Steel Plated Structures - COMBRI“ [7] and the subsequent dissemination project “Valorisation of Knowledge for Competitive Steel and Composite Structures COMBRI+“, both sponsored by RFCS. Part II is a separate publication [8], which shows the state-ofthe-art and the conceptual design of steel bridges and the steel parts of composite bridges and it is based on the rules in EN 1993-1-5, EN 1993-2 and EN 1994-2. This Part I focuses in detail on the application of Eurocodes on a composite I-girder bridge and a composite box-girder bridge which are related to plate buckling verifications but an overall view on bridge design could not be covered in depth due to its very wide field. In Chapter 2 the deck of the twin-girder and the box-girder bridge were described and the global analysis of both bridges were introduced. For this purpose, an overview on the bridge geometry, material distribution and construction sequences were firstly given. Secondly, a general section followed in which common data such as material properties and actions as well as combinations thereof were given. The global analysis were presented for both bridges and the relevant results - internal forces and moments - were summarised and set the basis for the verifications in Chapters 3 and 4 which look at the verifications during the final stage and the execution stage. In Part II of the Design Manual [8] the standard design of the calculation examples of this Part I is enhanced with regard to the conceptual possibilities of the Eurocode rules and the application of results of the COMBRI research project [7]. Part II of the Design Manual is structured according to certain main topics such as steel grades, flanges, webs, cross bracings and diaphragms as well as launching of steel- and composite bridges. Besides general design recommendations in these chapters, relevant parts of the calculation examples of this Part I are recalculated in order to compare and to show the application of new rules or proposals. Especially the following topics related to this Part I are addressed in Part II of the Design Manual [8]: • Hybrid girders with higher strength in the flanges than in the webs are economic in many applications. Thus, the box-girder is redesigned from S355 to a hybrid girder with S460 and S690 and it will be shown that the cost of the material is reduced by 10% in the spans and 25% at the piers. Double composite action with both top and bottom flanges being composite has been used for some large bridges in Germany and France. The top flange is as usual the bridge deck and the bottom flange has a concrete slab at the piers where the bottom flange is in compression. The design of bridges with double composite action is more complicated than the design of a normal composite bridge so that past experience is summarised and recommendations for design are given. Here and in general, it is common that transverse stiffeners are used at the locations of the cross bracings of which the transverse stiffeners form a part. Besides that. the effect of the transverse stiffeners on the resistance of the web is basically an increase in the shear buckling resistance. However, unless the distance between the transverse stiffeners is very short this effect is small and it does not justify the cost of the stiffeners. The possibility of omitting the transverse stiffeners ise discussed. Moreover, longitudinal stiffeners on webs increase the resistance for bending as well as for shear so that the economy of using longitudinal stiffeners and their detailing is studied. Cross-bracings and diaphragms are to prevent lateral torsional buckling and to transfer lateral loads on the girders to the deck. As used in Chapter 3, traditional cross bracings can be of truss type or frame type including transverse stiffeners on the webs. Although it is not much material
265

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

used for cross bracings, from an economical point of view it is important to minimize the man hours for fabrication. This is discussed in terms of eliminating parts and possibly also the transverse stiffeners leading to straightforward solutions. • The technique of launching bridges has become very popular. As shown in Chapter 4, the resistance to patch loading is of importance as very high support reactions have to be resisted in combination with high bending moments. This has been studied in the COMBRI research project and it resulted in improved design rules. These rules allow the utilisation of quite long loaded lengths and accordingly quite high resistance can be achieved. This may make it possible to launch bridges with parts of the concrete slab or the reinforcement in place. For the twin-girder bridge of this Part I, these two possibilities are studied and the results are compared.

266

References

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] Beg, D.; Dujc, J.: Eccentric loading on single sided transverse stiffeners. Background document DB-C008 to EN 1993-1-5, 2005. Beg, D.; Kuhlmann, U.; Davaine, L.: Design of Plated Structures. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures, Part 1-5 - Design of Plated Structures. ECCS (in preparation). Calgaro, J.-A.: The design of bridges with the EN Eurocodes. Workshop "Eurocodes: Building the future in the Euro-Mediterranean Area", November 27th-29th, 2006, Varese, Italy. Calgaro, J.-A.; Tschumi, M.; Shetty, N.; Gulvanessian, H.: Designers' Guide to EN 1992-2, 19911.3 and 1991-1.5 to 1.7 Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures - Traffic Loads and other actions on bridges. Thomas Telford, London, 2007. Clarin, M.: Plate Buckling Resistance - Patch Loading of Longitudinally Stiffened Webs and Local Buckling. Doctoral Thesis 2007:31, Division of Steel Structures, Luleå University of Technology, 2007. Cook, N.: Designers' Guide to EN 1991-1-4 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures, general actions part 1-4. Wind actions. Thomas Telford, London, 2007. COMBRI: Competitive Steel and Composite Bridges by Improved Steel Plated Structures. Final Report, RFCS research project RFS-CR-03018, 2007. COMBRI+: COMBRI Design Manual - Part II: State-of-the-Art and Conceptual Design of Steel and Composite Bridges. RFCS project RFS2-CT-2007-00031, 2008. Davaine, L.: Formulation de la résistance au lancement d’une âme métallique de pont raidie longitudinalement. Doctoral Thesis D05-05, INSA de Rennes, France, 2005.

[5]

[6] [7] [8] [9]

[10] DIN 18800 Teil 3: Stahlbauten - Stabilitätsfälle, Plattenbeulen, November 1990. [11] DIN EN 1993 NA: National Annex - Nationally determined parameters: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-5 NA: Plated structural elements (in preparation). [12] DIN-Fachbericht 103: Stahlbrücken. Revised version (in preparation). [13] EBPlate: A piece of software developed in the frame of the COMBRI research project [7]. Its aim is to assess the elastic critical stresses of plates. EBPlate is free of charge and can be downloaded from the web site of cticm: www.cticm.com [14] EN 1990/A1: Eurocode: Basis of structural design – Application for bridges, December 2005. [15] EN 1991-1-1: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-1: General actions - Densities, selfweight, imposed loads for buildings, April 2002. [16] EN 1991-1-3: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-3: General actions, Snow loads, July 2003. [17] EN 1991-1-4: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-4: General actions, Wind actions, April 2005. [18] EN 1991-1-5: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-5: General actions, Thermal actions, November 2003. [19] EN 1991-1-6: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-6: General actions, Actions during execution, June 2005. [20] EN 1991-1-7:Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-7: General actions, Accidental Actions, July 2006.
267

COMBRI Design Manual - Part I

[21] EN 1991-2: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges, September 2003. [22] EN 1993-1-1: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, May 2005. [23] EN 1993-1-5: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-5: Plated structural elements, October 2006. [24] EN 1993-2: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 2: Steel Bridges, October 2006. [25] EN 1994-1: Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for building, December 2004. [26] EN 1994-2: Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures – Part 2: General rules and rules for bridges, October 2005. [27] EN 1997-1: Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design – Part 1: General rules, November 2004. [28] EN 1998-1: Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. [29] EN 1998-2: Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 2: Bridges, November 2005 [30] EN 1998-5: Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects, November 2004. [31] Gozzi, J.: Patch Loading Resistance of Plated Girders - Ultimate and serviceability limit state. Doctoral Thesis 2007:30, Division of Steel Structures, Luleå University of Technology, 2007. [32] Hendy, C.R.; Johnson, R.: Designers' Guide to EN 1994-2 Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures Part 2, General rules and rules for bridges. Thomas Telford, London, 2006. [33] Hendy, C.R.; Murphy, C.J.: Designers' Guide to EN 1993-2 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures. Part 2: Steel bridges. Thomas Telford, London, 2007. [34] Johansson, B.; Maquoi, R.; Sedlacek, G.; Müller, C.; Beg, D.: Commentary and worked examples to EN 1993-1-5 "Plated structural elements". Joint report JRC-ECCS, 2007. [35] Leitfaden zum DIN-Fachbericht 101: Einwirkungen auf Brücken. Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2003. [36] Leitfaden zum DIN-Fachbericht 103: Stahlbrücken. Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2003. [37] Leitfaden zum DIN-Fachbericht 104: Verbundbrücken. Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2003. [38] Protte, W.: Beulwerte für Rechteckplatten unter Belastung beider Längsränder. Stahlbau 62 (1993), No. 7, pp.189-194. [39] Sedlacek, G.; Feldmann, M.; Naumes, J.; Müller, Ch.; Kuhlmann, U.; Braun, B.; Mensinger, M; Ndogmo, J.: Entwicklung und Aufbereitung wirtschaftlicher Bemessungsregeln für Stahl- und Verbundträger mit schlanken Stegblechen im Hoch- und Brückenbau. AiF-project 14771, Final Report, Oktober 2007. [40] Seitz, M.: Tragverhalten längsversteifter Blechträger unter quergerichteter Krafteinleitung. Doctoral Thesis, Universität Stuttgart, Mitteilung des Instituts für Konstruktion und Entwurf Nr. 2005-2, 2005. [41] Sétra: Guidance book Eurocodes 3 and 4 - Application to steel-concrete composite road bridges. Sétra (Service d’Etudes techniques des routes et autoroutes), July 2007.

268

List of figures

List of figures
Figure 1-1: Eurocodes to be used in a composite bridge design. ...............................................................1 Figure 2-1: Elevation of the twin-girder bridge. ........................................................................................5 Figure 2-2: Cross-section with traffic data of the twin-girder bridge.........................................................7 Figure 2-3: Transverse cross-bracing on supports of the twin-girder bridge. ............................................7 Figure 2-4: Structural steel distribution for a main girder of the twin-girder bridge. ................................9 Figure 2-5: Order for concreting the slab segments of the twin-girder bridge.........................................11 Figure 2-6: Elevation of the box-girder bridge.........................................................................................15 Figure 2-7: Cross-section with traffic data of the box-girder bridge........................................................15 Figure 2-8: Transverse cross-bracings on supports of the box-girder bridge...........................................17 Figure 2-9: Detail of a bottom flange longitudinal stiffener of the box-girder bridge. ............................19 Figure 2-10: Structural steel distribution for a main girder of the box-girder bridge...............................21 Figure 2-11: Order for concreting the slab segments of the box-girder bridge. .......................................23 Figure 2-12: Location of mid-span and support sections for longitudinal reinforcing steel of the twin-girder bridge................................................................................................................25 Figure 2-13: Location of mid-span and support sections for longitudinal reinforcing steel of the box-girder bridge.................................................................................................................25 Figure 2-14: Modelling the concrete slab for the longitudinal global bending (twin-girder bridge). ......27 Figure 2-15: Modelling the concrete slab for the longitudinal global bending (box-girder bridge). .......27 Figure 2-16: Non-structural bridge equipment details. ............................................................................35 Figure 2-17: Traffic lanes positioning for calculating the girder no.1. ....................................................39 Figure 2-18: Calculation of the box-girder for eccentric concentrated load. ...........................................41 Figure 2-19: Traffic lanes positioning for calculating the box-girder. .....................................................41 Figure 2-20: Tandem TS loading on the deck for the twin-girder bridge. ...............................................43 Figure 2-21: Tandem TS loading on the deck for the box-girder bridge..................................................43 Figure 2-22: UDL tranverse distribution on the bridge deck for the twin-girder bridge..........................45 Figure 2-23: UDL tranverse distribution on the bridge deck for the box-girder bridge...........................45 Figure 2-24: Effective slab width for a main girder in a given cross-sectionof the twin-girder bridge...................................................................................................................................57 Figure 2-25: Effective slab width for a main girder in a given cross-section of the box-girder bridge...................................................................................................................................59 Figure 2-26: Cracked zonesof the twin-girder bridge used in the global analysis. ..................................63 Figure 2-27: Cracked zones of the box-girder bridge used in the global analysis. ..................................63 Figure 2-28: Global analysis organisation chart.......................................................................................67 Figure 2-29: Isostatic and hyperstatic bending moments due to the long-term concrete shrinkage for the twin-girder bridge..........................................................................................................69
269

.................74 Figure 2-36: Bending moments under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the box-girder bridge..223 Figure 4-10: Stress field in bottom plate acc... .....................................................................................71 Figure 2-32: Shear forces under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the twin-girder bridge......................................... ....195 Figure 4-3: Stress field acting at the studied panel.... .................................................... ........................................ ................69 Figure 2-31: Bending moments under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the twin-girder bridge........................................................................................................................167 Figure 4-1: Most unfavourable launching situation................................................................... .......... to elastic bending theory (left hand side) and resulting conservative assumption for stress field in subpanel (right hand side).................................................. ................. .....................193 Figure 4-2: Dimensions of the studied panel in [m]...........................81 Figure 3-5: Design Plastic resistance moment at external support C0..................................................157 Figure 3-13: Utilisation level (left ordinate) and effectivep area (right ordinate) of bottom plate in function of bottom plate thickness tp........................................................................................................................ curve parameter = number of stiffeners nst.......................................................195 Figure 4-4: Distribution of patch loading resistances according to EN 1993-1-5 along the bridge length......97 Figure 3-7: Cross-section at the internal support P2....151 Figure 3-12: Geometry of the trapezoidal stiffeners...................................................Rd of the flanges only at internal support support P2................ .........................................................71 Figure 2-33: Isostatic and hyperstatic bending moments due to the long-term concrete shrinkage for the box-girder bridge.................... ..........................................209 Figure 4-6: Launching situation “2” (most unfavourable for weakest end-span cross-section).................................109 Figure 3-8: Design Plastic resistance moment Mf............................................................................................................................................................... .............................................Part I Figure 2-30: Bending moments under the uniformly distributed load and tandem traffic load (frequent and characteristic LM1) for the twin-girder bridge................................................................................................................. .......................................................................................................241 270 .................................................................................................COMBRI Design Manual .........................79 Figure 3-2: Checked sections of the twin-girder bridge....................................121 Figure 3-9: Checked sections of the box-girder bridge...........211 Figure 4-7: Launching situation “3” (most unfavourable for weakest mid-span cross-section).............76 Figure 3-1: Position of vertical stiffeners of the twin-girder bridge........................................................................................73 Figure 2-34: Bending moments under the uniformly distributed load and tandem traffic load (frequent and characteristic LM1) for the box-girder bridge .......... ..........................139 Figure 3-11: Cross-section of the box-girder bridge at the internal support P3.....81 Figure 3-4: Cross-section at the end support C0........89 Figure 3-6: Cross-section at mid-span P1-P2.....207 Figure 4-5: Launching situation “1” (most unfavourable both for maximum bending and pier crosssection)...................137 Figure 3-10: Cross-section of the box-girder bridge at mid-span P1-P2.73 Figure 2-35: Torque under characteristic LM1 for the box-girder bridge.........................211 Figure 4-8: Notations of the studied panel in [mm]........................................................................................................................74 Figure 2-37: Shear forces under the fundamental ULS and characteristic SLS combinations of actions for the box-girder bridge................................213 Figure 4-9: Stress field acting on the studied panel....... ............................ ........................................................79 Figure 3-3: Different subpanels on the internal support P2......................................................................... .......................................................................

............................263 Figure 4-15: Utilisation level of stiffener resistance ησ...............................................................................................249 Figure 4-13: Distribution of patch loading resistances according to EN 1993-1-5 [23] along the bridge length........................................... .........261 Figure 4-14: Utilisation level of subpanel resistance η in function of number of stiffeners.............................................max in function of number of stiffeners..............List of figures Figure 4-11: Axial stress distribution in bottom flange..263 271 ........245 Figure 4-12: Detail of bottom plate cross-section with trapezoidal stiffeners....................

.

............................................................33 Table 2-8: Loads of the non-structural equipment (box-girder bridge)..223 Table 4-4: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “1”...................... ..........................255 Table 4-5: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “2”..... .................35 Table 2-10: Shrinkage at infinite time.................List of tables List of tables Table 2-1: Age of concrete slab segments at the end of the construction phasing of the twin-girder bridge..........................................................................29 Table 2-5: Partial safety factors for materials (ULS)......................213 Table 4-3: Values of the studied panel..............................................................................23 Table 2-3: Areas of the steel reinforcement.........................................37 Table 2-12: Modular ratio for long-term loading (box-girder bridge).................................................259 273 .............................................................. ...............................................................................31 Table 2-6: Partial safety factors for materials (SLS)...... Variation parameter nst..159 Table 4-1: Dimensions of the studied panels in [mm]........................................29 Table 2-4: Decrease of fy and fu according to the plate thickness t....213 Table 4-2: Internal design forces........................................................................................................................................................................ Variation parameter nst.....................................................................................37 Table 2-13: Adjustment coefficients for LM1.................................. ...37 Table 2-11: Modular ratio for long-term loading (twin-girder bridge)............................39 Table 3-1: Resulting effectivep width of subpanels and stiffener plates............................................. see Figure 4-3 (compression is taken as positive)..................................................31 Table 2-7: Loads of the non-structural equipment (twin-girder bridge)............................................257 Table 4-6: Summary of parameter study for launching situation “3”.....................33 Table 2-9: Shrinkage at traffic opening for the persistent design situation at traffic opening (tini)..............................................................13 Table 2-2: Age of concrete slab segments at the end of the construction phasing of the box-girder bridge................................................................... . ........................................... Variation parameter nst.......................