Investigation of Large Web Fractures of Welded Steel Plate

Girder Bridge
Y. Edward Zhou, P.E., M.ASCE1; and Amy Eitel Biegalski, P.E., A.M.ASCE2

Abstract: Constructed in 1972 with ASTM A36 共250 MPa兲 steel, a highway bridge in Maryland is comprised of seven welded steel plate
girders of a constant web depth of 2,286 mm 共90 in.兲. In March 2003, the web fractures of two steel girders were discovered in a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

three-span continuous superstructure unit. A full-height web fracture occurred in an interior girder at a cross frame connection plate; and
a partial-height web fracture occurred in an exterior girder at an intermediate transverse stiffener next to a cross frame. The investigation
of the girder fractures involved fracture surface examination, material testing, fracture mechanics analysis, and comprehensive finite-
element modeling for fracture driving forces. The fracture mechanics analysis indicated that a brittle web fracture could occur at a high
stress level with either a surface crack or a through-thickness crack of certain dimensions. Finite-element analysis using a global model
and submodels investigated three possible causes: 共1兲 localized distortion of the unsupported web gap due to the lateral forces of cross
frame members; 共2兲 fabrication induced out-of-flatness of the web plate under in-plane loading; and 共3兲 residual stresses at the fracture
origin area due to the stiffener-to-web welds. The investigation concluded that one or a combination of these can result in the high local
tensile stresses triggering a brittle web fracture with certain crack dimensions at the fracture origin area. Several retrofit concepts were
investigated for their effectiveness in reducing stresses in the fracture origin area. Bridge inspections in the subsequent 6 years after the
web fractures have not reported any other cracks in the bridge.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲BE.1943-5592.0000111
CE Database subject headings: Bridges, steel; Welds; Bridges, box girder; Cracking; Stress; Fatigue; Finite element method;
Maryland.
Author keywords: Steel bridges; Welded steel girders; Brittle fracture; Fracture mechanics; Stress intensity factor; Fracture toughness;
Fatigue; Finite element analysis.

Introduction
Background
The I-895 Bridge over U.S. Route 1 and the Patapsco River in
Elkridge, Md. is located near the south end of I-895 where it
merges with I-95 just south of Baltimore. Built in 1972, the
welded steel plate girder structure consists of a three-span con-
tinuous unit with span lengths of 50.4, 60, and 75.9 m 共165.5,
197, and 249 ft兲, respectively, in Spans 1 through 3, and a simple
span of 16.8 m 共55.11 ft兲 in Span 4. The superstructure has a 35°
skew angle at all substructure units. Fig. 1 shows the bridge cross
section and framing plan.
On March 14 2003, two large cracks were discovered in the
webs of two steel girders. Both web fractures occurred in the
three-span continuous unit in Span 2 near Pier 2, one in an inte-
1
Program Manager of Bridge Evaluation, Testing and Retrofit, URS
Corporation, 4 North Park Drive, Hunt Valley, MD 21030 共corresponding
author兲. E-mail: ed_zhou@urscorp.com
2
Structural Engineer, Benham Companies LLC an SAIC Co.; for-
merly, URS Corporation, Hunt Valley, MD. E-mail: biegalskia@saic.com
Note. This manuscript was submitted on September 25, 2008; ap-
proved on February 22, 2010; published online on February 24, 2010.
Discussion period open until December 1, 2010; separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal
of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 4, July 1, 2010. ©ASCE, ISSN
1084-0702/2010/4-373–383/$25.00.
rior girder 共Girder 4兲 and one in an exterior girder 共Girder 7兲. The
approximate fracture locations are marked in the framing plan in
Fig. 1.
The superstructure is comprised of seven welded steel plate
girders with intermediate cross frames perpendicular to the gird-
ers and end cross frames along the skew at the substructure units.
The girders were fabricated with ASTM A36 共250 MPa兲 steel and
constructed with a composite, 229 mm 共9-in.兲-thick reinforced
concrete deck with shear studs. In the three-span continuous unit,
the web has a constant depth of 2,286 mm 共90 in.兲 with a thick-
ness of 8 mm 共5/16 in.兲 through most of the spans except the 11
mm 共7/16 in.兲 above Pier 2. The thickness of the flanges varies
from 22 to 95 mm 共7/8 to 3 3/4 in.兲.
After the discovery of the cracks, the bridge was closed to
traffic immediately. The fractured areas were examined, followed
by a thorough inspection of the entire bridge. No additional
cracks were found. In the immediate following days, permanent
girder repairs using bolted steel plates were designed and installed
after crack tips were removed from the girder and test specimens
were taken for material properties. The bridge was opened to
traffic upon completion of the repair and has been operating sat-
isfactorily under regular inspections.
Fracture of Girder 4 „G4…
The web fracture in the interior girder, as shown in Fig. 2, oc-
curred in the center girder 共G4兲 directly under the median barrier.
Examinations of the fracture surfaces indicated that the fracture
originated at the top of the web-to-stiffener weld, as illustrated in

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 373

J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Bridge framing plan and cross section
Fig. 3. The crack propagated downward and diagonally, fractured
the full height of the 2,286 mm⫻ 8 mm 共90 in. ⫻ 5 / 16 in.兲 web
plate, and arrested at the web-to-bottom flange weld, as shown in
Fig. 4. The top of the fracture propagated nearly horizontally up
and terminated at the weld between the web and the top flange in
the adjacent web panel, as shown in Fig. 5.
Throughout the bridge, transverse stiffeners are welded to both
sides of the web on all girders. The ends of the stiffener plates are
welded only to the compression flange while fitted tightly to the
tension flange, as visible in Figs. 3–5. The transverse stiffeners on
all girders are either 11 mm⫻ 178 mm 共7 / 16 in. ⫻ 7 in.兲 or
13 mm⫻ 203 mm 共1 / 2 in. ⫻ 8 in.兲 plates which also serve as
connection plates at cross frame locations. At the fracture location
of G4, the stiffeners are 13 mm⫻ 203 mm 共1 / 2 in. ⫻ 8 in.兲
plates and are also connection plates for the first cross frame
approximately 6.9 m 共22.67 ft兲 from Pier 2. The spacing between
the transverse stiffeners is approximately 864 mm 共34 in.兲 in this
region. The cross frame is the X-type, consisting of top and bot-
Fig. 2. Girder 4 web fracture, north side
374 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
tom chords made of 127⫻ 127⫻ 9.5 共5 ⫻ 5 ⫻ 3 / 8兲 angles and di-
agonals of 102⫻ 76⫻ 9.5 共4 ⫻ 3 ⫻ 3 / 8兲 angles. The girder also
has a line of longitudinal stiffeners consisting of 10⫻ 114 mm
共3 / 8 in. ⫻ 4 1 / 2 in.兲 plates, welded to one side of the web ap-
proximately 460 mm 共18 in.兲 above the bottom flange. The web
fracture caused partial fracture of the longitudinal stiffener.
Fracture of Girder 7 „G7…
The web fracture in the exterior girder occurred on G7 on the
south side of the structure, as shown in Fig. 6. The bottom of the
fracture terminated near the midheight of the web plate while the
top of the crack propagated nearly horizontally up into the adja-
cent web panel, similar to the crack on G4. Examinations of the
fracture surfaces indicated that the fracture also originated at the
top of the web-to-stiffener weld.
Compared with the web fracture in G4, the most distinguished
difference is that the G7 web fracture originated at an intermedi-
ate transverse stiffener instead of a cross frame connection plate.
The stiffener is one panel away from the first cross frame on G7
which is approximately 6.5 m 共21.25 ft兲 from Pier 2.
Fig. 3. Top of Girder 4 web fracture, north side
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 4. Lower end of Girder 4 web fracture, north side
Approach of Fracture Investigation
The general approach of this investigation can be summarized as:
共1兲 testing of steel samples removed from the fractured girder
webs for material properties; 共2兲 fracture surface examination for
the nature and the origin of the fractures; 共3兲 fracture mechanics
analysis to determine possible combinations of stress and flaw
geometry with respect to material toughness properties; and 共4兲
finite-element analysis of the bridge structure for fracture driving
forces, from global modeling for the cross frame member forces
to local modeling for stress fields in fracture origin areas. Details
and results of this investigation are discussed as follows.
Material Property Test Results
Two types of material samples were removed from the fractured
8-mm 共5/16-in.兲-thick webs prior to the installation of girder ret-
rofit. One was the complete removal of the crack tips at both ends
of each web fracture; and the other was for making test specimens
for the chemical and mechanical material properties of the web
steel.
Two 51-mm 共2-in.兲-diameter disc samples, one from each
girder, were tested for chemical properties. Results indicated that
both web samples met all the chemical requirements specified in
the AASHTO M270-02/ASTM A709-01 Standard Specification
Fig. 5. Upper end of Girder 4 web fracture, north side
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 375
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
Fig. 6. Girder 7 web fracture, south side
for Grade 36 共250 MPa兲 steel. For tensile strength, one 51 mm
共2 in.兲 共gauge length兲 ⫻ 13 mm 共1 / 2 in.兲 width plate specimen
from G4 was tested in accordance with ASTM A370-97a, “Test
Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Prod-
ucts.” Yield strength was determined to be at 317 MPa 共46 ksi兲
and ultimate tensile strength to be at 483 MPa 共70 ksi兲. All mea-
sured mechanical properties of the sample, including the elonga-
tion and the reduction of area, met the requirements of ASTM
A36 共250 MPa兲 steel.
Charpy V-Notch 共CVN兲 impact notch toughness testing was
performed in accordance with ASTM E23-00a, “Standard Test
Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials.”
Due to the small web thickness 共5/16 in. or 7.9 mm兲, subsized
共three-fourths兲 specimens 共7.5 mm⫻ 10 mm cross section兲 were
used in lieu of the standard full-size specimens 共10 mm
⫻ 10 mm cross section兲. As a result, a 0.75 conversion factor was
needed to obtain the equivalent impact energy requirement as
specified in AASHTO T243 共ASTM A673兲, “Sampling Procedure
for Impact Testing of Structural Steel.” A total of 12 specimens
from Girder 4 were tested at four different temperatures of 21, 4,
⫺12, and ⫺29°C 共70, 40, 10, and −20° F兲, three specimens at
each temperature. The CVN impact test results are presented in
Fig. 7, along with a regression curve. Standard CVN values can
be obtained by applying a multiplier of 1.33.
The Baltimore, Md. area falls in the AASHTO Temperature
Zone 2 for bridge design that has a minimum service temperature
of −1 to −30° F 共−18 to −34° C兲. Compared with the current
AASHTO material toughness requirements for main load-
carrying member components subject to tensile stresses
共AASHTO 2002; AASHTO 2004; AASHTO 2007兲, the CVN im-
pact test results indicated that the web steel satisfies the toughness
requirements for service temperature Zones 1 and 2 for fracture-
critical members. It should be noted that the AASHTO toughness
requirements were not in place until 1975, a few years after the
construction of the subject bridge in 1972. The bridge was de-
signed in accordance with the 1969 AASHTO Standard Specifi-
cations for Highway Bridges.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 7. Results of CVN impact tests of 0.75 subsized specimens of web steel
Fracture Investigation
Visual Examination of Fracture Surfaces
Visual examinations of fracture surfaces indicated flat cleavage
with little shear lips which are typical signs of brittle fracture. The
“chevron” marks are clearly visible on the fracture surfaces of
both girders, the arrows of which point back toward the fracture
origin 共Hertzburg 1989兲. At both web fracture locations, the chev-
ron marks on the fracture surface pointed up toward the top of the
vertical weld between the web and the transverse stiffener. All
fracture surfaces showed modest rust, indicating that the fractures
had occurred sometime prior to discovery.
SEM—Examination
Examinations of fracture surfaces in the origin areas using a scan-
ning electron microscope 共SEM兲 showed that the fracture surfaces
had relatively heavy rust and some were possibly due to the rub-
bing of the mating fracture surfaces under live load. These obser-
vations confirmed that the fractures likely had occurred sometime
before the discovery. The limited SEM examination indicated that
the web fractures were brittle in nature, and the crack origin was
at the top of the vertical welds between the web and the trans-
verse stiffener 共FHWA, personal communication, 2004兲. The poor
surface condition in the fracture origin areas limited the SEM
examination to clearly identify the existence and the extent of
fatigue crack development before the unstable brittle fracture.
Assessment of Web Steel Fracture Toughness „KIc…
The results of CVN impact tests were used to estimate the frac-
ture mechanics material toughness 共KIc or KId兲, which would re-
quire complex and expensive tests for direct measurement. Since
both the CVN and the impact plane-strain fracture toughness KId
tests undergo a transition in the same temperature zone, a corre-
lation between CVN impact energy and KId has been developed
for the lower transition region 共Barsom and Rolfe 1999兲
376 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
共KId兲2/E = 5共CVN兲 共US Customary units, CVN in ft-lb兲
共KId兲2/E = 640共CVN兲 共SI units, CVN in N-m兲 共1兲
The transition temperature from ductile behavior to brittle behav-
ior is an indication of material toughness, and a higher loading
rate causes an increase of the transition temperature. The shift of
the transition temperature from slow to impact loadings has been
found to decrease with the yield strength of the steel and can be
estimated by 共Barsom and Rolfe 1999兲
Tshift = 215 − 1.5␴ys for 36 ksi ⬍ ␴ys ⬍ 140 ksi
共US Customary units兲
Tshift = 120 − 120␴ys for 0.25 GPa ⬍ ␴ys ⬍ 1.0 GPa
共SI units兲 共2兲
Bridge structures are generally considered to be subject to inter-
mediate loading rate and a factor of 0.75 has been suggested to
adjust the KIc to KId temperature shift as calculated from Eq. 共2兲
共Barsom and Rolfe 1999兲. Using the test measured yield strength
of 317 MPa 共46 ksi兲 of the web steel, and adjusted for bridge
loading rate, the transition temperature shift was calculated as
Tshift,Interm. = 共0.75兲共120− 120␴ys兲 ⬇ 61° C 共110° F兲.
A review of the temperature history in the area indicated that
the lowest service temperature of the bridge during the winter
before the girder fractures was ⫺15°C 共5 ° F兲 in January 2003.
With a temperature shift of 61°C 共110° F兲, the corresponding tem-
perature for impact loading is −15° C + 61° C = 46° C 共5 ° F
+ 110° F = 115° F兲. Since the CVN impact tests were only per-
formed at temperatures 21, 4, ⫺12, and ⫺29°C 共70, 40, 10, and
−20° F兲 共based on the temperatures specified in the AASHTO
Impact Test Requirements for Fracture Toughness兲, the absorbed
energy at 46°C 共115° F兲 was estimated to be 68 Nm 共50 ft-lb兲,
using a curve that is of similar shape to the A36 共250 MPa兲 steel
impact CVN test results available in the literature 共Barsom and
Rolfe 1999兲. As illustrated in Fig. 7, 46°C 共115° F兲 is at the upper
shelf region of the CVN test data. Since Eq. 共1兲 only applies to
 the lower half of the CVN curve, the closest CVN test tempera-
ture would be 4°C 共40° F兲, with an average CVN energy of 40
Nm 共29.3 ft-lb兲 after being converted for standard full-sized
specimens. Thus, the web steel fracture toughness at the inter-
mediate loading rate 共around 1 s兲 and a service temperature
of −57° C = 4 ° C − 61° C 共−70° F=40° F – 110° F兲 was estimated
to be KIc,Interm.@−57°C = 冑 关640E共CVN@ 4 ° C兲兴 = 冑 关640
⫻ 共200,000,000,000 Pa兲共40 Nm兲兴 ⬇ 71 MPa冑 m 共KIc,Interm.@−70°F
= 冑 关5E共CVN@ 40° F兲兴 = 冑 关共5兲共29,000,000 psi兲共29.3 ft-lb兲兴
⬇ 65 ksi冑 in.兲. This value is within the variation range of the
fracture toughness of A36 共250 MPa兲 steel and provides a conser-
vative 共lower bound兲 estimate of fracture toughness for the ser-
vice temperature of ⫺15°C 共5 ° F兲.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Assessment of Required Stress Intensity Factors „KIc…
for Web Fractures
The suspected fracture origin, as shown in Fig. 3, is at the top of
the vertical weld between the web and the transverse stiffener/
connection plate. The lack of a positive connection between the
upper end of the connection plate and the girder top flange has
been a common source for steel bridge fatigue cracks due to the
out-of-plane distortion of the “web gap.” A previous research
共Fisher et al. 1990兲 has indicated that the web gap distortion may
cause stresses as high as the yield level of the steel. Under cyclic
stresses from traffic loadings, a microdiscontinuity at the weld toe
may develop into a surface crack, which subsequently would be-
come a through-thickness crack. At a particular combination of
crack size, stress level, and loading rate, web fracture would
occur when the fracture driving force 共KI兲 reaches the fracture
toughness 共KIc兲 of the web plate. Using the estimated plane strain
fracture toughness KIc,Interm.@−57°C=71 MPa冑 m 共KIc,Interm.@−70°F
=65 ksi冑 in.兲, the fracture driving force 共KI兲 was assessed for
three different crack configurations using a stress level of 317
MPa 共46 ksi兲 共yield strength兲 for the possibility of unstable web
fracture.
Case 1: Semielliptical Surface Crack of Half Web Thickness
[a = 0.00396875 m „0.15625 in.… , 2c = 0.016 m „0.625 in.…]
KI = 1.12␴ 冑 共␲a/Q兲M k 共3兲
where ␴ = stress normal to the crack plane= 317 MPa
共46 ksi兲; Q = flaw-shape parameter ⬇1.25 共for ␴ / ␴ys = 1.0 and
a / 2c = 0.25兲; M k = back free-surface correction factor= 1.0+ 1.2
共a / t − 0.5兲 = 1.0; and t = web plate thickness= 8 mm 共0.3125 in.兲
The calculated KI was 35.5 MPa冑 in. 共32.3 ksi冑 in.兲 and
significantly lower than KIc,Interm @−57°C = 71 MPa冑 m
共KIc,Interm @−70°F = 65 ksi冑 in.兲. This crack configuration would not
likely cause an unstable fracture in the girder web.
Case 2: Semielliptical Surface Crack of Full Web Thickness
[a = 0.0079375 m „0.3125 in.… , 2c = 0.03175 m „1.25 in.…]
KI = 1.12␴ 冑 共␲a/Q兲M k 共4兲
where ␴ and Q remain the same as in Case 1, however, M k
= back free-surface correction factor= 1.0+ 1.2 共a / t − 0.5兲 = 1.6.
Thus, calculated KI was 80.3 MPa冑 m 共73.1 ksi冑 in.兲 and
exceeded KIc,Interm @−57°C = 71 MPa冑 m 共KIc,Interm @−70°F
= 65 ksi冑 in.兲. Although the exact value of KIc,Interm at the ⫺15°C
共5 ° F兲 service temperature is unknown, it should be expected to
be higher than 71 MPa冑 m 共65 ksi冑 in.兲. Hence, it is uncertain if
a 32 mm 共1.25-in.兲-long surface crack of the full web thickness
could cause unstable fracture at the yield stress. However, a stress
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 377
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
level slightly beyond the yield strength, or a surface crack of a
very elongated shape, would cause a higher stress intensity factor,
and thus possibly the fracture of the web.
Case 3: Critical Length of a Through-Thickness Crack for
Web Fracture
The stress intensity factor for a through-thickness crack of total
length 2a is
KI = ␴ 冑 共␲a兲 共5兲
When the web stress normal to the crack plane reaches the yield
level, the critical crack length for fracture can be solved
by equating KI to KIc:
@−57°C/␴ys兲 /␲ = 2共71 MPa 冑 m/317 MPa兲2/␲
2
2acr = 2共KIc,Interm
= 0.033 m
关2acr = 2共KIc,Interm @−70°F/␴ys兲
2
/␲ = 2共65 ksi 冑 in./46 ksi兲2/␲
= 1.3 in.兴
Thus, for a through-thickness crack to cause unstable fracture of
the web at the yield stress level, the length of the crack needs to
be at least 33 mm 共1.3 in.兲. Since the fracture toughness at the
⫺15°C 共5 ° F兲 service temperature should be expected higher than
71 MPa冑 m 共65 ksi冑 in.兲, a through-thickness crack length some-
what longer than 33 mm 共1.3 in.兲 should be expected to cause an
unstable web fracture.
In summary, based on an estimated fracture toughness of
KIc,Interm @−57°C = 71 MPa冑 m 共KIc,Interm @−70°F = 65 ksi冑 in.兲, a
web fracture could occur at the yield stress level 关317 MPa 共46
ksi兲兴 with either an approximately 32 mm 共1.25 in.兲 or longer
surface crack of the full web thickness or a through-thickness
crack of 33 mm 共1.3 in.兲 or longer. The formation of these cracks
before the unstable fracture would be the result of a subcritical
fatigue crack development initiated from some weld induced de-
fect at the top of the web-to-stiffener/connection plate weld. The
subsequent sections investigate the stress fields in the crack origin
area resulting from various loads and the welding process.
Check of Girder Design and Fabrication
Requirements
Girder Design Requirements
The girders were checked for flexure and shear in accordance
with the current AASHTO Standard Specifications 共AASHTO
2002兲 and were found satisfying the design requirements of both
the service load design 共SLD兲 and load factor design 共LFD兲 meth-
ods for the HS-20 live load.
Web slenderness was postulated as a possible factor in the
crack initiation due to the relatively small web thickness 关tw
= 8 mm 共5 / 16 in.兲兴 and the resulting large slenderness ratio
关D / tw = 2,286 mm/ 8 mm⬇ 290 共90 in. / 0.3125 in. ⬇ 290兲兴 of
the girders, especially when combined with inevitable out-of-
flatness of the web after fabrication and erection. Nevertheless,
the web thickness was found to satisfy both the AASHTO SLD
and LFD design requirements with the as-built transverse and
longitudinal stiffeners.
 Connection between Connection Plate and Girder
Flange
In this bridge, cross frame connection plates and intermediate
transverse stiffeners were not welded to the girder tension flange.
As a result, cross frame member forces due to differential girder
deflections under vehicle loads cause out-of-plane bending in the
unsupported web gap area. Such web distortion has been found to
induce high localized stresses and to be the main cause for the
majority of fatigue cracks in steel girder bridges across the United
States. Although current bridge design specifications 共AASHTO
2002, 2007兲 require positive connections between the diaphragm
connection plates and girder flanges, the “tight-fit” connection
was a standard practice prior to the mid-1980s.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fabrication Tolerance for Web Out-of-Flatness
Due to increased forces 共secondary moments兲 in the web cross
section associated with web out-of-flatness, the web geometry
requirements from the current AASHTO Standard Specifications
for Highway Bridges and AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2002
Bridge Welding Code were referenced to determine regulated out-
of-flatness limitations. Division II Section 11.4.13.2 of the
AASHTO specifications 共AASHTO 2002兲 indicates that the
maximum deviation from detailed flatness of a panel should not
exceed the greater of 3/16 in. 共5 mm兲 or D / 共144冑 T兲 共US兲 关code
language is in US Customary units兴, where D = least panel dimen-
sion and T = minimum plate thickness. AASHTO/AWS Section
3.5 indicates a maximum allowable variation from web flatness of
d / 92 for interior girders and d / 105 for fascia girders 共when in-
termediate stiffeners are on both sides of the web and D / t is
greater than 150兲, where d = least panel dimension and D and t
= web depth and thickness, respectively.
The least dimension of the girder web panel in this bridge is
dictated by the transverse stiffener spacing, which ranges from
approximately 768 to 914 mm 共30.25 to 36 in.兲 in the vicinity of
the fracture location. This leads to a maximum allowable flatness
variation of 10 to 11 mm 共0.376 to 0.447 in.兲 according to
AASHTO and 8 to 10 mm 共0.329 to 0.391 in.兲 according to
AASHTO/AWS. Considering these geometries, out-of-flatness
variations of 5, 10, and 19 mm 共3/16, 3/8, and 3/4 in.兲 were
studied in the subsequent analyses.
Finite-Element Analysis for Web Fracture Driving
Forces
Overview of Finite-Element Modeling
Computer models were developed to perform a parametric study
for driving forces of the web fractures. First, a three-dimensional
共3D兲 global finite-element model 共FEM兲 of the bridge superstruc-
ture was developed for assessing the cross frame member forces.
Subsequently, local FEMs of the girders in the fractured regions
were used to examine the stress fields at the origin of the web
fracture considering different influencing parameters: lateral
forces from cross frames, web out-of-flatness, and weld induced
residual stresses.
Global FEM for Cross Frame Forces
A 3D global FEM was developed using the computer software
LUSAS 共LUSAS engineering analysis software 2003兲 to examine
378 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
the effects of design live load on cross frame forces. The global
FEM, representing the skewed bridge geometry, consisted of the
deck, all seven girders, and all the cross frame members. Since
both girder fractures were in Span 2 and adjacent to Pier 2, the
model consisted of only Spans 2 and 3 with approximate span
lengths of 62 and 75.9 m 共204 and 249 ft兲, respectively, for sim-
plicity and for limiting the model size. Girder supports were de-
fined to characterize fixed bearings at Pier 2 and expansion
bearings at Piers 1 and 3. Girder webs and the entire continuous
deck were modeled using the thick shell elements. Girder flanges,
lateral braces, and all cross frame members were modeled using
the beam elements of the proper section properties. All transverse
stiffeners and cross frame connection plates were also represented
with beam elements on the girder webs. Rigid links were used
between the deck and the centerlines of the girder top flange to
idealize the as-built composite construction between the deck and
the girders.
The net lateral force applied to the top of girder web at each
fracture location was assessed using the global model. The net
lateral force was determined from all connected cross frame
members for subsequent stress analysis using the local model. A
single HS-20 truck was placed along each traffic lane to produce
the maximum net lateral force applied on the girder web at each
fracture location. With the truck in Lanes 1 through 4 共from the
north side to the south side of the bridge, as shown in Fig. 1兲, the
maximum net lateral force at the upper cross frame connection at
the G4 fracture location was determined to be 10.7, 22.7, 8.0, and
8.0 kN 共2.4, 5.1, 1.8, and 1.8 kips兲, respectively. The highest net
lateral force 关22.7 kN 共5.1 kips兲兴 occurs with an HS-20 truck in
Lane 2 positioned with the rear axle adjacent to the fracture lo-
cation. The corresponding cross frame member forces and de-
flected shape are shown in Fig. 8 共the arrows mark the net forces
at the upper and lower cross frame connections; the girder web is
not shown兲. For the cross frame next to the G7 fracture location,
similarly, the maximum net lateral force at the top connection was
found to be 9.8, 3.1, 13.3, and 23.6 kN 共2.2, 0.7, 3.0, and 5.3 kips兲
with the truck in Lanes 1 through 4, respectively. The cross frame
member forces for the maximum net lateral web force 关23.6 kN
共5.3 kip兲兴 are depicted in Fig. 9. The corresponding truck position
was in Lane 4 with the rear axles straddling the cross frame next
to the G7 fracture.
Local FEM for Web Stresses due to Cross Frame
Forces
A local FEM was developed using LUSAS to study the local web
stresses in the fractured areas of both girders. The local model
consisted of the 2,286 mm⫻ 8 mm 共90 in. ⫻ 5 / 16 in.兲 web,
95 mm⫻ 305 mm 共3.75 in. ⫻ 12 in.兲 top and bottom flanges,
and 203 mm⫻ 11 mm 共8 in. ⫻ 0.4375 in.兲 transverse stiffeners
of five web panels of the fractured girders. The model was fully
supported at both end sections. 3D mild steel continuum elements
were used throughout the model to form a realistic representation
of the web gap area. A refined mesh with a maximum element
dimension of 6 mm 共1/4 in.兲 was used in the web gap area and 51
mm 共2 in.兲 in the outlying areas. Based on field measurements,
the vertical clearance between the stiffener and the top flange of
the girder was 6 mm 共0.25 in.兲. The stiffener had a 25-mm
共1-in.兲-wide and 19-mm 共0.75-in.兲-tall clip at the upper corner
next to the web, thus resulting in a 25 mm 共1 in.兲 vertical web gap
including a 8 mm 共5/16-in.兲 girder web-to-flange fillet weld.
The effect of cross frame forces on the local web stresses at
the presumed crack origin was studied using the local model by
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Cross frame member forces and deflected shape for maximum net lateral force at upper cross frame connection at Girder 4 fracture
location due to an HS-20 truck

applying the cross frame forces from the global model. The net
lateral force was applied on the upper end of the connection plate
at the location of cross frame bolted connection.
For G4, where the fracture occurred at a cross frame location,
the maximum principal stress 共S1兲 in the web was found to be
257 MPa 共37.3 ksi兲 at the presumed fracture origin under a net
lateral cross frame force of 22.7 kN 共5.1 kip兲. Fig. 10 shows the
cross frame lateral load and the deformed shape of the unsup-
ported web gap, and Fig. 11 shows the contours of the principal
stress S1 in the web in the vicinity of the presumed fracture
origin. The directions of the principal tensile stresses were nearly
perpendicular to the crack path as depicted in Fig. 3.
For G7, where the fracture occurred at an intermediate stiff-
ener, the stress field in the unsupported web gap at the adjacent
cross frame location due to the lateral force was found similar to
that of G4. At the fracture location, however, the maximum prin-
cipal tensile stress in the unsupported web gap area due to cross
frame forces was very low 关less than 7 MPa 共1 ksi兲兴. This indi-
cated that lateral forces from cross frame members must not have
played a significant role to this fracture. As shown in Fig. 6, the
G7 fracture self-arrested at about half of the web height as op-
posed to the full web height fracture in G4 共Fig. 2兲. This indicated
a significantly lower fracture driving force in G7 than that in G4.
It should be noted that the stresses discussed above were cal-
culated using a single HS-20 truck without impact. After consid-
ering multiple presence and dynamic impact, therefore, it is
possible that the maximum local tensile stress in the web gap area
at the cross frame locations can reach or exceed the actual yield
strength of web steel 关317 MPa 共46 ksi兲兴, as assumed in the pre-
vious fracture mechanics analysis.
Effects of Girder Web Out-of-Flatness on Local
Stresses
The local FEM containing five web panels was also used to study
the effect of girder web out-of-flatness on local stresses in the
unsupported web gap area. For this analysis, the local model was
supported as a cantilever fixed at one end and loaded at the free
end with a bending moment or a shear force. A constraint equa-
tion was used to maintain the free end of the girder as a plane

Fig. 9. Cross frame member forces for maximum net lateral force at upper cross frame connection next to Girder 7 fracture location due to an
HS-20 truck

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 379

J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.

 surface with only global translations and rotations. The maximum
web out-of-flatness was assumed at the center of each web panel
diminishing smoothly to all boundaries, with adjacent panels hav-
ing equal and opposite out-of-flatness polarities. Refined mesh for
the unsupported web gap area was defined only at the top of the
two center transverse stiffeners away from the ends. This model
was used to perform a parametric study to investigate the influ-
ence of several parameters to the local stress in the web gap area.
The effect of web out-of-flatness was studied by varying the
maximum offset 共f兲 of each web panel for values of 5, 10, and 19
mm 共3/16, 3/8, and 3/4 in.兲 based on the AASHTO and AWS
fabrication tolerance requirements as discussed previously. The
girder web thickness 共tw兲 was also varied for 6, 8, and 19 mm
共1/4, 5/16, and 3/4 in.兲 to study its effect on local stresses in the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 10. Girder 4 fracture origin web deformed shape under cross
frame lateral forces
Fig. 11. Girder 4 web principal Stress S1 contours 共ksi兲 at fracture
origin vicinity 共net lateral upper cross frame connection force
= 5.1 kips兲
web gap area. For loading of the model, an in-plane unit shear
force of 445 kN 共100 kip兲 and an in-plane unit bending moment
of 1,130 kN-m 共10,000 kip-in.兲 was applied, respectively, at the
free end. The maximum principal tensile stress in the web gap
area was investigated for combined variation of web thickness
and out-of-flatness. The results of this parametric analysis for
maximum tensile stress in the unsupported web gap area are sum-
marized in Table 1.
The effects of geometrically nonlinear finite element solutions
due to the secondary bending of the deformed geometry, or the
P-⌬ effect, were examined. As expected, the largest nonlinear
effect was observed for the thinnest web thickness with the largest
out-of-flatness studied. However, the effect of geometrical nonlin-
earity on the web gap local stress was found to be negligible 共at
most 2% greater than the linear solution stress兲.
For the effects of web out-of-flatness, principal stresses due to
the in-plane bending moment increased by less than 15% in the
web gap area compared to the flat web condition for all the out-
of-flatness models. Girder shear loading was found to cause sig-
nificantly amplified stresses at the unsupported web gap area due
to the web out-of-flatness. Compared to the base model with the
as-built web thickness 关tw = 8 mm 共5 / 16 in.兲兴, maximum princi-
pal stresses in the web gap area due to a 445 kN 共100 kip兲 shear
force increased by approximately 25%, 49%, and 105% with 5,
10, and 19 mm 共3/16, 3/8, and 3/4 in.兲 panel offsets, respectively
共Table 1兲.

Table 1. Maximum Principal Stresses in Web Gap Area with Varying Web Thickness and Out-of-Flatness due to 445 kN 共100 kip兲 Shear and 1,130 kN-m
共10,000 Kip-in.兲 Moment
Maximum principal stress in web gap area
共MPa兲
Web thickness tw Web out-of-flatness f 445 kN shear 1,130 kN-m moment
共mm兲 共mm兲 共100-kip兲 共10,000 kip-in.兲
6 共1/4 in.兲 None 33.7 共4.89 ksi兲 8.3 共1.20 ksi兲
5 共3/16 in.兲 45.2 共6.56 ksi兲 8.4 共1.22 ksi兲
10 共3/8 in.兲 56.5 共8.19 ksi兲 8.9 共1.29 ksi兲
19 共3/4 in.兲 81.2 共11.78 ksi兲 9.4 共1.37 ksi兲
8 共5/16 in.兲 共as-built兲 None 26.3 共3.82 ksi兲 8.1 共1.17 ksi兲
5 共3/16 in.兲 32.8 共4.76 ksi兲 8.2 共1.19 ksi兲
10 共3/8 in.兲 39.2 共5.69 ksi兲 8.3 共1.20 ksi兲
19 共3/4 in.兲 54 共7.83 ksi兲 8.5 共1.23 ksi兲
13 共1/2 in.兲 None 17.7 共2.57兲 7.2 共1.04 ksi兲
19 共3/4 in.兲 None 12.7 共1.84 ksi兲 6.8 共0.98 ksi兲
5 共3/16 in.兲 13.4 共1.94 ksi兲 6.8 共0.98 ksi兲
10 共3/8 in.兲 14.1 共2.05 ksi兲 7.4 共1.07 ksi兲
19 共3/4 in.兲 15.6 共2.27 ksi兲 7.4 共1.07 ksi兲

380 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010

J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.

 Table 2. Summary of Effects of Retrofit Alternatives at Girder 4 Fracture Location 共due to Single HS-20 Truck兲
girder design forces
gap principal stress
Condition of stiffener-to-top flange connection
Stiffener 6 mm 共1/4 in.兲 below top flange 共as built兲
Stiffener bolted to top flange
Stiffener cutoff 152 mm 共6 in.兲 below top flange
Stiffener cutoff 305 mm 共12 in.兲 below top flange
Crack arrest hole in web along path
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
a
Force determined from preretrofit model, the actual cross frame force after drilling a crack arrest holes should be lower due to the lowered web stiffness.
In summary, the effect of web out-of-flatness on the local
stresses in the web gap area increases with the degree of out-of-
flatness and lower web thickness. This stress increase is predomi-
nately due to the in-plane shear. For the as-built 8 mm 共5/16-in-
thick兲 web, the maximum local stress increases by about 50% for
a 10 mm 共3/8-in.兲 out-of-flatness in the web panels, which satis-
fies the AASHTO/AWS restrictions for the fabrication of welded
steel girders of such dimensions. This results in a maximum local
principal stress of about 133 MPa 共19 ksi兲 due to the in-plane
design load at the two web fracture locations. Therefore, fabrica-
tion induced web out-of-flatness can add significant local stresses
to the presumed fracture origin in the unsupported web gap area.
Effects of Weld Residual Stresses on Local Stresses
Given the postulation that the cracks initiated at the top of the
web-to-stiffener weld, the effect of residual stresses from the
stiffener-to-web weld was examined. Typically, tensile residual
stresses develop in the weld metal and the immediate region after
the steel cools down, and compressive stress fields develop in the
surrounding parent material for internal force equilibrium. The
process of welding and cooling is very complicated and involves
many variables such as the welding sequence, the number of weld
passes, and the temperatures at weld interfaces.
A simplified temperature decrease was analyzed using the
local model to idealize the effect of the welding process on the
local stress in the presumed fracture origin. A uniform tempera-
ture drop of 56°C 共100° F兲 was applied along the stiffener to web
interface on both sides of the stiffener plate with a gradient of
2.2°C/mm 共100° F / in.兲 decreasing away from the weld. This
analysis resulted in a maximum principal tensile stress of 93 MPa
共13.5 ksi兲 in the presumed fracture origin, and the direction is
nearly perpendicular to the path of the fracture. This result indi-
cates the possibility of significant impact of weld-induced re-
sidual stress on the web fracture since the actual temperature drop
should be much greater than the 56°C 共100° F兲 used in the analy-
sis.
If the stiffener plates were welded to both the top and bottom
flanges of the girder, the FEM indicated a maximum tensile prin-
ciple stress of 66 MPa 共9.5 ksi兲 in the fracture origin area. These
results of the idealized analysis suggest that attaching the stiffener
plate to both flanges would result in lower 共approximately 20–
30% reduction兲 tensile stresses in the web gap area.
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
In-plane Out-of-plane
cross frame lateral forces
Local model Global model Local model
Max S1 web Max top x-frame Max S1 web
net lateral force gap principal stress
共MPa兲 共kN兲 共MPa兲
155.8 共22.6 ksi兲 22.7 共5.1 kip兲 257.1 共37.3 ksi兲
153.7 共22.3 ksi兲 39.6 共8.9 kip兲 51.7 共7.5 ksi兲
159.3 共23.1 ksi兲 1.5 共0.34 kip兲 23.4 共3.4 ksi兲
157.9 共22.9 ksi兲 0.9 共0.20 kip兲 11 共1.6 ksi兲
242.7 共35.2 ksi兲 22.7 共5.1 kip兲a 337.1 共48.9 ksi兲
Other Possible Causes for Local Stresses
Three other factors may cause local stresses in the presumed frac-
ture origin in the unsupported web gap area. First, the installation
of cross frames between adjacent girders may cause locked-in
stresses in the connections, depending on the fabrication precision
and the sequence of installation. Second, a triaxial tension stress
state may exist in the small web gap area due to the residual
stresses caused by the longitudinal flange-to-web welds and the
vertical stiffener-to-web welds. Third, the temperature differen-
tials among the exterior girders, interior girders and the deck may
cause localized stresses in the web gap area, especially with the
skewed framing plan and very thin and deep girder web plates.
No analytical attempts were made to quantify these effects in this
investigation.
Concepts of Preventive Retrofit
Three retrofit alternatives were examined using the FEMs for
their effect on the cross frame forces and web stresses in the
vicinity of the G4 fracture due to out-of-plane and in-plane loads
dictated by the HS-20 design vehicle. The results are summarized
in Table 2.
Connecting Stiffeners to Girder Tension Flange
Both the global and local models were modified such that the
stiffeners in the vicinity of the G4 fracture were connected to the
top flange of the girders. Using the in-plane girder design shear
and bending moments, the analysis found little improvement in
the web gap stresses with the stiffeners attached to the top flange.
For out-of-plane bending effects, the analysis indicated that the
increased connection stiffness from the retrofit results in higher
cross frame forces at the top connection but the stresses in the
web gap area are much lower compared with the as-built condi-
tion. The largest net lateral force from the cross frame due to a
single HS-20 truck increased from 22.7 kN 共5.1 kip兲 of the as-
built condition to 39.6 kN 共8.9 kip兲 of the retrofitted condition.
However, the corresponding maximum principal stress in the web
gap area at the retrofitted cross frame connection decreased to
51.7 MPa 共7.5 ksi兲 from the original 257 MPa 共37.3 ksi兲 of the
as-built condition 共Table 2兲.
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 381
 Cutting Short Stiffener/Connection Plates
The effectiveness of removing a part of the stiffener/connection
plate near the girder tension flange was also investigated. Two
different clear web gap heights, 152 and 305 mm 共6 and 12 in.兲,
between the stiffener upper end and the 610 mm 共24-in.兲-wide top
flange were selected for investigation. AASHTO design specifi-
cations 共AASHTO 2007兲 recommend such web gap to be at least
152 mm 共6 in.兲 but not less than one-half the width of the flange
if it is not practical to attach lateral connection plates to flanges.
Due to the enlarged web gap, cross frame top chords and diago-
nals were lowered accordingly in the retrofitted global model.
The decrease in the connection stiffness caused a significant
reduction in cross frame member forces under the live load. The
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
maximum net top connection lateral force at the G4 fracture lo-
cation decreased from 22.7 to 1.5 and 0.9 kN 共5.1 to 0.34 and
0.20 kip兲 with a cutoff height of 152 and 305 mm 共6 and 12 in.兲,
respectively, due to a single HS-20 truck. Using the modified
local FEM, the maximum principal stress in the web gap was
reduced to 23.4 MPa 共3.4 ksi兲 for the 152 mm 共6-in.兲 stiffener
cutoff and 11 MPa 共1.6 ksi兲 for the 305 mm 共12-in.兲 stiffener
cutoff 共Table 2兲.
The local model was also used to analyze web stresses under
the in-plane design forces, 1,361 kN 共306 kip兲 shear and 15,288
kN-m 共11,276 kip-ft兲 bending moment at the G4 fracture location
共SLD girder section forces due to dead load and live load plus
impact兲. The maximum S1 principal stress in the web gap area
due to the in-plane design forces for both the 152 and 305 mm 共6
and 12 in.兲 cutoff essentially remained the same as the as-built
condition, about 159 MPa 共23 ksi兲 共Table 2兲.
Drilling Crack-Arrest Holes along Predicted Paths
The effectiveness of drilling crack-arrest holes near suspected
fracture initiation sites was also investigated using the FEMs. A
fracture path was first predicted along the directions perpendicu-
lar to the principal tensile stresses from the FEM with the applied
in-plane design load, which agrees well with both actual fracture
paths. A 51 mm 共2 in.兲 diameter retrofit hole was then introduced
into the local model along the predicted crack path near the sus-
pected fracture origin. The maximum principal tensile stress due
to the in-plane girder design forces at the G4 fracture location
were found to increase from 156 MPa 共22.6 ksi兲 for the as-built
section to 243 MPa 共35.2 ksi兲 共Table 2兲. Under the maximum
out-of-plane cross frame forces at the G4 fracture location, the
maximum principal stress in the web gap area increased from 255
MPa 共37 ksi兲 for the as-built section to 338 MPa 共49 ksi兲 with the
retrofit hole; the maximum stress on the perimeter of the hole was
165 MPa 共24 ksi兲.
Summary on Preventive Retrofit
As shown in Table 2, by connecting the stiffener plates to the
girder top flange at the cross frame locations, the web gap distor-
tion due to lateral cross frame forces is essentially eliminated and
the maximum out-of-plane bending induced stresses are reduced
by up to 80%. Cutting off transverse stiffeners at 152 to 305 mm
共6 to 12 in.兲 from the girder tension flange at cross frame loca-
tions can also significantly lower the net lateral force from the
cross frame members, and thus reduce web distortion stresses by
over 90%. Under the vertical in-plane loading on the girder, either
382 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
of the aforementioned retrofit methods causes little change to the
maximum principal stress in the web gap area. Drilling a crack
arrest hole along the expected fracture path near the predicted
fracture initiation site tends to increase the web flexibility and
generate undesirably higher stresses in the drilled web area under
both the in-plane girder load and lateral forces from the cross
frame.
However, none of these retrofit measures can address both web
fractures, of which one occurred at an intermediate stiffener with-
out the cross frame. In light of the fracture mechanics analysis
results, it is reasonable to assume that the two web fractures likely
involved some large flaws at the fracture origins associated with
some significant overload and/or locked-in stresses due to fabri-
cation errors and installation of the cross frames. Since no signs
of cracking were found at all other similar locations throughout
the bridge, no retrofit actions were recommended except that the
bridge be inspected annually with special attentions paid to the
fatigue and fracture susceptible web gap areas. Bridge inspections
in the subsequent 6 years after the 2003 web fractures have not
reported any other cracks in the bridge.
Summary and Conclusions
1. Visual examinations of both web fractures indicated flat
cleavage with little shear lips which are typical signs of
brittle fracture. At both locations, the chevron marks on the
fracture surfaces clearly pointed the fracture origin up toward
the top of the vertical weld between the web and the trans-
verse stiffener. The limited SEM examination supported
these observations.
2. Material tests indicated that the web steel satisfies or exceeds
the AASHTO/ASTM’s requirements for chemical composi-
tion, yield strength, tensile strength, and elongation for A36
steel. Additionally, the web steel satisfies the current
AASHTO impact test requirements for fracture toughness for
Zones 1 and 2 for fracture-critical members 共which came into
effect 3 years after the bridge completion兲.
3. The plane strain fracture toughness at intermediate loading
rate 共KIc,Interm.兲 was estimated using the CVN impact test
results. The fracture toughness of the web steel was esti-
mated to be KIc,Interm @−57°C = 71 MPa冑 m 共KIc,Interm.@−70°F
= 65 ksi冑 in.兲 This value is within the variation range of A36
共250 MPa兲 steel and provides a conservative 共lower bound兲
estimate of fracture toughness for the service temperature of
⫺15°C 共5 ° F兲 in the winter prior to the web fractures.
4. Based on the estimated fracture toughness, a fracture me-
chanics analysis indicated that a web fracture could occur at
the yield stress level 共317 MPa or 46 ksi兲 with an approxi-
mately 32 mm 共1.25 in.兲 or longer surface crack of the full
web thickness or a through-thickness crack of 33 mm 共1.3
in.兲 or longer. The formation of these cracks before the brittle
fracture would have been the result of subcritical fatigue
crack development initiated from some weld induced defect
at the top of the stiffener-to-web welds.
5. Analysis results of global and local FEMs indicated that the
maximum tensile stress in the suspected fracture origin area
can be very high, reaching the yield stress level of the web
steel. The causes for such high stresses may be one or a
combination of the following: 共1兲 web distortion due to lat-
eral cross frame forces; 共2兲 web out-of-flatness under in-
plane loading, especially shear; and 共3兲 residual stresses due
 to the stiffener-to-web welds. Other possible causes may in-
clude locked-in stresses resulting from installation of the
cross frames, a triaxial tension stress state due to the longi-
tudinal and vertical welds, and temperature differentials
among various structural components of the skewed framing
with very thin and deep web plates.
6. The fracture of the interior girder 共G4兲 may likely be a result
of high stresses due primarily to localized web distortion
under live load induced cross frame forces, in combination of
the effects of possible web out-of-flatness and weld induced
residual stresses. The fracture of the exterior girder 共G7兲 may
be attributed primarily to web out-of-flatness under in-plane
loading and weld induced residual stresses, associated with
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
possible locked-in stresses due to fabrication errors and erec-
tion. At both fracture locations, existence of relatively large,
fabrication induced initial defects should have been likely. A
significant overload traveling at a high speed may also have
been a cause.
7. A lesson learned from this fracture is some of the unexpected
negative effects of a very flexible girder web. Although the
slenderness ratio D / tw of 290 satisfies the AASHTO design
requirements with a longitudinal stiffener, the analysis indi-
cated very high local stresses in the unsupported web gap
area due to lateral forces of cross frame members, the inevi-
table web out-of-flatness from fabrication, and the cooling
process of welding the transverse stiffeners. These effects
were found considerably lower for a thicker web.
8. Several retrofit concepts were evaluated and it was found that
either connecting the cross frame connection plate end to the
girder flange or cutting off the connection plate by 152 to
305 mm 共6 to 12 in.兲 can significantly reduce the local
stresses in the unsupported web gap area due to the lateral
cross frame forces. However, either method would cause
little change to the fracture location on G7 where there is no
cross frame connected. No retrofit action was recommended
except that the bridge be inspected annually with special at-
tentions paid to the web gap areas. Bridge inspections in the
subsequent 6 years after the 2003 web fractures have not
reported any other cracks in the bridge.
Acknowledgments
The writers would like to express their appreciation for the sup-
port and advice they received from the following individuals: Dr.
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2010 / 383
J. Bridge Eng. 2010.15:373-383.
William Wright of the Federal Highway Administration; Mr.
Bruce Abernathy of the Metals Laboratory of the Maryland State
Highway Administration; and URS colleagues Messrs. Tom
Feroli, Nick Deros, and Tom Jenkins 共retired兲.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
E ⫽ Young’s modulus 共psi兲 共Pa兲;
f ⫽ girder web out-of-flatness relative to panel
boundaries formed by flanges and stiffeners 共in.兲
共mm兲;
Kc ⫽ fracture toughness, a critical value for KI above
that a fracture failure occurs 共psi冑 in.兲 共Pa冑 m兲;
KI共␴ , a兲 ⫽ stress intensity factor, a function of stress ␴,
crack size a, and local geometry 共psi冑 in.兲
共Pa冑 m兲;
KIc ⫽ plane strain fracture toughness at a slow loading
rate 共psi冑 in.兲 共Pa冑 m兲;
KIc,Interm. ⫽ plane strain fracture toughness at intermediate
loading rate 共psi冑 in.兲 共Pa冑 m兲;
KId ⫽ dynamic or impact plane-strain fracture toughness
共psi冑 in.兲 共Pa冑 m兲;
Tshift ⫽ shift in transition temperature from slow loading
to impact loading 共°F兲 共°C兲;
tw ⫽ girder web thickness 共in.兲 共mm兲; and
␴ys ⫽ room-temperature yield strength 共ksi兲 共GPa兲.
References
AASHTO. 共2002兲. Standard specifications for highway bridges, 17th Ed.,
Washington, D.C.
AASHTO. 共2004兲. Standard specifications for transportation materials
and methods of sampling and testing, 3rd Ed., Washington, D.C.
AASHTO 共2007兲. LRFD bridge design specifications, 3rd Ed., Washing-
ton, D.C.
Barsom, J. M., and Rolfe, S. T. 共1999兲, Fracture and fatigue control in
structures: Applications of fracture mechanics, 3rd Ed., ASTM, West
Conshohocken, Pa.
Fisher, J. W., Jin, J., Wager, D. C., and Yen, B. T. 共1990兲. “Distortion-
induced fatigue cracking in steel bridges.” NCHRP Rep. 336, Trans-
portation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Hertzburg, R. W. 共1989兲. Deformation and fracture mechanics of engi-
neering materials, 3rd Ed., Wiley, New York.
LUSAS engineering analysis software. 共2003兲. Finite Element Analysis
Ltd., Surrey, U.K.