Structural Design of Composite Bridges

with
Steel Plate Girders and RCC Deck Slab
in AASHTO – LRFD by ASTRA Pro

1
Foreword:
Composite Bridges are common in construction of Rail Over Bridges (ROBs), Flyovers and Elevated
Roads over busy railway and streets underneath. The advantage is the stoppage and interruption of traffic
is not done for long time. The staging and shuttering for the steel girders are not required as pre-
fabricated girders are brought to the site in trailers and they are erected by cranes. The casting of RCC
Deck Slab is done on shuttering with form work placed at the girders.

In case of Extradosed Bridges over rivers and other water bodies the Composite Deck-Girder
Superstructure is commonly used for the same advantages.

The design report is to be obtained for Composite Bridges with RCC Deck Slab and Steel Plate or Box
Girders is designed with Shear Connectors etc. with step wise detail design calculation and structural
detail drawing by following AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges, British Eurocode 2
and IRC 112

The studies are to be conducted about the results on analysis on same Bridge with all above standards.

Construction drawings for Composite Road Bridge with Steel Plate Girder and RCC Deck Slab

2
Composite Bridge in curved alignment:

For Trucks heavily loaded with stone aggregates, sand, marble slabs, cement bags, steel members etc.
when negotiates curve the centrifugal force is very high. If the transverse force is considered same as
straight bridge, by ignoring the effect of centrifugal force then the design and selection of the Bridge
Bearing shall be incorrect resulting fall of the curved span.

The essential considerations in this design are:

• Modelling of the bridge as a curved super-structure with multi-span continuous structure

• Applying transverse force at support nodes with correctly selected POT/PTFE Bearings obtained from the X
and Z direction components of the centrifugal force.
• Construction drawings for Composite Road Bridge with Steel Box Girder and RCC Deck Slab

3
Orthotropic Analysis of Composite Bridges:

Design of Continuous and Curved Three-Span Composite Bridge with Steel Girders and Concrete Deck
Slab may be done with Orthotropic Analysis as per British, AASHTO-LRFD and IRC Standard. The
differences in results are to be observed.

Model View by Graphical User Interface (GUI): View of Model for Orthotropic Analysis for Multi-span
Continuous Curved Spans with various options as available on the left panel of the GUI Window.

4
Steel Girder Design Steps with AASHTO - LRFD:

Table of Contents
Design Step 3.1 - Obtain Design Criteria
Design Step 3.2 - Select Trial Girder Section
Design Step 3.3 - Compute Section Properties
Design Step 3.4 - Compute Dead Load Effects
Design Step 3.5 - Compute Live Load Effects
Design Step 3.6 - Combine Load Effects

Positive Moment Region:

Design Step 3.7 - Check Section Proportion Limits
Design Step 3.8 - Compute Plastic Moment Capacity
Design Step 3.9 - Determine if Section is Compact or Non-compact
Design Step 3.10 - Design for Flexure - Strength Limit State
Design Step 3.11 - Design for Shear
Design Step 3.12 - Design Transverse Intermediate Stiffeners
Design Step 3.14 - Design for Flexure - Fatigue and Fracture
Design Step 3.15 - Design for Flexure - Service Limit State
Design Step 3.16 - Design for Flexure - Constructability Check
Design Step 3.17 - Check Wind Effects on Girder Flanges

Negative Moment Region:

Design Step 3.7 - Check Section Proportion Limits
Design Step 3.8 - Compute Plastic Moment Capacity
Design Step 3.9 - Determine if Section is Compact or Non-compact
Design Step 3.10 - Design for Flexure - Strength Limit State
Design Step 3.11 - Design for Shear
Design Step 3.12 - Design Transverse Intermediate Stiffeners
Design Step 3.14 - Design for Flexure - Fatigue and Fracture
Design Step 3.15 - Design for Flexure - Service Limit State
Design Step 3.16 - Design for Flexure - Constructability Check
Design Step 3.17 - Check Wind Effects on Girder Flanges
Design Step 3.18 - Draw Schematic of Final Steel Girder Design

5
Design Step 3.1 - Obtain Design Criteria

The first design step for a steel girder is to choose the correct design criteria.

The steel girder design criteria are obtained from Figures 3-1 through3-3 (shown below), from the concrete deck
design example, and from the referenced articles and tables in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
(through 2002 interims). For this steel girder design example, a plate girder will be designed for an HL-93 live
load. The girder is assumed to be composite throughout.

Refer to Design Step 1 for introductory information about this design example. Additional information is
presented about the design assumptions, methodology, and criteria for the entire bridge, including the steel
girder.

L= 46.875 ft
L1 = 10 ft
L2 = 12 ft
L3 = 12 ft
L4 = 10 ft

6
Girder Spacing

Where depth or deflection limitations do not control the design, it is generally more cost-effective to use a
wider girder spacing. For this design example, the girder spacing shown in Figure 3-2 was developed as a
reasonable value for all limit states. Four girders are generally considered to be the minimum, and five girders
are desirable to facilitate future redecking. Further optimization of the superstructure could be achieved by
revising the girder spacing.

Overhang Width

The overhang width is generally determined such that the moments and shears in the exterior girder are
similar to those in the interior girder. In addition, the overhang is set such that the positive and negative
moments in the deck slab are balanced. A common rule of thumb is to make the overhang approximately 0.35
to 0.5 times the girder spacing.

Cross-frame Spacing

A common rule of thumb, based on previous editions of the AASHTO Specifications, is to use a maximum cross-
frame spacing of 25 feet. For this design example, a cross-frame spacing of 20 feet is used because it facilitates
a reduction in the required flange thicknesses in the girder section at the pier.

This spacing also affects constructability checks for stability before the deck is cured. Currently, stay-in-place
forms should not be considered to provide adequate bracing to the top flange.
The following units are defined for use in this design example:

7
Design criteria:

Number of spans: Nspans = 1

Span length: Lspan = 120 ft
Skew angle: Skew = 0 deg
Number of girders: Ngirders = 5
Girder spacing: S= 9.75 ft
Deck overhang: Soverhang = 3.9375 ft
Cross-frame spacing: Lb = 20 ft
Web yield strength: Fyw = 50 ksi
Flange yield strength: Fyf = 51 ksi
Concrete 28-day compressive strength: f'c = 4 ksi
Reinforcement strength: fy = 60 ksi
Dia of bar Bar dia= 0.625 in
Area of bar Bar area= 0.31 in2

Design criteria (continued):

Total deck thickness: tdeck = 8.5 in

Effective deck thickness: teffdeck = 8 in
Total overhang thickness: toverhang = 9 in
Effective overhang thickness: teffoverhang = 8.5
Steel density: Ws = 0.49 kcf
Concrete density: Wc = 0.15 kcf
Additional miscellaneous dead load (per girder): Wmisc = 0.015 K/ft
Stay-in-place deck form weight: Wdeckforms = 0.015 ksf
Parapet weight (each): Wpar = 0.53 K/ft
Future wearing surface: Wfws = 0.14 kcf
Future wearing surface thickness: tfws = 2.5 in
Deck width: wdeck = 46.875 ft
Roadway width: wroadway = 44 ft
Haunch depth (from top of web): dhaunch = 3.5 in
Average Daily Truck Traffic (Single-Lane): ADTTSL = 3000

8
 For this design example, transverse stiffeners will be designed in Step 3.12. In addition, a bolted field splice
will be designed in Step4, shear connectors will be designed in Step 5.1, bearing stiffeners will be designed in
Step 5.2, welded connections will be designed in Step 5.3, cross-frames are described in Step 5.4, and an
elastomeric bearing will be designed in Step 6. Longitudinal stiffeners will not be used, and a deck pouring
sequence will not be considered in this design example.

Design factors from AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications:

Load factors:
Load Combinations and Load Factors
Limit Load Factors
State DC DW LL IM WS WL EQ
Strength I 1.25 1.5 1.75 1.75 - - -
Service II 1 1 1.3 1.3 - - -
Fatigue - - 0.75 0.75 - - -

Table 3-1 Load Combinations and Load Factors

The abbreviations used in Table 3-1 are as defined in S3.3.2.

The extreme event limit state (including earthquake load) is generally not considered for a steel girder design.
Resistance factors:
Resistance Factors
Type of Resistance Resistance Factor, φ
For flexure φf = 1.00
For shear φv = 1.00
For axial compression φc = 0.90

Table 3-2 Resistance Factors

Multiple Presence Factors

Multiple presence factors are described in S3.6.1.1.2. They are already included in the computation of live
load distribution factors, as presented in S4.6.2.2. An exception, however, is that they must be included when
the live load distribution factor for an exterior girder is computed assuming that the cross section deflects and
rotates as a rigid cross section, as presented in S4.6.2.2.2d. Since S3.6.1.1.2 states that the effects of the
multiple

presence factor are not to be applied to the fatigue limit state, all emperically determined distribution factors
for one-lane loaded that are applied to the single fatigue truck must be divided by 1.20 (that is, the multiple
presence factor for one lane loaded). In
addition, for distribution factors computed using the lever rule or based on S4.6.2.2.2d, the 1.20 factor should
not be included when computing the distribution factor for one-lane loaded for the fatigue limit state. It
should also be noted that the multiple presence factor still applies to the distribution factors for one-lane
loaded for strength limit states.

9
Dynamic load allowance:
Dynamic Load Allowance
Dynamic Load
Limit State
Allowance, IM
Fatigue and Fracture
15%
Limit State
All Other Limit States 33%

Table 3-3 Dynamic Load Allowance

Dynamic load allowance is the same as impact. The term impact was used in previous editions of the AASHTO
Specifications. However, the term "dynamic load allowance" is used in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications.

10
Design Step 3.2 - Select Trial Girder Section

Before the dead load effects can be computed, a trial girder section must be selected. This trial girder section is
selected based on previous experience and based on preliminary design. For this design example, the trial
girder section presented in Figure 3-4 will be used. Based on this trial girder section, section properties and
dead load effects will be computed. Then specification checks will be performed to determine if the trial girder
section successfully resists the applied loads. If the trial girder section does not pass all specification checks or
if the girder optimization is not acceptable, then a new trial girder section must be selected and the design
process must be repeated.

b1 = 14 ft d1 = 0.625 ft
b2 = 14 ft d2 = 0.875 ft
b3 = 14 ft d3 = 0.25 ft
b4 = 14 ft d4 = 0.375 ft
b5 = 14 ft d5 = 2.5 ft
b6 = 14 ft d6 = 2.75 ft
b7 = 0.5 ft d7 = 54 ft
L= 120 ft
L1 = 84 ft
L2 = 24 ft
L3 = 12 ft

For this design example, the 5/8" top flange thickness in the positive moment region was used to optimize the
plate girder. It also satisfies the requirements of S6.7.3. However, it should be noted that some state
requirements and some fabricator concerns may call for a 3/4" minimum flange thickness. In addition, the
AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration Document "Guidelines for Design for Constructability" recommends
a 3/4" minimum flange thickness.

11
Girder Depth

The minimum girder depth is specified in STable2.5.2.6.3-1. An estimate of the optimum girder depth can be
obtained from trial runs using readily available design software. The web depth may be varied by several
inches more or less than the optimum without significant cost penalty.

Web Thickness

A "nominally stiffened" web (approximately 1/16 inch thinner than "unstiffened") will generally provide the
least cost alternative or very close to it. However, for web depths of approximately 50 inches or less,
unstiffened webs may be more economical.

Plate Transitions

A common rule of thumb is to use no more than three plates (two shop splices) in the top or bottom flange of
field sections up to 130 feet long. In some cases, a single flange plate size can be carried through the full
length of the field section.

Flange Widths

Flange widths should remain constant within field sections. The use of constant flange widths simplifies
construction of the deck. The unsupported length in compression of the shipping piece divided by the
minimum width of the compression flange in that piece should be less than approximately 85.

Flange Plate Transitions

It is good design practice to reduce the flange cross-sectional area by no more than approximately one-half of
the area of the heavier flange plate. This reduces the build-up of stress at the transition.

The above tips are presented to help bridge designers in developing an economical steel girder for most steel
girder designs. Other design tips are available in various publications from the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC) and from steel fabricators.

12
Design Step 3.3 - Compute Section Properties

Since the superstructure is composite, several sets of section properties must be computed. The initial dead
loads (or the Non-composite dead loads) are applied to the girder-only section. The superimposed dead loads
are applied to the composite section based on a modular ratio of 3n or n, whichever gives the higher stresses.

Modular Ratio

As specified in S6.10.3.1.1b, for permanent loads assumed to be applied to the long-term composite section,
the slab area shall be transformed by using a modular ratio of 3n or n, whichever gives the higher stresses.

Using a modular ratio of 3n for the superimposed dead loads always gives higher stresses in the steel section.
Using a modular ratio of n typically gives higher stresses in the concrete deck, except in the moment reversal
regions where the selection of 3n vs. n can become an issue in determining the maximum stress in the deck.

The live loads are applied to the composite section based on a modular ratio of n.

For girders with shear connectors provided throughout their entire length and with slab reinforcement
satisfying the provisions of S6.10.3.7, stresses due to loads applied to the composite section for service and
fatigue limit states may be computed using the composite section assuming the concrete slab to be fully
effective for both positive and negative flexure.

Therefore, for this design example, the concrete slab will be assumed to be fully effective for both positive and
negative flexure for service and fatigue limit states.

For this design example, the interior girder controls. In general, both the exterior and interior girders must be
considered, and the controlling design is used for all girders, both interior and exterior.

For this design example, only the interior girder design is presented. However, for the exterior girder, the
computation of the live load distribution factors and the moment and shear envelopes are also presented.

For the design of an exterior girder, the composite section properties must be computed in accordance with
S4.6.2.6.

The modular ratio is computed as follows:

Wc = 0.15 kcf
f'c = 4 ksi

13
 Ec = 3834.254 ksi
Es = 29000 ksi

n= 7.563402
Therefore, use n = 8.

In lieu of the above computations, the modular ratio can also be obtained from S6.10.3.1.1b. The above
computations are presented simply to illustrate the process. Both the above computations and S6.10.3.1.1b
result in a modular ratio of 8.
The effective flange width is computed as follows:
For interior beams, the effective flange width is taken as the least of:
1. One-quarter of the effective span length:
Assume that the minimum, controlling effective span length equals approximately 60 feet (over the pier).

Spaneff = 60 ft

Weff1 = 15 ft

2. 12.0 times the average thickness of the slab, plus the greater of web thickness or one-half the width of the
top flange of the girder:

Weff2 = 8.58 ft
3. The average spacing of adjacent beams:

Weff3 = 9.75 ft

Therefore, the effective flange width is:

Weffflange = 8.58 ft or
Weffflange = 103 in

14
Based on the concrete deck design example, the total area of longitudinal deck reinforcing steel in the negative
moment region is computed as follows:

Adeckreinf = 12.772 in2

Slab Haunch

For this design example, the slab haunch is 3.5 inches throughout the length of the bridge. That is, the bottom
of the slab is located 3.5 inches above the top of the web. For this design example, this distance is used in
computing the location of the centroid of the slab. However, the area of the haunch is not considered in the
section properties.

Some states and agencies assume that the slab haunch is zero when computing the section properties. If the
haunch depth is not known, it is conservative to assume that the haunch is zero. If the haunch varies, it is
reasonable to use either the minimum value or an average value.

Based on the trial plate sizes shown in Figure 3-4, the noncomposite and composite section properties for the
positive moment region are computed as shown in the following table. The distance to the centroid is
measured from the bottom of the girder.

Positive Moment Region Section Properties

2
Area, A Centroid, d A*d Io A*y Itotal
Section 2 3 4 4
(Inches ) (Inches) (Inches ) (Inches ) (Inches ) (Inches4)
Girder only:
Top flange 8.75 55.188 482.9 0.3 7530.2 7530.5
Web 27 27.875 752.6 6561 110.5 6671.5
Bottom Flange 12.25 0.438 5.4 0.8 7912 7912.7
Total 48 25.852 1240.9 6562.1 15552.7 22114.7
Composite (3n):
Girder 48 25.852 1240.9 22114.8 11134.4 33249.2
Slab 34.333 62.375 2141.5 183.1 15566.5 15749.6
Total 82.333 41.082 3382.4 22297.9 26700.9 48998.8
Composite (n):
Girder 48 25.852 1240.9 22114.8 29792.4 51907.2
Slab 103 62.375 6424.6 549.3 13883.8 14433.2
Total 151 50.765 7665.5 22664.1 43676.2 66340.4
Section ybotgdr ytopgdr ytopslab Sbotgdr Stopgdr Stopslab
(Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches3) (Inches3) (Inches3)
Girder only 25.852 29.648 --- 855.5 745.9 ---
Composite (3n) 41.082 14.418 25.293 1192.7 3398.4 1937.2
Composite (n) 50.765 4.735 15.61 1306.8 14010.3 4249.8

Table 3-4 Positive Moment Region Section Properties

15
Similarly, the noncomposite and composite section properties for the negative moment region are computed
as shown in the following table. The distance to the centroid is measured from the bottom of the girder.

For the strength limit state, since the deck concrete is in tension in the negative moment region, the deck
reinforcing steel contributes to the composite section properties and the deck concrete does not.

As previously explained, for this design example, the concrete slab will be assumed to be fully effective for
both positive and negative flexure for service and fatigue limit states.

Positive Moment Region Section Properties

2
Section Area, A Centroid, d A*d Io A*y Itotal
2 3 4 4 4
(Inches ) (Inches) (Inches ) (Inches ) (Inches ) (Inches )
Girder only:
Top flange 35 58 2030 18.2 30009.7 30027.9
Web 27 29.75 803.3 6561 28.7 6589.7
Bottom flange 38.5 1.375 52.9 24.3 28784.7 28809
Total 100.5 28.718 2886.2 6603.5 58823.1 65426.6
Composite (deck concrete using 3n):
Girder 100.5 28.718 2886.2 65426.6 8226.9 73653.5
Slab 34.333 64.25 2205.9 183.1 24081.6 24264.7
Total 134.833 37.766 5092.1 65609.7 32308.5 97918.2
Composite (deck concrete using n):
Girder 100.5 28.718 2886.2 65426.6 32504.5 97931.2
Slab 103 64.25 6617.8 549.3 31715.6 32264.9
Total 203.5 46.703 9504 65975.9 64220.1 130196.1
Composite (deck reinforcement only):
Girder 100.5 28.718 2886.2 65426.6 1568.1 66994.7
Deck reinf. 12.772 63.75 814.2 0 12338.7 12338.7
Total 113.272 32.668 3700.4 65426.6 13906.8 79333.4
Section ybotgdr ytopgdr ytopslab Sbotgdr Stopgdr Stopslab
3 3 3
(Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches ) (Inches ) (Inches )
Girder only 28.718 30.532 --- 2278.2 2142.9 ---
Composite (3n) 37.766 21.484 30.484 2592.8 4557.7 3212.1
Composite (n) 46.702 12.548 21.548 2787.8 10376.2 6042.3
Composite (rebar) 32.668 26.582 31.082 2428.5 2984.5 2552.4

16
Design Step 3.4 - Compute Dead Load Effects

The girder must be designed to resist the dead load effects, as well as the other load effects. The dead load
components consist of some dead loads that are resisted by the noncomposite section, as well as other dead
loads that are resisted by the composite section. In addition, some dead loads are factored with the DC load
factor and other dead loads are factored with the DW load factor. The following table summarizes the various
dead load components that must be included in the design of a steel girder.

For the steel girder, the dead load per unit length varies due to the change in plate sizes. The moments and
shears due to the weight of the steel girder can be computed using readily available analysis software. Since
the actual plate sizes are entered as input, the moments and shears are computed based on the actual, varying
plate sizes.

For the concrete deck, the dead load per unit length for an interior girder is computed as follows:

Wc = 0.15 K/ft3
S= 9.75 ft
tdeck = 8.5 in

DLdeck = 1.036 K/ft

For the concrete haunch, the dead load per unit length varies due to the change in top flange plate sizes. The
moments and shears due to the weight of the concrete haunch can be computed using readily available
analysis software. Since the top flange plate sizes are entered as input, the moments and shears due to the
concrete haunch are computed based on the actual, varying haunch thickness.

17
For the stay-in-place forms, the dead load per unit length is computed as follows:

Wdeckforms = 0.015 ksf

S= 9.75 ft
Wtopflange = 14 in

DLdeckforms = 0.129 K/ft

For the miscellaneous dead load (including cross-frames, stiffeners, and other miscellaneous structural steel),
the dead load per unit length is assumed to be as follows:

DLmisc = 0.015 K/ft

For the concrete parapets, the dead load per unit length is computed as follows, assuming that the
superimposed dead load of the two parapets is distributed uniformly among all of the girders:

Wpar = 0.5 K/ft

Ngirders = 5

DLpar = 0.2 K/ft

Although S4.6.2.2.1 specifies that permanent loads of and on the deck may be distributed uniformly among the
beams, some states assign a larger percentage of the barrier loads to the exterior girders.

For the future wearing surface, the dead load per unit length is computed as follows, assuming that the
superimposed dead load of the future wearing surface is distributed uniformly among all of the girders:

Wfws = 0.14 kcf

tfws = 2.5 in
wroadway = 44 ft
Ngirders = 5

DLfws = 0.257 K/ft

Since the plate girder and its section properties are not uniform over the entire length of the bridge, an
analysis must be performed to compute the dead load moments and shears. Such an analysis can be
performed using one of various computer programs.

18
Need for Revised Analysis

It should be noted that during the optimization process, minor adjustments can be made to the plate sizes and
transition locations without needing to recompute the analysis results. However, if significant adjustments are
made, such that the moments and shears would change significantly, then a revised analysis is required.

The following two tables present the unfactored dead load moments and shears, as computed by an analysis
computer program(AASHTO Opis software). Since the bridge is symmetrical, the moments and shears in Span 2
are symmetrical to those in Span 1.

Dead Load Moments (Kip-feet)

Location in Span 1
Dead Load Component 0.0L 0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L 0.6L 0.7L 0.8L 0.9L 1.0L
Steel girder 0 75.4 125.5 150.3 150 124.4 73.6 -2.5 -107.2 -244 421.5
Concrete deck &
haunches 0 467.4 776.9 928.6 922.4 758.4 436.6 -43.1 -679.7 1472 2418.3

Other dead loads acting 0 68.8 114.3 136.7 135.8 111.7 64.4 -6.2 -99.9 -216.9 357.1
on girder alone
Concrete parapets 0 93.9 157.2 189.9 192.2 163.8 104.9 15.5 -104.5 -255 436.1
Future wearing surface 0 113.7 190.4 230.1 232.7 198.4 127.1 18.8 -126.6 -308.9 528.2

Table 3-7 Dead Load Moments

Dead Load Shears (Kips)

Location in Span 1
Dead Load Component 0.0L 0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L 0.6L 0.7L 0.8L 0.9L 1.0L
Steel girder 7.33 5.23 3.12 1.02 -1.08 -3.18 -5.29 -7.39 -10.06 -12.74 -16.84
Concrete deck &
45.53 32.37 19.22 6.06 -7.09 -20.24 -33.4 -46.55 -59.54 -72.52 -85.18
haunches
Other dead loads acting
6.7 4.76 2.83 0.89 -1.04 -2.98 -4.91 -6.85 -8.78 -10.72 -12.65
on girder alone
Concrete parapets 9.1 6.55 4 1.46 -1.09 -3.63 -6.18 -8.73 -11.27 -13.82 -16.36
Future wearing surface 11.02 7.93 4.85 1.77 -1.32 -4.4 -7.49 -10.57 -13.65 -16.74 -19.82

Table 3-8 Dead Load Shears

19
Design Step 3.5 - Compute Live Load Effects

LRFD Live Load

There are several differences between the live load used in Allowable Stress Design (ASD) or Load Factor
Design (LFD) and the live load used in Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD). Some of the more significant
differences are:

• In ASD and LFD, the basic live load designation is HS20 or HS25. In LRFD, the basic live load designation is HL-
93.
• In ASD and LFD, the live load consists of either a truck load or a lane load and concentrated loads. In LRFD,
the load consists of a design truck or tandem, combined with a lane load.
• In ASD and LFD, the two concentrated loads are combined with lane load to compute the maximum negative
live load moment. In LRFD, 90% of the effect of two design trucks at a specified distance is combined with 90%
of the lane load to compute the maximum negative live load moment.
• In ASD and LFD, the term "impact" is used for the dynamic interaction between the bridge and the moving
vehicles. In LRFD, the term "dynamic load allowance" is used instead of "impact."
• In ASD and LFD, impact is applied to the entire live load. In LRFD, dynamic load allowance is applied only to
the design truck and design tandem.

For additional information about the live load used in LRFD, refer to S3.6 and C3.6.

The girder must also be designed to resist the live load effects. The live load consists of an HL-93 loading.
Similar to the dead load, the live load moments and shears for an HL-93 loading can be obtained from an
analysis computer program.

Based on Table 3-3, for all limit states other than fatigue and fracture, the dynamic load allowance, IM, is as
follows:
IM = 0.33

The live load distribution factors for moment for an interior girder are computed as follows:
First, the longitudinal stiffness parameter, Kg, must be computed:

Longitudinal Stiffness Parameter, Kg

Region A Region B Region C Weighted
(Pos. Mom.) (Intermediate) (At Pier) Average *
Length (Feet) 84 24 12
n 8 8 8
4
I (Inches ) 22,114.80 34,639.80 65,426.60
A (Inches2) 48 63.75 100.5
eg (Inches) 36.523 35.277 35.532
4
Kg (Inches ) 689,147 911,796 1,538,481 818,611

Table 3-9 Longitudinal Stiffness Parameter

20
 After the longitudinal stiffness parameter is computed, STable4.6.2.2.1-1 is used to find the letter
corresponding with the superstructure cross section. The letter corresponding with the superstructure cross
section in this design example is "a."

If the superstructure cross section does not correspond with any of the cross sections illustrated in STable
4.6.2.2.1-1, then the bridge should be analyzed as presented in S4.6.3.

Based on cross section "a," STables 4.6.2.2.2b-1 and 4.6.2.2.2.3a-1 are used to compute the distribution factors
for moment and shear, respectively.

Check the range of applicability as follows:

3.5 ≤ S ≤ 16
S = 9.75 ft OK

4.5 ≤ ts ≤ 12
ts = 8 in OK

20 ≤ L ≤ 240
L = 120 ft OK

Nb ≥ 4
Nb = 5 OK

10000 ≤ Kg ≤ 7000000
Kg = 818611 in4 OK

For one design lane loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for moment in interior beams is as follows:

gint_moment_1 = 0.472 lanes

For two or more design lanes loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for moment in interior beams is as
follows:

gint_moment_2 = 0.696 lanes

21
The live load distribution factors for shear for an interior girder are computed in a similar manner. The range of
applicability is similar to that for moment.
For one design lane loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for shear in interior beams is as follows:

gint_shear_1 = 0.75 lanes

For two or more design lanes loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for shear in interior beams is as
follows:

gint_shear_2 = 0.935 lanes

Since this bridge has no skew, the skew correction factor does not need to be considered for this design
example.

This design example is based on an interior girder. However, for illustrative purposes, the live load distribution
factors for an exterior girder are computed below, as follows:

The distance, de, is defined as the distance between the web centerline of the exterior girder and the interior
edge of the curb. For this design example, based on Figure 3-2:

de = 2.5 ft

Check the range of applicability as follows:

−1.0 ≤ de ≤ 5.5
de = 2.5 ft OK

For one design lane loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for moment in exterior beams is computed
using the lever rule, as follows:

22
gext_moment_1 = 0.744 lanes

Multiple_presence_factor = 1.2

gext_moment_1 = 0.893 lanes (for strength limit state)

For two or more design lanes loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for moment in exterior beams is as
follows:

e= 1.045

gext_moment_2 = 0.727 lanes

The live load distribution factors for shear for an exterior girder are computed in a similar manner. The range
of applicability is similar to that for moment.

For one design lane loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for shear in exterior beams is computed using
the lever rule, as illustrated in Figure 3-5 and as follows:

gext_shear_1 = 0.744 lanes

Multiple_presence_factor = 1.2

gext_shear_1 = 0.893 lanes (for strength limit state)

For two or more design lanes loaded, the distribution of live load per lane for shear in exterior beams is as
follows:

e= 0.85

23
gext_shear_2 = 0.795 lanes

In beam-slab bridge cross-sections with diaphragms or cross-frames, the distribution factor for the exterior
beam can not be taken to be less than that which would be obtained by assuming that the cross-section
deflects and rotates as a rigid cross-section. Equation 4.6.2.2.2d-1 provides one approximate approach to
satisfy this requirement. The multiple presence factor provisions of S3.6.1.1.2 must be applied when this
equation is used.

Since this bridge has no skew, the skew correction factor does not need to be considered for this design
example.

The following table presents the unfactored maximum positive and negative live load moments and shears for
HL-93 live loading for interior beams, as computed using an analysis computer program. These values include
the live load distribution factor, and they also include dynamic load allowance. Since the bridge is symmetrical,
the moments and shears in Span 2 are symmetrical to those in Span 1.

Live Load Effects (for Interior Beams)

Live Load Location in Span 1
Effect 0.0L 0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L 0.6L 0.7L 0.8L 0.9L 1.0L
Maximum
positive 0 836 1422 1766 1908 1857 1628 1318 1006 865 983
moment (K-ft)
Maximum
negative 0 -324 -583 -777 -905 -968 -966 -966 -1097 -1593 -2450
moment (K-ft)
Maximum
positive shear 110.5 93.7 76.6 61 49.6 42.5 37.1 33.5 32.1 33 35.8
(kips)
Maximum
negative shear -33.8 -28.7 -29.1 -36.4 -47.8 -62.2 -76.7 -91.1 -105.1 -118.5 -131.4
(kips)

The design live load values for HL-93 loading, as presented in the previous table, are computed based on the
product of the live load effect per lane and live load distribution factor. These values also include the effects of
dynamic load allowance. However, it is important to note that the dynamic load allowance is applied only to
the design truck or tandem. The dynamic load allowance is not applied to pedestrian loads or to the design
lane load.

24
Design Step 3.6 - Combine Load Effects

After the load factors and load combinations have been established (see Design Step 3.1), the section
properties have been computed (see Design Step 3.3), and all of the load effects have been computed (see
Design Steps 3.4 and 3.5), the force effects must be combined for each of the applicable limit states.

For this design example, η equals 1.00. (For more detailed information about η, refer to Design Step 1.)

Based on the previous design steps, the maximum positive moment (located at 0.4L) for the Strength I Limit
State is computed as follows:

LFDC = 1.25
MDC = (150K.ft. + 922.4K.ft+135.8K.ft + 192.2K.ft )
MDC = 1400.4 K⋅ft
LFDW = 1.5
MDW = 232.7 K⋅ft
LFLL = 1.75
MLL = 1908 K⋅ft

Mtotal = 5439 K⋅ft

Similarly, the maximum stress in the top of the girder due to positive
moment (located at 0.4L) for the Strength I Limit State is computed as
follows:

Noncomposite dead load:

MnoncompDL = (150K.ft. + 922.4K.ft+135.8K.ft )

MnoncompDL = 1208.2 K⋅ft
3
Stopgdr = 745.9 in

fnoncompDL = -19.44 ksi

25
Parapet dead load (composite):

Mparapet = 192.2 K⋅ft

3
Stopgdr = 3398.4 in

fparapet = -0.68 ksi

Future wearing surface dead load (composite):

Mfws = 232.7 K⋅ft

3
Stopgdr = 3398.4 in

ffws = -0.82 ksi

Live load (HL-93) and dynamic load allowance:

MLL = 1908 K⋅ft

3
Stopgdr = 14010.3 in

fLL = -1.63 ksi

Multiplying the above stresses by their respective load factors and adding the products results in the following
combined stress for the Strength I Limit State:

fStr = -29.23 ksi

Similarly, all of the combined moments, shears, and flexural stresses can be computed at the controlling
locations. A summary of those combined load effects for an interior beam is presented in the following three
tables, summarizing the results obtained using the procedures demonstrated in the above computations.

26
 Combined Effects at Location of Maximum Positive Moment
Summary of Unfactored Values:
Moment fbotgdr ftopgdr ftopslab
Loading
(K-ft) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
Noncomposite DL 1208 16.95 -19.44 0
Parapet DL 192 1.93 -0.68 -0.05
FWS DL 233 2.34 -0.82 -0.06
LL - HL-93 1908 17.52 -1.63 -0.67
LL - Fatigue 563 5.17 -0.48 -0.2
Summary of Factored Values:
Moment fbotgdr ftopgdr ftopslab
Limit State
(K-ft) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
Strength I 5439 57.77 -29.24 -1.33
Service II 4114 44 -23.06 -0.99
Fatigue 422 3.87 -0.36 -0.15

Table 3-11 Combined Effects at Location of

Maximum Positive Moment

As shown in the above table, the Strength I Limit State elastic stress in the bottom of the girder exceeds the
girder yield stress. However, for this design example, this value is not used because of the local yielding that
occurs at this section.

Combined Effects at Location of Maximum Negative Moment

Summary of Unfactored Values (Assuming Concrete Not Effective):
Moment fbotgdr ftopgdr ftopslab
Loading
(K-ft) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
Noncomposite DL -3197 -16.84 17.9 0
Parapet DL -436 -2.15 1.75 2.05
FWS DL -528 -2.61 2.12 2.48
LL - HL-93 -2450 -12.11 9.85 11.52
Summary of Unfactored Values (Assuming Concrete Effective):
Moment fbotgdr ftopgdr ftopslab
Loading
(K-ft) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
Noncomposite DL -3197 -16.84 17.9 0
Parapet DL -436 -2.02 1.15 0.07
FWS DL -528 -2.44 1.39 0.08
LL - HL-93 -2450 -10.55 2.83 0.61
LL - Fatigue -406 -1.75 0.47 0.1
Summary of Factored Values:
Moment fbotgdr ftopgdr ftopslab
Loading
(K-ft) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
Strength I * -9621 -48.84 44.99 26.44
Service II ** -7346 -35.01 24.12 0.94
Fatigue ** -305 -1.31 0.35 0.08

Table 3-12 Combined Effects at Location of

27
Maximum Negative Moment

Legend:
* Strength I Limit State stresses are based on section properties assuming the deck concrete is not effective,
and fdeck is the stress in the deck reinforcing steel.
** Service II and Fatigue Limit State stresses are based on section properties assuming the deck concrete is
effective, and fdeck is the stress in the deck concrete.

Combined Effects at Location of Maximum Shear

Summary of Unfactored Values:
Shear
Loading
(kips)
Noncomposite DL 114.7
Parapet DL 16.4
FWS DL 19.8
LL - HL-93 131.4
LL - Fatigue 46.5
Summary of Factored Values:
Shear
Limit State
(kips)
Strength I 423.5
Service II 321.7
Fatigue 34.8

Table 3-13 Combined Effects at Location of Maximum Shear

Envelopes of the factored Strength I moments and shears are presented in the following two figures. Maximum
and minimum values are presented, and values for both interior and exterior girders are presented. Based on
these envelopes, it can be seen that the interior girder controls the design, and all remaining design
computations are based on the interior girder.

28
Design Steps 3.7 through 3.17 consist of verifying the structural adequacy of critical beam locations using
appropriate sections of the Specifications.

For this design example, two design sections will be checked for illustrative purposes. First, all specification
checks for Design Steps 3.7 through 3.17 will be performed for the location of maximum positive moment,
which is at 0.4L in Span 1. Second, all specification checks for these same design steps will be performed for
the location of maximum negative moment and maximum shear, which is at the pier.

Specification Check Locations

For steel girder designs, specification checks are generally performed using a computer program at the
following locations:

• Span tenth points

• Locations of plate transitions
• Locations of stiffener spacing transitions

However, it should be noted that the maximum moment within a span may not necessarily occur at any of the
above locations.

The following specification checks are for the location of maximum positive moment, which is at 0.4L in Span 1,
as shown in Figure 3-8.

29
Design Step 3.7 - Check Section Proportion Limits - Positive Moment Region

Several checks are required to ensure that the proportions of the trial girder section are within specified limits.

The first section proportion check relates to the general proportions of the section. The flexural components
must be proportioned such that:

ttopfl = 0.625 in (see Figure 3-4)

Dweb = 54 in (see Figure 3-4)
tbotfl = 0.875 in (see Figure 3-4)
tw = 0.5 in

0.625x14^3
Iyc =
12
Iyc = 142.9 in4

0.625x14^3 54x0.5^3 0.875x14^3

ly= + +
12 12 12
Iy = 343.6 in4
Iyc / Iy = 0.416 OK

The second section proportion check relates to the web slenderness. For a section without longitudinal
stiffeners, the web must be proportioned such that:

For the Strength I limit state at 0.4L in Span 1 (the location of

maximum positive moment):
fbotgdr = 57.77 ksi (see Table 3-11 and explanation below table)
ftopgdr = -29.24 ksi (see Table 3-11)
ttopfl = 0.625 in (see Figure 3-4)
Dweb = 54 in (see Figure 3-4)
tbotfl = 0.875 in (see Figure 3-4)

Depthgdr = 55.5 in

30
Depthcomp = 18.65 in

Dc = 18.03 in
tw = 0.5 in
E= 29000 ksi
fc = 29.24 ksi

72.12

213.2058

≤ and ≤ 200 OK

The third section proportion check relates to the flange S6.10.2.3 proportions. The compression flanges on
fabricated I-sections must be proportioned such that:

bf = 14 in
Dc = 18.03 in
0.3⋅Dc = 5.41 in

According to C6.10.2.3, it is preferable for the flange width to be greater than or equal to 0.4Dc. In this case,
the flange width is greater than both 0.3Dc and 0.4Dc, so this requirement is clearly satisfied.
In addition to the compression flange check, the tension flanges on fabricated I-sections must be proportioned
such that:

bt = 14 in (see Figure 3-4)

tt = 0.875 in (see Figure 3-4)

8 <= 12 OK

31
Design Step 3.8 - Compute Plastic Moment Capacity - Positive Moment Region

For composite sections, the plastic moment, Mp, is calculated as the first moment of plastic forces about the
plastic neutral axis.

For the tension flange:

Fyt = 50 ksi
bt = 14 in
tt = 0.875 in

Pt = 613 K

For the web:

Fyw = 50 ksi
Dw = 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

Pw = 1350 K

For the compression flange:

Fyc = 50 ksi
bc = 14 in
tC = 0.625 in

PC = 438 K

32
For the slab:
f'c = 4 ksi
bs = 103 in
tS = 8 in

PS = 2802 K

The forces in the longitudinal reinforcement may be conservatively neglected.

Check the location of the plastic neutral axis, as follows:

Pt + Pw = 1963 K
Pc + Ps = 3240 K
Pt + Pw + Pc = 2401 K

Therefore, the plastic neutral axis is located within the slab.

Y= 6.86 in

Check that the position of the plastic neutral axis, as computed

above, results in an equilibrium condition in which there is no net
axial force.

Compression = 2402 K

Tension = 2401 K

33
The plastic moment, Mp, is computed as follows, where d is the distance from an element force (or element
neutral axis) to the plastic neutral axis:

dc = 4.33 in

dw = 31.64 in

dt = 59.08 in

Mp = 7422 K.ft

34
 Design Step 3.9 - Determine if Section is Compact or Noncompact - Positive Moment Region

The next step in the design process is to determine if the section is compact or noncompact. This, in turn, will
determine which formulae should be used to compute the flexural capacity of the girder.

Where the specified minimum yield strength does not exceed 70.0 ksi, and the girder has a constant depth,
and the girder does not have longitudinal stiffeners or holes in the tension flange, then the first step is to check
the compact-section web slenderness provisions, as follows:

Since the plastic neutral axis is located within the slab,

Dcp = 0 in

Therefore the web is deemed compact. Since this is a composite section in positive flexure, the flexural
resistance is computed as defined by the composite compact-section positive flexural resistance provisions of
S6.10.4.2.2.

For composite sections in positive flexure in their final condition, the provisions of S6.10.4.1.3, S6.10.4.1.4,
S6.10.4.1.6a, S6.10.4.1.7, and S6.10.4.1.9 are considered to be automatically satisfied.

The section is therefore considered to be compact.

35
 Design Step 3.10 - Design for Flexure - Strength Limit State - Positive Moment Region

Since the section was determined to be compact, and since it is a composite section in the positive moment
region, the flexural resistance is computed in accordance with the provisions of S6.10.4.2.2.

This is neither a simple span nor a continuous span with compact sections in the negative flexural region over
the interior supports. (This will be proven in the negative flexure region computations of this design example.)
Therefore, the nominal flexural resistance is determined using the following equation, based on the
approximate method:
Mn = 1.3⋅Rh⋅My

All design sections of this girder are homogenous. That is, the same structural steel is used for the top flange,
the web, and the bottom flange. Therefore, the hybrid factor, Rh, is as follows:

Rh = 1

The yield moment, My, is computed as follows:

Fy = 50 ksi
MD1 = 1510 k.ft = 18120 k.in
MD2 = (1.25x192.2) + (1.5 x 232.7)
= 589.3 k.ft = 7071.6 k.in

For the bottom flange:

SNC = 855.5 in3
SLT = 1192.7 in3
SST = 1306.8 in3

MAD = 2493 k.ft

Mybot = 4592.3 k.ft

For the top flange:

SNC = 745.9 in3
SLT = 3398.4 in3
SST = 14010.3 in3

36
 MAD = 27584 k.ft

Mytop = 29683.3 k.ft

The yield moment, My, is the lesser value computed for both flanges. Therefore, My is determined as follows:

My = 4592.3 k.ft

Therefore, for the positive moment region of this design example, the nominal flexural resistance is computed
as follows:
Mn = 1.3⋅Rh⋅My = 5970 k.ft

In addition, the nominal flexural resistance can not be taken to be greater than the applicable value of Mn
computed from either SEquation 6.10.4.2.2a-1 or 6.10.4.2.2a-2.

Dp = 6.86 in
β= 0.7 for Fy = 50 ksi
d= 55.5 in
ts = 8 in
th = 3.5-0.625 = 2.875 in

D' = 6.195 in
5⋅D' = 30.975 in

Therefore

Mn = 7328 k.ft

Therefore, use Mn = 5970 k.ft

The ductility requirement in S6.10.4.2.2b is checked as follows:

37
 1.1 5 OK

The factored flexural resistance, Mr, is computed as follows:

φf = 1

Mr = 5970 K⋅ft

The positive flexural resistance at this design section is checked as follows:

or in this case:

For this design example,

Ƞ= 1

As computed in Design Step 3.6,

Σγi⋅Mi = 5439 K⋅ft

Therefore
Σηi⋅γi⋅Mi = 5439 K⋅ft
Mr = 5970 K⋅ft OK

Available Plate Thicknesses

Based on the above computations, the flexural resistance is approximately 10% greater than the factored
design moment, yielding a slightly conservative design. This degree of conservatism can generally be adjusted
by changing the plate dimensions as needed.

However, for this design example, the web dimensions and the flange width were set based on the girder
design requirements at the pier. In addition, the flange thicknesses could not be reduced any further due to
limitations in plate thicknesses or because such a reduction would result in a specification check failure.

Available plate thicknesses can be obtained from steel fabricators. As a rule of thumb, the following plate
thicknesses are generally available from steel fabricators:

3/16" to 3/4" - increments of 1/16"

3/4" to 1 1/2" - increments of 1/8"
1 1/2" to 4" - increments of 1/4"

38
Design Step 3.11 - Design for Shear - Positive Moment Region

Shear must be checked at each section of the girder. However, shear is minimal at the location of maximum
positive moment, and it is maximum at the pier.

Therefore, for this design example, the required shear design computations will be presented later for the
girder design section at the pier.

It should be noted that in end panels, the shear is limited to either the shear yield or shear buckling in order to
provide an anchor for the tension field in adjacent interior panels. Tension field is not allowed in end panels.
The design procedure for shear in the end panel is presented in S6.10.7.3.3c.

39
Design Step 3.12 - Design Transverse Intermediate Stiffeners - Positive Moment Region

The girder in this design example has transverse intermediate stiffeners. Transverse intermediate stiffeners are
used to increase the shear resistance of the girder.

As stated above, shear is minimal at the location of maximum positive moment but is maximum at the pier.
Therefore, the required design computations for transverse intermediate stiffeners will be presented later for
the girder design section at the pier.

40
Design Step 3.14 - Design for Flexure - Fatigue and Fracture Limit State - Positive Moment Region

Load-induced fatigue must be considered in a plate girder design. Fatigue considerations for plate girders may
include:

1. Welds connecting the shear studs to the girder.

2. Welds connecting the flanges and the web.
3. Welds connecting the transverse intermediate stiffeners to the girder.

The specific fatigue considerations depend on the unique characteristics of the girder design. Specific fatigue
details and detail categories are explained and illustrated in STable6.6.1.2.3-1 and in SFigure 6.6.1.2.3-1.

For this design example, fatigue will be checked for the fillet-welded connection of the transverse intermediate
stiffeners to the girder. This detail corresponds to Illustrative Example 6 in SFigure 6.6.1.2.3-1, and it is
classified as Detail Category C' in STable 6.6.1.2.3-1.

For this design example, the fillet-welded connection of the transverse intermediate stiffeners will be checked
at the location of maximum positive moment. The fatigue detail is located at the inner fiber of the tension
flange, where the transverse intermediate stiffener is welded to the flange. However, for simplicity, the
computations will conservatively compute the fatigue stress at the outer fiber of the tension flange.

The fatigue detail being investigated in this design example is illustrated in the following figure:

41
The nominal fatigue resistance is computed as follows:

for which:
3
A= 4400000000 (ksi)
n= 1
ADTTSL = 3000

N= 82125000
ΔFTH = 12 ksi

3.72 ksi

6 ksi

ΔFn = 6 ksi

Fatigue Resistance

CTable 6.6.1.2.5-1 can be used to eliminate the need for some of the above fatigue resistance computations.
The above computations are presented simply for illustrative purposes.

The factored fatigue stress in the outer fiber of the tension flange at the location of maximum positive moment
was previously computed in Table 3-11, as follows:
fbotgdr = 3.87 ksi
fbotgdr = ≤ ΔFn OK

In addition to the above fatigue detail check, fatigue requirements for webs must also be checked. These
calculations will be presented later for the girder design section at the pier.

42
Design Step 3.15 - Design for Flexure - Service Limit State - Positive Moment Region

The girder must be checked for service limit state control of permanent deflection. This check is intended to
prevent objectionable permanent deflections due to expected severe traffic loadings that would impair
rideability. Service II Limit State is used for this check.
The flange stresses for both steel flanges of composite sections must satisfy the following requirement:

The factored Service II flexural stress was previously computed in Table 3-11 as follows:

fbotgdr = 44 ksi
ftopgdr = -23.06 ksi
Fyf = 50 ksi
0.95⋅Fyf = 47.5 ksi OK

In addition to the check for service limit state control of permanent deflection, the girder can also be checked
for live load deflection. Although this check is optional for a concrete deck on steel girders, it is included in this
design example.

Using an analysis computer program, the maximum live load deflection is computed to be the following:
Δmax = 1.43 in

This maximum live load deflection is computed based on the following:

1. All design lanes are loaded.

2. All supporting components are assumed to deflect equally.
3. For composite design, the design cross section includes the entire width of the roadway.
4. The number and position of loaded lanes is selected to provide the worst effect.
5. The live load portion of Service I Limit State is used.
6. Dynamic load allowance is included.
7. The live load is taken from S3.6.1.3.2.

In the absence of other criteria, the deflection limit is as follows:

Span = 120 ft

Δallowable = 1.8 in OK

43
Design Step 3.16 - Design for Flexure - Constructibility Check - Positive Moment Region

The girder must also be checked for flexure during construction. The girder has already been checked in its
final condition when it behaves as a composite section. The constructibility must also be checked for the girder
prior to the hardening of the concrete deck when the girder behaves as a noncomposite section.

As previously stated, a deck pouring sequence will not be considered in this design example. However, it is
generally important to consider the effects of the deck pouring sequence in an actual design because it will
often control the design of the top flange in the positive moment regions of composite girders.

The investigation of the constructibility of the girder begins with the the noncompact section compression-
flange slenderness check, as follows:

bf = 14 in
tf = 0.625 in

11.2

Therefore, the investigation proceeds with the noncompact section compression-flange bracing provisions of
S6.10.4.1.9.

The term, rt, is defined as the radius of gyration of a notional section comprised of the compression flange of
the steel section plus one-third of the depth of the web in compression taken about the vertical axis.

For the noncomposite loads during construction:

Depthcomp = 55.5 − 25.852 in
Depthcomp = 29.65 in

Dc = 29.03 in
bc = 14 in
tc = 0.625 in

9.68 in

44
It = 143 in4

At = 13.6 in2

rt = 3.24 in

E= 29000 ksi
Fyc = 50 ksi

Lp = 11.44 ft

Lb = 20 ft

Therefore, the investigation proceeds with the noncomposite section lateral torsional buckling provisions of
S6.10.4.2.6.

45
 Lateral Torsional Buckling

Lateral torsional buckling can occur when the compression flange is not laterally supported. The laterally
unsupported compression flange tends to buckle out-of-plane between the points of lateral support. Because the
tension flange is kept in line, the girder section twists when it moves laterally. This behavior is commonly referred
to as lateral torsional buckling.

Lateral torsional buckling is generally most critical for the moments induced during the deck pouring sequence.

If lateral torsional buckling occurs, the plastic moment resistance, Mp, can not be reached.

Lateral torsional buckling is illustrated in the figure below.

The nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange is determined from the following equation:

The load-shedding factor, Rb, is computed as follows:

λb = 4.64 for sections where Dc is greater than D/2
Dc = 29.02 in
D= 54 in
D/2 = 27 in
Therefore
λb = 4.64

Check if

46
 Dc = 29.02 in
tw = 0.5 in

116.1

E= 29000 ksi
fc = 1.25x19.44 = 24.3 ksi

160.3

Therefore:
Rb = 1

For homogeneous section, Rh is taken as 1.0.

Rh = 1

The critical compression-flange local buckling stress, Fcr, is computed as follows: S6.10.4.2.4a

40.9 ksi

Fyc = 50 ksi

Fcr = 40.9 ksi

47
 Therefore the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange is determined from
the following equation: S6.10.4.2.4a

Fn = 40.9 ksi

In addition, the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange should not
exceed the nominal flexural resistance based upon lateral-torsional buckling
determined as follows: S6.10.4.2.6a

Check if

Dc = 29.02 in
tw = 0.5 in

116.1

λb = 4.64
E= 29000 ksi
Fyc = 50 ksi

111.7

Check if

Iyc = 142.9 in4

d= 55.5 in
Sxc = 745.9 in3
E= 29000 ksi
Fyc = 50 ksi

Lr = 29.06 ft
Lb = 20 ft

48
Therefore:

The moment gradient correction factor, Cb, is computed as follows:

Use:

Cb = 1.3
Kb = 1.75

Therefore
Cb = 1.3

My = 50x745.9 = 3108 k.ft

4
= 142.9 in

2
At = tc⋅bc 0.625x14 = 8.8 in

4.03 in

E= 29000 ksi
Fyc = 50 ksi

= 14.23 ft

Lb = 20 ft
Lr = 29.06 ft

= 3254 k.ft

Rb⋅Rh⋅My = 3108 k.ft

49
Therefore
Mn = Rb⋅Rh⋅My = 3108 k.ft

= 3108/745.9 = 50 ksi

Therefore, the provisions of SEquation 6.10.4.2.4a-2 control.

1X1X40.9 = 40.9

The factored flexural resistance, Fr, is computed as follows:

φf = 1
Fr = 1X40.9 = 40.9 ksi

The factored construction stress in the compression flange is as follows:

fc = 24.3 ksi (previously computed) OK

For the tension flange, the nominal flexural resistance, in terms of stress, is determined as follows:

where: Rb = 1
Rh = 1
Fyt = 50 ksi
Fn = 50 ksi

The factored flexural resistance, Fr, is computed as follows:

φf = 1
Fr = 1X50 = 50

The factored construction stress in the tension flange is as follows:

ft = 1.25X16.95 = 21.19 OK

Therefore, the girder design section at the location of maximum positive moment satisfies the noncomposite
section flexural resistance requirements for construction loads based upon lateral torsional buckling for both
the compression flange and the tension flange.

50
In addition, composite girders, when they are not yet composite, must satisfy the following requirement during
construction:

for which:
E= 29000 ksi
α= 1.25 for webs without longitudinal stiffeners
D= 54 in
Dc = 29.02 in

31.2

k = 31.2
tw = 0.5 (see Figure 3-4)

k = 31.2

tw = 0.5

87.27 ksi

Fyw = 50 ksi

50 ksi

fcw = -22.5738 OK

51
In addition to checking the nominal flexural resistance during construction, the nominal shear resistance must
also be checked. However, shear is minimal at the location of maximum positive moment, and it is maximum at
the pier. Therefore, for this design example, the nominal shear resistance for constructibility will be presented
later for the girder design section at the pier.

52
Design Step 3.17 - Check Wind Effects on Girder Flanges - Positive Moment Region

As stated in Design Step 3.3, for this design example, the interior girder controls and is being designed.

Wind effects generally do not control a steel girder design, and they are generally considered for the exterior
girders only. However, for this design example, wind effects will be presented later for the girder design
section at the pier.

Specification checks have been completed for the location of maximum positive moment, which is at 0.4L in
Span 1.

Now the specification checks are repeated for the location of maximum negative moment, which is at the
pier, as shown in Figure 3-12. This is also the location of maximum shear.

53
Design Step 3.7 - Check Section Proportion Limits - Negative Moment Region

Several checks are required to ensure that the proportions of the trial girder section S6.10.2
are within specified limits.

The first section proportion check relates to the general proportions of the section. S6.10.2.1
The flexural components must be proportioned such that:

b1 14 in
b2 54 in
b3 14 in
d1 0.625 in
d2 1.25 in
d3 2.5 in
d4 0.875 in
d5 1.375 in
d6 2.75 in
L1 120 ft
L2 84 ft
L3 24 ft
L4 12 ft

54
 2.75x14^3
Iyc =
12
Iyc = 628.8 in4

2.75x14^3 54x0.5^3 2.5x14^3

ly= + +
12 12 12

Iy = 1201.1 in4

Iy / Iyc= 0.524 OK

The second section proportion check relates to the web slenderness. For a S6.10.2.2
section without longitudinal stiffeners, the web must be proportioned such that:

At sections in negative flexure, using Dc of the composite section consisting C6.10.3.1.4a

of the steel section plus the longitudinal reinforcement is conservative.

Dc for Negative Flexure

At sections in negative flexure, using Dc of the composite section consisting of the steel section plus the
longitudinal reinforcement, as described in C6.10.3.1.4a, removes the dependency of Dc on the applied
loading, which greatly simplifies subsequent load rating calculations.

Dc = 32.668-2.75 = 29.918 in (see Figure 3-4 and Table 3-5)

tw = 0.5 in (see Figure 3-4)
E= 29000 ksi S6.4.1
fc = 48.84 ksi

119.7

165

≤ and ≤ 200 OK

55
The third section proportion check relates to the flange proportions. The compression
flanges on fabricated I-sections must be proportioned such that: S6.10.2.3

bf = 14 in (see Figure 3-4)

Dc = 29.918 in
0.3⋅Dc = 8.98 in
bf ≥ 0.3⋅Dc OK

According to C6.10.2.3, it is preferable for the flange width to be greater than or

equal to 0.4Dc. In this case, the flange width is greater than both 0.3Dc and 0.4Dc,
so this requirement is clearly satisfied. C6.10.2.3

In addition to the compression flange check, the tension flanges on fabricated I-

sections must be proportioned such that: S6.10.2.3

bt= 14 in (see Figure 3-4)

tt= 2.5 in (see Figure 3-4)

2.8 OK

56
Design Step 3.8 - Compute Plastic Moment Capacity - Negative Moment Region

For composite sections, the plastic moment, Mp, is calculated as the first moment
of plastic forces about the plastic neutral axis. S6.10.3.1.3

For the tension flange: SAppendix A6.1

Fyt = 50 ksi
bt = 14 in
tt = 2.5 in

Pt = 1750 K

For the web:

Fyw = 50 ksi
Dw = 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

Pw = 1350 K

For the compression flange:

Fyc = 50 ksi
bc = 14 in
tc = 2.75 in

Pc = 1925 K

57
For the longitudinal reinforcing steel in the top layer of the slab at the pier:
Fyrt = 60 ksi
Art = 6.39 in2

Prt = 383 K

For the longitudinal reinforcing steel in the bottom layer of the slab at the pier:
Fyrb = 60 ksi
2
Arb = 6.39 in

Prb = 383 K

Check the location of the plastic neutral axis, as follows: SAppendix A6.1
Pc + Pw = 3275 K
Pt + Prb + Prt = 2516 K
Pc + Pw + Pt = 5025 K
Prb + Prt = 766 K

Therefore the plastic neutral axis is located within the web. STable A6.1-2

Y= 15.18 in

Since it will be shown in the next design step that this section is noncompact, the plastic moment is not used to
compute the flexural resistance and therefore does not need to be computed.

58
 Design Step 3.9 - Determine if Section is Compact or Noncompact - Negative Moment Region

The next step in the design process is to determine if the section is compact or noncompact. This, in turn, will
determine which formulae should be used to compute the flexural capacity of the girder.

Where the specified minimum yield strength does not exceed 70.0 ksi, and the girder has a
constant depth, and the girder does not have longitudinal stiffeners or holes in the tension
flange, then the first step is to check the compact-section web slenderness provisions, as
follows: S6.10.4.1.1

Since the plastic neutral axis is located within the web,

DW = 54 in
Y= 15.18 in
Dcp = 38.82 in
tw = 0.5 in

155.3

E= 29000 ksi
FYC = 50 ksi

90.6

Therefore, the web does not qualify as compact. Since this is not a composite section in
positive flexure, the investigation proceeds with the noncompact section compression-flange
slenderness provisions of S6.10.4.1.4. S6.10.4.1.4

59
bf = 14 in
tf = 2.75 in

2.5

Therefore, the investigation proceeds with the noncompact section compression-flange

bracing provisions of S6.10.4.1.9. S6.10.4.1.9

The term, rt, is defined as the radius of gyration of a notional section comprised of the compression flange of
the steel section plus one-third of the depth of the web in compression taken about the vertical axis.

Based on previous computations,

Dc = 29.92 in

9.97 in

bc = 14 in
tc = 2.75 in
tw = 0.5 in

4
It = 628.9 in

bc = 14 in
tc = 2.75 in
tw = 0.5 in
Dc = 29.92 in

60
 2
At = 43.5 in
4
It = 628.9 in

rt = 3.8 in

E= 29000 ksi
FYC = 50 ksi

Lp = 13.42 ft
Lb = 20 ft

Therefore, the investigation proceeds with the composite section lateral torsional buckling provisions of
S6.10.4.2.5.

Noncompact Sections

Based on the previous computations, it was determined that the girder section at the pier is noncompact.
Several steps could be taken to make this a compact section, such as increasing the web thickness or possibly
modifying the flange thicknesses to decrease the value Dcp. However, such revisions may not be economical.

61
Design Step 3.10 - Design for Flexure - Strength Limit State - Negative Moment Region

Since the section was determined to be noncompact and based on the computations in the
previous design step, the nominal flexural resistance is computed based upon lateral torsional
buckling. S6.10.4.2.5

The nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange, in terms of stress, is determined
from the following equation: S6.10.4.2.5a
S6.10.4.2.4a

The load-shedding factor, Rb, is computed as follows: S6.10.4.3.2

λb = 4.64 for sections where Dc is greater than D/2

Dc = 29.92 in
D= 54 in
D/2 = 27 in
fc = 48.84 ksi
Therefore
λb = 4.64

Check if

Dc = 29.92 in
tw = 0.5 in

119.7

λb = 4.64
E= 29000 ksi
fc = 48.84 ksi

113.1

Therefore:
Rb = 1

For homogeneous section, Rh is taken as 1.0.

Rh = 1

62
The critical compression-flange local buckling stress, Fcr, is computed as follows:

E= 29000 ksi
bf = 14 in
tf = 2.75 in
Dc = 29.92 in
tw = 0.5 in

779 ksi

Fyc = 50 ksi

Fcr = 50 ksi

Therefore the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange is determined from the
following equation: S6.10.4.2.4a

Rb = 1
Rh = 1
Fcr = 50 ksi

Fn = 50 ksi

63
 In addition, the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange should not exceed the
nominal flexural resistance based upon lateral-torsional buckling determined as follows: S6.10.4.2.5a
Check if

rt = 3.8 in
E= 29000 ksi
Fyc = 50 ksi

Lr = 33.9 ft
Lb = 20 ft

Therefore:

The moment gradient correction factor, Cb, is computed as follows: SC6.10.4.2.5a

Use: (based on analysis)

1.75− 1.05⋅(0.5) + 0.3⋅(0.5)^2 = 1.3

Kb = 1.75

Therefore
Cb = 1.3
Rb = 1
Rh = 1
Fyc = 50 ksi
Lb = 20 ft
rt = 3.8 in
E= 29000 ksi

54.57 ksi

50 ksi
64
Therefore

Fn = 50 ksi

The factored flexural resistance, Fr, is computed as follows: S6.10.4

φf = 1.00 S6.5.4.2
Fn = 50 ksi

Fr = 50 ksi

The negative flexural resistance at this design section is checked as follows: S1.3.2.1

or in this case:

For this design example,

ηi = 1.00

As computed in Design Step 3.6, the factored Strength I Limit State stress for the compression flange is as
follows:
Σγi⋅Fi = 48.84 ksi

Therefore
Σηi⋅γi⋅Fi = 48.84 ksi

Fr = 50 ksi

For the tension flange, the nominal flexural resistance, in terms of S6.10.4.2.5b
stress, is determined as follows:

where:
Rb = 1 S6.10.4.3.2b
Rh = 1
Fyt = 50 ksi
Fn = 50 ksi

65
The factored flexural resistance, Fr, is computed as follows: S6.10.4

φf = 1.00 S6.5.4.2
Fn = 50 ksi

Fr = 50 ksi

The negative flexural resistance at this design section is checked as follows: S1.3.2.1

or in this case:

For this design example,

ηi = 1

As computed in Design Step 3.6, the factored Strength I Limit State stress for the tension flange is as follows:

Σγi⋅Fi = 44.99 ksi

Therefore
Σηi⋅γi⋅Fi = 44.99 ksi
Fr = 50 ksi OK

Therefore, the girder design section at the pier satisfies the flexural resistance requirements for both the
compression flange and the tension flange.

66
Design Step 3.11 - Design for Shear - Negative Moment Region

Shear must be checked at each section of the girder. For this design example, shear is S6.10.7
maximum at the pier.

The first step in the design for shear is to check if the web must be stiffened. The nominal
shear resistance of unstiffened webs of hybrid and homogeneous girders is: S6.10.7.2

k= 5 S6.10.7.3.3a
tw = 0.5
D= 54

108 S6.10.7.3.3a

E= 29000
k= 5
FYW = 50

59.2

74.3

Therefore,

D= 54
tw = 0.5
E= 29000
k= 5
FYW = 50

C= 0.378

S6.10.7.3.3a&c

FYW = 50 ksi
D= 54
tw = 0.5

67
 Vp = 783 K

Vn = 295.97 K
The factored shear resistance, Vr, is computed as follows: S6.10.7.1
φv = 1

Vr = 295.97 K

The shear resistance at this design section is checked as follows: S1.3.2.1

or in this case:

For this design example,

ηi = 1

As computed in Design Step 3.6, the factored Strength I Limit State shear is as follows:
Σγi⋅Vi = 423.5 K

Therefore
Σηi⋅γi⋅Vi = 423.5 K

Vr = 295.97 K

Since the shear resistance of an unstiffened web is less than the actual design shear, the web must be
stiffened.

Nominally Stiffened Webs

As previously explained, a "nominally stiffened" web(approximately 1/16 inch thinner than "unstiffened") will
generally provide the least cost alternative or very close to it. However, for web depths of approximately 50
inches or less, unstiffened webs may be more economical.

For this design example, transverse intermediate stiffeners are used and longitudinal S6.10.7.1
stiffeners are not used. The transverse intermediate stiffener spacing in this design example is
80 inches. Therefore, the spacing of the transverse intermediate stiffeners does not exceed
3D. Therefore, the design section can be considered stiffened and the provisions of S6.10.7.3
apply.

68
Stiffener Spacing

The spacing of the transverse intermediate stiffeners is determined such that it satisfies all spacing
requirement in S6.10.7 and such that the shear resistance of the stiffened web is sufficient to resist the applied
factored shear.

First, handling requirements of the web are checked. For web panels without longitudinal S6.10.7.3.2
stiffeners, transverse stiffeners must be used if:

D= 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

108

Another handling requirement is that the spacing of transverse stiffeners, do, must satisfy the
following: S6.10.7.3.2

D= 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

313

Use
do = 80 in OK

This handling requirement for transverse stiffeners need only be enforced in regions where transverse
stiffeners are no longer required for shear and where the web slenderness ratio exceeds150. Therefore, this
requirement must typically be applied only in the central regions of the spans of relatively deep girders, where
the shear is low.

The nominal shear resistance of interior web panels of noncompact sections which are S6.10.7.3.3b
considered stiffened, as per S6.10.7.1, is as follows:

Check if

69
The term, fu, is the flexural stress in the compression or tension flange due to the factored loading, whichever
flange has the maximum ratio of fu to Fr in the panel under consideration.

fu = 48.84 ksi
φf = 1
Fy = 50

37.5 ksi

Therefore,
fu ≥ 0.75⋅φf⋅Fy

do = 80 in
D= 54 in
k= 7.3 S6.10.7.3.3a

108 S6.10.7.3.3a

E= 29000
k= 7.3
FYW = 50 ksi

71.6

89.8

70
Therefore,

C=

D= 54 in
E= 29000
k= 7.3
FYW = 50 ksi
tw = 0.5 in

C= 0.552

The reduction factor applied to the factored shear, R, is computed as follows: S6.10.7.3.3b

Fr = 50
fu = 48.84
φf = 1
Fy = 50
R= 0.637

FYW = 50 ksi
tw = 0.5 in
D= 54 in
Vp = 783 K
R= 0.637
C= 0.552
do = 80 in
D= 54 in

71
 384 K

C⋅Vp = 432 K

Vn = 432 K

The factored shear resistance, Vr, is computed as follows: S6.10.7.1

φv = 1 S6.5.4.2

Vr = 432 K

As previously computed, for this design example:

Σηi⋅γi⋅Vi = 423.5 K
Vr = 432 K OK

Therefore, the girder design section at the pier satisfies the shear resistance requirements for the web.

72
Design Step 3.12 - Design Transverse Intermediate Stiffeners - Negative Moment Region

The girder in this design example has transverse intermediate stiffeners. Transverse S6.10.8.1
intermediate stiffeners are used to increase the shear resistance of the girder. The shear
resistance computations shown in the previous design step were based on a stiffener spacing
of 80 inches.

In this design example, it is assumed that the transverse intermediate stiffeners consist of S6.10.8.1.1
plates welded to one side of the web. The required interface between the transverse
intermediate stiffeners and the top and bottom flanges is described in S6.10.8.1.1.

The transverse intermediate stiffener configuration is assumed to be as presented in the following figure.

The first specification check is for the projecting width of the transverse intermediate S6.10.8.1.2
stiffener.The width, bt, of each projecting stiffener element must satisfy the following:

and

bt = 5.5 in
d= 59.25 in
tp = 0.5 in
bf = 14 in

3.98 in

Therefore,
bt ≥ OK

16.0⋅tp = 8 in
0.25⋅bf = 3.5 in

Therefore,
OK

73
The second specification check is for the moment of inertia of the transverse intermediate S6.10.8.1.3
stiffener. This requirement is intended to ensure sufficient rigidity. The moment of inertia of any
transverse stiffener must satisfy the following:

do = 80 in
tw = 0.5 in
D= 54 in

J= -0.9

Therefore,
J= 0.5

Therefore,
4
5 in

bt = 5.5 in
tp = 0.5 in
4
It = 27.7 in

Therefore,
It ≥ OK

The third specification check is for the area of the transverse intermediate stiffener. This S6.10.8.1.4
requirement is intended to ensure sufficient area to resist the vertical component of the
tension field. The area of any transverse stiffener must satisfy the following:

B= 2.4 for single plate stiffeners

D= 54 in
tw = 0.5 in
C= 0.55
Vu = 423.5 K
Vr = 430.7 K
Fyw = 50 ksi
E= 29000 ksi
bt = 5.5 in
tp = 0.5 in

74
 74.5 ksi

Fys = 50 ksi

Therefore,
Fcr = 50 ksi

-0.1 in2

Therefore, the specification check for area is automatically satisfied.

Therefore, the transverse intermediate stiffeners as shown in Figure 3-13 satisfy all of the required
specification checks.

75
Design Step 3.14 - Design for Flexure - Fatigue and Fracture Limit State - Negative Moment Region

For this design example, the nominal fatigue resistance computations were presented S6.6.1
previously for the girder section at the location of maximum positive moment. Detail
categories are explained and illustrated in STable 6.6.1.2.3-1 and SFigure6.6.1.2.3-1.

In addition to the nominal fatigue resistance computations, fatigue requirements for S6.10.6.1
webs must also be checked. These checks are required to control out-of-plane flexing of S6.10.6
the web due to flexure or shear under repeated live loading.

For this check, the live load flexural stress and shear stress resulting from the fatigue load S6.10.6.2
must be taken as twice that calculated using the fatigue load combination in Table 3-1.

As previously explained, for this design example, the concrete slab is assumed to be fully S6.6.1.2.1
effective for both positive and negative flexure for fatigue limit states. This is permissible
because the provisions of S6.10.3.7 were satisfied in Design Step 2.

For flexure, the fatigue requirement for the web is as follows: S6.10.6.3

If then

Otherwise

D= 54 in
Dc = 29.92 in

For the fatigue limit state at the pier (the location of maximum negative moment): S6.10.3.1.4a

Noncomposite DL -16.84
Parapet DL -2.02
FWS DL -2.44
LL - Fatigue -1.75

fbotgdr = (-16.84)+(-2.02)+(-2.44)+(2x0.75(-1.75))
= -23.93 ksi

Noncomposite DL 17.9
Parapet DL 1.15
FWS DL 1.39
LL - Fatigue 0.47
ftopgdr = (17.9)+(1.15)+(1.39)+(2x0.75(0.47))
= 21.15 ksi

76
 ttopfl = 2.5 in (see Figure 3-4)
Dweb = 54 in (see Figure 3-4)
tbotfl = 2.75 in (see Figure 3-4)

Depthgdr = 59.25 in

Depthcomp = 31.45 in

Dc = 28.7 in

D= 54 in
Dc = 28.7 in

31.9

k= 31.9

D= 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

108

k= 31.9
Fyw = 50 ksi
E= 29000 ksi

129.2

Therefore,

77
Based on the unfactored stress values in Table 3-12:

Noncomposite DL -16.84
Parapet DL -2.02
FWS DL -2.44
LL - Fatigue -1.75

fcf = (-16.84)+(-2.02)+(-2.44)+(2x0.75(-1.75))
= -23.925
Fyw = 50 ksi

Therefore,

OK

For shear, the fatigue requirement for the web is as follows: S6.10.6.4

Based on the unfactored shear values in Table 3-13:

Noncomposite DL 114.7
Parapet DL 16.4
FWS DL 19.8
LL - Fatigue 46.5

Vcf = (114.7)+(16.4)+(19.8)+(2x0.75(46.5))
= 220.7 K

D= 54 in
tw = 0.5 in

Vcf = 8.17 ksi

C= 0.55
Fyw = 50 ksi

15.95 ksi

Therefore,
OK

Therefore, the fatigue requirements for webs for both flexure and shear are satisfied.

78
Design Step 3.15 - Design for Flexure - Service Limit State - Negative Moment Region

The girder must be checked for service limit state control of permanent deflection. This S6.10.5
check is intended to prevent objectionable permanent deflections due to expected severe
traffic loadings that would impair rideability. Service II Limit State is used for this check.

This check will not control for composite noncompact sections under the load combinations C6.10.5.1
given in STable 3.4.1-1. Although a web bend buckling check is also required in regions of
positive flexure at the service limit state according to the current specification language, it is
unlikely that such a check would control in these regions for composite girders without
longitudinal stiffeners since Dc is relatively small for such girders in these regions.

The web must satisfy SEquation 6.10.3.2.2-1, using the appropriate value of the depth of the S6.10.5.1
web in compression in the elastic range, Dc.

for which:
E= 29000 ksi
α= 1.25 for webs without longitudinal stiffeners
D= 54 in

The factored Service II flexural stress was previously computed in Table 3-12 as follows:

fbotgdr = -35.01 ksi

ftopgdr = 24.12 ksi
Depthgdr = 59.25 in (see Figure 3-4)

Depthcomp = 35.08 in

tbotfl = 2.75 in
Dc = 32.33 in
D= 54 in

for webs without longitudinal stiffeners

79
 25.1

k= 25.1
tw = 0.5 in (see Figure 3-4)
E= 29000 ksi
α= 1.25
D= 54 in

70.21 ksi

Fyw = 50 ksi

50 ksi

Dc = 32.33 in
tf = 2.75
fbotgdr = -35.01 ksi
fcw = -32.27 ksi OK

In addition, the flange stresses for both steel flanges of composite sections must satisfy the following
requirement:

As previously explained, for this design example, the concrete slab is assumed to be fully S6.10.5.1
effective for both positive and negative flexure for service limit states.

The factored Service II flexural stress was previously computed in Table 3-12 as follows:

fbotgdr = -35.01 ksi

ftopgdr = 24.12 ksi
Fyf = 50 ksi

47.5 ksi OK

80
In addition to the check for service limit state control of permanent deflection, the S2.5.2.6.2
girder can also be checked for live load deflection. Although this check is optional for a
concrete deck on steel girders, it is included in this design example at the location of
maximum positive moment.

81
Design Step 3.16 - Design for Flexure - Constructibility Check - Negative Moment Region

The girder must also be checked for flexure during construction. The girder has already S6.10.3.2.2
been checked in its final condition when it behaves as a composite section. The
constructibility must also be checked for the girder prior to the hardening of the concrete
deck when the girder behaves as a noncomposite section.

The investigation of the constructibility of the girder begins with the the noncompact S6.10.4.1.4
section compression-flange slenderness check, as follows:

bf = 14 in (see Figure 3-4)

tf = 2.75 in (see Figure 3-4)

2.5

In addition, composite girders, when they are not yet composite, must satisfy the following S6.10.3.2.2
requirement during construction:

for which:
E= 29000 ksi
α= 1.25 for webs without longitudinal stiffeners
D= 54 in

For the noncomposite loads during construction: computed in Table 3-12 as follows:

fbotgdr = (1.25x-16.84)
= -21.05 ksi

ftopgdr = (1.25x17.9)
= 22.38 ksi

Depthgdr = 59.25 in (see Figure 3-4)

Depthcomp = 28.72 in

82
tbotfl = 2.75 in
Dc = 25.97 in
D= 54 in

38.9

k= 38.9
tw = 0.5 in (see Figure 3-4)
E= 29000 ksi
α= 1.25
D= 54 in

108.81 ksi

Fyw = 50 ksi

50 ksi

Dc = 54 in
tf = 2.75
fbotgdr = -21.05 ksi
fcw = -20.03 ksi OK

83
In addition to checking the nominal flexural resistance in the web during construction, the S6.10.3.2.3
nominal shear resistance in the web must also be checked as follows:

C= 0.55
Vp = 783 K
Vn = 430.7 K
φv = 1 S6.5.4.2

Vr = 430.7
Vu = (1.25⋅114.7⋅K) + (1.25⋅16.4⋅K) + (1.50⋅19.8⋅K)
Vu = 193.58 OK

Therefore, the design section at the pier satisfies the constructibility specification checks.

84
Design Step 3.17 - Check Wind Effects on Girder Flanges - Negative Moment Region

As stated in Design Step 3.3, for this design example, the interior girder controls S6.10.3.5
and is being designed.

Wind effects generally do not control a steel girder design, and they are generally C6.10.3.5.2 &
considered for the exterior girders only. However, for illustrative purposes, wind C4.6.2.7.1
effects are presented below for the girder design section at the pier. A
bridge height of greater than 30 feet is used in this design step to
illustrate the required computations. S3.8.1.1

For noncompact sections, the stresses in the bottom flange are combined as follows: S6.10.3.5.2

Since the deck provides horizontal diaphragm action and since there is wind bracing C4.6.2.7.1
in the superstructure, the maximum wind moment on the loaded flange is
determined as follows:

Lb = 20 ft

η= 1

Strength Limit States for Wind on Structure

For the strength limit state, wind on the structure is considered for the Strength III and Strength V Limit
States. For Strength III, the load factor for wind on structure is 1.40 but live load is not considered. Due to
the magnitude of the live load stresses, Strength III will clearly not control for this design example (and for
most designs). Therefore, for this design example, the Strength V Limit State will be investigated.

γ= 0.4 for Strength V Limit State STable 3.4.1-1

85
Assume that the bridge is to be constructed in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The design S3.8.1.2
horizontal wind pressure is computed as follows:

PB = 0.05 ksf STable

VB = 100 MPH 3.8.1.2.1-1

Vo = 12 MPH for a bridge located in a city STable

3.8.1.1-1

V30 = 60 MPH assumed wind velocity at 30 feet above low ground or above
design water level at bridge site

VB = 100 MPH S3.8.1.1

Z= 35 ft assumed height of structure at which wind loads are being calculated as

measured from low ground or from water level

Zo = 8.2 ft for a bridge located in a city Stable 3.8.1.1-1

VDZ = 26.1 MPH

PD = 0.00341 ksf

86
After the design horizontal wind pressure has been computed, the factored wind force C4.6.2.7.1
per unit length applied to the flange is computed as follows:

η= 1 S1.3
γ= 0.4 for Strength V Limit State STable 3.4.1-1
PD = 0.00341 ksf
d= 9.23 ft from bottom of girder to top of parapet

w= 0.00629 K/ft

Next, the maximum lateral moment in the flange due to the factored C4.6.2.7.1
wind loading is computed as follows:

w= 0.00629 K/ft
Lb = 20 ft
Mw = 0.252 K.ft

Finally, the flexural stress at the edges of the bottom flange due to S6.10.3.5.2
factored wind loading is computed as follows:

Mw = 0.252 K.ft
tfb = 2.75 in
bfb = 14 in
Fw = 0.034 ksi

87
The load factor for live load is 1.35 for the Strength V Limit State. However, it is 1.75 for the Strength I
Limit State, which we have already investigated. Therefore, it is clear that wind effects will not control the
design of this steel girder. Nevertheless, the following computations are presented simply to demonstrate
that wind effects do not control this design:
Fu = (1.25⋅(-16.84ksi)) + (1.25⋅(-2.15ksi)) +(1.5⋅(-2.61⋅ksi)) + (1.35⋅(-12.11⋅ksi))
Fu = -44.001

Fw = -0.028 ksi
Fu + Fw = -44.03 ksi
Fr = 50 ksi

Therefore:

Fu + Fw ≤ Fr OK

Therefore, wind effects do not control the design of this steel girder.

88
Design Step 3.18 - Draw Schematic of Final Steel Girder Design

Since all of the specification checks were satisfied, the trial girder section presented in Design Step 3.2 is
acceptable. If any of the specification checks were not satisfied or if the design were found to be overly
conservative, then the trial girder section would need to be revised appropriately, and the specification
checks would need to be repeated for the new trial girder section.

The following is a schematic of the final steel girder configuration:

For this design example, only the location of maximum positive moment, the location of maximum
negative moment, and the location of maximum shear were investigated. However, the above schematic
shows the plate sizes and stiffener spacing throughout the entire length of the girder. Some of the design
principles for this design example are presented in "tip boxes."

Design computations for a bolted field splice are presented in Design Step 4. Design computations and
principles for shear connectors, bearing stiffeners, welded connections, and cross-frames are presented in
Design Step 5. Design computations for an elastomeric bearing pad are presented in Design Step 6.

END OF DESIGN REPORT

89