EUROCODES

Bridges: Background and applications

Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 1

Composite bridge design (EN1994-2)

Bridge modelling and structural analysis

Laurence DAVAINE
French Railways
y (SNCF)
( )
Bridge Engineering Department (IGOA)
 Contents
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 2

1. Bridge modelling
Geometry
Effective width (shear lag effect)
Modular ratios (concrete creep) Cross-sectional
mechanical properties
Transversal distribution

2. The global cracked analysis according to EN 1994-2

Determination of the cracked zones on internal supports
Results from the global analysis
 Twin-girder bridge modelling
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 3

C3

G P2

z
y
x P1
simply supported bar model (dz=0 for every support)
C0 half-bridge cross-section represented by its centre of gravity G
(neutral fibre)
structural steel alone, or composite, mechanical properties
according to the construction phases of the bridge slab
 Concrete slab thickness
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 4

Actual slab Computed slab

Sactual = Scomputed (same area)

actual = computed (same location of the slab gravity centre Gc)
 Shear lag in the concrete slab according to EN 1994-2
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 5

xx ,max
beff

Non-uniform transverse
xx distribution of the
longitudinal stresses

1be1 2 be 2
b0 750 mm
b1 3.125 m b0 b2 2.125 m
beff b0 i bei
i

L
bei min e ; bi
8
i 1 except for end supports where
Le
i 0.55 0.025 1.0
bei
 Shear lag in the concrete slab according to EN 1994-2
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 6

Equivalent span length Le

Global analysis (calculation of internal forces and moments) : constant

along each span (equal to the value at mid-span)

Section analysis (calculation of stresses) : linearly variable along Li/4

surrounding the internal supports
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 7

C0 P1 P2 C3

60 m 80 m 60 m

Le ((m)) 0.85x60 = 51 0.7x80 = 56 0.85x60 = 51

0.25 x (60+80) = 35 0.25 x (60+80) = 35

Le (m) be11 (m) be22 (m) 1 2 beffff (m)

In-span 1 and 3 48 3.125 2.125 1 1 6.0
In-span 2 56 3.125 2.125 1 1 6.0
Internal supports P1 and P2 35 3 125
3.125 2 125
2.125 1 1 60
6.0
End supports C0 and C3 48 3.125 2.125 0.958 1.15 but < 1.0 5.869 < 6.0
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 8

C0 P1 P2 C3
3

L1/2 L2/2 L1/2

1 L1/4 L1/4 L2/4 L2/4 L1/4 L1/4

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

-1

-2

-3

-4
 Composite cross-sections mechanical properties
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 9

Un-cracked behaviour (mid-span regions, Mc,Ed > 0)

beff

Gc R i f
Reinforcement
t neglected
l t d (i
(in compression)
i )

y Gc Ac Ac
G
elastic A Aa Ay G Aa y Ga y Gc
yG neutral axis n n
Ga
y Ga 1
I Ia Aa ( y G y Ga )2 Ic Ac y G y Gc
2

Cracked behaviour (support regions, Mc,Ed < 0)

beff
Ea = Es = 210 000 N/mm (n = 1)
Gs

y Gs A Aa As Ay G Aa y Ga As y Gs
G elastic
neutral axis
I Ia Aa ( y G y Ga )2 Is As y G y Gs
yG Ga 2
y Ga

Is 0
 Modular ratios (creep effect)
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 10

0.3
E f cm
Short-term modular ratio: n0 a E cm 22000
E cm 10
L
Long-term
t modular
d l ratio:
ti
n L n 0 . 1 L t

t t t 0 Creep coefficient according to EN 1992-1-1 with :

t = age of concrete when the considered loading is applied to the bridge

t = age of concrete at the considered time during the bridge life
0

t0 = 1 day for shrinkage

t0 = mean value of age of concrete segments, in case of composites structures
cast in several stages
g (p(permanent load))

L depends on the Permanent loads 1.1

load case : Shrinkage 0.55
Imposed deformations 1.5
 Creep coefficient according to Annex B in EN 1992-1-1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 11

0.3
t t0
t 0 .c t t 0 0 .
t 0 (end of bridge life)

H t t 0

H 1.5. 1 0.012 RH .h 0 250.3 1500.3

18

RH
1 16.8
1
0 RH . f cm . t 0 1 100 .1 . 2 .
. 0.2
0.1 0 3 h
0 cm
f 0.1 t 0

with : RH = 80 % (relative humidity in the bridge area)

2A c
h0 notional size (u is the concrete slab
u perimeter exposed to drying)

0.7 0.2 0.5

35 35 35
1 0.8658 2 0.9597 3 0.9022
f cm cm
f cm
f
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 12

1 Slab segments 16
... ... time (in day)
t =0 t=66 t=80 t=110
Beginning of concreting End of Jacking
Composite behaviour or concreting
not, according to the Bridge equipments
segment concreting order
Mean value of concrete age :
t0 = 35.25 days

14 days

For shrinkage : 1 , t 0 t0 = 49.25 days

30 days
t0 = 1 day
y
nL,1 2 , t 0 t0 = 79.25 days

4 , t 0
3 , t 0
nL,2
L2
nL,4
nL,3
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 13

Short-term modular ratio

Ea
For all load cases : n0 6.
6 1625
E cm

Long-term modular ratio

Load case L t0 (days) t = 0 nL

Concrete slab segment (selfweight) 1.10 35.25 1.394 15.61

Settlement 1.50 49.25 1.291 18.09
Shrinkage
g 0.55 1 2.677 15.24
Bridge equipments 1.10 79.25 1.179 14.15
 Transversal distribution between the two girders
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 14

Influence line a ea
of the support 1
reaction on F
girder
i d no. 1
0

Bridge axle

Girder no.1 girder no. 2

(modeled)
e/2 e/2

a a
R1 F 1 R2 F
e e
 Application to the traffic load model LM1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 15

1. Conventional traffic lanes positioning

1m 0.5 m

Lane no.1
no 1 Lane no.2
no 2 Lane no.3
no 3 Remaining area
3m 3m 3m 2m

Bridge axle

Girder no.1 girder no. 2

(modeled)
3.5 m 3.5 m
 Application to the traffic load model LM1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 16

2. Tandem TS
Bridge axle

1 TS 2 per axle :
TS 1 per axle : 1.0 x 200 = 200 kN
1 0 x 300 = 300 kN
1.0 TS 3 per axle :
1.0 x 100 = 100 kN
0

R1 R2
Influence line of the
support reaction on
girder no. 1
0.5 m 1m 2m

Support reaction on each main girder : R1 = 471.4 kN

R2 = 128.6
128 6 kN
 Application to the traffic load model LM1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 17

3. Uniform Design Load UDL

Bridge axle

Load on lane no.1 : 1 Load on lane no.2 :

1.0 x 9 x 3 = 27 kN/ml 1.0 x 2.5 x 3 = 7.5 kN/ml

LANE 1 Load on lane no.3 :

1.0 x 2.5 x 3 = 7.5 kN/ml
LANE 2 LANE 3

R1 R2

0
Influence Line

0.5 m 1m 2m

Support reaction for each main girder : R1 = 35.36 kN/ml

R2 = 6.64 kN/ml
 Application to the traffic load model LM1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 18

4. Bending Moment (MN.m) for UDL and TS

 Contents
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 19

1. Bridge modelling
Geometry
Effective width (shear lag effect)
Modular ratios (concrete creep) Cross-sectional
mechanical properties
Transversal distribution

2. The global cracked analysis according to EN 1994-2

Determination of the cracked zones on internal supports
Results from the global analysis
 Structural analysis of a composite bridge girder
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 20

Uniform load q (N/m)

P
Static system

Concrete cracking 1

Deformed shape M
Steel yielding 2
Linear elastic global analysis (except for accidental M at mid-span with P
loads) increasing
Mpl,Rd
No bending redistribution is allowed
Mel,Rd Class 1
Concrete cracking near internal support and steel
yielding near mid-span are taken into account through
simplified methods
Plate buckling is neglected in the global analysis except
if the effectivep area of one of the panel is lower than half
its gross area (Aeff < 0.5 Agross)
 Global cracked analysis 1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 21

Stress distribution c in the concrete slab for the characteristic SLS

combination of actions assuming the concrete resists in every cross
section (EI1)
In the zones where c < - 2 fctm , the concrete is assumed to be cracked
(and then neglected) for the bending stiffness distribution (EI2)

EI1 EI1
EI2
EI1 = un-cracked composite second moment of area
(structural steel + concrete slab in compression)
EI2 = cracked composite second moment of area
(structural steel + reinforcement in tension)

This approach is not iterative (the cracked zones are

! determined only once).
 Global cracked analysis 1
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 22

Simplified method is possible if :

- no p
pre-stress
0.15 (L1+ L2)
EI2
- Lmin/Lmax > 0.6

As
L1 L2

EI1

Ac = 0

In the stiffness zones EI2 :

concrete in tension is neglected
reinforcement are included
 In-span steel yielding 2
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 23

Mid-span eventual yielding is taken into account if :

Class 1 or 2 at mid span (and MEd > Mel,Rd )
Class 3 or 4 on internal support
Lmin/Lmax < 0.6

Lmax Lmin

Class 1 or 2 Class 3 or 4

As Lmin/Lmax > 0.6 in the example, the redistribution due to

yielding near mid-span is not taken into account.
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 24

Concreting phases, Slab segments order:

1 2 3 16 15 14 4 5 6 7 13 12 11 10 9 8

10
oncrete slab ((N/mm)
Characteristiic SLS combination

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Stresses in co

-5

2f ctm 6.4 N/mm 2

-10
S

x = 35.0 m x = 76.0 m x = 124.0 m x = 152.0 m

-15

Cracked zone for P1 Cracked zone for P2

41.0 % 19.5 % 19.5 % 20.0 %
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 25

SLS and ULS bending moment distribution MEd (= Ma,Ed + Mc,Ed)

100

Characteristic SLS
80
Fundamental ULS
63.90
55.42 57.59
60
47.18
41.01 42.58
40
ment (MN.m)

20

0
Bending mom

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

-20

-40

-60

-80
-84.56
-81.67
-100
-109.35
-112.72
-120
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 26

SLS and ULS shear force distribution VEd

10

8 12
8.12 Characteristic SLS 7 47
7.47
8
Fundamental ULS
6.02 5.98
6

4.83
4
2.78
es (MN)

2
Shear force

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

-2 -1.90

-4

-5.74
-6
-6.04

8
-8
-8.01 -8.14

-10
 Application to the twin-girder bridge example
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 27

ULS stresses (N/mm) along the steel flanges, calculated without concrete resistance
400

300
277.5 272.6

200

100

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

-100

-200

-287.1
-300
-292.6
292 6

-400
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010 28

Thank you for your kind attention !