Analysis of Horizontally Curved Bridges Using Simple

Finite-Element Models
Eduardo DeSantiago, M.ASCE1; Jamshid Mohammadi, M.ASCE2; and Hamadallah M. O. Albaijat3

Abstract: A series of horizontally curved bridges were analyzed using simple finite-element models. The analyses included using a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by BITS Pilani - Hyderabad Campus on 02/05/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

typical truckload and also the dead load as the primary forces on bridges. In each analysis, the behavior of bridges was investigated, and
the major internal forces developed in members were determined. Specifically, an increase in bending moment and the existence of a
torsional moment in cases where the horizontal angle of curvature is large (about 20–30°) was observed. The significance of these
moments, compared with the maximum bending moment of a comparable straight bridge, was noted. Bridges used in the analysis were
assumed to be composed of single spans with about 30.5-m (100-ft) span lengths (the chord length was set at 30.5-m for all bridges), steel
girders, and an 203-mm (8-in.) reinforced concrete slab. The finite-element analyses consisted of a three-dimensional idealization using
simple beam elements to model top and bottom flanges of the girders and plate bending elements modeling the girder webs and the slabs.
The analyses revealed that this simple modeling could effectively be used in analyzing curved bridges. The analyses showed that the
bending moment in girders of a curved bridge can be about 23.5% higher compared with moments in girders of a straight bridge of similar
span and design configuration. As a result of the curved geometry of the bridge, a torsional moment is developed in the girders. The
magnitude of this moment was found to be about 10.3% of the maximum bending moment of a comparable straight bridge.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(2005)10:1(18)
CE Database subject headings: Bridge design; Curved beams; Finite element method.

Introduction the structure. Full-scale experimental studies (along with a com-

Horizontally curved bridges make up of a significant portion of
the bridge population in the United States. These bridges have
been the subjects of many investigations. The current design prac-
tice by AASHTO provides guidelines for the design requirements
for horizontally curved bridges (2002). The AASHTO guide
specification is a comprehensive document and embodies the re-
sults of research conducted on horizontally curved bridges in the
past two decades. The predecessors to this document were two
AASHTO publications entitled Guide specifications for horizon-
tally curved highway bridges (published in 1980 and 1993). The
2002 publication includes most of the research conducted after
1980 as well as the results of full-scale tests conducted through
the Curved Steel Bridge Research Project (CSBRP) initiated by
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in 1992 (Zureick et
al. 1994). The initiation of the CSBRP and others was due to the
fact that the behavior investigation of a horizontally curved bridge
requires an understanding of the three-dimensional behavior of
1 bridges and check their design for any potential overstress condi-
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Architectural Engineering,
Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616.
2
Professor and Chairman, Dept. of Civil and Architectural Engineer-
ing, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616.
3
Formerly, Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Architectural Engi-
neering, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616.
Note. Discussion open until July 1, 2005. Separate discussions must
be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor.
The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible
publication on July 2, 2003; approved on July 29, 2003. This paper is part
of the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, Vol.
10, No. 1, February 1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISSN 1084-0680/2005/1-18–21/
$25.00.
prehensive three-dimensional structural analysis) not only pro-
vided for a better understanding of the overall behavior of the
bridge, but also eliminated the concerns over the scale factor,
which was inherent in small-scale studies (Linzell 1999).
Compared with straight bridges, certain girders in curved
bridges experience a much larger bending moment. Depending on
the overall geometry of a curved bridge, the distribution of bend-
ing moment among girders may be quite different from the dis-
tribution of moments among girders of a comparable straight
bridge. While girders in a straight bridge each carry about the
same amount of bending moment, the outer girders in curved
bridges often experience a much larger bending moment than the
inner girders (Albaijat 1999). The overall sum of moments for all
girders is the same for bridges with the same span length regard-
less of the curvature angle. This is because the overall static mo-
ment of a simply supported system is constant for the same load
and span length. Because of the nonuniform distribution of bend-
ing moment among girders, it is imperative to accurately deter-
mine the maximum bending moment for all girders in curved
tion. The accurate determination of the bending moment distribu-
tion can be achieved by the aid of a three-dimensional structural
analysis. Horizontally curved bridges may also develop a signifi-
cant torsional moment in their girders. This may especially be
prevalent when the curvature angle is large, roughly 30–40° (Al-
baijat 1999). The magnitude of these internal forces depends on
the angle of curvature, the span length and the geometry of gird-
ers. Three-dimensional structural analyses are helpful in provid-
ing a more refined representation of the behavior of horizontally
curved bridges and the significance of the curvature effect in de-
veloping a sizable torsional moment in their girders.
This paper presents a simple three-dimensional finite-element

18 / PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2005, 10(1): 18-21

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by BITS Pilani - Hyderabad Campus on 02/05/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Bridge plan layout

analysis on a series of single-span horizontally curved bridges.

Example bridges studied were assumed to be made up of steel
girders with reinforced concrete slabs forming composite beam
construction. The bridges had different angles of horizontal cur-
vatures (up to 30°). The analyses were intended to provide an
insight into the significance of the curvature effect in increasing
the bending moment and in causing torsion in girders. A compa-
rable case of a straight bridge was used as a baseline for evalu-
ating the results; as such, the internal forces developed in the
girders of the curved bridges were compared with the maximum
bending moment developed in the girders of the straight bridge. Fig. 2. Layout and configuration for straight bridge
In conducting the structural analysis, any horizontal thrust from
trucks going over the curved bridge due to superelevation was not designed per recommendations of AASHTO for both the shear
considered. It is emphasized that this paper is only intended to force and fatigue consideration. Lateral bracing elements were
provide the reader with an overall understanding of the order of provided at the ends and at intermediate locations. Several con-
the increase in the bending moment and the magnitude of the figurations were considered for the location of the lateral bracing
torsion that may develop in curved bridges. Furthermore, the supports ranging from no intermediate bracing to those at 1 / 30 of
paper is intended to demonstrate that a simple analysis can effec- the span length. Fig. 4 provides a typical detail for the lateral
tively be achieved by using any commercially available structural bracing support system.
analysis software. For a comprehensive set of requirements for
the design of such bridges—including strength, stiffness, service-
ability, and detailing requirements—the reader is referred to the Finite-Element Idealization
AASHTO document cited earlier (AASHTO 2002).
The three-dimensional finite-element idealization consisted of
beam and plate elements. Table 1 provides a summary of the
Design and Geometrical Configuration of Bridges elements used for each component

Fig. 1 shows the plan layout of curved bridges used in the analy-
sis. The curvature is represented by the angle ␪. Five different
curved bridge configurations were considered with ␪ equal to 10,
15, 20, 25, and 30°. A comparable straight bridge (curvature
angle= 0) was also considered in the analysis to provide a base-
line for comparing the results obtained for curved bridges. The
actual span lengths of the bridges are slightly different from one
another. However, the chord length L was set at a constant value
equal to 30.5 m 共100 ft兲. Thus the straight bridge has a span
length of 30.5 m 共100 ft兲, whereas the 30° curved bridge, for
example, has a curved span length of 30.8 m 共101 ft-2 in.兲. Each
bridge was designed for the dead load and the AASHTO-
recommended truckload. The cross section of each bridge consists
of an 203 mm 共8-in.兲 thick reinforced concrete slab and seven
identical steel girders spaced at 1.2 m 共4 ft兲 intervals (cross-
sectional details depicted in Figs. 2 and 3). The seven girders all
have the same curvature radius; and as such, they are parallel to
each other. The steel girder–concrete slab configuration was de-
signed as a composite section for the dead load and live load
combination, and also as a simple steel beam system for the dead
load alone considering an unshored construction. The studs were Fig. 3. Steel girder design configuration

PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 19

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2005, 10(1): 18-21

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by BITS Pilani - Hyderabad Campus on 02/05/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. A typical finite-element idealization

Fig. 4. Lateral bracing support configuration

lengths (i.e., the location of the lateral bracing supports) and

In several trial runs using the straight bridge model, various
sizes for the finite elements were selected and the stability of the
results (for both the internal forces as well as deformations) was
examined. The size was measured along the span length of the
bridge. It was then determined that a size equal to 1.0 m 共40 in.兲,
which is equal to 1 / 30 of the span length of the bridge, would
result in a stable and accurate output. A mesh size with smaller
elements will not improve the results significantly considering
what is acceptable as a reasonable accuracy level in practical
applications.
The live load used for the analysis consisted of a 320-kN (72-
kip) five-axle truck. The idealization of the 320 kN truckload was
done considering the footprint of each wheel and weight transmit-
ted from wheels to the bridge. The location of these loads was
changed, in conducting various finite-element analyses, to simu-
late the variability experienced in load application with respect to
the geometry of the bridge. The load transmitted through each
wheel was estimated to be 18 kN 共4,000 lbs兲 in a five-axle,
eighteen-wheel truck configuration. The distance between the
front axle and the rear axle of the truck was taken as 4.3 m
共14 ft兲. The distance between the trailer axle and the truck real
axle was taken as a variable ranging between 4.3 and 9.1 m (14
and 30 ft). Possible scenarios for truck passage on the bridge
included such conditions as only one truck using the bridge or
two trucks using the bridge in opposite directions.
The girders are identified as G1–G7, where G7 is the outer
girder in the group as shown in Fig. 2. The idealization of the
boundary conditions for the girders was done by restraining the
movement at the supports. Among the three possible rotational
degrees of freedom at each support, only the in-plane rotation was
allowed to occur. A typical finite-element mesh is shown in Fig. 5.
Results
truckload locations. In each run, the maximum bending moment,
torsional moment, and deflection were obtained. The bending and
torsional moments were each divided by the maximum bending
moment obtained for a straight bridge (curvature angle= 0). The
maximum vertical deflection obtained for the girders was divided
by the maximum deflection of the straight bridge.
The analysis revealed that girder G7 experienced the largest
bending moment and vertical deflection. The location of the maxi-
mum torsional moment varied, depending on the location of the
truck; however, the most severe cases were noticed in middle
girders closer to the inner girders (e.g., in girder G2).
The maximum vertical deflection for various positions of the
truckload for the straight bridge was 27 mm 1.06 in. With the
introduction of the curvature, the bridge span length increases
slightly (the chord is set at 30.48 m 关100 ft兴). This, along with the
change in the geometry, increases the bridge flexibility and con-
sequently results in a higher deflection. The overall stiffness of
the curved bridge can be increased by the introduction of addi-
tional lateral supports. Table 2 summarizes the ratio of the vertical
deflection of curved bridges (for the curvature angle ranging from
10 to 30°) to the maximum deflection of a straight bridge. As seen
in the table, if lateral bracing supports are only used at the ends,
the deflection can become as much as 4.42 times higher in a
curved bridge with a 30° curvature angle. Increasing the number
of lateral supports will improve the deflection substantially. For
the most severe case of a bridge with a 30° curvature angle, the
deflection is only 1.81 times higher than that in the straight bridge
when lateral bracing supports at intervals equal to 1 / 30 of the
span length are used.
The maximum bending moment in a straight bridge is
8015 kN· m 共5,915 ft-kips兲 considering various locations for the
truckloads. The analysis shows that the bending moment for a
comparable curved bridge can be up to 23.5% larger than that in
the straight bridge (see Table 3). This is the case where a reason-

The structural analysis was conducted for over 120 cases with
various configurations for curvature angle, unsupported girder Table 2. Ratio of Vertical Deflection of a Curved Bridge to Deflection of
a Straight Bridge (Girder G7)
Bridge curvature angle
Table 1. Finite Elements Used for Various Components
Component Element used Degrees of freedom/element Lateral bracing location 10° 15° 20° 25° 30°

Slab Shell 24 At 1 / 30 of span 1.20 1.30 1.41 1.60 1.81

Steel girder flanges Beam 12 At 1 / 15 of span 1.25 1.37 1.50 1.73 2.00
Steel girder web Shell 24 At 1 / 10 of span 1.30 1.44 1.59 1.88 2.18
Cross bracing Beam 12 At 1 / 3 of span 1.51 1.86 2.03 2.52 3.11
Studs Beam 12a At 1 / 2 of span 1.61 1.92 2.22 2.83 3.53
a At ends only 1.79 2.19 2.59 3.42 4.42
These beam elements have a large stiffness acting as rigid links.

20 / PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2005, 10(1): 18-21

 Table 3. Ratio of Bending and Torsional Moment of a Curved Bridge to
Bending Moment of a Comparable Straight Bridge
Bridge curvature angle
Type of
internal force 10° 15° 20° 25° 30°
In-plane bending 1.087 1.117 1.175 1.220 1.235
moment
Torsional moment 0.037 0.052 0.074 0.088 0.103
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by BITS Pilani - Hyderabad Campus on 02/05/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
able design for the location of the lateral bracing supports is con-
sidered (the unsupported length used in this analysis is equal to
1 / 30 of the span length). A higher value will be obtained if the
spacing between lateral bracing supports is increased. For ex-
ample, if the unsupported length is taken as 1 / 15 of the span
length, the increase in the bending moment can be as high as 28%
for a curved bridge with a 30° curvature angle (compared with the
bending moment of a straight bridge).
The introduction of a horizontal curvature to a bridge also
causes a torsional moment to develop in girders. To have a basis
for comparing this internal force, the maximum torsional moment
resulting from various locations for the truckloads was computed
and then divided by the maximum bending moment for a straight
bridge (i.e., 8,015 kN· m or 5,915 ft-kips). The results appear in
Table 3. Again, these results are for a lateral bracing support
system with 1 / 30 of span length spacing. The results indicate that
a torsional moment with a magnitude equal to about 10.3% of the
in-plane bending moment may result when a 30° curvature is
introduced to the bridge. This value will further increase to about
10.7% if the spacing between the lateral bracing supports is
lengthened and taken equal to 1 / 15 of the span length.
PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION © ASCE / FEBRUARY 2005 / 21
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2005, 10(1): 18-21
Summary and Conclusions
A simple finite-element analysis model was used to study several
horizontally curved bridges with about 30.5 m 共100 ft兲 of span.
Several curvature angles were considered in the analysis. Follow-
ing are the main conclusions of this study:
• The vertical deflection of a curved bridge is about 80% higher
than the deflection of a straight bridge. This is when the angle
of curvature is 30° and a reasonable design for lateral bracing
support system is used. However, with the increase in the
spacing between lateral supports, the increase in the deflection
becomes much higher.
• Compared with straight bridges, curved bridge girders experi-
ence about 23.5% higher bending moments for an angle of
curvature equal to 30°.
• The introduction of curvature in a bridge will also result in a
sizeable torsional moment to develop in the girders. The mag-
nitude of torsional was determined to be about 10.3% of the
maximum bending in girders of a straight bridge with a com-
parable span length and design.
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO). (2002). Guide specifications for horizontally curved steel
girder highway bridges with design examples for I-girder and box-
girder bridges, Washington, D.C.
Albaijet, H. M. O. (1999). “Behavior of horizontally curved bridges
under static load and dynamic load from earthquakes.” PhD thesis,
Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago.
Linzell, D. G. (1999). “Studies of a full-scale horizontally curved steel
I-girder bridge system under self-weight.” PhD thesis, Georgia Insti-
tute of Technology, Atlanta.
Zureick, A., Naqib, R., and Yadlosky, J. M. (1994). “Curved steel bridge
research project, interim report I: Synthesis.” Publication No. FHWA-
RD-93-129, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, Va.