ODOT

Structure Project Manager

Seminar

Fatigue Analysis
 Session Outline
• Definition
• Three stages of the results of fatigue
• Premise of fatigue design
• History
• Fatigue evaluation
• Retrofit
 Fatigue Definition
 Reduced material resistance under
fluctuating stresses or reversals,
which may culminate in cracks or
failure after a number of cycles.
• Fatigue is the tendency of a member
to fail at stress levels below yield
stress when subject to cyclical
loading (Truck loading)
 Stress – Strain Curve
• Add stress strain curve
 Three Stages of Fatigue
Failure
1. Crack Initiation
 Initiation from a point of high stress concentration.
 Stress concentration can result from weld flaws, out-
of-plane distortion, fabrication details or fatigue prone
details
 Fabrication Flaws
• Plug and tack weld
• Incomplete fusion
• Slag inclusions and porosities
• Blowholes and undercuts
• Start and stop positions
• Craters and arc strikes
• Back-up bars
• Intersecting welds
Porosity
 Three Stages of Fatigue
Failure
2. Stable Crack Propagation
 Crack continues to grow under cyclic loading until it
reaches critical size.
 Three Stages of Fatigue
Failure
3. Fracture
• When the crack propagates to the critical size fracture will
occur.
 Fatigue Design Parameters
Number of Cycles (75 year life) – 4 considerations
• 100,000
• 500,000
• 2,000,000
• Over 2,000,000
Number of cycles depends on road classification (AASHTO)
• Case I more than 2500 ADTT (average daily truck traffic)
• Case II less than 2500 ADTT
Stress Range (thru analysis)
• Differences in maximum and minimum live load stresses
• Allowable stress range based on number of cycles and
detail type
• Note lane loading is less severe than truck loading (single
truck load is the load that causes the worst fatigue
condition)
 Stress Range
• Live Load Stress Range
• Fatigue is only considered for tension or stress
reversal situation.
• Tensile portion of stress cycle drives or
propagates the fatigue crack, no matter how
small the tension component
• No test specimen lost their load-carrying capacity
as a result of compression cracks
 Fatigue Design Parameters
Fatigue Detail Types (AASHTO)
• Assignment of Stress Categories for various details
Redundancy
• Different allowable for non-redundant and redundant
members
Test were made to determine allowable stress range for
various details and plotted against number of cycles
• Allowable Stress v. number of cycles S-N Curves
• If computed stress range is less than the allowable stress
range = infinite life for the detail
 Redundancy
Load Path
• Having three or more main load carrying members

Non- Redundant
Redundant
 Session Outline
• Definition
• Three stages of the results of fatigue
• Premise of fatigue design
• History
• Fatigue evaluation
• Retrofit
 Fatigue History Tidbits
• 1930’s railroad bridges
• Riveted steel highway bridge construction 1940’s
& 1950’s
• Early 1960’s cracks formed at the AASHO Road
Test program (by John Fisher)
• 1967 Silver Bridge (stress corrosion initialized
fatigue of eyebar)) Initiate Bridge Inspection
program
• 1968 NCHRP fatigue research (Lehigh) begins
• 1970 I-95 Yellow Mill Pond Bridge (cover plated
beam)
• AASHTO specs – 1973 & 1989
 Moment Cover Plate
Related Issues
Large number of ODOT’s interstate was constructed
with using steel rolled beams with coverplates
located over the piers
• Field splice location
• Provide extra capacity over piers in higher moment
area.
• Allowed similar beam size along bridge. Economical
design.
• Bridge Standard Drawings 1950’s and 1960’s
 Moment Cover Plate
Problem
• Significant stress concentration at coverplate end
due to abrupt change of cross-section.
• Weld at ends of coverplate caused weld
termination transverse to flow of stresses
• Later discovered that these coverplated details
where all E or E’ category fatigue prone details
• Level of low allowable stress range
 Rolled beam
Bottom cover plate

Bottom cover plate

A

Crack Propagation at Cover

Plate Ends
A
 Fatigue Evaluation BDM
Method A (evaluation of remaining life)
Based on NCHRP Report 299
• AASHTO Guide Specification for Evaluation of Existing
Steel Bridges (prediction of remaining life of fatigue prone
detail)
Method B (allowable stress range)
• AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges (new
design) allowable stress range

A fatigue analysis of all existing steel members to be re-

used or rehabilitated shall be included as part of the
Structure Type Study, PDP Step 7.
 FATIGUE ANALYSIS

• Methods are useful as indicators of the

relative severity of the fatigue detail. So
they should both be evaluated along with
any other pertinent information that could
help in reaching a conclusion.
• ODOT will review the analysis for final
determination as to whether the members
require fatigue related upgrading.
Method A - Guide Specifications for Fatigue
Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges

• Remaining mean life of the detail, 50 percent probability

that the actual life remaining will exceed the remaining
mean life
• Remaining safe life of the detail, 98 (for redundant
members) percent probability that the actual life remaining
will exceed the remaining safe life
Method A - Guide Specifications for Fatigue
Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges

STEP 1 - Design assumptions and input values

• Fatigue truck - HS15 truck with back axle spacing fixed at
30 ft.
• Live load distribution factor more realistic based on field
data less conservative than Std. Spec.
• Allowance for alternate methods, finite element,
instrumentation, this would require special consideration
by the department.
• Section properties - For non-composite decks if the deck
shows no signs of detachment, may increase section
properties 30% in positive and 15% in negative regions.
• Impact 10%
Method A - Guide Specifications for Fatigue
Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges

STEP 2 - Run the structural anaylsis

• Design Moments
• Stress range
• Check against the limiting stress range if less than infinite
life then finished

STEP 3 - Compute remaining life of detail

Parameters
• ADTT , "Ta", growth rate "g" and present age of structure in
years.
• Typical growth rate of between 2% and 4%
• Back calculate using actual traffic counts if available
• Calculated reliability factor "Rs", basic reliability factor
"RS0", "FS1", "FS2", "FS3"
 Fatigue Life Calculation
• Y calculated fatigue life
• A current age
• K, C, f detail factors
• R reliability factor
• Sr Stress range
Y= [f x K (10^6)/T x C x (R x Sr)^3] - A

Variation in Stress range very sensitive to the calculations

Ex. 30 year old structure
Sr = 2 ksi yields 50 years
Sr = 2.5 ksi yields 10 years
Sr = 3 ksi yields negative life
 Method A - Guide Specifications for Fatigue
Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges
The following should be submitted
1. A table showing:
- Remaining safe and mean fatigue life
- Moments and stress ranges at each detail and location
being evaluated.
2. A list of assumptions and input values used for each detail and
location being evaluated including:
- Live load distribution factor
- Wheel and axle spacing of the fatigue truck used as
defined in the guide specification.
3. Location and section properties of the detail and a narrative
stating whether those section properties are composite or non-
composite.
4. ADTT , "Ta", growth rate "g" and present age of structure in years.
5. Impact percentage (10%)
6. Calculated reliability factor "Rs", basic reliability factor "RS0",
"FS1", "FS2", "FS3"
 Fatigue Strength Analysis
Method B
• In applying loads for fatigue stresses, a
single lane of traffic shall be used. (live
load distribution factor of S/7)
• The design loading shall be HS20.
 Method B - Current Standard AASHTO
Specifications for Fatigue

The following should be submitted:

1. A table showing moments and stress
ranges at each detail and location being
evaluated. (strength analysis also required)
2. A list of assumptions and input values
used for each detail and location being
evaluated including: Live load distribution
factor (S/7) & Fatigue vehicle used (HS20-44)
3. Location and section properties of the
detail and a narrative stating whether those
section properties are composite or non-
composite. (If you do both then the benefit of
going to composite can be determined).
 Report Contents
• The Fatigue Analysis should provide the
information as requested in table form
which is easy to follow
• Series of computer output is not
necessary, actual not wanted
• Any background information to better
understand assumptions should be
provided, for example existing plan details
 Fatigue Retrofits
• Composite design - Do nothing option
• End bolted cover plate retrofits

Worthy of mention
Fatigue of sign supports a source of
fatigue problems due to cyclical loading
of truck traffic passing or wind. Western
states. No inspection program