Load Rating of a Steel Composite

Girder Bridge
MIDAS 2016 Elite Engineers Webinar Series
April 07, 2016

Luis J. Vila, Ph.D.

Structural Engineer, GM2 Associates, Inc.
 Presentation Outline

 Introduction
 Modeling Aspects
 Construction Stage Analysis
 Live Load Analysis
 Load Rating
 Analysis of Expansion Joint

2
 Introduction

 Bridge location

3
 Introduction (Cont’d)

 Bridge location

4
 Introduction (Cont’d)

 Bridge 00032, Stamford, CT

I 95

MNRR

5
 Introduction (Cont’d)

 Built in 1958
 Rehabilitation work since: joints replacement, substructure
strengthening, widening

6
 Introduction (Cont’d)

Bridge 00032 overview:

 17 spans carrying I95 over MNRR and local roads
 1065 ft long
 16 Steel Composite Girder Spans

 Main span over MNRR

• - Composite and Non-composite
Floorbeams
• - Steel Through Girders
7
 Introduction (Cont’d)

Span 7: I95 over Metro-North Railroad (MNRR)

 200 ft Span
 Steel Through Girders 11 ft
 Composite and Non-composite Floorbeams
 Diagonal Expansion Joint

SB Traffic

NB Traffic

8
 Defining Bridge Geometry

 Import geometry from Microstation or AutoCAD

 Bridge Wizard (e.g. Steel composite, PSC, Cable Stayed, Suspension)

 Define each node and element

9
 Steel Composite Girder Modeling

Definition of Steel Composite

Girder Geometric and Material
Properties

 Material:
• - SRC
 Section:
• -Composite
• -Ds/Dc=0
 Weight of concrete
applied as distributed
load

10
 Steel Through Girder Modeling

 Built-up Section
• - 2 Web Plates
• - 6 Plates for Flanges
• - Longitudinal Stiffeners

 Modeled using Midas Civil General

Section Designer Tool
• -Import shape from
Microstation or AutoCAD
• - Determines Section Properties
of Built-up Section

11
Steel Through Girder Modeling

12
 Concrete Deck Modeling

 Deck Dummy Elements

• -Weightless concrete
• -Provide transverse connection
between floorbeams
• -Transverse distribution of live
loads and composite dead loads

13
 Diagonal Expansion Joint Modeling

 Diagonal Expansion Joint

Compression only link

Rigid elastic link

14
 Construction Stage Analysis

 Composite Section for Construction

Stage

Non-composite stage

Composite stage

 Stage 1: Steel Only

15
 Construction Stage Analysis (Cont’d)

 Stage 2: Concrete Pour

 Stage 3: Composite Action

16
 Live Load Analysis

 Live Load Analysis for Load Rating:

• -Design (HL93)
• -CT Permit
• -CT Legal
 Traffic Lane Definition
• -Traffic Lane Optimization

Center (Default) Left Right

17
 Live Load Analysis (Cont’d)

 Traffic Lanes
• -Forward and backward moving load

18
 Live Load Analysis (Cont’d)

 Live Load Analysis Results

• -Moment Diagrams

Non-Composite Floorbeam

19
 Live Load Analysis (Cont’d)

 Live Load Analysis Results

• -Displacement Results for HL93 Truck

20
 Load Rating

Strength Limit State: Service Limit State: Fatigue Limit State:

21
 Load Rating (Cont’d)

 Fatigue Limit State

22
 Load Rating (Cont’d)

 Parameters for Fatigue Rating

23
 Load Rating (Cont’d)
 Fatigue Limit State
• -Rating Results

If RF < 1.0 => Check for finite fatigue life 24

 Analysis of Expansion Joint

 Analysis of Expansion Joint Under Live Load

SB Traffic

NB Traffic

 Corrosion of floorbeam below expansion joint due to active water

leakage
 Damaged deck due to repeated impacts against top flange of floorbeam

25
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

Span 7 over MNRR

Planking for floorbeam

inspection 26
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

South Side of Non-Composite floorbeam North Side of Non-Composite floorbeam 27

 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

Deck deterioration along joint

28
Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

29
Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

30
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)
 Determine the location of the truck when deck detaches from top
flange
• -MIDAS Civil Moving Tracer Tool

 Location of truck causing maximum and minimum displacement of

deck
• -Two locations of trucks causing a gap between deck and top flange

31
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Moving Load Tracer

32
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Moving Tracer Results

Maximum (upward) displacement at midspan

Minimum (downward) displacement at midspan

33
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Case 1: Maximum (upward) displacement of deck at expansion joint

Through Girder
Pier 6 (North) Pier 7

Deck
Joint 16 kips wheel load
4 kips wheel load

Through
Girder
(South)

34
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Case 1: Maximum (upward) displacement of deck at expansion joint

Through
Girder
(North)

gap

Deck
Joint

Through
Girder (South)

35
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Case 1: Maximum (upward) displacement of deck at expansion joint

gap

gap

36
 Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

 Case 2: Minimum (downward) displacement of deck at expansion joint

Through Girder
Pier 6 (North) Pier 7
N

Deck
16 kips wheel load
Joint 4 kips wheel load
Through
Girder (South)

37
Analysis of Expansion Joint (Cont’d)

Through Girder
(North)

gap

Deck Joint

Through
Girder (South)

gap

38
 Conclusion

 Load Rating Method

• -Composite girders/floorbeams (midas Civil)
• -Non-composite floorbeam (spreadsheet using results
from midas Civil)
• -Through girders (spreadsheet using results from midas
Civil)

 midas Civil advantages

• -User friendly
• -Graphic user interface
• -Fast and accurate bridge modeling
• - General section designer

39
Questions?

40